Sony Ditching Cell Architecture For Next PlayStation? [Slashdot]
RogueyWon writes "According to reports in Kotaku and Forbes, Sony is planning to ditch the Cell processor that powered the PlayStation 3 and may be planning to power the console's successor using a more conventional PC-like architecture provided by AMD. In the PS3's early years, Sony was keen to promote the benefits of its Cell processor, but the console's complicated architecture led to many studios complaining that it was difficult to develop for."
Read more of this story at Slashdot.
More...
I am not a real person. I am the Digital Press ServBot, in active duty, assigned to fetching various RSS feeds and posting them here. If you can suggest a better feed source please PM a moderator or admin.
There goes backwards compatibility for the PS4.
Sony's mistake wasn't the cell processor but it was the lack of training and support that Sony gave the developers outside of Sony when it came to programming on the cell processor architecture. Sony just assumed that programmers would adjust to programming for the new architecture by themselves. Honestly, I think Sony needs to completely open up the PS3 and remarket it as a low cost computer after the PS4 is released.
Last edited by Clownzilla; 03-01-2012 at 01:59 PM.
Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes not divine, but demonic.
Pope Benedict XVI
What's the total market for that though? Sony isn't interested in an initiative like that which will only move a few thousand units to hobbyists and most consumers aren't going to buy what is a pretty inflexible piece of hardware as a replacement for a computer, especially without commercial productivity software to support it and especially when you can get a pretty decent low end complete PC system for a few hundred bucks nowadays.Originally Posted by Clownzilla
Surely there's a possibility of them releasing a PS4 with a set of Cell processors on-board dedicated to backward compatibility tasks (or emulating it)?
The PS3 wasn't built with the Emotion Engine, but there was one in there at launch for BC games (and later emulated).
"And the book says: 'We may be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us.'"
Let's be honest, the PS3 wasn't very backwards compatible either. Then at one point they threw up their hands and just said screw is all together with the slim.
Atari: 2600, Jaguar
Microsoft: XBox, XBox 360
Nintendo: NES, GB, GBC, SNES, N64, GameCube, GBA SP, Wii, New 3DS, Wii U
Sega: SMS, Genesis, Game Gear, Nomad, Sega CD, 32X, Saturn, Dreamcast
Sony: PS1, PS2, PS3
Wanted: 7800, Neo Geo CD
My only advice is that if Sony is to make the PS4 BC, either make it BC and keep it that way or don't do it at all. I'm only assuming they'll get less backlash over not even offering BC than if they offered it then later took it away.
Everything in the above post is opinion unless stated otherwise.
Honestly, it might be a bad idea to go that route. Could help to simply release the next console with no BC at all. We all know what happens when a console gets streamlined and periphery functionality gets trimmed off. Cutting off that drama at its source by not introducing the functionality at all might help Sony in the long run. The sting of a new console not being backwards compatible will cool off pretty damn quickly, much more quickly than a gradual paring down over a couple revisions, a stigma they still haven't quite escaped from.
Last edited by TonyTheTiger; 03-01-2012 at 02:51 PM.
I'm just guessing, but I think Sony made the original PS3 backwards compatible because they figured that the PS2 wouldn't last much longer. They thought that everyone would buy PS3s (599 US Dollars) because they had better hardware and stop buying PS2s, allowing them to stop making PS2's while still making money from it's games.
It would make more sense for the PS4 to be BC because the PS3 isn't as popular as the PS2, but still has some great games coming out for it.
I think it'll be a lose/lose either way.
Based on Sony's prior commitments to backwards compatibility it's fair to say that certain camps will want it or expect it.
If they don't provide it out of the gate those people will be disappointed.
And if they do offer it for a limited time and then adjust SKUs in later models to leave it out (which seems to be the more industry-wide standard these days) there will be the standard complaining then.
But, really, there's always all the time complaining about everything.
"And the book says: 'We may be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us.'"
I at least hope they continue with PS1 BC and do PS2 BC with the next edition of their numbered series of consoles.
PS3 might be a bit pricey to include, and cost was their official reason for ending PS2 BC support with newer models of the PS3. I can keep a system to play that games on, no big deal. But it will be nice to be able to lessen the load for a heavily used disc system that will be pushing 10-15 years in age when the new system comes out.
This was expected. To my knowledge, IBM's attempt to bring the C.E.L.L. to servers largely failed. At least that's what I remember reading a while back. It's a very complicated architecture.
Possibly. But an alternative scenario is like what happened with Microsoft. At this point, it seems most people have forgotten the 360 is backwards compatible at all, probably stemming from the BC there never being a particularly strong selling point. The difference between the 360's BC and the later fat PS3's BC was mostly nil except Microsoft got more leeway it seems because they never actually took anything away.
I have a feeling that backwards compatibility is not the selling point it once was. Frankly, it doesn't make a lot of economic sense for the publishers given that there is now a market for "HD" remakes of games from as little as one generation ago. Ultimately, the average gamer doesn't have a huge library of older games anyway (look at the attach rates per console sold and it's frankly shocking how few games are purchased by the average console owner) and the only people who likely care about BC would be collectors who would be a very small group anyway.
As much as the whole refusal of Sony to provide a low cost or free backward compatibility program for the PSP UMDs on the Vita seemed unreasonable to me, the truth is like most gamers, I tend to move on software wise when new platforms are released and if I feel the urge to play something older, it's not that hard to pull out my old hardware.
I can understand using an AMD video card, but it's pretty stupid to go with an AMD processor. AMD is so far behind Intel in the CPU market that even their latest "bulldog" processor (BS if you ask me) barely performed better than the good old i7 975, and it came nowhere near the performance of the i7 2600k.
Today, I had a pretty funny experience with an AMD fan. I was looking at power-supplies (PC cases were right above them) and this guy starts talking to me about a Cooler-Master case that he had. He then goes on about getting an 8150 (at first it didn't dawn on me what he was talking about) and he mentions that it's even faster than the i7s. I looked over at him and said: "No it's not, I'll show you." I whip out my phone and start loading the Passmark website. He says: "Passmark, I've heard of them." And sort of backs away before he gets the message of defeat.
Last edited by Gamevet; 03-01-2012 at 06:18 PM.
The Sony PC route would be only after the PS3 mass market gaming lifespan has run it's course (many years after the release of the PS4). Release an update that will open the system up and create a nice following of PS3 PC enthusiasts. It would only be a positive for the Sony brand and gamers would give them more respect. Will Sony do this.......no. Should Sony do this from a "good business" standpoint.........absolutely yes.
Wherever politics tries to be redemptive, it is promising too much. Where it wishes to do the work of God, it becomes not divine, but demonic.
Pope Benedict XVI
Yeah, I guess what BC does is encourage early adoption when the library is pretty paltry. Look back on most consoles and you can see how slipshod most launches really were. But it becomes apparent that we're talking entirely additional hardware to cover that niche during such a small fraction of the console's lifespan. It's pretty silly, overall. Don't get me wrong. I love full backwards compatibility simply for space saving purposes. But if I put myself in the shoes of Sony it's very hard for me to justify going out of the way to produce that benefit, especially when the interest to the end user diminishes over time as the console comes into its own. If the hardware itself makes it easy to implement then great. But a clean divorce from it when the hardware doesn't really support the effort is probably better than an awkward removal over time once it becomes apparent the extra manufacturing cost just ain't worth it.
Sorry but I just don't see it. There is no money at all to be made from this, so I fail to see how it would be "good business". 99% of consumers and gamers have zero interest in something like this. If you mean that it will make some tiny group of hobbyists happy, then yes, it's "good business".
I thought Sony was selling off the cell processor tech? Maybe they haven't found a buyer yet, but if they have then they would have to buy processors somewhere. I cannot imagine a PS4 being backwards compatible for cost reasons, and if you have not noticed they like to sell old games for download these days -- you can buy your favorite games again.
AMD also owns ATI?Radeon now so we may see a CPU/GPU combo for the next gen Playstation.
The backwards compatibility isn't normally that big of a deal to me, I normally will keep my older consoles anyway. The problem with loosing it in the PS3 is that the best supported way to play PS2 games (up-scaled through the PS3) just disappeared as an option. The whole thing that drove me to buy the PS3 MGS bundle (the last backwards compatible model) was that they were totally ending support for the BC in their hardware and if I didn't buy it then I'd either have to hunt for one or get a refurb.
If there's no enhanced backwards compatibility in the PS4 at all, I can guarantee I'm going to wait until some major price drops occur to pick up anything.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
