Sony said to be hanging onto Cell processor for PlayStation 4
By Donald Melanson 
posted September 30th 2008 6:27PM
posted September 30th 2008 6:27PM
As should be clear by now, any talk of a successor to a still relatively new game console should be taken with a hefty grain of salt but, if word from Japan's Impress is to be believed, it looks like we could possibly be getting a clearer indication of what might be under the PlayStation 4's non-existent hood. Apparently, unlike the massive shift from the PS2 to PS3, the eventually PS4 will be a decidedly smaller leap, with it relying on a slightly speedier (and, likely, 45nm) Cell processor but not a completely new architecture. That would let Sony keep the cost down considerably while also easing development for the console since, by then, developers should finally have a handle on the PS3's hardware. To further cut costs, Sony is also said to be considering a switch from the speedy Rambus XDR memory to more traditional DDR3 memory, which could apparently be tied directly to the processor to cut down on latency. Or the PS4 could be powered by a pink slime that feeds on negative energy, you never know.
[Via Electronista]
[Via Electronista]
There is a point lost in the fanboyism, Sony lost almost all of it's exclusives due to their lack of communication with developers and weak developer support, they should have been paying attention to the support system Microsoft was building with their third-best console last time around, because it robbed them of Final Fantasy along with their own mistakes.
Honestly I think a new batch of exclusives will drive the console forward due to the loss of the big names barring MGS4, you have LittleBigPlanet and Resistance 2 coming up, R2 promises to be absolutely stunning after the somewhat pedestrian CoD-with-Aliens/Plot Resistance, I think it's going to be THE multiplayer game for PS3.
There's really no argument these days for it having no games, it has a few exclusives worth buying, not as many as other consoles, but that's getting old, attack it for removing features they lauded over the X360, that's still pretty funny in an ironic way.
On one hand, I'm happy Sony won't be going crazy next time and putting a chip in the PS4 that works like an electronic version of the improbability drive. On the other hand, you got to ask yourself WHY are they doing this? The cell isn't the best type of chip for this job. You have one teacher and 7 monkeys in a room trying to learn Japanese, then when you switch to Latin, they all die. That's basically how I see the cell. It works great, until real demand is put on the stripped down cores, then they all start shatting themselves and flinging poo... or something like that.
I'd be more impressed with a general CPU that has 7 cores than a sever CPU with one real core and 7 retards counting on two fingers. (Hint hint, nudge nudge Sony/MS)
MS? Doesn't the 360 have 2 or 3 real cores, not 1 real core and 7 retard cores?
The 360 has 3 cores, with 2 threads per core. So you can think of it as very similar to a 6 core CPU or 6 seperate CPU's, each running at 3.2GHz for a total of 19.2GHz of processing power.
@ Mason: I was hinting for one of them to give it a shot.
@Jagster: It doesn't quiet work like that. A dual core, 2.5GHz chips is still just a 2.5GHz chip. Only thing is, it's like running two processors, not one huge fast one. Now, for SPEs, they are not full processors. You can theoretically get 3.2GHz out of one, but what does that power really mean? A SPE is not like a processor core. It's "dumb". It's only real strength is calculation. While this is great for data processing applications, like folding@home, or in a server for a complex website, it isn't built to take full advantage of it's enviroment. It can't directly access ram, video memory, or... well.. anything. It sits in it's own little world, talking to the other SPEs and shooting the calculations to the SPU. Also, you have to write little programs for the SPU to tell them what todo and calculate. This is complicated since the SPEs are "dumb" and don't natively handle something like branch prediction or direct resource accessing. This takes up processing power.
All in all, the 3 core 360 processor hasn't yet failed to do anything the Cell can. All that bragging and boasting and the great Cell is being beat by a tweaked 3 core PPC. Not only can the three cores of the Xenon do 3.2GHz, it can access ram and video memory. In adition, the Xenon can directly effect video data instead of having to call on a main core to do so.
Don't get me wrong, I like the PS3 for what it is, but the Cell is not needed and a load of crap on chips for this application. Point is, Sony bragged and bragged and bragged. When they finally hit the bottom of the hole they were digging, they started telling you how much better it would make the PS3 graphics. While the CPU is important, it will not effect how "shinny" graphics are, just smoothness. Less tearing, smoother animations, and stuff. If Sony hadn't been a bunch of tards and tried to make the Cell do video, audio, and processing by itself, the PS3 would have a better chip and still be the console of choice.
TL;DR: Cell is a huge calculator. CPU cores>SPE cores. Sony needs to find a hardware designer that isn't Sony.
lol Thanks for more info. I live near a college where I've seen some Cell experiments and I know a little about it, but I know next to nothing about the Xenon. I like the design of the cell, but it just seems... stupid in a real world situation. Having 6 chips that can do blazing fast calcuations but they can't do branch prediction and have to have special software written for each core... meh. Like I said, it's great for server/data processing type applications, but fails at the type of work needed for a gaming system.
What I want to see in the next Playstation and Xbox is a totally built-from-the-ground-up chip that is easy to program for and takes advantage of the GPU and such in way better than what we have now. I know that will never happen, but it's a nice pipe dream. Also, I think Sony is sticking with the cell because they have a contract/preordered stock with IBM. What do you think?
Meh, Have a PS3, dont use it.
IMO, the most awesome thing in terms of hardware support any console manufacturer could do is stick the beefiest X86 Quad core they can get in the machine. I know X86 isn't ideal for real-time systems but my PC definately runs games real-timish enough for me and its not exactly a beast of a gaming rig, (well it is, minus the graphics card).
Anyone agree?
You would be suprised at what you can do with a CPU when it comes to building an OS from the ground up. Look up QNX.
I wouldn't want an x86 chip. I don't want Intel to have the bragging rights.
@ skyride:
"Meh, Have a PS3, dont use it."
So then, can I have it?
I definitely don't agree. The x86 is the biggest piece of legacy crap out there. It is really unfortunate that so many people depend on legacy support that we need to be tied down with this antique ISA. There is just so much die real estate wasted for nothing more than compatibility with old software. The things that can be done with a modern RISC architecture is just nuts - look at the UltraSPARC T2 for an example. If a platform doesn't need legacy support, you shouldn't be using x86.
I want to check out the new SPARC chips sooooo baaaaaaad. I miss the ol' days when people didn't just stick to one set processor. I guess that is why I like console gaming.
That was brilliant writing! You totally sucked me right into the pink slime.
Even if it is the same cell processor, wouldn't the considerably better graphics card create a much more powerful system? I think the PS3 card is based on an Nvidia 7 series. By the time the PS4 roles out, the graphics card will be way more advanced, so as long as the processor isn't a major bottleneck, the graphics will be way better. And since it will surely still use blu ray, which should be cheap by then, and hopefully stick with standard harddrives, maybe we'll get lucky and see a
Yes, I really hope we get to see a
This actually makes sense as manufaturing cost for console are through roof...not to mention the next generation of hardware....there is no doubt sony and Microsoft are looking at nintendo's chocie and choosing what they are gona do for there next itereation. lets just hope the hardware isnt underpowered.
Not sure whats worse here, the fact that you are a troll, or the fact that you signed up just to attempt to spam Rick Roll links with 'iPhone' in your posting name on a tech blog and with no substance in your comment other than, 'Look a PS4'.
Get lost.
The rate at which computer hardware and computer graphics are improving isn't as high as it used to be. It kinda makes since, because the developers wouldn't have to learn how to program for it again, because the PS3 is complicated. And games aren't really CPU limited if you have a fairly recent processor, so the cell probably still has some life in it. But I don't see why they would make an entire new console if it's just gonna be the same. Maybe they are upgrading the graphics.
I don't get "...which could apparently be tied directly to the processor to cut down on latency."
So what, no memory controller? Or would they just stick it all on the CPU? Neither of these options really makes any sense.
Anyone else know what that's supposed to mean?
Sony, please make a cheap PS4 if you want to stay ahead of Xbox 720 lololololol
Seriously please make a cheaper console.
This would be a great move, it will allow sony to sell an inexpensive system. The Cell processor should be ok for the next generation, but they just need to upgrade the video chipset......It seem that Sony has learned a lesson in humility from Nintendo. But I'm still more interested in seeing if the big N will finally develop a system with HD graphics and built-in hard drive.
one of the first smart moves sony has made with the ps3.... oh wait
Wow, it'll be like having a cost-effective hobby like fishing or something.
PS4? Oh please. They're missing the obvious. Some have tried but no one has really nailed it yet. Game system/PC plus TV = entertainment center/computer. I mean come on!!! Apple teased us with Apple TV, Xbox has the media thing... but someone needs to go all out! Get ... on ... it.
I would say the PS3 handles media a lot better than the X360...
sure the ps3 commands a learning curve, as does every console. just look at how people used to bitch about the ps2 years ago. in all honesty every developer interview i've seen have said that the ps3 is just as capable as the 360. The bad ports that you see such as the madden debacle from last year...well, thats nothing but lazy ass developers cutting corners programming for once console then thinking they can save time and money by making a port.
And then they wonder why it doesn't look as good on the ps3. dipshit devs if you ask me
lol. That's really valid, but you still have to give some credit to microsoft though. They cooperate with developers and try to make it easier for developers' lives. That's probably one reason why developers choose to develop for the X360 and port to PS3 instead of the other way around. Yea, they're still dipshit developers though.
Oh, and I'd say the PS3 is more capable.
well, i was going to say that....but i'm not trying to insight a flame war. Even though some 360 developers have said they've just about reached the point of "full potential" w/ the console, whereas a game like MGS4 was only using a fractional percentage of the PS3s SPUs
ooops...
=X
Love the Ghostbusters II pink slime reference. Classic.
I ain't gonna buy this PS4. I'd rather wait for the PS5 (and then for the PS6, the PS7...)
Who ya gonna call? Ghostbusters!
P.S. - If that's the new design it looks sleek.
I think a lot of people who aren't technology geeks are mis-interpreting this. Remember, the most important part of a gaming machine, whether you are talking about consoles or home PCs is the *GRAPHICS CARD*, not the CPU. The playstation 3's GPU was built from an early version of Nvidia's G70 chip, which would eventually become the Nvidia 7800GTX, although the PS3 version is probably more like a 7800GT/GS. Compared to the most recent GPUs like the Nvidia GTX 280 or ATI 4870X2, the PS3 card is pretty weak. The Cell processor in the PS3 is quite capable of running all the necessary processes in a game and keeping the GPU fed with rendering data.
For a Playstation 4, I could see them using the newer, more advanced version of the Cell that IBM is using in it's super computers, and perhaps running at a higher clockspeed than the PS3. This would probably provide plenty of power for next-generation physics, and especially in the case that future GPUs take over more of the physics processing tasks from. Game developers would certainly appreciate if this is the case, as they will be able to use their existing knowledge and mature developer tools from PS3 for new development. This will reduce costs and required effort, and lead to a more diverse and higher quality game market. If the new consoles are really going to be coming out sometime in the later part of 2010, it will be interesting to speculate about the graphics cards they will use. Given the fact that the current state-of-the-art is very impressive, I can only imagine what will be ready to go in 24 months from now. And remember, because the consoles are made to have a long lifetime, the graphics companies usually use their most cutting edge technology and designs for the cards. I wouldn't be surprised if Sony or Microsoft has an active "skunk-works" project with Nvidia or ATI right now that is dedicated to developing their most advanced technology for these consoles that will then become a generation of GPUs for computers.
Because you stated the obvious.
Hm... sounds like a smart move on Sony's part... a cheaper console, still good specs (esp. if they bump up the gpu & ram). At least this will give them a price advantage this time... (ie. not being rediculously expensive... )
Jesus, people are still going on about the PS3 price? Fuckin' hell! This has been going on since I bought release console, and I'm in the UK.
All I can say is, least my PS3 hasn't broken yet haha ^_^
To be honest, it's not expensive... I can think of a certain phone that is wayyyy more a rip of than a PS3 haha.
As much as I like my PS3 and the 360, they aren't so much 'game consoles' anymore as they are 'computers for the living room'. I was excited to put all my MP3's and photos on the the PS3, but did I do it? No. I tried to use it to surf the web, but anything but YouTube (Engadget included) is pretty rough. I think Sony should copy Microsoft and release its hit games for PC, and be done with it. The line between PC and consoles today is strictly about Sony/Microsoft-induced restrictions, not abilities. I am not a fanboy for either side, and don't flame me for this, but does it feel to anyone else like PS3/360 are not advanced consoles, but hobbled computers?
Agreed. That's why it's Sony COMPUTER Entertainment of America. That and so they can avoid extra taxes by calling it a computer instead of a video game console.
What the PS4 really needs is a video scaling chip like in the XBox 360.
That and better software dev tools at launch. Microsoft beat them handily at that this time around, so I hear. Keeping a similar architecture to PS3 should help with that.
Apart from that, an upgraded Cell architecture will certainly get the job done, and Blu-Ray isn't going anywhere either, though they may go for a newer drive that handles more layers, like those 200 GB BR discs they are experimenting with.
Sony talking about a PS4 now is foolish. They should be putting all their efforts into making the current PS3 the best console around.
Ive done extensive research into this topic and you can find my views at psfour.info/cpu.php
I think the ps3 should be around until an xbox 1080 or something cause the playstation 3 was so powerfull, no one could know what to do with it and how to program game that could use 6 cores. but by then, people will have contact lenses instead of computer screens that can be used to play games and stuff.