Will the PS3 eventually have a combined Cell/RSX?

[Joseph F]

I was wondering if anyone knows if Sony is planning on making a single-package RSX and Cell in a later-revision PS3. Or, If they're at least planning on using a 32nm process sometime within the next two years or so.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Who knows, I'd guess yes to both, as it wouldn't be that difficult to put them on the same die (which is all they did with the 360's GPU and CPU), which would make a single HSF easier. Then again, since they use separate and different memory technologies they might not do that. Also probably depends on the shrinks, as I think Cell has already been shrunk to 32nm by IBM, but I'd guess for the GPU they'd go 28nm (the Cell went 45nm and the RSX went 40nm).

 

[lamedude]

Sony bought back their fabs and my guess if for this reason. If they were able to get EE+GS+32MB RDRAM into a single die Cell+RSX should be doable.

 

[exar333]

What they should do is bring back the PS2 backward compatibility...

 

[Oyeve]

What they should do is bring back the PS2 backward compatibility...

This. I play my PS2 a hell of a lot more than I play my PS3.

 

[mmntech]

What they should do is bring back the PS2 backward compatibility...

As much as I loved my 60gb (which I plan on restoring to a working state eventually), that ship sailed a long time ago. Sony will never bring back PS2 BC. At least not for the PS3. Maybe the PS4 will be powerful enough to emulate, but the PS3 isn't. PS2 slims are cheap enough these days.

 

[exar333]

As much as I loved my 60gb (which I plan on restoring to a working state eventually), that ship sailed a long time ago. Sony will never bring back PS2 BC. At least not for the PS3. Maybe the PS4 will be powerful enough to emulate, but the PS3 isn't. PS2 slims are cheap enough these days.

They could put the 'emotion engine' on about $10 worth of silicon now...that would actually spur a lot of sales for those wanting to replace their PS2...

 

[Oyeve]

They could put the 'emotion engine' on about $10 worth of silicon now...that would actually spur a lot of sales for those wanting to replace their PS2...

True. I think that the lack of ps2 bc really hurt them in the long run. Dont know what their thinkingwas to remove it other than them havingtoo manyps2s in the warehouse to unload.

 

[Googer]

Who knows, I'd guess yes to both, as it wouldn't be that difficult to put them on the same die (which is all they did with the 360's GPU and CPU), which would make a single HSF easier. Then again, since they use separate and different memory technologies they might not do that. Also probably depends on the shrinks, as I think Cell has already been shrunk to 32nm by IBM, but I'd guess for the GPU they'd go 28nm (the Cell went 45nm and the RSX went 40nm).

Microsoft owns the design rights to both processors found in the XBOX. But with the PS3, the design rights belong to a multitude of companies, IBM, Toshiba, Sony, NVIDIA, and Rambus. So combining the two would probably take a lot more legal diplomacy than what it maybe worth.

 

[Anteaus]

I can't find the source because it was awhile back, but Sony already said they are likely going with an standard Intel solution with their next console. The interesting bit is that since the 360 successor will be likely be Directx based, BC with the 360 is will be relatively easy since they would simply have to provide native support for the 360 codecs..the rest of the machine is simply more powerful...assuming MS even wants to do free BC because there is money in digital distribution of old titles.

My guess is that the cell chip notwithstanding, the PS3 is still PC flavored and can still have the same BC advantage on the PS4.

Emulating complete chipsets is no longer necessary nor efficient. The new consoles will simply be more of the same.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

True. I think that the lack of ps2 bc really hurt them in the long run. Dont know what their thinkingwas to remove it other than them havingtoo manyps2s in the warehouse to unload.

They want people to buy Ps3 games. They don't make much money when people buy a PS3 to buy PS2 games. Quite simple explanation.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Microsoft owns the design rights to both processors found in the XBOX. But with the PS3, the design rights belong to a multitude of companies, IBM, Toshiba, Sony, NVIDIA, and Rambus. So combining the two would probably take a lot more legal diplomacy than what it maybe worth.

Good point, although would that be that big of a deal when just putting it on the same die and not actually changing the design?

I can't find the source because it was awhile back, but Sony already said they are likely going with an standard Intel solution with their next console. The interesting bit is that since the 360 successor will be likely be Directx based, BC with the 360 is will be relatively easy since they would simply have to provide native support for the 360 codecs..the rest of the machine is simply more powerful...assuming MS even wants to do free BC because there is money in digital distribution of old titles.

My guess is that the cell chip notwithstanding, the PS3 is still PC flavored and can still have the same BC advantage on the PS4.

Emulating complete chipsets is no longer necessary nor efficient. The new consoles will simply be more of the same.

I'd say that'll be mostly true, but I do think Sony will have more trouble as they never had the same software support that Microsoft did, and Cell is more of a kink in that developers would offload some graphics work to it and do some other things that I would guess will have to be reworked to maintain compatibility.

Funny thing is that I think backwards compatibility is a bigger issue for Sony (meaning people interested in the Playstation seem more interested in backwards compatibility). I actually wondered if Sony might put Cell in the PS4 for that reason. Either an updated version or maybe put two shrunk Cells on the same die, or as a third processor. This way they could maintain compatibility with the PS3 more easily, as well as offering an extra processor that can be used for physics, audio, or some graphics work too. Or they could use it to help with 3D or other tasks (i.e. run video chat feeds on it and this way it wouldn't mess with the resources of a game and so you could video chat fine regardless of what games you're playing).

 

[BD2003]

Good point, although would that be that big of a deal when just putting it on the same die and not actually changing the design?



I'd say that'll be mostly true, but I do think Sony will have more trouble as they never had the same software support that Microsoft did, and Cell is more of a kink in that developers would offload some graphics work to it and do some other things that I would guess will have to be reworked to maintain compatibility.

Funny thing is that I think backwards compatibility is a bigger issue for Sony (meaning people interested in the Playstation seem more interested in backwards compatibility). I actually wondered if Sony might put Cell in the PS4 for that reason. Either an updated version or maybe put two shrunk Cells on the same die, or as a third processor. This way they could maintain compatibility with the PS3 more easily, as well as offering an extra processor that can be used for physics, audio, or some graphics work too. Or they could use it to help with 3D or other tasks (i.e. run video chat feeds on it and this way it wouldn't mess with the resources of a game and so you could video chat fine regardless of what games you're playing).

Im pretty sure that's basically what they did by throwing the ps1 chip in the ps2...IIRC it was used primarily for basic controller IO, but also served to make BC a breeze. Seems like a sensible thing to do next go round.

 

[Anarchist420]

They should just make the PS4 powerful enough so it can emulate the PS3 fine. Or as someone suggested, they can put a Cell in it, and only emulate the RSX with the new GPU.