Support NeoGAF

[TheIkariWarrior]

65nm Cell; PlayStation cost controls on the horizon
05-Feb-2007, 17:33.24 Reporter : Carl B
Last week during Sony's quarter-end earnings call, CFO Takao Yuhara provided new insight into upcoming cost-cutting measures for the PlayStation 3, including a move already underway towards 65nm production for Cell.

Asked by an analyst what Sony was doing to help reduce PS3 manufacturing costs, Yuhara indicated that besides the move to 65nm, the Playstation would be receiving a component update designed to 'reduce the parts' inside of the console. Whether this was in reference to the anticipated removal of the EE+GS chip used to power backwards compatability is unknown, but would certainly make sense. Sony has been working feverishly to perfect their PS2 software emulation; removing the legacy hardware would reduce both chip expense and motherboard complexity. Other potential areas for chip consolidation would be the unification of separate smaller ICs - such as bluetooth and WiFi - into single chip solutions and a change to a more specialized southbridge. Suspected of being Toshiba's 'Super Companion Chip,' the present southbridge occupies a large die area while providing superfluous functionality not presently required by the PS3.

In terms of Cell on 65nm, Yuhara said only that production is presently underway. He did not state explicitly whether chips were being sourced from East Fishkill or Sony's own Nagasaki (or both), but confirmed that die size had been reduced by 40%. PlayStations shipping with the new Cell revision probably won't hit shelves until after the European launch, however, as SCE will wish to work through present supplies before transitioning. Going forward, as primary silicon gets shrunk, and tertiary silicon is removed from the system, PS3 should enjoy a cascading cost-reduction effect. Not only will the cost of the chips themselves go down, but the associated motherboard, cooling solution, and power supply will be able to be 'lightened' as well, as power and thermal pressures subside.

Yuhara indicated seperately that as of December, blue laser diode yields have improved greatly, and he expects 6 million PS3's shipped by the end of Sony's fiscal year (March 31st, 2007) to remain an achievable goal.

http://beyond3d.com/#news38360


when 60 GB PS3 is $300, or at most, $400, I will buy.

 

[Tieno]

Wow, that's fast, nice!

 

[Zombie James]

PSX and PS2 software emulation would lead to removing the EE+GS chip, and smaller, cooler chips would let them do something else with cooling, so yea.

 

[Elios83]

First revision this spring?

 

[[Nintex]]

People who are expecting a price drop shouldn't get their hopes up. The first thing that Sony is gonna do is make sure they make profit on the machine, not lowering te price.

 

[Haunted]

Wow, that's fast, nice!

.

The million dollar question is: will they keep the price at current levels to reduce their loss on each console? Or will they cut the PS3's price to gain a better foothold in the market while staying at 250$(?) loss per console.

I obviously much prefer the latter option.

 

[mug]

I say just remove the EE+GS chip. I doubt there will be much if any of a pricedrop by the time the 65nm is released, how long will it take for the Bluray player to reduce, any estimates?

 

[Zabojnik]

I predict that the 65nm Cell PS3 will hit shelves one week after I get mine @ EU launch. I just know it.

 

[speculawyer]

Whether this was in reference to the anticipated removal of the EE+GS chip used to power backwards compatability is unknown, but would certainly make sense. Sony has been working feverishly to perfect their PS2 software emulation; removing the legacy hardware would reduce both chip expense and motherboard complexity.

I wonder how this is going to work . . . If they go to software emulation, I wonder if they'll be able to make almost all the titles work as the current PS3 does. I doubt it. Or will they give this PS3 a new name to make it clear that the new PS3 can't do BC as well as the current PS3. (PS3 lite?)

And will they harm BC in the current PS3 models? (Will there be things that work in BC now due to the EE+GS chip that break in a future software-only BC mode?)

 

[kenta]

So if these measures reduce costs as much as it sounds, coupled with this rolling thunder rumor of a price drop... could we see it by holiday 2007?

 

[-Rogue5-]

Sooner than 360's 65nm transition? That's fast. REAAALLLY fast. I wonder if 65nm yeilds would improve to the point that all 8 SPEs would be useful. Not that they would enable it, but maybe through some l337hax (hardware or software) the extra power could be used.

ALSO, if software PS2 emulation comes into fruitation soon (March?), with upscaling to 1080p and FPS improvements, I think Sony would prove that they mean business. Really all I want is Shadow of the Colossus at 1080p/30fps...That would be HOT.

 

[Wollan]

I say just remove the EE+GS chip.

They have been working on emulation software for quite some time. A tech office in the UK has the responsibility or at least partial me thinks (there was an interview last year).

So if these measures reduce costs as much as it sounds, coupled with this rolling thunder rumor of a price drop... could we see it by holiday 2007?

Won't happen before september at the earliest but when it does it will be worldwide and I would expect a big game to ship at the same time or a week later. One week before GTA4 would be a smart move I would think as I would expect a big chunk of that fanbase won't buy into next-gen consoles before that releases as well as the great majority were PlayStation owners. A PS3 price cut the week before would get their attention even if the X360 is cheaper.

 

[Link316]

People who are expecting a price drop shouldn't get their hopes up. The first thing that Sony is gonna do is make sure they make profit on the machine, not lowering te price.

good thing Sony already said they plan to break even by March 2008 even with a price cut

 

[HAL_Laboratory]

People who are expecting a price drop shouldn't get their hopes up. The first thing that Sony is gonna do is make sure they make profit on the machine, not lowering te price.

Exactly. Lowering the manufacturing cost, at this point, has little to do with a price-cut.

 

[TheIkariWarrior]

People who are expecting a price drop shouldn't get their hopes up. The first thing that Sony is gonna do is make sure they make profit on the machine, not lowering te price.

if Sony does not significantly drop the price of PS3, it'll end up in last place. they HAVE to drop the price or lose lots of markshare to Microsoft and Nintendo.

 

[Baryn]

I say just remove the EE+GS chip. I doubt there will be much if any of a pricedrop by the time the 65nm is released, how long will it take for the Bluray player to reduce, any estimates?

9-15 months.

 

[speculawyer]

I say just remove the EE+GS chip.

That is a good biz decision, but will that cause a huge backlash if many PS2 titles don't work in their software-only BC system?

BTW, poor Sony is gonna look kind pathetic retro-actively copying the xbox 360 BC scheme. (Software only BC.) Well, I guess they won't look pathetic if they get it work work with many more titles than the pathetic weak xbox 360 BC support.

 

[BudokaiMR2]

Yes...

But is the horizon something you can really catch?

 

[-Rogue5-]

if Sony does not significantly drop the price of PS3, it'll end up in last place. they HAVE to drop the price or lose lots of markshare to Microsoft and Nintendo.

You mean after they stop selling out of the things, right? They haven't launched in Europe yet, and they systems still aren't readily available on store shelves. It's probably gonna receive it's first price cut when sales really start to slow down -- I'm thinking Spring 2k8, $50 price drop.

 

[kenta]

BTW, poor Sony is gonna look kind pathetic retro-actively copying the xbox 360 BC scheme. (Software only BC.) Well, I guess they won't look pathetic if they get it work work with many more titles than the pathetic weak xbox 360 BC support.

How the heck is a software-based backwards compatibility solution "pathetic" or copycat? Especially if, like you said, it trumps every other BC solution in the history of consoles?

 

[[Nintex]]

if Sony does not significantly drop the price of PS3, it'll end up in last place. they HAVE to drop the price or lose lots of markshare to Microsoft and Nintendo.

Well if they put the system out for $299 tommorow it will be a NGC $99 story. A short burst in sales, but death right after. Sony can do the waiting but making money game for a year and drop te price when DMC4, MGS4, Killzone etc. are released. Some way or another they have to make money on this machine or their won't be a PS4.

 

[Wollan]

BTW, poor Sony is gonna look kind pathetic retro-actively copying the xbox 360 BC scheme. (Software only BC.) Well, I guess they won't look pathetic if they get it work work with many more titles than the pathetic weak xbox 360 BC support.

Well this is the reason why they included the PS2 chipset in the first place so they could spend the time needed on the BC emulation. One funny thing I expect is that the chips in the PS3s for us early buyers will most likely go 'dead' once that firmware update is out.

 

[Nerevar]

That is a good biz decision, but will that cause a huge backlash if many PS2 titles don't work in their software-only BC system?

BTW, poor Sony is gonna look kind pathetic retro-actively copying the xbox 360 BC scheme. (Software only BC.) Well, I guess they won't look pathetic if they get it work work with many more titles than the pathetic weak xbox 360 BC support.

you do realize that Sony was intending to have a software-only BC solution at the outset, but couldn't get it functioning as well as expected so they included the EE+GS on the motherboard as sort of a "last minute" addition, right?

 

[UltimaKilo]

So can the PS3's size and power consumption be decreased in the near future? I mean that's the best we'll get with a reworked PS3 I fear. A price cut would not be seen until (like it has already been pointed out) SONY can at least break even (with the price cuts).

 

[speculawyer]

How the heck is a software-based backwards compatibility solution "pathetic" or copycat? Especially if, like you said, it trumps every other BC solution in the history of consoles?

Nothing wrong with (well implemented) software-only backwards compability. It just looks like they made a decision to go with hardware aided backwards compability by creating the EE+GS chip and putting it in the PS3 but then changed their mind and went with the software-only BC system.

The end result isn't bad . . . it is just the flip-flopping that makes them look pathetic.

 

[kenta]

Nothing wrong with (well implemented) software-only backwards compability. It just looks like they made a decision to go with hardware aided backwards compability by creating the EE+GS chip and putting it in the PS3 but then changed their mind and went with the software-only BC system.

The end result isn't bad . . . it is just the flip-flopping that makes them look pathetic.

I now refer you to the other two posts that quoted you. They never changed their minds, they included the EE+GS chips as a stopgap until they could get the software solution up to snuff. This has been known for years now

 

[speculawyer]

you do realize that Sony was intending to have a software-only BC solution at the outset, but couldn't get it functioning as well as expected so they included the EE+GS on the motherboard as sort of a "last minute" addition, right?

You have any links? I find it hard to believe that designing & debugging a EE+GS chip plus adding it to the PS3 mobo could be a "last minute" decision.

 

[Wollan]

So can the PS3's size and power consumption be decreased in the near future? I mean that's the best we'll get with a reworked PS3 I fear. A price cut would not be seen until (like it has already been pointed out) SONY can at least break even (with the price cuts).

With a smaller chip (65nm) less power is required so yeah. I have no clue on how significant that will be.

The end result isn't bad . . . it is just the flip-flopping that makes them look pathetic.

They should have done it elegantly like MS ja?

 

[Ragnarok10]

Nothing wrong with (well implemented) software-only backwards compability. It just looks like they made a decision to go with hardware aided backwards compability by creating the EE+GS chip and putting it in the PS3 but then changed their mind and went with the software-only BC system.

The end result isn't bad . . . it is just the flip-flopping that makes them look pathetic.

I don't think it's flip-flopping as much as it is not having SW emulation ready at launch. They wanted to avoid the 360 B/C stigma so they probably had to include the GS+EE chip in order to provide acceptable B/C at launch. SW emulation has been there goal from day 1 but it requires a substantial amount of work to implement well but it provides them a significant cost reduction as well as control over things like upscaling and AA enhancements.

 

[dalyr95]

The original PS2's controller I/O was the original's PlayStation's CPU which handled BC. When the PStwo came out, that was replaced with a software BC. Sony have repeatly said they will only settle for above ~95% BC.
They fixed the early BC issues and that was software after all....

 

[LJ11]

You have any links? I find it hard to believe that designing & debugging a EE+GS chip plus adding it to the PS3 mobo could be a "last minute" decision.

Here's the link

 

[-Rogue5-]

I now refer you to the other two posts that quoted you. They never changed their minds, they included the EE+GS chips as a stopgap until they could get the software solution up to snuff. This has been known for years now

QFT... Sony have stated it many times. The reason they included the ES+GS is because they couldn't get their software emulation up to their high standards prior to launch so they threw in the hardware solution.

 

[speculawyer]

I now refer you to the other two posts that quoted you. They never changed their minds, they included the EE+GS chips as a stopgap until they could get the software solution up to snuff. This has been known for years now

If that is really what they did, then I actually find that even more stupid than going with the h/w-based BC. If they planned to do software-only BC all along, then they should have done it the MS has done it . . . get what you can get working out at launch and then incrementally improve it over time with udates.

Going through the expense of designing a chip and putting in on the motherboard of device known to lose money only to eventually eliminate use of that chip is mind-bogglingly stupid. Hey, let's make this money-losing box even more expensive by designing another custom chip for it that will eventually not even be used . . . GREAT IDEA! :lol

 

[UltimaKilo]

QFT... Sony have stated it many times. The reason they included the ES+GS is because they couldn't get their software emulation up to their high standards prior to launch so they threw in the hardware solution.

So get rid of the ES+GS for a new, less power consuming, 65nm Cell equipped PS3. Hopefully they can reduce the size of the PS3 as well.

 

[dalyr95]

If that is really what they did, then I actually find that even more stupid than going with the h/w-based BC. If they planned to do software-only BC all along, then they should have done it the MS has done it . . . get what you can get working out at launch and then incrementally improve it over time with udates.

Going through the expense of designing a chip and putting in on the motherboard of device known to lose money only to eventually eliminate use of that chip is mind-bogglingly stupid. Hey, let's make this money-losing box even more expensive by designing another custom chip for it that will eventually not even be used . . . GREAT IDEA! :lol

Worked in the PS2

 

[LJ11]

It's funny how lawyers twist things.

1. "Sony is pathetic, they are going with software emu." :lol
2. "Sony is even more retarded for including the EE/GS chip for BC support. They should have gone software emu, even though it wasn't ready." :lol

**** you Sony for trying to include some semblance of BC from day 1.

 

[speculawyer]

Here's the link

Wow. Sony has many so many huge business mistakes with the PS3 that I am surprised that it is doing as well as it is doing. I am totally in awe of their incompetence. :lol

 

[Ynos Yrros]

Hurry up people, it's good SONY news, let's change topic to find BAD things! :lol

That's ridicolous. This new isn't about backward compatibility, it's about moving to another technological process with Cell. Going to 65nm will reduce production costs, but also make the system quieter and lower it's energy consumption and in effect heat output. It also seems that the change will come rather sooner than later.
Good news all around, I hope they make it shortly after European launch. I'm still saving money for a new car, so I hope that revised version of PS3 will be right there when I'll get my shiny vehicle.

 

[antiloop]

Nothing wrong with (well implemented) software-only backwards compability. It just looks like they made a decision to go with hardware aided backwards compability by creating the EE+GS chip and putting it in the PS3 but then changed their mind and went with the software-only BC system.

The end result isn't bad . . . it is just the flip-flopping that makes them look pathetic.

pathetic? I can understand that you are mad that MS didn't do care about bc as much as Sony and therefore just did a halfassed software emulation. But come on now.

Of course, including the extra hardware drives up costs. The magazine adds that Sony plans on removing the PS2 chipset from future revisions of the PS3 hardware once it has finished development of a proper software-based PS2 emulator. Such a removal would help bring down costs for the system.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/711/711242p1.html

So just get on with the speculation about how long beforehand they though about this BC problem. PS2 actually had hardware BC up til PS2 slim.

 

[-Rogue5-]

So get rid of the ES+GS for a new, less power consuming, 65nm Cell equipped PS3. Hopefully they can reduce the size of the PS3 as well.

That's their plan... shrink Cell, eliminate ES+GS, combine wifi and bluetooth, then with the reducing in power/heat they can make the power supply and heatsink smaller... all of which reduces the production cost of the system. PSThree probably won't come until late 2k9 though.

 

[speculawyer]

It's funny how lawyers twist things.

1. "Sony is pathetic, they are going with software emu." :lol
2. "Sony is even more retarded for including the EE/GS chip to include BC. They should have gone software emu, even though it wasn't ready." :lol

My accusing them of belatedly flip-flopping was apparently my mistake. However, I stand by opinion that intentional flip-flopping was a really stupid biz move. Like their non proprietary bluetooth headset & SATA 2.5" hdd . . . this was another decision that was nice for the consumer, but really stupid for Sony.

 

[Ynos Yrros]

My accusing them of belatedly flip-flopping was apparently my mistake. However, I stand by opinion that intentional flip-flopping was a really stupid biz move. Like their non proprietary bluetooth headset & SATA 2.5" hdd . . . this was another decision that was nice for the consumer, but really stupid for Sony.

How was ever being nice to a consumer, bad to the company?
Sure, they could build HDDs and headsets specifically for PS3, but they are actually already doing it, there's alot of SONY electronics on the market.

 

[[Nintex]]

Hurry up people, it's good SONY news, let's change topic to find BAD things! :lol

Actually this isn't news at all, and the PS3 wont be magicly become a better or faster console. Just cheaper to manufacture for Sony and that happens with all console's in their lifespan.

 

[Link316]

If that is really what they did, then I actually find that even more stupid than going with the h/w-based BC. If they planned to do software-only BC all along, then they should have done it the MS has done it . . . get what you can get working out at launch and then incrementally improve it over time with udates.

um no, there was already more than enough complaints over a handful of titles not working, can you imagine how much worse it would've been if only a few titles were BC?

Going through the expense of designing a chip and putting in on the motherboard of device known to lose money only to eventually eliminate use of that chip is mind-bogglingly stupid. Hey, let's make this money-losing box even more expensive by designing another custom chip for it that will eventually not even be used . . . GREAT IDEA! :lol

yeah they sacrificed their own profits for the gamer, how awful of them

 

[LJ11]

My accusing them of belatedly flip-flopping was apparently my mistake. However, I stand by opinion that intentional flip-flopping was a really stupid biz move.

They promised full BC from day 1, they delivered (though it wasn't perfect). I remember news/media outlets running stories on how the PS3 was incompatible or had problems with 200 PS2 games (the number escapes me so I may be wrong). Imagine the PR nightmare if BC was only available for 200 games.

 

[Chris_C]

If that is really what they did, then I actually find that even more stupid than going with the h/w-based BC. If they planned to do software-only BC all along, then they should have done it the MS has done it . . . get what you can get working out at launch and then incrementally improve it over time with udates.

God... maybe you were being sarcastic? I hope so... please.

 

[HomerSimpson-Man]

Jezus speculawyer, in the grand scheme of things who the hell cares? Hell, in the small of things who cares?!

Sony releases a system with 95% BC, totally owning every single system saves it's previous PS2 in terms of BC. Great.

X360 in comparision is just retarded no matter the system you buy core or premium in terms of BC. Suggesting going the X360 route knowing full well they weren't software ready? Please. That's suppose to be a good thing to me, how?

Sony will have a hardware revision sooner or later that would go with straight emulation till again it's 95% all in a 65 nm process to all around reduce manufacturing costs for itself. Well good for them....well la de da...as long as we all get that great BC support, fine.

How is something really pathetic when no one gave a damn in the first place as long as it provides the same outcome either way to the consumer.

That's some pointless rhetoric.

Can't believe Sony somehow making things easier and cheaper for themselves is twisted into something bad for Sony.

And you just twisted the non-proprietary HDD into something negative too?

You seriously can't be that shallow, if not, it's an odd sense of sarcasm.

Damn this forum gives me a headache sometimes.

 

[Nightbringer]

I don´t believe that the console will go down to 299$ in price but I don´t discard a lower than the actual price, perhaps 100$ less.

PS3 will be at $299 when the first BluRay Players for $299 will appear, not before.

 

[J-Rzez]

Well, it all comes down to their next move like others said... shave their loss per unit? Or, drop the consumer price accordingly to what their loses are now in attempt to start a major sales surge?

I guess we won't find out... until about Sept/Oct/Nov (fall) of this year... or, until we hear something from MS on a price slash...

But, get MORE 20gb PS3's out there, and at $400, and I'd predict a decent sales change for the better... which is another thing Sony has to work on... getting across that the 20Gb unit isn't as gimped as another co's lower sku... once that settles into the mind of the consumer, things will change... Especially around then, a decent library of titles should be available, and, tons more should be mentioned to be hitting in the near horizons...

 

[Ynos Yrros]

Actually this isn't news at all, and the PS3 wont be magicly become a better or faster console. Just cheaper to manufacture for Sony and that happens with all console's in their lifespan.

Well it will be better. It will output less noise, heat and take less power. That's alot better to me.