PC Watch: PS4 could be based on Cell architecture
by Andrew Yoon 
{ Sep 30th 2008 at 9:45AM }
Nintendo found great success (and profitability) with Wii by releasing hardware that was only marginally more powerful than the Gamecube. Sony may mimic that trend by having PS4 hardware based on the same Cell architecture as the PS3. Keeping the same architecture will help developers, many which have only recently come to grips with the complex processes of Sony's proprietary system.
However, one particular note in the report has us quite worried: according to PC Watch, the Sony wants to launch a new system, before the competition -- eyeing a 2011 release. With the PS3 still so relatively young, we'd hate to see Sony raise a white flag and move on to something new, especially when they've harped about the "10 year life cycle" so often. Too soon of a hardware release could be seen as a betrayal by many, and could result in a serious backlash. For us, we'd love to get more time out of the significant investments we've made in our PS3 hardware.
[Via NeoGAF]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
OddyOh @ Sep 30th 2008 9:51AM
Yeah, 2011 is too soon...why not let MS take the lead and fail again next generation. Well, by fail I mean, they lead up until now, but the tables will continue to turn for the next several years...
Steve Childs @ Sep 30th 2008 11:08AM
To be fair, and I have posted this before; If they simply ramp up the specs for the PS4, but keep the architechure the same, the only thing they need to improve is the graphics capability so the machine can produce full HD @ 60fps.
In a way, this could turn out to be a master stroke by Sony, helped hugely if MS screw up on the backward compatility again with the 360 and its successor. Development wise, it would also be a huge advantage to Sony if they do follow this path, as if the PS4 is simply a beef-ed up PS3, everything the developers learnt for the PS3 would be carried over for the PS4.
Imagine it, a PS4 with a Blu Ray drive (which can at least read the next-gen, higher capacity BR discs), 4GB of ram and able produce graphics at 1080p @ 60fps.
Most importantly, if they re-use the same platform it should lean itself to almost perfect PS3 backward compatibility.
So, imagine its 2 years down the road. MS have announced the 360 II, with limited backward compatibilty with the 360.
Then within a month Sony announce the PS4.
* Twice the power of PS3's Cell
* Ability to produce 1080p @ 60fps (tbh, the 360 II should be able to do this too)
* 100% compatibility with PS3 games
It could be argued that Sony have jumped so far ahead with the PS3, technologically wise, they've cut the development cost for the PS4 and can bring it to market quicker.
Time will tell, but it could be that Sony have pulled a masterstroke, but we won't know for quite some time!
OddyOh @ Sep 30th 2008 11:11AM
Excellent points Steve Childs. Yes, if the PS4 doesn't have 100% backwards compatibility, people will march on Sony's grave, I guarantee! :)
Curious to see if the 360 II will have Blu-Ray, or if Toshiba will be lured into another one of MS's scams...
Steve Childs @ Sep 30th 2008 11:14AM
Ironically it may even help PS3 game development.
If the Devs can produce a game for the PS4 and then cut it down a bit for the PS3 and port it over to the 360, it means they can earn more sales per game property.
Like I said, its all 'what if' right now, until MS launch the 360 II (or Sony announce a PS4 first, which I doubt), we won't know for sure.
But one thing for sure, it makes a lot of sense for them to development the console in this way. CPU power is sufficient now, its not like the games are CPU limited, they tend to be GPU limited and that's where the key improvements need to be made.
btw, above where I said the PS4 needs to be capable of 1080p @ 60fps, I know the PS3 can do this, but only on a few games, what I meant is that every game should be capable of 1080p, not just the occasional few.
Jakey @ Sep 30th 2008 11:26AM
I think sony still has that huge fanbase so I doubt they need to go that early. With the proper introduction and the right advertising they can pull that off with a 2012-2013 release. People seem to forget that sony is still probably the strongest competitor right now with all those ps2's out there. Thats why they risked the high hardware costs in the beginning! They new eventually that most of those 120mill ps2 owners would eventually convert to the ps3.
Arnon @ Sep 30th 2008 11:27AM
and it would only cost $700+..
Steve Childs @ Sep 30th 2008 11:34AM
The thing is Arnon, it probably wouldn't. The development cost for both consoles (if this rumor is true) could end up being paid in the majority by the PS3. The PS4 would have a lot less of RnD to repay and thus could be priced lower at launch than the PS3.
Although in reality, its probably going to be around the same, if not a little lower.
Nick @ Sep 30th 2008 2:41PM
I don't think this is really a negative. If the hardward is going to be basically the same thing, and they continue to use Blu-Ray, and the online infrastructure is maintained using XMB and Home, etc, then nothing should change. The system should be backwards compatible and potentially forward compatible. If that's the case late adopters wouldn't be affected. This isn't a bad thing. 360 was pushed early, and it worked out great for them.
Fane @ Sep 30th 2008 6:30PM
I agree with Steve. Using the same basic tech, with upgrades (like a multi-multi-layer Blu-ray and superior Bluetooth and WiFi) would allow reduced R&D and production costs, avoiding the problems with the PS3 launch, AND allow for easy PS3/PSN BC AND make PS4 development easier for those familiar with PS3.
I do think that Sony should just slap four Cells in the system, with a greatly improved GPU and 4GB of RAM.
Didn't Sony make a big deal about how well the Cell chips talk to each other around the time of the PS3 announcement?
Arnon @ Sep 30th 2008 6:58PM
But I want my PS4 to hover and make waffles D:
Anyways yeah.. it will probably be around the same price if they're using smaller chips.
Dries @ Sep 30th 2008 9:53AM
PFF..... Why can't they just give it time. When they got everything out of the ps3, then they may start thinking about the ps4.
I doubt that by the time the ps4 will be released, the ps3 has used half his strengths
Steve Childs @ Sep 30th 2008 11:42AM
Personally, I wouldn't mind if they did launch a PS4 in 2011. As long as it will play ALL PS3 games. Any backlash would only come if it didn't play all PS3 games and people ended up having to re purchase PS4 versions of their PS3 games.
After all, the PS2 is still going strong even though the PS3 has been out for ages. Even if a PS4 appeared in 2011, the PS3 I'd say would have a good number of years left in it.
The PS3 also has the ability for games to be patched, unlike the PS2, so any incompatibilities in some PS3 games, running on a PS4 could be fixed and patched for launch anyway. Hell, they could even be patched to make use of the additional power of the PS4!
DAR @ Sep 30th 2008 1:06PM
Come on guys, do you believe that. the playstation brand have a ten years life cycle. ps1, ps2 and ps3 will be the same. Ps4 will be most likely be a redesign ps3. like a ps3 slim. not a new hardware all together. the ps4 will probable come out in year 8 of the ps3 lifecycle. And would they want a ps4 so early? remember, maybe ps3 is more expensive than xbox but youll buy two different xbox by the time ps3 is done. as for the cell, its way to ahead of its time. wait until all the dev put their head around it, just look at what crytek said about the cell. they wait to see whats going to be in the ps4 to base their graphic engine on.
Lars @ Sep 30th 2008 1:39PM
"the ps4 will probable come out in year 8 of the ps3 lifecycle"
Why? They've been 5-6 years apart. Why would they wait longer for the PS4 than they did for PS2 & PS3?
GGCAN @ Sep 30th 2008 10:12AM
I agree that 2011 is too soon...there is still so much they can do with the PS3 and it seems to only just have started.
Sporia @ Sep 30th 2008 10:11AM
2011!!!! i just got a ps3! want it to last atleast a min of 4 years.
hvianna @ Sep 30th 2008 10:22AM
Yeah, if I wanted to buy new hardware every couple of years I'd go back to PC gaming.
Sony's continued support to the PS2 was one of the reasons that made me opt for the PS3 in this generation, so I really hope they won't abandon the PS3 so soon.
SuperGayParade @ Sep 30th 2008 10:22AM
Not going to happen.
DeathroW @ Sep 30th 2008 11:00AM
Err, why not? It happened to the ps2.
Brett from Atlanta @ Sep 30th 2008 10:26AM
It's not gonna happen, the costs of the ps3 aren't down enough yet. They haven't even made slimline ps3's yet. Besides, I don't know why sony would wanna go first anyway. They would be better off hanging back and seeing what the competition does first and either expanding on it, or deciding to go a different route altogether. While the ps3 is a great machine and getting to be the best IMO, they really can't afford another launch like the ps3's launch.
Mike Sylvester @ Sep 30th 2008 11:39AM
Sony's cut out enough hardware that they could slim it down. But the distinctive look of the PS3 console is part of the branding. Sales need to steady and then start tapering off before Sony will want to change the image and try to make people think there's something new to buy.
The PS4 using a CELL architecture does not necessarily mean that it will be based around the same CELL BE that is in our PS3s. The PS3 chips will already be very different at the end of the cycle than the ones that the platform launched with, so the next gen can expect some refinement, and at the very least, a full set of 8 SPEs. But the architecture is loosely-defined enough that the PS4's CELL could have some components that aren't in the PS3's CELL BE. I think the plan from the beginning was to build a scalable, cellular architecture that could be added onto for several generations of products.
The PS4 will need more memory and a new GPU, though. Those are the PS3's biggest bottlenecks today.
Dahk @ Sep 30th 2008 12:16PM
I think they could create a slim PS3 while keeping the branding. The PS2 kept its branding while slimming down, and its probably no different here.
strike @ Oct 1st 2008 11:06PM
The momentum JUST started picking up and I JUST got a PS3, despite the fact I've been reading ps3 fanboy since i got a psp =p I'd hate for Sony to slip up like this, Don't do it Sony!
I think, if they are in dire need of cash, release a new type of gaming device......... PS3 and PSP are about power.......make something, kinda like the Wii or DS, where interaction is key. Incorparate the things which (apparantly) makes the wii and ds fun to play (touch screen, etc), while adding a few extras, keeping it within the same price as a wii or ds.
Yeh, u can call it 'stealing' someone elses ideas, but Nintendo really is 'stealing' SONY's thunder. I think the PS3's price tag was too high, but right now, I'd fork over the money, rather than buy a wii. And psp's are better than ds's, in every aspect.
All this random krap I'm talking about is my opinioon, so please keep the bitching down to constructive critisizm, thanks.
vahdyx @ Sep 30th 2008 10:30AM
Well they did find reports of a PS3 with more memory and more video memroy etc. so that could be the ps4
I'm sure Microsoft will do the same thing!
Rock @ Sep 30th 2008 10:33AM
I always though the PS4 should just be a dual cell system with more ram. This way you don't have to re-invent the wheel developement wise. You already have the basic building blocks for the cell so just use that knowledge and work on a dual cell system.
Rock @ Sep 30th 2008 10:55AM
This would also make backwards compatability pretty easy I'd think
HAAS599 @ Sep 30th 2008 11:01AM
you are correct.
The PS4 will debut in 2012 and be released in 2013.
It will have more cells, more ram, bigger HD, wireless b/g/ & n, etc. It may not come with any controllers to keep the price down since you will be able to use the DS3.
I'm most interested in the design of the PS4, also what will the smaller PS3 look like?
Fane @ Sep 30th 2008 6:24PM
Hopefully, they'll use four Cell chips rather than just two. No need to make the PS4 as anemic as a Wii (i.e., 2 GameCubes) just because you're using the same basic tech.
Kinsey @ Sep 30th 2008 10:40AM
They could probably get away just using most of the same architecture and beef up Video and RAM for the PS4. Plus that way playing PS3 games on the PS4 hopefully wouldnt be just BC, it would just straight up run them normal. But ya 2011 is too soon. And, personally cant see it happen. If they wanted to they could just remarket the PS3 slim (or whatever it will be called) when it comes out almost like a new machine.
"WELCOME THE NEW PS3.5 COMING TO A LIVING ROOM NEAR YOU".
Well you get the idea.
DeforMAKulizer @ Sep 30th 2008 10:47AM
I dont think 2011... I think it will be something like 2013... We might start to hear official news as of 2011... Take the PS2 for example!
Sony is firm with the ten year policy!
nathan @ Sep 30th 2008 11:18AM
see, this rumor is going to hurt the brand. If its true, then it'll hurt it justifiably, but if its not, it really would suck.
I'm not talking about using another Cell chip, I"m talking about an early release (2011). The cell chip is a good idea. The early release would absolutely kill the ps3. Gee, save up my money now (like I'm doing), so I can buy a very expensive game system with maybe one or two pretty expensive games, or wait just a few years and buy a better system that'll last longer. meh.
xystos @ Sep 30th 2008 11:03AM
why is 2011 so hard to believe? By then the ps3 will be turning 5 years old such is about the norm between gens
Rolanthas @ Oct 8th 2008 9:16AM
still so early to talk about a follow up ps on my part . the only thing I'm ready to learn about the new console is whether the fricking controller be finally revamped , that's it.
Kspraydad @ Sep 30th 2008 11:02AM
End of 2011 would be 5 years into the PS3 life cycle right?
PS2 launched just over 5 years into the PS1s lifecycle.
PS3 launched 6 years into the PS2 lifecylce.
This isn't out of line with what SONY has always done. And to think that it wouldn't be Cell based is crazy...of course it is.
Copland @ Sep 30th 2008 11:15AM
They really should stick with CELL (or an enhanced version of CELL), because it will make backwards compatibility more easy to achieve. PS3 really suffered backwards compatibility because PS2 and PS3 has a different architecture, so PS3 had to put a chip which was used in PS2 (Emotion Engine??) on PS3 to get backwards compatibility and that made the price increase for the PS3 which had PS2 compatibility.
Also for PS4, they should definitely use a good GPU this time, and make a decent time frame for the GPU developers.
jimmyink @ Oct 2nd 2008 7:02AM
Everything is going towards parallel processing these days and Sony decided to make the leap this generation whereas xbox will have to do it in the next generation, in which they will probably experience the same growing pains of developers getting used to their new architecture. The main point of the CELL's design is scalability.
2011 is no surprise, and to all the people whinging... don't buy it on launch then! The only people who are crying about 2011 are probably the ones who couldn't afford the PS3 at launch or still saving, so whats the difference? You'll still have another 5+ years with the PS3.
Brandon @ Sep 30th 2008 11:19AM
I was thinking Sony would cash in on the "4" aspect of the PS4 and go with a quad-cell system. Makes a hell of a lot more sense than merely doubling the power.
The Aggie CEO @ Sep 30th 2008 1:15PM
the cell is ALREADY 8-cores.......
that would be essentially 16 Processors!?!?!??!
Can you IMAGINE what that would be capable of in a GAMING SYSTEM!?!?!?!
Steve Childs @ Sep 30th 2008 5:42PM
lol, I can see the dev's crying at the thought now.
Seriously, multicores only help up to a point, then its back to sheer CPU speed.
There are only so many things you can split off into seperate threads, you get to a point where trying to manage all the threads will use up a core by itself!
ehisforadam @ Sep 30th 2008 11:24AM
It'll be like duct taping two PS3s together.
I think sticking with the same architecture is a good idea, since they sunk a lot into Cell, it doesn't make sense to abandon it.
Cornelius @ Sep 30th 2008 11:41AM
The Cell processor won't be changed much. More cores will be added and perhaps we'll see a few new registers per SPU, but there won't be much of a difference in its architecture. This will also ensure 100% BC with PS3 games.
To be honest, it wasn't the cell wasn't the PS3 back from producing fast enough frame rates (although some games run nicely at 1080p/60fps- WipeoutHD?). The weak link in the PS3 is the RSX GPU, which is very similar, both architecturally and performance-wise, to the Geforce 7800, and it was already outdated by the time the PS3 was released in late 2006, as the Geforce 8800 GTX came out at about the same time.
Needless to say, the PS4 will have a much faster GPU (try to imagine the upper-midrange GPU segment in 2011) and will likely be made by nvidia (again), since they seem to have a good relationship- not to mention AMD's (thus ATI's) surivival these next couple of years is murky at best.
Microsoft won't put nearly as much effort into getting the 360's successor out as early. $1bln writedown due to the RROD + statements made by management indicate that MS has really taken a financial beating over the 360. Both Microsoft and Sony will try Nintendo's approach of breaking even, perhaps profiting some, on the next-gen hardware.
In terms of features, there isn't much the PS3 can't already do. BluRay, bluetooth, wifi, USB 2.0 (USB 3.0 will be supported by the PS4), but Sony may add a DVR and TV-tuner to the list of features. I wouldn't put money on it, but it seems likely that all-in-one game console/Digital HDTV STB/DVR/Blu/DVD/HTPC is the next step.
Hopefully they'll improve their web browser, or at least replace it with Firefox or Opera. Sony, will you do that please- it really sucks.
Devin @ Sep 30th 2008 12:41PM
The PS3's browser is Firefox, or a variant of Firefox (either one). My g/f has a way of tracking browser types on her website and when I visited it, it said "Firefox (something, something)"....
Ron @ Sep 30th 2008 1:42PM
The PS3 browser is definitely not Firefox, its is Netfront.
Devin @ Sep 30th 2008 4:03PM
So explain why her website tracking program says "Firefox"....
Steve Childs @ Sep 30th 2008 5:48PM
"The weak link in the PS3 is the RSX GPU, which is very similar, both architecturally and performance-wise, to the Geforce 7800, and it was already outdated by the time the PS3 was released in late 2006, as the Geforce 8800 GTX came out at about the same time."
hmmm, well, the Gfx subsystem is the bottleneck and that is the key area to improve.
However, saying its as powerful as a 7800 or even 8800 its a little wrong. Odd how the 8800 in my PC won't even stand a chance of getting any decent framerates at 1920x1080!
Its no way as powerful as a 7800. Perhaps an 8800, but not a 7800.
I've got one of them in my system too and the difference between the 8800 and 7800 is astounding.
By the lead times involved, the RSX would have been designed probably a while before the 8800, I'm not even sure the two GPUs can be evenly compared.
Ron @ Sep 30th 2008 6:40PM
At its core, Netfront is a mobile web browser meant for cell phones, PDAs, and other portable devices. In order for the PS3 to receive the 'full' version of web pages and not the cut down, reformatted mobile version it's HTTP User Agent Data has been changed to report Mozilla 5.x.
The website your girlfriend uses checks this HTTP User Agent Data to determine what browser a visitor is using. It sees Mozilla (the falsified data) and reports it as Mozilla Firefox.
Hope that clears it up for you. If the PS3 browser was Firefox it would perform much much better.
Jerses @ Sep 30th 2008 11:41AM
I think this gen consoles need more time in the market, im mean we are seen games that have 3 years in the making. Every good game now doesnt come next year. Maybe thats why the ps3 will have 10 years in market...well i hope so i dont want to buy the ps4 and wait 4 years for the good games to come out.
Moe-Ali @ Sep 30th 2008 12:36PM
yeah im not sure about 2011 its kind of a rip off
maybe a slim ps3 by 09 and a ps4 by 2014/2015 (you know see wats on the market then make the best)
as for the cell architechture . great idea . but this time put more ram ... i know its not that big of a deal with videogames but still it would make things easier for the devs .. as for format unless theres this amazing new great thing then stick with bluray .. by then it'll be a 8 layer or even 16 layer which would be really good
also this time start with 250gb hdd not 20gb :p
anyways unless they can figure out how to use a cell processor as a graphics card... use a good graohics card .. with more ram damn it
anyways ill stick with sony's consoles UNLESS they become 'not loyal' and put a new system by 2011 then im honestly gonna switch to microsoft (btw the zune is pretty good)
STEVE @ Oct 1st 2008 11:05PM
Okay in theory this is possible. Sony is losing their collective asses on the ps3 hardware and unless they do some kind of rebuild on this thing to make it cheaper they will probably keep losing money and trying to make it up on games.
Microsoft did this with the xbox when they launched the 360 and even though this was a middle finger to the consumers everyone still bought the 360 and continues to buy them today!
The botttom line with these game consoles has always been the same, money!
If it makes more sense in dollars to move on to the next system because your current will never catch up then so be it. This is stictly my opinion and I could be way off.
Tridrakious @ Sep 30th 2008 1:00PM
Have people forgotten that the PS3 was launched in November 2006 (japan and north america)? That's 6 years into the PS2's lifecycle and the PS2 is still going strong. 2006 to 2011 is almost 6 years (depending on the month they launch). Also in this era of the gaming industry, if a company waited til the system was sucked dry before starting to even think or getting anything started on the next system, leaves them at a huge disadvantage.