It isn't hard to guess what's likely to be in the next version of the PlayStation when Sony moves on to generation four in a few years' time, so the news that we appear to have a leak of sorts isn't exactly Earth-shattering.
According to Japanese site PC Watch, Sony discussions with software developers suggest that the PS4 will still be based on the Cell Broadband Engine processor, but that it will be twice as powerful as the PS3.
Cell all the way
Whether that's to be achieved through some sort of co-processor or by optimising the Cell, we can only speculate – we'd say the latter.
More significantly, the scuttlebutt that apparently comes from somewhere inside Sony Computer Entertainment holds that the PS4 will have to be cheap to build and, therefore, to buy.
Lastly, we have a likely launch pinned some time during 2011 and the earnest hope that Sony's next console will beat the third Xbox to market, unlike last time, when the Xbox 360 had a lead over the PS3 of almost a full year.
Your comments (8) Click to add a new comment
harrybauer
May 30th
8. For the next generation Playstation, the Cell needs to increase the LS memory for each SPU by another 256KB. Maybe increase additional coprocessors (PPU/SPU). However, the current Cell is still very capable for next generation physic calculations and other vector (SIMD) based equations; what the next Playstation needs is an improved graphics processor and possibly improve/better power management i.e. less power use or intelligent power management system (software controlled).
Alert a moderator
psfour
October 13th 2008
7. Ive done research into the cell which should be used in PS4. Can find the information here.
www.psfour.info/cpu.php
Alert a moderator
weezer
October 3rd 2008
6. Iggy - okay, sorry about that, I would have edited it had TR's forum had let me!
On pure numbers, the Nvidia RSX in the PS3 is - technically- not as powerful as the ATI Xenos GPU in 360. It's a close call, but the Xenos edges it - mainly due to memory bandwidth issues and the way the RSX is tied to the Cell. It's way more complicated than my brain can cope with (all to do with pixel shaders and triangles per second) but go to Anandtech for more details.
I meant that the card and architecture aren't up to the task in terms of what Sony was promising - full 60fps at 1080. It's rubbish; a lot of games are 720p and some are even lower res and upscaled.
Wipeout HD is gorgeous , for example, but it's one of those games that flatters to deceive - the world is limited to the course so you can really optimise these kinds of games.
Clearly for this generation, the PS3 is adequate - there are a lot of lovely games out there, but improving the Cell processor is not the only answer: make the graphics card twice as powerful and make the architecture more memory/speed efficient and the machine would be easier to code for and you WOULD notice a difference, visually.
(Also, I think the next-gen machines should have dedicated physics processors not just faster general-purpose chipsets).
I don't believe the 360's three-core Xenon can crunch more numbers than the 7-SPE Cell, but it's a more elegant unified system and the proof of the pudding seems to be that in A-B comparisons, 360 is either equal to or beats the PS3 graphically in every single test (Eurogamer).
Honestly, I'm not after an argument - I own all three consoles and they all have games worth playing. I just think the PS3 is the one that has overpromised and underdelivered.
Alert a moderator
iggy82
October 2nd 2008
5. @ Weezer
Don't appreciate the 'way too precious love' comment. Also think your statement is a very bold - "you can't really argue that the graphics card and architecture are up to the task"
Can you explain why you think this is true? Is this something you have read spec-wise or do you really think the 360 can out-perform the cell?
Alert a moderator
weezer
October 2nd 2008
4. iggy - wtf? If you think that was a fanboy rant you're way too precious love. I own a PS3 and am increasingly happy with it. But you can't really argue that the graphics card and architecture are up to the task - the Xbox360 out-performs almost every single cross-platform game (see Eurogamer for their detailed head-to-heads).
I actually agree with you: I don't see any reason for a PS4 in three years' time. I've barely scratched the surface with mine, and neither have the developers, I believe.
And I stand by my 'twice as powerful' comment. PS3 was ten+ times more powerful than PS2 (or so Sony would have us believe). I just don't think that people will be flocking to a machine that barely looks much different graphically.
Alert a moderator
asd007
October 2nd 2008
3. I think that just shows how PS3 is desperate in their struggle for this console war. Sony fears the competition from the Xbox720, which would further strengthen the position of the Xbox range of consoles. Sony announced earlier that the PS3 is the next gen console for the next 10 years, but only 2 years have passed since its launch, so does that mean the PS3 has failed their expectations?! I'm a big Sony fan by the way.
Alert a moderator
Tell us what you think
You need to Log in or register to post comments