PS4 NewsRumor: PS4 Is A Gaming Quality PC In The Living Room - PS4 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Rumor: PS4 Is A Gaming Quality PC In The Living Room

Consoles get more computer-like with every passing generation. And nobody will be surprised if the PS4 ends up being a high-end gaming PC for your living room.

As reported by GamesIndustry.biz, Digital Foundry's Richard Leadbetter apparently has some inside information concerning Sony's next PlayStation console. Recently, we heard from ex-AMD employees that the PS4 would utilize AMD-powered graphics rather than Nvidia.

Now, Leadbetter claims a "reputable source" said the next PlayStation system is "essentially a PC" in regards to its architecture. The source reinforces the aforementioned rumor by saying Sony and AMD are collaborating on the CPU, which means the next PlayStation won't use the Cell found in the PS3. Leadbetter also mentioned the new Vita:

"It's not about exotic, groundbreaking hardware anymore, it's all about creating the best possible games machine with an enviable set of development tools - and it's an approach that has already yielded results. While PlayStation Vita may lack a stand-out killer app, I still think that it's set the bar in terms of overall quality and quantity over and above any console launch I've seen in over 21 years in the business. Extrapolating that same philosophy towards PlayStation 4 makes a PC-style approach to Sony's next console seem very likely indeed."

Sony has gone on the record several times, saying they have no intention of producing a new console any time soon. Right now, their focus is squarely on both the Vita and the PS3. ...but the future is always just around the corner, yes?

Tags: sony, ps4, playstation 4, next playstation, next-gen consoles

3/1/2012 8:44:13 PM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (77 posts)

fatelementality
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 9:18:48 PM
Reply

I honestly think that for now they should stick with the graphics level they're currently at and use all that power to eliminate load times. I could only imagine playing something like Skyrim with no loading screens. Probably would have around a week of my life back. That week would be used for Skyrim, but you get the idea.

Last edited by fatelementality on 3/1/2012 9:20:23 PM

Agree with this comment 15 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

firesoul453
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 11:36:13 PM

More processing power wouldn't help with load times

Problem with loading is that disks are slow (hardrives a bit faster but also slow)

Developers can manage load times better probably though. There are plenty of games that do a good job of loading while your doing something.

More ram can help with loadings, since they could load more and not have to load it later.



The only way to get rid of loadings are to either get a really fast hard drive (and install the game data on it), or use cartridges

Although I would absolutely LOVE cartridges, it would makes games cost $100+

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jawknee
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 12:08:38 AM

Developers just need to do a better job at hiding load times behind cutscenes like Uncharted and Killzone.

Agree with this comment 12 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 12:31:15 AM

I amused myself during the Skyrim load times by twirling and zooming in and out on whatever monster/person/object/world model that was present. Hey... it's somethin'

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 12:47:22 AM

Lol - actually so do I, World. I find amusement in it too!

As Jawk say, hiding loading times behind cutscenes is the neatest solution - but is only applicable on certain style games.

What would be a *real* boost in cutting down loading time would be to not have to read from disc/hard drive all the time, ergo more memory. Then more stuff could stay in ram and not had to be thrown out again instantly.


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/2/2012 12:49:34 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 1:02:32 AM

What I don't understand is why downloadable versions on the hard drive still have those load times.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 2:17:52 AM

As firesoul said, HDDs are faster than disc drives, but it's not the same as the data being in the RAM.

What I don't understand is when PSN games smaller than say 300 MB have load times. Shouldn't the whole game be loaded into the RAM? I guess they're super-compressed or something.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 3:08:42 AM

Fane, I think Highlander said something about this once. Something about not changing the architecture of the game so that it performs the full loading process originally in the game even though it doesn't need to.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 5:48:20 AM

World, it doesn't matter if the game is stored on your hard drive or on a blu-ray disk, it still needs to read files when it needs to. In principle the hard drive is just a very fast, much larger blu-ray disk that you can write to as well. In principle.

It's the limited amount of ram that to a great extent decides how often a game must read from disk (as opposed to from memory). And that amount of ram is the same for every game, no matter where it is stored.

Last edited by Beamboom on 3/2/2012 5:50:27 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

fatelementality
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 6:09:01 AM

I remember playing Soul Reaver for the PSOne and it had virtually no load times when you were roaming the world. Someone needs to go back a few decades and hit the math books. Not me though, I suck at math :)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 10:25:27 AM

Load times can be hidden, usually behind a cutscene, but some games will smartcache assets so that as you enter a new area, it continues playing witho9ut an apparent load. More RAM in the console would help developers do this as they could literally pre-load the data for the opening scene in a new level as you enter the closing stages or an area with an exit. It all depends on how hard the developer tries to hid the load times. If they don't try, and simply have a loading screen, then no matter the media (including cartridge) you will see a load time as the game is loaded from the media to main memory.

As an example of zero load times, look at Burnout Paradise. that game pre-caches world data to the HDD from the BluRay as you play, it's kind of a silent install. Even the add-on Island works the same way so you drive seamlessly from one area to the next. The only time this breaks down is when a player manages to get a car fast enough to outpace the speed within which the world data can be streamed.

Last edited by Highlander on 3/2/2012 10:27:34 AM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Oyashiro
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 1:31:29 PM

Same here, I don't care if there is a big jump in graphics, if anything I want games to run at 60 FPS as a standard in the next generation.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 3:00:22 PM

Yes Burnout Paradise is awesome in that respect, Highlander (well, Burnout Paradise is awesome, period).
We find the same in GTA4 as well. It loads in the background along the way. Very few, if any loading screens.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 3:19:53 PM

Indeed Beamboom, that is something that is well implemented (and kinda has to be) in most open world games. I just don't understand why developers do not manage to make things as seamless in other games.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Saturday, March 03, 2012 @ 2:39:45 AM

I've been thinking the same, High. Cause obviously it's doable and most all games would benefit from it.
And I suspect the answer is hidden in your sentence between parentheses there; they don't *have* to do it in the other games, therefore they don't. It's easier to just pull up something temporary while reading the chunk of data you need next.


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/3/2012 3:17:29 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 9:29:19 PM
Reply

Sony may not want to produce it, but that doesn't mean they can't play around with components. I just hope if the new architecture is true then they better make it compatible form the get go or else they'll get the same reaction from the public. "I want a vita sooo baaad I'ts got great games, awesome features, a great machine overall, but it doesn't play PSone games so I'll wait." Yeah cause that's what the vita was clearly made for.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Mdash0009
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 9:37:30 PM

I'm waiting for the PS1 classics to go on Vita so I can deactivate my PSP and activate my Vita. So yes, the PS1 classics feature is a huge deal for me, even though the Vita is made to be a Vita.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 10:51:17 PM

PS1 classics > all games

Agree with this comment 2 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

Oyashiro
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 3:58:35 PM

Do you have more then one PSP? You can register two handhelds to the PS3.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Mdash0009
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 4:19:37 PM

@Oyashiro, yes, 2 PSP's, that's why I need to deactivate one, the other 1 isn't mine so I cant deactivate theirs.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 9:51:11 PM
Reply

I constantly state that "I am happy with the PS3", but who am I fooling? I'll have a PS4 on launch!

Agree with this comment 12 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Clamedeus
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 10:14:22 PM

I'll at least try to get one on launch, and I hope i have enough money to get one as well. I might.. have to work the corner..

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 11:05:20 PM

Same here max...

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 11:05:43 PM

LOL. I should of added - "if the money is there that month".

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 12:51:48 AM

Me too Max, especially now. I really am excited over these news!

Last edited by Beamboom on 3/2/2012 1:00:14 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

daus26
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 1:11:14 PM

I'd so agree with this, but I can't. Don't get me wrong, but other than the PS1, my launch PS2 and PS3 all died earlier than I'd want it to. That and the fact that I hear a lot of others have as well, to the point where it's too much to hear. Unless Sony can ensure me somehow that it's going to be much more reliable than the PS3 like heat temps, materials or whatever, I'm going to be very hesitant to get a PS4 at launch.

But please, this is not to let anybody down that's excited to get one at launch. I just personally don't have the confidence I think I need to do so.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Excelsior1
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 10:10:33 PM
Reply

Sony did also say it would be "undesirable" to let Microsoft get a significant jump on them again. It scares me to think about MS going unchallenged in NA for any length of time next gen. I know MS launching first is probably way down on the list on the reasons why this gen played out the way it did but it did not help matters for Sony.

As for the PS4...it sounds like this it will be a much more developer firendly system which is good news for gamers. I would love backwards compatability because I believe it would help early adoption rates but what I really want is it be flat out more powerful than the next system from MS.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 10:19:24 PM

I doubt MS will make a next gen machine that much more powerful than the ps3 to make Sony want to release theirs ASAP. I wouldn't hurry things up unless it helps get 3rd party devs on board with it and not have a deja vu with the ps4 in terms of crappy ports or sub par multiplats. In other words, as long as Sony can get most if not all 3rd party devs to make their games with exactly the same quality as with the next xbox then Sony should be fine, regardless of when they release the PS4.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 10:53:47 PM
Reply

Well, according to the equally reliable anonymous sources I have read today while digging on this, the story is a bunch of hogwash and the truth of the matter is that the current early dev kits use Cell derived CPU with more SPUs and an AMD GPU at the moment.

I find it highly unlikely that Sony would throw in the towel and make a glorified PC instead of a console, that would practically betray their entire history.

Agree with this comment 15 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 10:58:51 PM

It's curious to say the least because there has been such a huge investment in Cell, but it would remove a lot of the barriers for developers.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Qubex
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 3:34:01 AM

We will have to see... I know that both yourself and myself have said that it would be desirable for Sony to stick with the Cell architecture. All the developer kits are already available for this. Adding more cores should not cause issues but give us a far more powerful machine...

Why the hell would Sony change their tact now??? I hope they don't screw it up???

Highlander... I hope you are right my friend...

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Looking Glass
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 4:11:24 AM

I'm inclined to agree Highlander.

I actually did hear a while ago that the next Playstation would use two CELLs as opposed to one (in addition to the GPU). I don't know if it's true but it certainly seems to be more plausible than this story.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 4:20:43 AM

however interested i am to see where they could go with it, why beat on a dead horse?
IBM dropped cell for a reason!
$ony is only shooting themselves in the foot by sticking with cell!
the exotic architecture is exactly why we have had to put up with crappy ports!
yea some have learned to master it, but what about those like bugthesda?
do you really want to have to put up with more skyrim, and fallouts?
$ony releasing the ps4 with cell would be like M$ releasing their next system with a HD DVD drive!

Agree with this comment 4 up, 12 down Disagree with this comment

xnonsuchx
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 6:17:18 AM

Looking Glass - Not 2 Cells, but a multi-core IBM POWER6/POWER7-based CPU w/ upgraded SPU 'co-processor' (like 14-16+ double-precision SPUs) which together would be a seriously souped up Cell-compatible set up.

And it could be true that AMD and Sony are working together to make a CPU+GPU, but that doesn't necessarily mean an AMD Fusion-type, x86-compatible chip. They could be licensing a POWER6/POWER7 core from IBM and doing a POWER CPU+SPU Farm+GPU all on a single chip design. I believe another rumor was that all this could be running at 4-4.2GHz too.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Looking Glass
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 6:28:00 AM

@ No-name

First of all if even someone is too lazy or too incompetent to truly learn about the CELL or something similar to it Sony should theoretically be able to get around this by also including an improved GPU and a larger amount of RAM. Or in other words stuff that's easier for them to wrap their heads around.

And second, incompetent designers can't really be helped all that much if at all. After all, even the version of Skyrim on the developer friendly Xbox 360 still had bugs and glitches.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 9:28:32 AM

@Anonymous Cowherd,

IBM didn't 'drop' Cell. Cell is/was a joint venture between IBM, Sony and Toshiba. Toshiba essentially sold their interest to Sony, and IBM ended *their* active development in the Cell architecture indicating that the project's work would be rolled into their other designs. NO comment was made regarding the future of Cell with Sony, nor was it ever indicated that IBM would not do additional work with Sony on the design.

A Power 7 based CPU with an SPU coprocerssor (AKA the Toshiba SPURS - which Sony now owns the rights to) seems a likely CPU architecture. It retains sufficient SPU capability to provide backwards compatibility, and yet is based on a newer state of the art Power design that is a true powerhouse. The Power 7 architecture draws on the work done with the Cell processors, and in some ways it is the spiritual successor to the original Cell.

Another possibility is that IBM would work under contract to produce a CPU based on two PowerXCell8i CPUs on a single die, this would provide 2PPEs and 16 (or more) SPUs, all using the more advanced design of the PowerXcell8i.

All I know is that comments by sources that I know to be as reliable as any other un-named source are saying that the early dev kits feature a CPU architecture that is cell derived with many SPUs.

@Qubex, indeed. I hope so too. Switching architectures would mean that Sony's own in-house devs would all have to start over again. 3rd parties be damned, the in-house teams are the ones that matter at this stage..

@Looking glass, the original PS3 concept featured multiple Cells, but they were too costly to make and the yield sucked. So they went with 1 slightly gimped Cell, and GPU to supplement it. I would not be surprised to see something with the hardware equivalent of twin (or even quad) cells in a PS4, but with about 4 times the performance of the original CellBE.

I would be completely surprised if Sony ditched everything that has gone before in terms of design philosophy and architecture and chose an X86 design. That would not only be a retrograde step technologically, it would be completely against the nature of the console world.

I know that Sony are seeking to make the PS4 developer friendly. One thing for everyone to remember is that the next generation of consoles will use CPUs with many more cores than the previous one. GPUs have many cores now too. Sony's approach of many cores with specific purposes has actually been validated in all aspects of computing. Mobile devices with quad core CPUs and quad GPUs are coming through (like the Vita), the current PC CPU architecture is actually closer in design to the Cell than to the x86 architecture of the past. If anything x86 is holding things back because it's no longer the native environment. If you look at the latest AMD and Intel designs they are running x86 in micro-code, but the underlying architecture is not x86, and hasn't been for a long time.

Sony's strategy of a single general purpose Core with multiple high speed math cores has been shown to be valid by the programmers that have used it. What Sony has to do is build development tools that can put that power into the hands of developers. So yes, make a machine that is easy to develop for, but that has more to do with things like available memory and dev tools than it does CPU architecture.

Last edited by Highlander on 3/2/2012 9:37:59 AM

Agree with this comment 8 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

daus26
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 1:11:58 PM

This bit of news is much more pleasing to see for me!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Saturday, March 03, 2012 @ 7:57:26 AM

they stopped working on it, if that does not mean they dropped it then what does it mean?
i dunno about you, but when a company comes out and says were stopping R&D into the cell, id call that dropping it.
i never said cell is dead, i said why beat on a dead horse.
cant believe i have to break that down, but what the hell.
what it means is its not nessessary, its like the red laser tech developed recently.
that can store what was it, 500GBs per layer?
would you advise $ony to add that in the ps4?
a updated cell probably would be higher spec then a conventional PC set up, but it also would be more expensive, and much more of a pain in the a$$ to work with!
so ill ask the question again, why beat on a dead horse?
yes they could stick with cell, but whats the point when a cheaper, easier to work with, and more developer friendly alternative will do?

fact is $ony always has created new architecture for its hardware.
so ps4 will be no different, but this time go back to conventional software instead of alien tech.
only reason $ony has always been the difficult one is because of father ken.
now hes gone, the vita has fallen in line, and the ps4 will do the same.
in fact im so sure of it if ps4 uses cell ill quit gaming for good!
no freaking way $ony will use cell in the ps4.
might as well use a chopper to pick up a pencil!


Last edited by ___________ on 3/3/2012 8:00:07 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 10:56:35 PM
Reply

It makes some sense, and ultimately I think the aim here is to shrink up the development cycle. If the game is made on PC then it takes a significantly less amount of time to get it functioning on the console.

Still, it's kind of scary in that it's MS-like BUT it will make Bethesda games run so much better :)



Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 3/1/2012 10:57:11 PM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 2:20:57 AM

No Bethesda game will ever run well on any system.

;P

Last edited by Fane1024 on 3/2/2012 2:21:23 AM

Agree with this comment 9 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 3:10:00 AM

ha you know what I mean, you'll never get away from those bugs but the murderous framerates and many freezes could be helped.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 10:33:26 AM

No, I don't agree with this at all. Sony's first party development commitment is what differentiates them from everyone else. If, and it's a *bug* if, Sony went a more commodity route with their console hardware, all that would differentiate them from others is their first party devs. To some extent having a non-commodity design benefits the in-house first party teams and provides a way for Sony to set itself apart from the rest. In competition for consumers, differentiating yourself from the competition is vital. Sony's first party studios and their high quality PS3 work is what has driven the success of the PS3. Switching to a commodity x86 architecture levels the playing field and removes the inherent advantage of those in-house teams. Bad move in my opinion.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

telly
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 11:16:54 AM

If it's true, it makes sense. Obviously most of us put PS3 head and shoulders above 360, but third party developers have often felt otherwise, and that's reflected in the quality of the software. The situation is much, much better that it was at launch of course, but anyone who's dealt with the Skyrim fiasco and issues with some other games (has anyone else had a HELL of a time getting online co-op to work on the PS3 version of Dead Island? Me and my buddy have literally quit trying it was such a pain in the ass) knows that clearly, third party developers are making superior versions of games for 360. I'm sure Sony would love to have an extremely developer-friendly system, and that means it has to be more similar to PCs, they'll do it.

I do see your point, Highlander. PS3 exclusive games, built to optimize Cell technology, really do have a unique look and feel, and that uniqueness could be jeopardized if Sony starts playing Microsoft's game. But from a business perspective, would be hard for sony to pass up I think.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 11:48:07 AM

See the thing is, this whole 'more similar to PCs' thing is a complete red herring. The 360 itself is not more similar to PCs. It uses a three core PowerPC CPU and an AMD GPU with eDRAM to boost performance. It's the development tools that MS provided. They used their position as the key holder to the Windows platform to make the dev tools on the 360 work just like them, the brought their own existing software standards from Windows to the 360 and offered these things to third party developers. Sony was never going to be in a position to do this since they do not hold the keys that MS does. They could have licensed MS libraries (assuming MS wanted to let them) for a fairly exorbitant fee, or use open standards and third party standards - which is what they did.

None of this has anything to do with the underlying hardware. It's a complete myth that the 360 is somehow PC like and the PS3 is uber-exotic. It's simply not the case. And before anyone bleats about the memory architecture on the PS3. Most PCs with discrete GPUs use separate memory pools for system and video, just like the PS3, and only mass market cheapo PCs use embedded graphics and shared memory - as used by the 360.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

daus26
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 1:03:55 PM

First thoughts that come to this for me is it would be almost a slap to the face of 1st party devs. They've worked their butt off this gen to get us quality games on the PS3. And you know what, it also differentiates between the developer's work ethic. It took Valve years to even "attempt" at putting effort to the PS3.

Well, I guess it's a matter of wanting to level the playing field vs. having more potential. I just don't understand how we're all getting these great games for the PS3, that's continually increasing in quality, and completely disregarding like it was crap. I mean are 3rd party PS3 games that bad?

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 2:42:31 PM

I defer to Highlander in all technological matters.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

matt99
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 11:08:46 PM
Reply

If Sony is smart, they are hard at work developing the best gaming system ever made...and not telling a damn soul about it.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, March 01, 2012 @ 11:51:55 PM

Definitely, but they are SOOO bad at keeping secrets.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 1:01:25 AM
Reply

This is GREAT news, every PS gamer should be happy if this turns out to be true!

I believe it will lead to better games, shorter development time, lower overall development costs, easier to recruit skilled developers for projects, great games will be available for the ps4 sooner after launch, we don't need five YEARS to reach the hardware's full potential (who would mind if were were at current level quality games on the ps3 already three-four years ago? I know I wouldn't!)... The list really is LONG.

The *only* argument against - in my opinion - is that we will have to kiss bye-bye to backward compatibility to the ps3 games. PS1 compatibility should easily be possible to create with software emulation by now.

This news really, really ignited my excitement. D1P!

Last edited by Beamboom on 3/2/2012 1:09:26 AM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Ignitus
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 2:19:12 AM

I also think this is great news and I'm also excited about it just include lots of RAM and it should be perfect.

And don't worry about B/C. For those who want it real bad, there will be and add-on that will conect to the PS4 gigabit ethernet port that will enable ps3 B/C.

It will keep the PS4 price down and those who really want the PS3 B/C can pay for it.


Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 2:25:50 AM

@Beam

...says the lifelong PC gamer.

If I wanted a PC clone, I'd get a s***Box. Here's hoping Highlander is right (a safe bet most of the time).

Gross over-simplification: 360 games reached their potential years ago, while PS3 games are still improving, with a greater long-term up-side...thanks to Ken Kutaragi's visionary engineering.


Last edited by Fane1024 on 3/2/2012 2:32:58 AM

Agree with this comment 8 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 3:10:33 AM

Fane,

Is it worth getting sluggish ports, longer development time and the lesser version of a game for YEARS just in the sake of "being different"? Cause that's the reality here!

Forget those party speeches of "visionary engineering". We can talk about what the ps3 architecture *could* have been used for until we turn green in our faces: The harsh, painful reality is that games are after all these years STILL struggling with catching up with the X360 version of the same game. Is that really so cool?

It boils down to one question: "Why do we own a console?". The answer to that should be simple: "To experience awesome gaming moments with minimum hazzle", right? Not to be able to cluster a stable of consoles to solve huge mathematical challenges. We don't do that. Not you, not I, none around here does. There was a time when Linux users did so, but that's long gone. All that's left is a box to play games on. A games console.

If you really think it's worth it to wait until the end of it's life cycle and after the rest of the hardware world long ago has surpassed the performance before the full power of your game box is unleashed, well then I can understand why you would want this to continue. Otherwise? Not so much.

Cause it will not be just a "PC clone" anyway! It will still be what defines a console: ONE piece of hardware to design for, as opposed to the PC where you got an ocean of different performances and hardware components. Can't you see? All the benefits from having a console would remain, the only major difference would be that you will get more top quality, top performance games coming from a higher number of studios earlier in the life cycle. How can that possibly be a bad thing?

And it's not like our PS3 today is *that* different from a PC. Quite the contrary: It's using PC standard hard drives, graphics chipset from nVidia (the major PC graphics chipset manufacturer), PC standard file system, PC standard bluetooth support, PC standard USB ports, PC standard network interface, uses standard media server protocols used in the PC world. Like it or not, but in all practical terms your PS3 IS a PC. There is a reason why a PC operating system, Linux, could run on it.

So the PS4 will still be a console with the advantages that comes with being one. Don't worry. Trust me on this one: This is GOOD news. :)


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/2/2012 4:07:43 AM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Qubex
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 3:36:39 AM

Beamboom... it is sad news for me...

Sony is about the exotic... even though they do piss me off at times...

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 4:53:58 AM

That I can understand, Qubex. The nostalgic aspects for long time followers should not be underestimated. Luckily/unfortunately for me the PS3 is my first console ever, so I haven't established such bonds yet so I can more easily welcome changes, confident that my gaming experience as a continuous Sony console gamer will benefit from this.

But while I do respect the nostalgia I really do believe you guys are overreacting here. It will still be a console, still be a Sony, it will still be different!
Remember that even amongst the PC manufacturers there are good and bad PCs, awesome and sucky machines. Just look at ASUS!

The exclusives will remain exclusive, still be tailor made for this particular hardware setup, still unavailable on other platforms and still have the insane level of polish as ever before!

And as soon as the ps4 is here in all its shiny, classic Sony trademark design and Playstation OS, as soon as you fire up your first games and they look awesome, play awesome and feel awesome from day ONE, well then I believe you all will soon forgive Sony for making this move.


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/2/2012 5:21:09 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 9:42:01 AM

How is switching from high performance computing architectures to the uber-kludge known as x86 a good thing? Good grief, it's like saying, no, I don't want that Ferrari, I'll take that Kia Rio instead please. Seriously the PC architecture is so worn out is has needed replacement for at least a decade. If anything has held back IT is the insistence on maintaining some kind of backwards compatibility with a design created in 1978.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 11:42:35 AM

Apparently there are a lot of people reading today that know zero about hardware and CPU architectures seeing as how my above comment is being so happily down voted.

If you're so blinded by bias or blind faith that you think that the PC architecture is not worn out, so be it. I've worked with PCs since the early 80's and followed the technology closely since before that time. Even after all the 'evolution' that the PC has gone through we are still suck with the same crap instruction set, and the same design compromises that facilitated early PCs addressing more than 64KB of RAM continue to have their influence today.

To put it bluntly, it's a crap architecture that should have been put to death a long time ago.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 11:53:09 AM

I don't think it's like saying that at all.

But discussing the finer technical details from an engineers perspective is not really that relevant - what matters is the end result. A system is never better than the software that runs on it.

If this move by Sony means more and better games then that's what's important to most, I would assume. And there's still *plenty* room for Sony to do ingenious designs based on these technologies? It's not like they are just throwing in a standard PC motherboard in there.
I really don't think you all should take this so negative! I think this can end up really good. Although it feels strange that it's *me* who defend Sony's decisions here. :D

PS: The Porsche 911 is built on a design introduced in 1963.


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/2/2012 12:03:35 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 12:08:06 PM

Only you would compare a commodity PC design to a Porsche.

Oh, and as far as games programmers are concerned, they are very much interested in the finer technical details. If there's a developer that isn't interested in them, then I have severe doubts about the quality of their work.

Last edited by Highlander on 3/2/2012 12:09:30 PM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 12:12:57 PM

Hehe - tell that to the ones who enjoy the most intense game experiences right now. I believe they all play on a PC.

Dude, chill! This will be just fine. Don't trust me, but trust Sony. In this case I really believe they know what they are doing.


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/3/2012 3:10:11 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

daus26
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 12:50:31 PM

It's funny how you talk about the end result beamboom. Which system between the PS3 and Xbox 360 do you think will have the better end result? As far as I know, 360s been pushed some time ago. Not only that, I'm gonna believe it when developers say that some exclusive games for the PS3 can't run on the 360 due to the differences in cpu power.

I can see how this would be very good news in the beginning, but you have to look at the fact that the "beginning" of this is not the same as to when the PS3 just launched in 2006. Things are just starting to kick in with the cell processor. When things starts to kick in, they usually improve overtime. Eventually, the differences will mute.

Also, shoddy ports for the PS3 from 360 are usually due to framerate issues and texturing. I'm pretty confident devs can overcome those with next gen's improved RAM and GPU.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

xnonsuchx
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 11:24:09 PM

Looks like some PC ignoramuses don't like your truth, TheHighlander. :-)

Agree with this comment 3 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Sunday, March 04, 2012 @ 4:11:09 AM

Daus, I really don't see how enjoying a systems full potential only a few years after it's release can be seen as a bad thing. Why wouldn't you want full usage of your system? If you could choose, would you rather wait even *more* years before the really good games arrived for the ps3? Would you prefer it wasn't fully used until... 2014? 2020? Then why the heck buy an Playstation at all, five years ago? I really don't follow that kind of logic at all. I want full effect of my hardware when I buy it!

One thing is how the games COULD have been right after launch (the "party speeches"), another story altogether is how it turned out to be.
If it was all up to me, I'd want the quality level of 2011 already the first year I owned a ps3. Who would NOT want that? Who would really want to buy something that's a problem child 70% of it's life span? Who?

So to your question, "Which system between the PS3 and Xbox 360 do you think will have the better end result?":
Well, I've had a console that's been struggling with the lesser version of my favourite games ever since it's launch. I've owned a console where, if a game performed EQUAL as on the x360 we cheered. I've had a console where the only developers who were able to make something special out of it were OWNED by the manufacturer, dictated by the manufacturer. "Go Make Us A Flagship!". The PS3.

Who do I think has the better end result, all years taken into account? As a PS3 fan I don't really want to answer that one. I just am relieved that Sony now seem to take action for this not to happen again.


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/4/2012 4:38:55 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 4:16:39 AM
Reply

what does changing architecture have to do with "gaming quality PC"?
way to take the guys words and twist it for hits!
this is just silly, ps4 might be gaming quality PCs from 2 years ago, but by the time it releases it will be ancient history!

what he was actually saying was no more alien architecture like previous systems, which was pretty obvious!
everyone said once father ken leaves every system after that will stick to normal architecture which they have.
look at the vita, same system components of allot of other mobile devices out there, no custom made parts specifically made for it like previous systems.

both a good and a bad thing.
good because it will make ports that much easier, games will have lower budgets and lower development times, meaning more launch titles, and better ones.
but bad because im worried we wont see the leap we have seen and have come to expect.
look at the leap from uncharted to uncharted 2, that was possible because ND had such a short time to develop uncharted 1 so they really were not utilizing it as well as they could be.
2 they had a bigger team, and much more time so they could really pull out all the stops.
simplifying the tech im worried will decrease the graphical leaps we see.
its nice seeing what a console can do earlier, but the problem with that is lower lifetime.
seeing the same graphics for 3 years straight, 2 years into a systems lifespan is going to make people want a new system.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

PMartinNL
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 5:54:18 AM
Reply

@ Cesar_ser_4, the ps3 is indeed a powerful machine, however your view on the power is a tad over the top. Games now on both consoles are pretty much equal in terms of graphics, the XBOX 720 will obviously be way ahead of the ps3 in terms of power and or '' graphics ". I couldn't click the relpy button so I had to reply in this manner.

Agree with this comment 5 up, 9 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 10:35:37 AM

No offense, but, no they are not equal. First party games are the peak of quality on these consoles. Compare first party games vs first party games, the PS3 wipes the floor with the 360 in that regard.

Agree with this comment 10 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

gray_eagle
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 7:19:04 AM
Reply

comparing a next gen console to this gen console?
imo, it does'nt matter what sony comes up with, ms will still be here,
throwing money around.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

CrusaderForever
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 9:49:20 AM
Reply

It's like Sony is reading my mind! This is fantastic news from a development stand point. There shouldn't be any inferior ports anymore. Get us some SATA3/SSD and a very fast Bluray drive and load times will be diminished a great deal. Also, I would like to see an AMD 7000 series chipset with a 28nm. I know that is pushing it but AMD is great at getting a lot out of a cheaper price. The PS4 future state is getting brighter and brighter!

Last edited by CrusaderForever on 3/2/2012 9:51:59 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 12:02:18 PM
Reply

Dang, so if this is true, then the PS3 won't be backwards compatiable. Is Sony still going to use blu-ray?, if so will they use more layers so they can increase the data storage over 50GB?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

daus26
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 12:40:35 PM
Reply

I don't like this news at all, and I'm gonna side with Highlander on this. All you guys who are looking at this news as positive are looking at the short term.

First of all, Sony is just picking up strides with this cell technology. Sure, not all develepors have mastered it yet, but eventually there will come the time where 3rd party devs are near equal in skill to the 1st party.

Second, it's a HUGE waste of investment time and money for something as innovative as the cell only to be dispose of to an aging PC architecture. I really want the cell architecture to become more mainstream in the future and be part of other products besides playstation, because I just think it has that potential to replace CPU architectur. Surely, physicists and scientist didn't use the cell and Ps3s early in its life because it's just "different." It's a beast!

Third, competition would be pointless and mute. If both Xbox and Playstation used the PC architecture, where would be the edge other than raw horsepower? They might as well join forces together. It's like Apple giving in to PC's Windoze.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 1:22:57 PM

Hi Daus :)
Regarding your last comment about Apple giving in to Windows PCs: In fact Apple has done just that. They shifted from their PowerPC CPUs to Intel x86-based processors some years ago. Today Apple use a subset of the standard PC architecture which provides support for Mac OS X and other operating systems so both Windows and Linux can now run on Mac hardware.

Still, Linux, Windows and Mac are three significantly different systems running very different software and offer different pros&cons.

It will be the same with the PS3 and the X360, they will continue to be different even if they share certain similarities in their architecture.

Seriously guys: It *really* is not the end of Playstation as a unique machine even if they do this shift. Please hear me, it isn't! Would Sony ever allow that to happen?


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/2/2012 3:25:39 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

xnonsuchx
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 11:16:43 PM

Correction: Linux runs on many CPU architectures and ran fine on PowerPC Macs too, so didn't need the switch to Intel to be able to run it.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Saturday, March 03, 2012 @ 2:18:37 AM

Ah! That is true Xnon, and a good correction. I had totally forgotten about that. You could indeed.


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/3/2012 2:29:48 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

DennisAR
Friday, March 02, 2012 @ 6:23:57 PM
Reply

It is apparent that you guys do not keep up with PC tech. So I will help you guys. The PC is becoming more and more dependent on the graphics card's graphics processing unit doing the computational processing that was traditionally for the CPU and for good reason: the GPU on a graphics card is extremely powerful. For example my AMD HD7970 has 3.79 TERAFLOPS of single precision computation power and 947 GIGAFLOPS of double precision computation power while my CPU can only manage 60 GIGAFLOPS of single precision computation power. I don't know what the double flops rating is, but you guys need to realize that the CPU is becoming less relevant. If you have a weak video card then your computer will suck.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Saturday, March 03, 2012 @ 2:22:32 AM

Yes, there are much prejudice against anything PC to be found around here. And quite frankly I don't think that will change any time soon.

But that's all right. We all need our teams to cheer on. :)


Last edited by Beamboom on 3/3/2012 3:22:25 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Nerull
Sunday, March 04, 2012 @ 2:06:21 PM
Reply

if it's even more pc like does that mean we can finally run linux again?
not likely

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Id00urmomma
Tuesday, March 06, 2012 @ 12:33:23 PM
Reply

They need to go back to a cartridge based system instead of a disc based system, flash is a million times faster and has become extremely cheap over the last decade, it is way more compact so even games on a portable could play the cartridges, it is where they need to go if they are going to keep a "hard" copy of a game, but unfortunately they will eliminate the eventually just look at how they are trying to eliminate the resell market by adding a "online pass".

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Id00urmomma
Tuesday, March 06, 2012 @ 12:33:24 PM
Reply

They need to go back to a cartridge based system instead of a disc based system, flash is a million times faster and has become extremely cheap over the last decade, it is way more compact so even games on a portable could play the cartridges, it is where they need to go if they are going to keep a "hard" copy of a game, but unfortunately they will eliminate the eventually just look at how they are trying to eliminate the resell market by adding a "online pass".

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

What do you think of the Destiny beta?
It's awesome! Can't wait for September!
It's only good, but I'm having fun.
Eh, it's okay, but I expected more.
It sucks, period.

Previous Poll Results