PS6 and Xbox Next with UDNA architecture
The next generation of consoles isn't defined by a single number, but by the type of architecture that underpins it. Beyond teraflops, the focus is on how the PS6 and Xbox Next could redefine their technological foundation.
PS6 and Xbox Next: The UDNA rumor matters more because of the change in the base than because of the number.
The next generation of consoles is starting to take shape around a concrete idea: Sony and Microsoft would once again rely on AMD, but not simply with a direct evolution of what we already saw in the PS5 and Xbox Series X. The interesting point lies in the possible adoption of UDNA, an architecture that would seek to bring together two worlds that AMD has kept more separate until now: RDNA, designed for consumer graphics, and CDNA, geared towards professional computing.
If this is confirmed, the change shouldn't be interpreted simply as "more teraflops" or more compute units. The relevant aspect would be something else: a console GPU better equipped to blend traditional rasterization, ray tracing, and artificial intelligence without relying so heavily on ad-hoc software solutions. This alone doesn't guarantee more ambitious games, but it does change the technical scope within which studios can work.
A likely leap, but still sustained by leaks
The New rumors They point out that PS6 y Xbox Next They would use a common graphic base with AMD's UDNA architectureThere's also talk of up to a 20% improvement in rasterization compared to RDNA 4, while maintaining the same clock speed. It's an attractive figure, but it should be treated with caution: there are no final publicly available specifications, and a console doesn't perform like a desktop graphics card just because it shares part of the architecture.
The comparison with models like GeForce RTX 5070 y Radeon RX 9070 It can serve as a rough reference, not a direct equivalent. Other factors matter in a console: power consumption, temperature, shared memory, manufacturing cost, chip size, and the margin needed to maintain reasonable prices. That's where many overly simplistic predictions fall short.
The PS6 and Xbox Next are also expected to share some of their CPU components, though not necessarily the same final performance. Sony and Microsoft could start with similar technology but end up with different designs due to priorities such as cost, size, cooling, or product strategy. The current generation has already demonstrated that two consoles with similar technical origins can perform differently depending on memory, clock speed, development tools, and internal decisions.
The real soft spot: ray tracing and AI
The most interesting improvement isn't necessarily in rasterization. Current consoles can already handle visually complex games, but ray tracing remains a constant compromise: lower resolution, fewer effects, separate quality modes, or partial implementations. If UDNA truly doubles performance in Artificial intelligence (AI) and ray tracing Compared to RDNA 4, the leap would be significant, but not for marketing reasons. It would be significant because it would allow those resources to be used with fewer visible sacrifices.
That interpretation needs to be qualified. The supposed increase isn't being compared to the PS5 or Xbox Series X, but rather to RDNA 4. The actual difference compared to current consoles would be greater, because the PS5 and Xbox Series X are based on RDNA 2. Even so, a technical improvement doesn't automatically translate into games with fully ray-traced lighting. Studios will continue to balance resolution, frame rate, geometry, physics, open worlds, and production time.
The IA It could have a more visible role than in this generation. Intelligent upscaling, frame generation, and similar techniques technologies Systems like PSSR would be a natural part of that transition. The question isn't whether the next generation of consoles will use AI, but how much they'll rely on it to deliver a visually rich, 4K-like experience without driving up hardware costs.
GPU and CPU: possible figures, not firm promises
The GPU details remain unconfirmed. The most common estimate suggests between 50 and 60 active compute units, which would be equivalent to 3,200 a 3,840 shaders If AMD maintains the 64 shaders per compute unit scheme, that number, in isolation, reveals less than it seems. A GPU with more units can perform worse if it operates at a lower frequency, if memory bandwidth is limited, or if the design prioritizes efficiency over brute force.
In the CPU realm, rumors about 3D stacked cache seem to have lost steam. A conventional solution would make sense if the goal is to control production costs and avoid an excessively expensive chip for a product that needs to be mass-produced for years. That decision might disappoint those hoping for a no-compromise console, but consoles are always built around compromises. The challenge isn't including the most expensive technology; it's choosing which improvement will be most noticeable in real-world games.
For now, UDNA sounds like a logical choice for PS6 and Xbox Next: more ray tracing capabilities, a greater emphasis on AI, and an architecture less constrained by the traditional separation between graphics and computing. What's still missing, and most importantly, is how Sony and Microsoft will translate that foundation into final hardware, pricing, memory, power consumption, and developer tools. Without that, any impressive figures remain just a clue, not a definitive conclusion.
