phosphor112
Banned
10x PPU would suck. The Cell gets about 250GFLOPS when properly optimized, but the PPU alone gets a fraction of that. There is a link in here somewhere showing the performance of just 1PPU with 1 SPE and it's like 15 GFLOPS.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
vg247-PS4: new kits shipping now, AMD A10 used as base, final version next summer
- Thread starter Globox_82
- Start date
10x PPU would suck. The Cell gets about 250GFLOPS when properly optimized, but the PPU alone gets a fraction of that. There is a link in here somewhere showing the performance of just 1PPU with 1 SPE and it's like 15 GFLOPS.
It's not a typical increase in CPU power for Sony in particular, but relatively small improvements on that end have been quite predictable. Sony always went big on CPU power because they wanted to go big on FP performance. With PS2 and PS3 they designed so the CPU could offer a flexible helping hand for graphics work to the GPU. Since PS3 launched, that kind of performance and flexibility is to be found on GPUs. So in designing a system you would be trading off whether it's preferable to balance heavy computational resources across CPU and GPU or have a bigger GPU. I think most devs would be asking Sony for the bigger GPU given the advances in GPU computing since 2005. It means that performance can be more easily put to work on the task its most likely to be used for anyway (GPU), while still leaving the door open to software experimentation and evolution for other tasks (which wasn't so much there before).
It's a not insubstantial increase in 'general' perf though, and how it'll fare on that front will depend on what its competitor is providing to games...
edit - I'll link to a post I made in 2009 making the same point:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14576590&postcount=42
IMO, making 'general' processing easier to manage, with better per-thread performance*, while pumping up the GPU to handle heavier computation...that's been on the cards for some time now. We had 'big' CPUs, we had hybrids (ala Cell), and now we have big, more general, GPUs. Whilst it's still a delicate environment, GPU has seemingly been winning the 'acceleration' argument for a while now.
* this might be out the window now in a world of 'more smaller cores vs fewer bigger ones', if we're now talking about jaguars, of course
Commanche Raisin Toast
Member
michaelius
Banned
Why would you want to pay more then next box if it's less powerfull ?
And also with Sony using amd parts plus MS being forced to adopt same optical drive format there won't be any reasons why Sony hardware would be more expansive than MS one.
Most people buy console with "all my friends have it" logic in mind (not saying he does, I'm just displaying the general way of thinking). And those friends for the most part don't really care about FLOPS, number of shaders, amount and type of RAM, bandwidth, etc.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
1st party studios, online services, games announced?
there are a lot of reasons why one would pick durango and/or orbis.
I won't be selling my PS3 regardless but i don't mind shelling some extra cash for b/c either be it an add on or a more expensive SKU,it would be nice to play PS1-4 games on one console.
MS and sony teaming up or having near identical hardware specs or having a less powerful system than MS would simply end up in sony forfeiting more marketshare next generation.
Let me give you an example of similar thing that happened in sony's camera division but in reverse. Sony always used to lag behind Canon and nikon in the camera stakes. They tried doing what the above classic brands used to do and it was getting them no where. And that was at the height of sony's brand value. It got them no where with consumers.
Until some engineers at sony thought 'screw this we need to have something that distinguishes us from these guys' So they rejigged their whole operations, spent more money into R&D, bought back a whole fab from toshiba and generally got their own signature mark on imaging and camera hardware ethos.
As a result of this, sony now accounts for 70 percent of all camera sensors in this world. They are at full capacity and they can't keep enough with demand. Even bitter enemies like samsung are buying sony sensors in billions because their technology is ahead of everyone else.Not to mention designing ground breaking products like Rx100 which now forced canon and nikkon to rethink everything.
Compare that to sony's playstation division. Now i don't know if these rumours are true or what not. But with the exit of ken from the business and now SCEI run by marketing clowns and accountants i fear for sony. I think they are going to release some uninspired console with generic innards. And since they are behind MS when it comes to software design and multiplayer services like xbox live, they will have basically nothing left except their first party studios.
Only this time no amount of pumping money will make their games stand out next to their rivals like this generation. Sony needs guys like Tatsuya Akashi and Takashi Yasuda running SCEI. Not andrew house and jack tretton.
Let me give you an example of similar thing that happened in sony's camera division but in reverse. Sony always used to lag behind Canon and nikon in the camera stakes. They tried doing what the above classic brands used to do and it was getting them no where. And that was at the height of sony's brand value. It got them no where with consumers.
Until some engineers at sony thought 'screw this we need to have something that distinguishes us from these guys' So they rejigged their whole operations, spent more money into R&D, bought back a whole fab from toshiba and generally got their own signature mark on imaging and camera hardware ethos.
As a result of this, sony now accounts for 70 percent of all camera sensors in this world. They are at full capacity and they can't keep enough with demand. Even bitter enemies like samsung are buying sony sensors in billions because their technology is ahead of everyone else.Not to mention designing ground breaking products like Rx100 which now forced canon and nikkon to rethink everything.
Compare that to sony's playstation division. Now i don't know if these rumours are true or what not. But with the exit of ken from the business and now SCEI run by marketing clowns and accountants i fear for sony. I think they are going to release some uninspired console with generic innards. And since they are behind MS when it comes to software design and multiplayer services like xbox live, they will have basically nothing left except their first party studios.
Only this time no amount of pumping money will make their games stand out next to their rivals like this generation. Sony needs guys like Tatsuya Akashi and Takashi Yasuda running SCEI. Not andrew house and jack tretton.
Whilst I can understand this sentiment and a part of me fondly remembers the days of very proprietary console technology, the simple truth is that the state of the art in silicon design, and moreover, graphics silicon design, resides outside these companies now. Shared partners and a level of commoditisation of boxes was/is inevitable.
SCE did try to be a player in silicon design for games machines, reaching a climax with the Cell project, but we know how this story ended... even if it were feasible for any of these parties to play that kind of role again in the future, I'm not sure now is the right time.
However, we can't lose sight of the fact that this is ultimately a software business. That's where it's more important to differentiate (which raises questions for both in a multiplatform world but I digress...)
That said, I think there is still scope, and perhaps big scope, for hardware differentiation still - not so much in the box, however, but in interface and peripherals. Both Sony and MS could do so much, and so much different from each other here, if sufficiently motivated. There may yet be distinct hardware flair to these systems overall, just less so in the core box.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
i get the feeling we're being trolled
Best post in this thread!
The worst sony can do now is to deliver a mediocre console!
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
I get the feeling that MS at least will try to differentiate their hardware, not just from consoles but from PC, as much as they can anyway. An 8 core/16 thread CPU would do that. You'd have to retink how to program things to make full use of that, and when you make full use of that, it would probably not be very portable to other consoles or even PC.
iamvin22
Industry Verified
[QUOTE Sony needs guys like Tatsuya Akashi and Takashi Yasuda running SCEI. Not andrew house and jack tretton.[/QUOTE]
i have worked at sony for years and let me tell you that no one in SCEA/ SCEE has any say over anyone at SCEI. everything is done through SCEI. work at sony in their network/ hardware division and you will blow a load at how little input SCEA/ SCEE has on anything.
i have worked at sony for years and let me tell you that no one in SCEA/ SCEE has any say over anyone at SCEI. everything is done through SCEI. work at sony in their network/ hardware division and you will blow a load at how little input SCEA/ SCEE has on anything.
Graphics Horse
Member
It has some good points but I don't think the innards of a console necessarily what defines it.
Interface, Software, Services come first, all of these will offer things differently to Microsoft and Nintendo even if the guts were identical. If Gr1mlock is assuming that MS are going to deliver a better product aside from the innards, well... maybe that's what they should be addressing?
In terms of services, Sony's problem with PS3 was they didn't properly plan/reserve enough ram and power for the OS. If they keep that in mind this time, they can adapt if they have to borrow from Microsoft's idea book again instead of being stuck without certain system wide features. The only exception might be an HDMI/Cable input capability like what Jeff Rigby keeps going on about, but even then surely they could provide that with a tiny add on?
edit: after dealing with the awful new PSN store again I can't really blame all their woes on bad planning, they're just not very good at this shit are they.
Yes Vita is doing great!!
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
what does hardware "design" have to do with the vita doing (not) great?
I think we need to see what type of core at what clock, and what kind of resource reservation is involved. PC CPUs may not be generally 8-core, 16-thread, but they're probably going to have a lot more performance per thread. So the latency to finish a multithreaded job on one vs the other may not wind up being very different or even in the higher-core chip's favour. I am not sure the decision to use a 8-core/16-thread cpu would be as motivated by raw performance as perhaps the ability to more easily make a hard reservation of not insubstantial cpu resources for other purposes. Higher multiplicity of cores @ lower clock might serve that purpose better than lower multiplicity @ higher clock even if the overall performance possible was more or less the same. I don't think the intention in this choice is about trying to make a hard turn away from PC land or PC support - MS knows that would likely fail anyway given publisher needs to support other platforms and their effort would be in vain. Based on all the rumours so far, I think it's about other parts of the strategy...
It has everything to do with hardware design. It does nothing groundbreaking new. Yes its got a nice screen, its got good graphics and I`m sure its easy to develop for. But thats not enough! It has to have a "must have" factor and it doesnt.
Sony need to take som risks, playing it safe gets them nowhere, doing the same thing over and over gets them nowhere.
Vol5
Member
Sorry. I don't agree. Kaz is now heading up Sony. He's moved up through the Playstation division and to his credit, he's not only turned around the playstation division, but is turning the Sony ship around as well, albeit slowly. I doubt as a technology company PS4 is going to be lagging behind to such an extent the innards could be called generic. I think this talk about Wii U's CPU has gone to peoples heads.
Create engaging experiences and people will buy, regardless of how many jigaflops it's pushing
i have worked at sony for years and let me tell you that no one in SCEA/ SCEE has any say over anyone at SCEI. everything is done through SCEI. work at sony in their network/ hardware division and you will blow a load at how little input SCEA/ SCEE has on anything.[/QUOTE]
andrew house is in charge of playstation business at the moment. From ken to Andrew house.
It doesn't bode well for playstation at all. Not to mention when you have jack tretton still in charge of SCEA.
Kaz comes from the same mould as stringer. Men who focus upon services services services and forget what made sony great. Hardware engineering. The playstation division could only go one way after 2007. Ken's brain child was 60 gb playstation. Kaz hirai is the super slim. An ugly looking console that basically stripped everything good from the ken's brainchild.
To create engaging experiences you need to have the hardware capable to do it. When your main rival a software firm is going all out and you're tip toeing around then it just makes a mockery of everything
phosphor112
Banned
That has nothing to do with the hardware, and everything to do with marketing and software.
Except Sony was never the leader in DSLRs. They worked away behind the scenes producing sensors. The biggest change came when they started with the mirrorless Nex line with APS-C sensor and led the way as an innovator.
Gaming works differently in that the symbiotic relationship between hardware and software is more biased toward latter especially because third party developers products account for the largest segment of software sales on almost all platforms save Nintendo. And if they can't make games with the same ease on PS as they can with their direct competitor Xbox, then you're handed down poor ports that cost the same for consumers.
In this way, Sony and MS can, with input from major devs and publishers can establish the target parameters pertaining performance for their next gen systems which the third parties expect not only to be similar in performance but also when it comes to ease of programming. Perhaps this wouldn't have been true if PS3 had unequivocally, unambiguously dominated in all regions and was planning to bring out the PS4 before Xbox by a good margin. But as we saw with this gen, 360 provided multiplat developers with better tools and easier hardware to code for. The former changed with time but the latter is fixed. And even then as games become more expensive to produce, coding for an exotic hardware may only unnecessarily burden the developers' budgets.
The biggest differentiator next gen will be OS features and exclusives. Unless PS4 turns out be weaker by an unexpected amount and its OS is severely bloated yet much lacking against its competitor, the first parties give PS4 the edge.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
vita (and even the 3ds) are doing poorly because of the rise of the smartphone/tablet business. games are too expensive, the hardware is too expensive and there's no support for the platform.
what's the hardware must have factor of the 3ds that's also making nintendo keep lowering their forecasts? the 3d screen?
that market is changing and sony is (?) learning that. nintendo had to drop their hardware price AND release big names for their platform for the 3ds to rise from its early grave. it had nothing to do with hardware design.
meanwhile, vita is still sitting at the original price point and the sw support is nowhere to be seen in 2013. again, not hardware related.
the vita is a capable and well designed machine, from hw to OS, having played with one already it's certainly the best handheld i've ever used, the OS is nice too (still needs some improvements).
what did the ps1 bring to the table? cd's and 3d graphics. what did ps2 bring? dvd's and better 3d graphics. what did the ps3 bring? blurays and better 3d graphics.
what is the ps4 gonna bring? blurays and better 3d graphics.
the controller has stayed the same, we've been using motion control gimmicks for a long time now, but truly exotic hardware isn't that relevant anymore.
what will make nintendo/sony/microsoft rise or fall are the online services they provide, the franchises they create/get exclusively and the adoption of new trends, like social gaming and F2P.
Vol5
Member
My guess is MS are relying HEAVILY on current Live subs. If your friends are buying 720 then the masses will feel compelled to go that route to. Sony needs PSN to offer the same or more at zero cost + their first party content.
The market has changed considerably.
Do you see Apple developing their main chips in house? And we're talking about the best selling electronics entertainment products in the world.
Sony wasn't able to develop a GPU for the PS3 in house, how do you expect them to make something for the PS4?
What's the purpose of spending billions just to say that you've done it in house if you can buy something similar if not better from a specialized company?
CPUs and GPUs are so complex that at this point only a few big companies have the know-how to develop high end parts.
Hardware power at this point is becoming a commodity, it's just a matter of how much you want your product to cost, you can even make a 700$ console bigger than the original Xbox and put a GTX680 in it, but that's not the way of doing business.
Differentiation at this point is done through games, applications, controllers, services, retail price not by having a slightly higher or lower clockspeed. The global market really doesn't care or Nintendo at this point would be dead.
Same reason I'd buy any console. Once it has a big enough library of quality exclusives.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
so, you're confusing "design" with hardware engineering? the super slim is exactly the same console as ken's "brain child", just in a different form factor.
sony removed linux support, sacd support and 2 usb ports long before the first slim came along, that's pretty much the only hardware related stripping that went on.
the super slim is selling well just as well as the other revisions, it's cheaper to make and they're profiting from that by keeping the same price. it's an attempt to further cut costs and introduce the ps3 to emerging markets further along the way.
they are focusing on services because that's exactly what they need to focus, along with 1st party content.
i don't even know why i'm bothering to reply, people have been countering your same arguments over and over again...
AstroNut325
Member
systemfehler
Member
I think this thread needs a few more ground rules to avoid confusion and problems. Maybe it would help if people state in bold what they are trying to say. Is it their own speculation, a rumour they read (somewhere), inside information (vague hints from a collegue, working on something, ...), facts (I wish *g*), ...
It is hard to keep track with all those long posts, quotes what has been said, what was deleted and what is even something we should consider when - sorry Jeff Rigby when there is a quote of a quote with the same "information" (HSA, wide I/O, etc). People might think this is a fact, rumour or whatever. I really hope that at least some people will follow my lead and when posting information tag it so that it is easier for everybody to understand.
It is hard to keep track with all those long posts, quotes what has been said, what was deleted and what is even something we should consider when - sorry Jeff Rigby when there is a quote of a quote with the same "information" (HSA, wide I/O, etc). People might think this is a fact, rumour or whatever. I really hope that at least some people will follow my lead and when posting information tag it so that it is easier for everybody to understand.
AranhaHunter
Banned
In this day and age great hardware will only take you so far, especially since mostly everything that's not super high end is razor thin market today. With services you can keep making money for years from loyal customers. Jeff Bezos said he would give kindle fires away if people would use and spend money on the services provided.
Furthermore, Ken's 60GB playstation was costing sony $200+ per console sold and cost them billions of dollars and, outside of a few 1st party games, didn't really provide a major graphical advantage over the 360 which was released a year earlier, whereas Kaz' slim was making them money per console sold. Not sure you want another $200+ loss per console.
Canis lupus
Member
I'm sure if they did that, the Vita would cost twice as much, it wouldn't sell and people would blame Sony for not going for something simple.
Sony did that with PS3 and were just able to turn things around.
AranhaHunter
Banned
Honest question, do you think Sony will be able to turn the vita around, sales wise?
gundamkyoukai
Member
I think with a few price drops and some content sales will get better .
Still the handheld market has change to much and they would be lucky if it sell even half as much as psp.
Sony should have never brought out Vita but at least they don't lose much on it .
IMO it wil get much better with a significant price cut (170-180$) and more games but it will never be a huge hit, maybe they can reach N64 like numbers, but the problem is that the market is not there anymore. Dedicated gaming handhelds at this point can only be sold to kids (if the price is 150$ or lower) and to hardcore gamers, working on the price and games Sony can get kids and gamers waiting for big titles on board, but the mass market, causal audience will never be interested in the product.
Sony tried to make something relatively conservative and 'safe' but in doing so they ended up with the wrong product for the time, they should have created a true Playstation Tablet, an actual Android tablet with Vita's specifications, running all the Android apps plus legacy PS1, PS2 titles, PSN and of course new titles developed exclusively for the hardware (the Vita games basically). In that case they could have captured a much bigger audience.
Sony did not do this with PS3. The PS3 does almost exactly the same as the 360, and being more expensive.
Its never a good thing to offer the same product as your competitor, at a higher price point.
Luckily Sony had the brand name, thats why its neck and neck with the 360. (And blu-ray, but thats part of the problem in the first place)
You can't take risk if your bleeding money. Even then not all risk are even worth the rewards.
Tallshortman
Member
It's a very well designed piece of hardware, has little to do with how its' marketed or perceived in the handheld market. Plenty of great hardware doesn't sell well depending on market conditions and how it's handled by the business side.
The 3DS has outsold Vita 10:1, its not just tablets and cell phones! But yeah, thats part of it!
PS1: 3D, this was a BIG thing around that time
PS2: DVD playback, Emotion Engine and memory bandwith gave the PS2 features to hype! And boy did Sony hype it!
PS3: Failed attempt. As we know, the way PS3 turned out, was not part of the plan. It wasnt supposed to have the RSX, they had to come up with something at the last minute. (last year) That said the PS3 is not a complete disaster, but it should have done so much better. (in the marketplace)
My fear now is that Sony got so burned on PS3, that they stop taking risks and innovate. That would kill them off completely.
If your bleeding money, you have to find a balance between cutting cost and investing. But playing it safe will get you nowhere, its just not that easy.
I hope all these rumors about the next PS4 being gimped and much less powerful then 720 are utterly rubbish. Sony needs to do what they do best and create the next sexy powerful beast that is more mainstream so developers don't bitch about it. And no Sony did not lose this gen...they are doing pretty well on worldwide sales. US is not the entire world as some think.
phosphor112
Banned
It won't compete with 3DS. Ever. But their sales over the next 5 or so years will put them in the green. I'm guessing they'll use the vita in conjunction with the PS4 for some serious media functions.
Power wise, it's the same product. Feature wise, it's much more. That's why the PS3 had done well.
eighty(one)
Member
Oh, I dunno....
First handheld with dual analog sticks? Capacitive touchscreen? Quad core everything? A rear touch pad (which I really like, actually)? Samoled screen?
Software: auto suspend and resume games? PS+? Ability to customize the aspect ratios and filters of BC/legacy games? PSN trophies synching and platform/cross play/save/buy initiatives?
That's a lot of differentiation with touch only tablets (none which match Vitas power out put, yet - still top dog there), or the single nub 3DS (which I admittedly love the 3D)...
Differentiating system features to me ^_^
None of witch consumers care about obviously (mass market). It needs to offer something fundementally different which it doesnt.
eighty(one)
Member
It depends on the consumer. Whether I bought the system or not, I'm still a consumer.
I bought the system, therefore they successfully targeted the software and hardware to my consumer interest.
At large, I think the Vitas largest issue is a perception problem. People spout nonsense all over the web about the system. They're parroting the "issues", even though they don't own a Vita or have never used one first hand. If the noise were relegated to a hushed muffle, the system would surely sell better. It's that people are afraid to invest, because of the memes and toxic image people have painted.
I get asked all the time, by clients (I do hair) or at a coffee shop (if I'm using my Vita) - how I like it...or I get "Oh, is that a PSVita?" asked, too. People are aware of the system and there is a genuine interest; a mild curiosity from my anecdotal, first person experience.
For a core gaming platform, tablet running on Android will NOT work (for Sony) -
Android can be easily rooted and piracy is a big, big problem. Sony would be smart to NOT use Android. They designed their own OS on Vita and utilize proprietary memory to: recoup costs, prevent piracy.
So MS is copying Sony again? The first leaks of the next gen 720 were nothing like the last stuff we've seen. MS wasn't even going with AMD, if I'm not mistaken they were working with IBM.
Sometime after we learned that Sony was working with AMD, MS pulled a 360 (no pun intended) and jumped on the AMD ship.
Of course I might be mistaken since there's still nothing official but it's not like this has not happened before.
The Xbox 360 CPU Xenon uses technology developed to power the PS3 Cell processor.