PS4 NewsCheck Out The PS4's CPU Specs - PS4 News

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

Check Out The PS4's CPU Specs

If you've been looking for a full breakdown of PS4 specs, Sony was prepared to oblige during this year's GDC conference. 

Check out the full rundown and then decide for yourself. Many are saying these are essentially nothing more than low-end PC specs, while others say they're a bit more special than that. Here's the PS4's CPU:

  • 64-bit x84 arch
  • Low power consumption
  • Low heat
  • 8 cores, HW threads
  • 2MiB L2-cache per 4 core group, 32kib I1 I/D-cache
  • PlayStation Shader Language
  • Similar to HLSL
  • Allows featured BEYOND DirectX 11 and OpenGL 4.0

There's also 8GB of 256-bit GDDR5 RAM and they're saying the machine will come with "a very large hard drive." Many are hoping for 1TB, because that seems like what we'll need to deal with the size of next-gen titles. While it's certainly true that the PS4 is more developer-friendly than past PlayStation consoles, a lot of gamers don't like the sacrifices Sony had to make in terms of futuristic, cutting-edge power. Well, don't forget; that kind of thing costs everyone more and people freaked out over the $600 PS3 price tag, remember...? Can't have it both ways, ya know.

Tags: ps4, playstation 4, ps4 specs, ps4 details, sony

3/27/2013 9:57:59 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 (59 posts)

firesoul453
Wednesday, March 27, 2013 @ 10:35:59 PM
Reply

Don't let people fool you. (People will see a low clock speed and think the processor isn't powerful, but clock speed is a useless way to compare processors unless they are the same type. ) This will be a beast of a machine!

Not only is the processor significantly more powerful, but the GPU is a much bigger jump than the processor.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, March 27, 2013 @ 11:04:47 PM

Not to mention the PS4 processor will be almost entirely dedicated to running games and not a bunch of extraneous processes like a PC.

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

daus26
Wednesday, March 27, 2013 @ 11:36:58 PM

Yeah, the big problem is people would compare a PC and a game console's spec side by side, but it just doesn't work that way.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Axe99
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 12:06:35 AM

Aye - if you look at the disparity in power between current and previous generation consoles and PCs, consoles have always performed well above what their specs would suggest if it was a straight comparison, and I'd expect the same again. Am looking forward to muchly :).

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

Highlander
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 1:15:36 AM

No, it won't be a beast of a machine. Stop looking at it through the rose tinted glasses of an optimistic fan.

The specs are skeleton to say the least. No clock speed, nothing about the GPU specs at all, and just a mysterious mention of "PlayStation Shader Language". It's a tweaked variant of HLSL. The GPU's only mention is tessellation. No offense, but any modern GPU can handle tessellation.

Look at the spec on an AMD A8-4555M, Double up the x86 units and you more or less have what is claimed to be in PS4. The GPU in the A8-4555M is horrible, but has tessellation capability.

See the thing is, nothing about the x86 cores is in any way different to any other x86 core. The GPU is an AMD GPU, and the only tweaking is the PlayStation Shader language instead of HLSL. Why no mention of clock speeds? Where is the number of cores in the GPU? 8 64-bit x86 cores is easy enough to understand, the only real missing item there is the clock, but that GPU is the real power in the system, so how many cores does it feature?

Honestly, anyone calling this thing a beast and describing it as if it's some kind of pocket super computer compared to a decent contemporary PC is literally deluding themselves. Accessible it may be, but a beast it is not.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 6 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 1:30:50 AM

Regardless of if its a beast or not... the demos, games, and CG weve seen so far is pretty significant. It will produce games that look, run and play better than what we have now.

Agree with this comment 8 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 5:09:50 AM

Problem is, Highlander, that it depends on how you choose to spin it. You've just decided to give this machine as much hate as you can garner, and therefore see nothing but mediocrity.

One could easily have spun the PS3 the same way back in the days. Totally ignore the good parts and just ridicule 256mb ram and 256mb video memory who really was *nothing* back then compared even to low-end PCs. Laptops were better equipped.
Or the graphics chipset who were picked from an Nvidia generation that already at launch were totally standard, nothing impressive at all. I had *two* cards of that same generation in my PC at the time I bought the PS3.
Or the stamp-sized hard drives. Or... Or... Or... One could go on like that, just like you've done with the PS4 for months now, ever since *all* you knew was that it could be x86 based. That's the whole deal for you.

So instead of laughing in the face of those who are optimistic and enthusiastic about this machine - may I suggest that you take a step back and consider how you yourself have reacted in similar discussions in the past, when *you* were the enthusiastic and optimistic one and were replied to by someone who did not share your positive views. Think back at how you felt about them, and how you welcomed their comments. That's you, now.
For example, look up older discussions here on PSXE and how you felt about - and talked to - those who did not share your limitless optimism about the Vitas potential and market appeal, and just maybe put this into perspective and stop "laughing your ass off" at those who now are genuinely excited for Sonys next console.

Cause for *most* gamers it's all about the software. The games. This console will deliver games on a scale we've never experienced before, and include more developers than we've ever seen before. *That's* why we, the industry and the media all are so excited. Because we're *gamers*.

Last edited by Beamboom on 3/28/2013 6:11:22 AM

Agree with this comment 10 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 8:25:14 AM

My reason on why I don't care about alleged power or lack there of is simple...

The PS3 with its Cell meant nothing to me in multiplatform titles and when there was a difference, it was usually on the negative end for the PS3.

The PS4 will change all of that.

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

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 10:20:03 AM

In any case Mr. boom, it still does sound pretty ignorant to say that these specs belong to a "beast machine", specially when you have throttled clock speeds. Both of you (you and highlander) make valid points. And this goes to the rest of the peeps. The fact that it will only run games (as in with no OS or processes and the like) does not make it a beast of a machine. Now, if only it had a Sony "modified" version of the APU with proprietary stuff that doesn't necessarily have to involve an exotic arch, then yeah I would believe it could be very capable.

Also, if you guys could go ahead and point out that when you call this a "beast of a machine" it is in comparison with the "mediocre" machine we now have that'd be great.

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

Highlander
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 11:24:59 AM

No offense beamboom, but that's rubbish. Maybe you don't remember the PS3's arrival? People bitched about the memory until the cows came home. The fact that the 360 has the same amount of physical RAM, and that in practical terms the differences between the two were down to how you approach the partition between video and application on the 360, or the hard partition on the PS3 was immaterial to everyone who was too busy complaining about the lack of RAM.

No one complained about the postage stamp sized HDDs because at the time, they were not postage stamp sized, that comparison of yours is based on today's judgment, not that of 6-7 years ago. If you want to do that consider that 6-7 years ago, nothing came with BluRay - but the PS3 did, nothing came with HDMI, but the PS3 did, nothing came with a CPU with the performance of Cell BE, but PS3 did. $600 PCs generally did not come with discrete GPU memory, PS3 did. Nothing else on the market had memory capable of keeping up with the CPU's internal clock, the PS3 did.

And look, let's not play around here, the CellBE CPU of 7 years ago is equivalent in computing terms to the performance that the AMD x86 cores in this APU. 7 years ago, the CellBE was truly ground breaking, it out performed everything on the market at the time. The PS3's GPU was mediocre by PC GPU standards at the time, and that was a sore spot for a lot of people, but legitimately one could point out that the RSX was a custom part with a lot of modification from the original core GPU, but it still got torn apart compared to PC parts and the GPU inside the 360.

What you're saying at this point is ignore the hardware because it's the games that matter, sure it is, it was that way 6-7 years ago as well. But does that mean we should either ignore the mediocre hardware? Does it mean we should adopt fanboy glasses and talk of the beast that this system is?

That's ridiculous. After 7 years of technology advancing, why are we being fobbed off with a system that has a CPU no more powerful than the 7 year old Cell, and a mid-range consumer grade GPU, and being told how freaking great they are. Memory size and HDD size are peripheral issues at this point. 8GB of DDR5, woot, except 4GB would have done nicely too - unless you're loading 3GB of OS and making it resident while running games.

You can go on and on with your faux comparisons with PS3 vs PCs available at the time all you like, but you know all you'll be doing is echoing things there were said by others 7 years ago. The truth is that 6-7 years ago, the PS3 was criticized over the amount of RAM, the GPU, the price, and numerous other issues, but the CellBE was hailed by most everyone - rightly so. 6-7 years ago I thought PS3 should have had more memory too, but at the same time I also railed against the pointless comparisons of the 360's UMA vs the hard partition in the PS3 because it really was and is a false comparison to make.

so, why should I not point out the failings of the specification now, just as I did then? As for your efforts to counter the criticisms of this design by nitpicking things from 6-7 years ago, none of that addresses the points made about this system.

BTW, I said laughing my butt off, not "ass", thank you, if you're going to quote me, at least be accurate.



Last edited by Highlander on 3/28/2013 11:27:28 AM

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

Akuma07
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:08:38 PM

Yeah sure the Cell did all that 7 years ago, it also caused a price tag of $600 USD, or $1000 AUD here in my country.

It caused Sony to actually lose money for a long period of time.

Most of the people around here aren't just wearing fanboy-tinted glasses. I myself am looking through developer-tinted glasses. I have read nearly all the major devs including some of the smartest people in the industry such as the creator of DOOM, say several times that they are happy with the hardware, some of them even go as far as being excited.

and please, tell me one game that NEEDS more than this to look amazing? Tell me one PC game that effectively uses that amount of RAM or effectively uses multi-core processors? Because I don't know of any.

PC Specs are completely over the top these days, the software is years behind the hardware.

The PS3 was nothing special, and had specs that rivalled mid-ranged PC's back at release as well. It was the Cell that set it apart, and honestly, the Cell was a failed experiment.

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

Akuma07
Wednesday, March 27, 2013 @ 10:46:48 PM
Reply

Where is he......

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

WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, March 27, 2013 @ 11:05:09 PM

You speak of The Lander who is High?

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

Highlander
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 1:19:31 AM

He is here, laughing his butt off when anyone calls this thing a beast.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 7 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 7:28:39 AM

How about an affordable pack-mule?

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

Crabba
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:07:23 PM

How about an affordable pack-mule?

Sounds like the PS3. Thanks, but I already got one.

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

Akuma07
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:12:49 PM

Lydia, nuff said.

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

WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, March 27, 2013 @ 11:08:09 PM
Reply

The only parts of that I understand are X86, Direct X, and Open GL. But yeah I'm sure it looks like not much to PC gamers, though we shouldn't be listening to them on the subject too much. The playstation experience is about much more than specs, I've learned that over these many years the specs are means to the realization of a vision for gaming. I see that vision going forward.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

maxpontiac
Wednesday, March 27, 2013 @ 11:26:58 PM
Reply

Everyone has two choices..

1 - Be happy and get ready to play much improved versions of games we love.

2 - Be UNhappy with the new Playstation console and move on.

It is as simple as an In and Out menu.

Agree with this comment 8 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 12:40:48 AM

hahaha, love In-N-Out.

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

daus26
Wednesday, March 27, 2013 @ 11:29:48 PM
Reply

Is this official? There seems to be some typos here and there. Usually it's official when Sony releases the actual reader file, as they did on Feb. 20.

Well, CPU is still pretty "weak" in PC terms and cache isn't great either, but you can say it's special because it seems to be custom made for the PS4. Regardless, it'll be used solely for gaming and I think it's the best dollar to power ratio Sony could've asked for.

It also looks like the 8 core will be divided into 2 L2 groups, instead of L3 caches between all 8 like I thought it was. Not a big deal I guess.

"Allows featured BEYOND DirectX 11 and OpenGL 4.0"

Really?

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

Highlander
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 1:17:41 AM

Yes, so how about that GPU? Oh wait, no information. How many cores does it have? We don't really have much information at all beyond knowing it's capable of tesselation (apparently) and features a tweaked HLSL called PlayStation Shader Language. Wow, amazing.

I'm finding that the reality is not even licing up to my expectations, never mind the expectations of those calling this lump a beast.

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

Simcoe
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 8:26:06 AM

Dev consoles have a 7870.

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

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 10:25:05 AM

For its GPU it will feature an AMD firepro W8000 hehehe.

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

Crabba
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:10:40 PM

Simcoe: where did you hear that? I haven't seen anything about a 7870 in the PS4. If that were true I'd actually be ok with that...

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

Simcoe
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 10:20:31 PM

Let's say I have a friend, who works for a game developer, who has both a PS4 and new xbox dev consoles.

Also, I should qualify that it's a "heavily modified 7870".

He is more excited about the PS4 potential (for games) than he is about the next xbox.

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

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 10:30:30 PM

I feel what simcoe says would be more reliable if it came from an anonymous source hahahaha

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

Simcoe
Friday, March 29, 2013 @ 12:17:07 PM

lol

You know everyone working with these things have to sign NDA's, so it's best to keep things vague so nothing can be tracked back to my friend. My friend will sometimes tell me things (both hardware and software related), but there are still lots of other "stuff" that he doesn't/wont talk about. He is usually more open about the game he's been working on (which I won't say here), but he also hears "stuff" from friends that work for other developers too (he's previously worked for another developer in the past). There are times that I'll ask him about something I read (which I suppose are based on leaks) in an article and he'll say he "can't talk about that". Other times I ask questions and his silence speaks VOLUMES! I'll say that he's working/worked on a multiplatform triple A title that has been/will be release(d) in 2013. He's also started working on an unannounced PSN/Ouya title for release late 2013/early 2014. He also believes that the PS4 will have a clear advantage over the next xbox in terms of graphic ability/potential. He's also pretty excited about the Ouya. He's told me so much more but I just don't think, given the permanence of the internet that I'll say anymore, at least for today. I worry that I've said too much; although, it probably seems like I've said much ado about nothing! I'm also hoping that given this long post, most people will just skip over it.

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

kraygen
Wednesday, March 27, 2013 @ 11:53:07 PM
Reply

Truth is though that pc's wouldn't need such crazy high specs if it wasn't for all the background trash it has to run.

It seems the more power they put into pc's the more junk MS requires you to run for your OS.

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

Highlander
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 1:19:03 AM

Truth is that you only need that background trash if you're running with Windows in the background. Most games talk directly to the hardware, and most of Windows is paged out of memory since it's not doing anything while you play.

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

unapersson
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 2:53:41 AM

There will still be a lot of stuff running that isn't swapped out, anti-virus and other background services, browsers etc. that keep themselves in RAM by polling facebook for updates every few minutes. A lot of GUI apps and some of the Windows GUI itself will get swapped out, but some of it still needs to be there or you won't be able to alt-tab out of games.

Windows does seem to struggle with a lot of console ports. I know the issue of optimisation always gets brought up, but games tend to run on middleware engines, so if the PC port needs lots of optimization then it suggests the platform doesn't have as much free power as people like to say. You'll always get more out of a platform optimised for games than an equivalent general purpose machine.

Personally the PS4 specs just sound perfect for a gaming machine, something with a lightweight OS (though it's hard to be as heavyweight as Windows) that is optimised for gaming.

The processor seems more than fast enough, especially considering that a lot of the engines seem to be doing their AI and physics calculations etc. on the GPU using the 8Gb of fast graphical memory for the storage.

Games will also be able to have one copy of structures in memory, rather than having to copy them between the CPU memory and GPU memory, so that will also speed things up.

The PC as a gaming platform has always been let down by a substandard operating system, so no matter how powerful the hardware it's still punching below its weight. It's just that no one has released a PC OS that is optimised for gaming. Maybe Valve can do it if they strip down Linux enough.

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

Akuma07
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:14:45 PM

Any developer worth their salt knows that Windows is a pathetic environment for running software.

The huge amounts of RAM top-end rigs have is complete and utter overkill for anything except running some kind of particle simulation.

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

Crabba
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:16:11 PM

That's typical PC myth. There's very little going on in the background when playing a game on your PC, unless you specifically start 50 apps running in the background when playing.

It's actually fairly simple, check your task manager on CPU utilization before starting a game, if idle it's typically at 0-1%, GPU use is obviously 0% since there's nothing windows does in the background that would require the GPU, so the only remaining item is RAM, most of which is flushed to a page-file when starting the game, and even if it wasn't is irrelevant for gaming performance unless your PC is completely memory starved.

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

Knightzane
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 12:23:44 AM
Reply

All i could get from that is my current gaming pc from 8 months ago is already aged and out of date. SOB

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

Wissam
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 2:59:48 AM
Reply

Well this is amazingly good in my book. I was really afraid of Sony going Wii on us. but thanks to Wiiu its look like they thought twice about that and made the thing powerful. I can't wait to see what is this machine capable of.

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

___________
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 6:51:52 AM
Reply

same specs they announced at the meeting over a month ago!
still no clock speed!
and only 2MB of cache?
seriously!?
wow, im even more disappointed than i was before!
how the hells that possible!?


Last edited by ___________ on 3/28/2013 6:52:27 AM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

city96
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 10:11:24 AM
Reply

I agree with TheHighlander here.

The PS4 is nothing but a mediocre spec gaming PC. Frankly, there is nothing wrong with that because the hardware can perform above what PC's can because PC's run heavy OS's in the background.

The PS4 is almost outpowered by my laptop. The fact that it will cost half that of these PC's the real selling point.
The exlcusive games, PS+ and PSN services as well as the game recording and social features.

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

Highlander
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 1:13:39 PM

City, my biggest issue with this whole enterprise - so to speak - is the fact that he PS4 represents a complete break from the past for PlayStation.

Yes the hardware is a mediocre HTPC spec, it will probably be a decent price for what it is when it launches. However, that doesn't make it an excellent machine, nor a beast, and that's something people are just going to have to be realistic about and recognize.

But the biggest issue I have is this. The PS2 at launch could play every PlayStation(PS1) game just by inserting the disc. The PS3 at launch could play all PS1 and PS2 games, just by inserting the disc. There was a heritage of games that continued through the generations. Each new PlayStation built on the past. But that's not the case with the PS4.

PS4 breaks the mold in two ways, first of all, the hardware is not the dedicated console design of yesteryear, it's an adaptation of PC technology. The system really doesn't differentiate itself from the PC market with the exception of no Windows Tax being applied to it. Other than that it's little more than an Sony branded generic consumer HTPC.

Second, the PS4 offers no backwards compatibility at all. Before anyone says that is does, think carefully about the way that Sony says the PS4 will handle backwards compatibility. Nothing will run locally, it will all run via a cloud based solution, gameplay will be streamed. Stop and think for a moment, if the game is running remotely, why is the PS4 required to run the PS1/PS2/PS3 game? It's not, you could have a PlayStation cloud client running on any PC or any other device that can accept streamed video and send back controller instructions. Cloud based backwards compatibility is device independent.

There's no practical reason to run PS1 games anywhere but on the PS4 locally. Of course the same is true for Vita, but corporate decisions have blocked the majority of PS1 games from being able to run on Vita in the NA market, even though the same games are available in the EU. In other words, it's not a hardware limitation, it's a decision - just like the PS4's incapability to run PS1 games is.

If you buy a PS4 and want to play your old games, you'd better hang on to those discs and consoles. Unless you have nice fast Internet with no bandwidth cap and cast iron reliability, you're going to be disappointed. Heaven help you if the Net goes out, because the PS4 will be no help when that happens.

In essence, the PS4 is not a PlayStation. It runs games made for it, and nothing else. The games made for it are 95% identical to the games that will run on Next Xbox, and PC. the underlying hardware is near identical - give or take a clock speed or GB of RAM. The PS4 is a PC based console, but it's not a PlayStation in anything but branding.

With BC being done through the cloud, any PC with a BluRay drive could access that cloud service to Play PS1, PS2, PSN and PS3 games. There is no need for a PS4 to do it. In the end I am left wondering why they are even bothering with hardware. What would be the difference betweeh them putting out this hardware and Sony creating a PlayStation runtime environment that runs on any sufficiently poweful PC? All BC is done via the cloud. All cloud based and SEN/PSN services are going to be x86 based now, so there is no intrinsic reason why all of what the PS4 will do could not be done through a PS runtime environment on any PC.

But, hey, whatever right? Highlander is just going all anti-sony and whining that the Playstation 4 is just a PC. But, it is, isn't it? Highlander is ignoring the game demos and footage that show what this beast can do...am I? Even if I accept that Windows chews up tons of memory on a PC, the truth is that when a game is running in the foreground, most of Windows and other tasks are paged out of memory, and games talk directly to the hardware. There is no reason why a PC with near identical specifications to the PS4 could not push identical results to the PS4, It's undeniable that the CPU is generic x86 and not terribly quick, so a PC with a better CPU and equivalent or better GPU can do anything that a PS4 can do. Literally anything.

So again, why bother with the hardware if all you're going to deliver is a slightly tweaked HTPC with a custom runtime/OS instead of Windows?

Oh well, I know what will happen and what will be said in reply to this. I'm not even going to respond to it anymore because all the replies are based on blind faith and not reality. The truth is that the PS4 is a mid range HTPC with a custom OS. Backwards compatibility via the cloud uses an x86 based client on the PS4, which could run on any sufficiently powerful PC (mid range HTPC or better). The games on PS4 will be no better technically than those on any other x86 based platform. The thing that differentiates PS4 from other x86 devices is the service offerings made by Sony and the consumer lock-in that they provide. As I have said before, the PS4 will be the last PlayStation console, after this, PlayStation will become a device independent service based system.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 4:53:50 PM

I'm sorry to disappoint you Highlander but I will have to disagree with you on the PS4 being an HTPC. I mean come on dude, at least you can upgrade an HTPC. And if one thing fails you don't have to send it to the manufacturer and get charged far out the arse for it. Although it isn't an all in one type of thing (as in you don't have to deal with different manufacturers for different parts, since most if not all HTPCs are custom built.) But it damn well better have a decent web browser on it so help me god.

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

Snorge
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 5:23:29 PM

I totally agree with the backwards compatibility. You need to have a fast, rock solid connection for the BC to even be feasible as your game depends STRICTLY on the net.

Look what happened to Onlive, not a bad idea, but didn't really work well due to bandwidth limitations. So, unless you live in KC (lucky me) and have Google Fiber, I don't believe the BC is feasible at the moment IMO.

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

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 6:06:22 PM

What I'm totally sure is going to happen is we'll have to repurchase our games again

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

Akuma07
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:20:43 PM

How many of you use your PS3 to play PS2 games? Honestly.

I made BC a huge issue for me back when the PS3 started to remove BC, but I soon realised that about 3 years after I got my PS3, I had stopped playing my older games completely.

I don't own an Xbox but is the 360 backwards compatible?

Highlander, the one thing that annoys me about your arguement, is that you keep calling the PS4 basically a PC. That is such a ridiculous statement, if that is the case, then every console released since the PS1 is pretty much a PC then right because what makes them different?

Oh and on Windows background programs, I monitor my RAM usage on a seperate window will playing games, and at least 1/4-1/2 of my RAM is taken up with background processes constantly while playing games.

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

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:32:47 PM

Akuma, No one uses their PS3s to play PS2 games anymore because they ain't BC anymore hehehe. But that's the case in point. One does not simply stop playing last gen video games when a next gen console comes out. Sure, people eventually stop playing them, but not right away. It is good for consoles to have BC for the simple reason that they will sell more as people get more confident in ditching their old consoles. It may not be a killer feature but it does help out quite a bit. As for the 360 being BC they say it is but only in software emulation.

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

Highlander
Friday, March 29, 2013 @ 12:51:08 AM

Akuma,

The PS4 IS a PC. Look the system, what kind of CPU is it? What's the GPU?

x86 CPU, AMD GPU. The only other devices anywhere to use that combination of basic hardware are PCs. Just because it may not run Windowes, does not mean it is not a PC. It is a PC that will be running a custom OS, but it is still a PC.

It is, at the base level a PC, to deny that is ridiculous.

As for your comment about other consoles being PCs, no, not really. PS1, PS2, PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, WiiU, all of Nintendos previous consoles were all based on non standard, non PC technology. They are not x86 based, and were essentially completely bespoke systems. The original Xbox BTW WAS a PC, it was an Intel Celeron with an nVidia GPU. So, I don't know what you're smoking, but you're completely wrong.

Last edited by Highlander on 3/29/2013 12:53:56 AM

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

Comic Shaman
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 12:05:42 PM
Reply

To Beast or Not to Beast... that is the question.

Let's even call it a given: PS3 was a beast for its time, PS4 is not.

What good did it do Sony to make the PS3 a beast? For a variety of reasons -- crippling price point, later launch, unusual architecture -- the PS3 has had a very rough life cycle compared to its predecessor. Sony has been struggling to gain ground this entire generation, and it took them years to draw even with the 2nd place competitor. And they're still 3rd in the lucrative North American market. Quite a fall from the lofty slot they occupied with the PS2.

And much of this failure can be directly tied to all the things that made the PS3 a hardware beast.

Sony is not in this to get some kind of moral victory ("Look at how great Uncharted is! That's how you use the power of this console") at the expense of financial success.

Sony listened. Here's what they heard:
1) Gamers don't care much about system power. The Wii proves that, the X360 reinforces it.
2) Developers wanted an easier system to work on, especially now that AAA development costs are so high. Learning a whole new idiosyncratic architecture would cause a lot of hardship.
3) Retail price matters for consoles. A lot. Keep your costs down.

Making another PS3-style beast would not have been a smart move for Sony.

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

Highlander
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 1:22:46 PM

For the record, the 360 was, and never has been less expensive than the PS3 spec for spec, function for function. Never. And you pay MS just to play online. The only thing I learned from the Wii is that cheap consumers pay for cheap hardware and lose interest in it, leaving it to collect dust. You'll note that the WiiU is selling horribly - where are all the Wii owners who should be upgrading? they realized they don't play Wii very often and decided to spend their money elsewhere. There are no lessons to learn there about price, only how to fool people into buying a product they later stop using.

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

bigrailer19
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 4:41:51 PM

Hes not talking about cost spec for spec. The 360 is more affordable to parents because they only look at initial cost, so do a lot of consumers. Your reaching a bit there for justification there Highlander but the price on the shelf of what comes in the box is the topic here. Not how much Live is in addition or how much wifi adaptors used to be and never mind the hdd. Just the console that comes in the box. Fact of the matter is not you or I, but the average consumer see a 360 on the shelf and a PS3 on the shelf with an initial price difference of $100 and they will go with the cheaper console. Its only recently that Sony has brought prices down and their console was making a lot of ground world wide in sales.

And hes right about the wii too. It sold because it was cheap entertainment. And sure the consumer got wise, but his point that initial price points plays a role is factual and theres tons of evidence of that.

Last edited by bigrailer19 on 3/28/2013 4:42:05 PM

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

Highlander
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 5:20:52 PM

Some parents look only at the initial cost. Smart ones look at the initial cost, plus the extras, plus the annual fee.

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

slugga_status
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 12:27:08 PM
Reply

Although he has a unpopular opinion Highlander is right in regards to calling the PS4 a "beast". I do believe it will be a great next gen console but to call it a "beast" I can't say that with the current spec information available. I strongly feel that the CellBE could've been improved upon. Just my opinion though.

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

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 4:57:24 PM

I wonder if it had been possible to make it dual core, just how everything nowadays is.

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

slugga_status
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 6:27:27 PM

I'm thinking it's possible. I mean the year after the PS3 they made a variant of the Cell. It may have been costly but I believe it would've been possible.

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

Akuma07
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:27:13 PM

and there is the sole reason why it was abandonded. It was costly.

Since 2006, the world has gone through gigantic financial changes, the world will never be the same, not for many decades. For them to use such a costly piece of hardware, would be suicide. They would need to exit the console market.

The fact is, what exactly IS a beast of hardware?

ANY kind of PC that can be called a beast today is overkill for any game out there.

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

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 10:16:31 PM

This still wouldn't have happened if they had gone with Nvidia hahahaha. jk

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

taus90
Friday, March 29, 2013 @ 3:06:33 AM

Highlander does make a valid point, but a flawed argument. Nobody said PS4 is a beast of a machine, but when compared to a gaming consoles yes it is a beast. My studio just requested for PS4 devkit after examining one at friends studio. although every generation of console have had PC hardware, it was the architecture which set them apart from PC. so to make it simple in x86 architecture in PC is only utilized at max to 60% again that has to be coded to windows environment which in turn will be emulated to different hardware spec on windows. PS4 will show what truely an x84 architecture could do by eliminating those limitation, thats why they are calling it "supercharged"

So take it this way windows is just a game which has a feature to emulate an App(game) to a particular sets of hardware. In console we don't have that kind of limitation, we can code directly to the hardware without answering to the need of the OS. although with all the multitasking PS4 is touting about we might just have to do that too on a console, but not to the extent of the PC.

Its just PC is a bigger sandbox but with less sand to play with, and console is a smaller sandbox but with more sand in it.

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

Highlander
Friday, March 29, 2013 @ 3:48:50 AM

Taus, lots of people have called it a beast, granted very few of them know the ins and outs of hardware, but the PS4 has been frequently called a beast, even now, sight unseen.

Making gross generalizations and sweeping claims about only coding to 60% efficiency on Windows machines doesn't help your post sound any more authoritative. There has always been a degree of hardware abstraction in Windows, especially after the advent of Windows NT, but more recent versions of Windows have exposed the hardware far more directly, and claiming that 40% of the capacity of the system is eaten up though emulation doesn't really jive with the systems I know. I think you are overstating that Windows overhead greatly, and ignoring the many ways in which the hardware is laid open.

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

slugga_status
Friday, March 29, 2013 @ 10:42:09 AM

I don't care if it would've cost me another $600 for a PS4 with classic Sony power inside. The Cell has far too much potential.

Personally I don't think you can call a console a "beast" until the competition comes out. In compared to the Wii U yes the PS4 could be considered a "beast". If it isn't meaningfully better then the next M$ console it could be labeled "better" but not a "beast"

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

Crabba
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 8:57:19 PM
Reply

Umm, these aren't "full CPU specs" for the PS4, not even close. In fact they gave more info than that during the original PS4 meeting.

You can't say ANYTHING WHATSOEVER about the PS4's performance from these specs shown here.

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

Cesar_ser_4
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 10:14:45 PM

So right dude, I mean, its not like these parts are available to purchase separately.

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

Akuma07
Thursday, March 28, 2013 @ 9:08:06 PM
Reply

What the..... my reply dissapeared.

Last edited by Akuma07 on 3/28/2013 9:08:26 PM

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 about The Last Of Us: Remastered?
Fantastic! Can't wait to get it!
Good, not sure if I'll buy immediately.
Eh, not bad, but I don't care.
It's just a stupid money grab.

Previous Poll Results