PS4 could be another Cell based console...released in 2011?

[Queasy]

Link

Perhaps the PS3 was a bit too ahead of its time. The console was almost absurdly expensive when it launched -- and not just for consumers. In spite of an initial $600 price tag, Sony lost hundreds of dollars on every system manufactured. The combination of Blu-ray drive and Cell processor made the PS3 a bit too bleeding edge, perhaps. A report from respectable Japanese site PC Watch suggests that Sony may be considering a cheaper alternative for the next-generation PS4.

Nintendo found great success (and profitability) with Wii by releasing hardware that was only marginally more powerful than the Gamecube. Sony may mimic that trend by having PS4 hardware based on the same Cell architecture as the PS3. Keeping the same architecture will help developers, many which have only recently come to grips with the complex processes of Sony's proprietary system.

However, one particular note in the report has us quite worried: according to PC Watch, the Sony wants to launch a new system, before the competition -- eyeing a 2011 release. With the PS3 still so relatively young, we'd hate to see Sony raise a white flag and move on to something new, especially when they've harped about the "10 year life cycle" so often. Too soon of a hardware release could be seen as a betrayal by many, and could result in a serious backlash. For us, we'd love to get more time out of the significant investments we've made in our PS3 hardware.

I'm not sure why the surprise at a 2011 release here. That would be a 5-year period between console releases for Sony which is usually considered the norm. Yeah, it sucks to think about it now because the PS3 is finally getting its legs underneath with software and price cuts but it isn't like the Xbox being released in 2001 and the 360 being released in 2005.

Sony would be smart in keeping the basic Cell architecture though...just more powerful. Would make backwards compatibility a non-issue and would make the job of developers easier as well.

 

[JackBurton]

2011 is too soon IMO. But if the PS4 can do 100% PS1, 2 and 3 backwards compatibility, I'm cool with it.

 

[destrekor]

I think the Cell would be a great idea, however, it wouldn't be just like including the PS3's Cell chip and that's it. A more improved cell, potentially with more SPEs, a more powerful PPE, and of course more memory and a more powerful GPU would be good. I do doubt, and seriously am against, that the GPU would be based on the GPU of the PS3. That would definitely make the PS3->PS4 very similar to the GCN->Wii.
I'd say continue to go with nVidia, and let them develop a chip based around then-current chip tech. If they make more progress in chip design, such as the GT200 series chips of today, it'd probably be great, and they could probably work into it chip logic that mimics the PS3's GPU to help provide the backward compatibility.
Sony's best move would be to continue using the Cell chip they worked so hard to make, and I actually would bet on Sony using it, considering the Cell is continually being enhanced in tech and is still being utilized in various ways by its creators (Sony, IBM, Toshiba). Sounds like all three parties would like it to continue, considering how much R&D they poured into it.

But as for 2011... I hope not... not unless Microsoft is planning on that time-frame too. If not, then please, let this generation last longer that previous generations, as this generation has been more expensive for all parties.

 

[Deeko]

PSX was released in 1995. PS2 in 2000. PS3 in 2006. Why is 2011 so hard to believe? And the 10 year life span of the PS3 could still very well be true - the PS2 is still alive and kicking, is it not?

 

[ubercaffeinated]

Originally posted by: Deeko
PSX was released in 1995. PS2 in 2000. PS3 in 2006. Why is 2011 so hard to believe? And the 10 year life span of the PS3 could still very well be true - the PS2 is still alive and kicking, is it not?

but the mentality of gamers is to have the newest and the best. 2011 in my opinion is too soon. I have heard 2011 quoted before, but considering that the PS3 still needs to catch up considerably software wise, it would be a mistake for them to attempt the PS4 unless Sony and associate producers come out with a massive amount of titles within the next couple of years.

 

[Kabob]

I think Sony's strategy is going to be vastly different than Microsoft's. I think MS will milk the 360 until 2012 - 2013, it's still way in the lead with sales and I think there's still alot of untapped power. Sony will put out the next gen console before MS will, maybe as early as 2011 but probably closer to 2012.

Nintendo will probably put out the first "next gen" console, followed by Sony and then MS ~ year later.

*edit*
One more thought, thus far the Cell (IMHO) has been tremendously underwhelming. It's difficult to program for and hasn't shown to offer really any benefit. If they do intend to use it again next-gen I hope they've got better architecture/development tools or something to help dev's more easily use it's power. I think it was the single biggest reason for a $600 launch console price.

 

[ed21x]

the reason this feels 'soon' is because nobody adopted the ps3 the first year it came out, and it is just beginning to gain traction now, as well as a flow of games, so this supposed "5 year" life cycle feels alot more like 3-4. If Wii came out with a successor in 2011, it would feel normal because they've had significant marketshare since day 1, and would end the life cycle with around 50-60 million units sold. Right now, the ps3 has not manage to outsell the N64, so any announcement of a successor would be looked upon as a defeat.

 

[DaveSimmons]

My stock answer in PS4 threads is that if they're smart Sony will follow the wii's model and make it 2 PS3s duct-taped together: 100% compatible Cell chip with just more cores (1-2 more general purpose cores would be a great help for porting), 2-4x the RAM, and a 100% BC GPU with 4-8x the power.

It would be 100% compatible with PS3 games -and- the source code and development tools. Tools and engines would work as-is but for PS4 builds could turn on higher resolutions, more in-memory caching, use of the extra cores.

Developers would be happy since there would be no new learning curve and source code could be shared between PS3 and PS4 builds of a game.

With no real new tech, the 45nm CPU & CPU would start off cheap to develop and cheap to manufacture. Blu-ray drives will also be much closer to regular DVD prices. The intro price could probably be held to $399 instead of $599.

Whether or not Sony will do this or decide to scare away developers by reinventing the wheel again, who knows? It might depend on how much coke and scotch the Sony execs have snorted and drank that week

 

[Deeko]

The Wii wasn't a huge success because the technology was easy for game developers to use - the Wii was a huge success because it was extremely innovative and a new way of gaming. Not to say that ease-of-development isn't important - it certainly is - but you can't take that one aspect of the Wii and use it as a blueprint for all future consoles.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Deeko
The Wii wasn't a huge success because the technology was easy for game developers to use - the Wii was a huge success because it was extremely innovative and a new way of gaming. Not to say that ease-of-development isn't important - it certainly is - but you can't take that one aspect of the Wii and use it as a blueprint for all future consoles.

That and it was much cheaper than its competitors.

 

[DaveSimmons]

The duct-tape approach woould solve 3 sources of failure in year 1 of the PS3 that the wii got right:

- High cost of PS3: wii was break-even at $249 from using old tech, duct-PS4 could launch with probably a small loss at $399 vs. PS3 losing $200+ at $600.

- No trained developers, engines and code for PS3: with wii you had to learn to waggle, but otherwise it was almost just GameCube development. duct-PS4 would let the now-trained PS3 developers be productive immediatel, using working engines and code.

- High development costs: wii development was cheap from using lo-res art to using existing GameCube libraries and already-trained developers. duct-PS4 wouldn't solve the cost of HD art, but it could be shared between PS3 & PS4 (& 360 & 720). It would solve the extra cost PS3 incurred from starting from scratch on coding, building new engines, and training developers.

So: yes, duct-PS4 alone wouldn't steal the casual gaming crown from wii or wii-two, but it could stop year 1 of PS4 from failing as badly as the PS3 did.

 

[abhinit90]

I'll start caring about Ps4 in 2011....

till then enjoy whichever consoles you've got....

and dont count your chickens before they hatch.........

 

[mugs]

5 years between console generations is NORMAL. 2011 makes sense, especially since Sony was hurt by MS beating them by a year. 10 year lifecycle doesn't mean 10 years between consoles - the PS2 is still going strong, and it's been 2 years since the PS2 came out. I don't expect the PS3 to last so long after the PS4 comes out though, because it isn't dominant like the PS2 was.

Sticking with similar technology is smart, as it helps ensure backward compatibility and ease of transition for developers.

And if you feel "betrayed" by anything Sony does, you're probably a fanboy; fanboys get over betrayal pretty quickly.

Bring on the PS4 in 2011... and give it a better controller, damnit!

 

[Kabob]

Originally posted by: mugs
5 years between console generations is NORMAL. 2011 makes sense, especially since Sony was hurt by MS beating them by a year. 10 year lifecycle doesn't mean 10 years between consoles - the PS2 is still going strong, and it's been 2 years since the PS2 came out. I don't expect the PS3 to last so long after the PS4 comes out though, because it isn't dominant like the PS2 was.

Sticking with similar technology is smart, as it helps ensure backward compatibility and ease of transition for developers.

And if you feel "betrayed" by anything Sony does, you're probably a fanboy; fanboys get over betrayal pretty quickly.

Bring on the PS4 in 2011... and give it a better controller, damnit!

True, but as mentioned above the cost of this generation has hurt alot of people, it might help their sales if they hold off for an extra year and try to get some use out of the system. How many fanboy's are gonna like it if they get only a few stellar titles out of the PS3 and then have to pick up a PS4??

 

[DaveSimmons]

There should be at least a couple of years of overlap, especially if they make the duct-tape PS4 that can share source code with the PS3. So buying a PS3 now would probably mean 3-5 years of new games.

But you'd still have the $60 GTA V running at 640p on PS3 and 1080p on PS4, so for eye candy it's true you'd want to upgrade.

If Sony really wanted to make people happy they could put both versions of many games (in 2010-11) on a single 50 GB blu-ray: buy and play it on PS3, keep it to play it again in 1080p when you upgrade to PS4.

 

[Extelleron]

I don't think the next generation PlayStation being based on the Cell-architecture is at all surprising; it would be very silly if Sony forced developers to learn a very different style of programming with the Cell and then suddenly changed architectures again for the next generation.

If the PS4 comes out in 2011, its processor will be based almost certainly on 32nm technology; the original Cell was built at 90nm. This gives plenty of room for an increase in CPU power. A Cell with perhaps 2 PPEs and 16 SPEs, double the current resources, plus possible optimizations/increase in frequency, would provide plenty of processing power while allowing the chip to much smaller in size.

Of course if Sony wants the PS4 to be at all competitive with the PCs of 2011, they will need a lot more than that. But as this article says I can't see Sony going for a huge, expensive system again.

 

[Kabob]

Originally posted by: Extelleron
But as this article says I can't see Sony going for a huge, expensive system again.

Yeah, that sorta blew up on 'em...

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
There should be at least a couple of years of overlap, especially if they make the duct-tape PS4 that can share source code with the PS3. So buying a PS3 now would probably mean 3-5 years of new games.

But you'd still have the $60 GTA V running at 640p on PS3 and 1080p on PS4, so for eye candy it's true you'd want to upgrade.

If Sony really wanted to make people happy they could put both versions of many games (in 2010-11) on a single 50 GB blu-ray: buy and play it on PS3, keep it to play it again in 1080p when you upgrade to PS4.

Well, you might see something like that with 'lesser' games, but almost certainly won't see that with big games, if nothing else for lack of licensing profit. The whole idea is you sell the console at a loss initially, and make up for that with immediate profits from games and accessories - Game profits are from various fees associated with publishing the title. Eventually those profits, combined with the eventual time when the system can be sold for profit, are what eventually bring the overall effort into the positive end of the money system, recouping all losses.

I'd fully expect major titles to be released both on PS3 and PS4, and not compatible with each other. Let's Sony double-dip in the disc sales, but Microsoft does it too. Hell, Microsoft even charges for each disc included in the package!

 

[Bateluer]

2011 fits with previous releases, and if a PS4 launches at a better price than the 600 dollar PS3, people will buy it. If its using the Cell chip, backwards compatibility won't be too hard to manage.

Didn't Sony also want to ditch optical media for the next version of the Playstation and go with online streaming entirely? Doesn't sound like such a good idea given the trends in the US broadband market. Only a few PS3 games would break a monthly cap.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Didn't Sony also want to ditch optical media for the next version of the Playstation and go with online streaming entirely? Doesn't sound like such a good idea given the trends in the US broadband market. Only a few PS3 games would break a monthly cap.

No, that's MS. Sony is heavily invested in Blu-Ray and needs that to succeed long term.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Didn't Sony also want to ditch optical media for the next version of the Playstation and go with online streaming entirely? Doesn't sound like such a good idea given the trends in the US broadband market. Only a few PS3 games would break a monthly cap.

No, that's MS. Sony is heavily invested in Blu-Ray and needs that to succeed long term.

Neither is going to do away with optical media entirely next generation. US is only around ~50% broadband.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Didn't Sony also want to ditch optical media for the next version of the Playstation and go with online streaming entirely? Doesn't sound like such a good idea given the trends in the US broadband market. Only a few PS3 games would break a monthly cap.

No, that's MS. Sony is heavily invested in Blu-Ray and needs that to succeed long term.

Neither is going to do away with optical media entirely next generation. US is only around ~50% broadband.

Yeah, if Microsoft tries, their customer base will be extremely limited unless they then offer an add-on optical drive... again.
It would work in Japan, but no way can it work in the US. It'll be forever before the US can even catch up to Japan... our population density to geographical size is a major factor, mainly the geographical size... high-bandwidth runs across the country just are not feasible at this time, or for the next few years. Well... would be extremely expensive, and that's where the population density comes into play... the customer base wouldn't offset the enormous costs of laying that kind of network.

 

[SoulAssassin]

1080p is still very new, no one is broadcasting in it but the PS3 will do it. If that will still be the standard resolution of tv's in 2011 how much better can the graphics really get? I don't think we can expect the leap that we saw from the last generation to this one because I don't think tv's will change as much as we've seen in recent years. An incremental increase like this is probably what we can realistically expect.

 

[Piuc2020]

2011 is still 3 long years away, people sound like 2011 is right around the corner.

Get some perspective.

 

[magomago]

When the ps2 came out I remember immediately reports on Ps3. Don't worry guys! Its normal. Anyways the same architecture doesn't mean at all the same processor. Think about how far x86 has gone. Btw 5 years is totally normal...