Sony Working on Multi-Core Design for PS4?

I seriously hope they don't use the PS3 and 360 with their X1950 and 7800 GTX until 2014, we'll have the 7xxx and 5xx GPU series by then

I bet it would play Crysis!

I'm sorry, I swear! I won't say it again, I... holy crap, who hired ninjas! No! No!

In all seriousness now: If a more typical multicore processor woul make the system easier to understand for developers, then I say go for it. Yeah, Sony can justify it by saying "It's all part of the plan" and "It extends the lifecycle" but if developers don't develop good games, what's the point?

I've been saying this for a few years now. Sony and MSFT need to design their next gen systems around an SLI/Crossfire platform. Start the system off with a dual core GPU solution, with an expansion port or two.

As an example, you could build a system with a strong media/general processor to drive the system, along with a say 800 stream processor graphics core linked via 256bit bus to say 512MB/1GB of video RAM. Then have an expansion port or two with which the consumer can easily add say a 400 steam processor, 128bit 512MB expansion or two, essentially doubling the graphics power of the system.

That expansion would allow the new game engine that come out two years after the console's release to still function to their full potential, unlike today where 2 years down the line, console games are utter crap and are stagnating game engine growth.

You could even go a step further, leaving out that media processor and driving everything via OpenCL/CUDA style programming on the GPUs exclusively.

I've been saying this for a few years now. Sony and MSFT need to design their next gen systems around an SLI/Crossfire platform. Start the system off with a dual core GPU solution, with an expansion port or two.

As an example, you could build a system with a strong media/general processor to drive the system, along with a say 800 stream processor graphics core linked via 256bit bus to say 512MB/1GB of video RAM. Then have an expansion port or two with which the consumer can easily add say a 400 steam processor, 128bit 512MB expansion or two, essentially doubling the graphics power of the system.

That expansion would allow the new game engine that come out two years after the console's release to still function to their full potential, unlike today where 2 years down the line, console games are utter crap and are stagnating game engine growth.

You could even go a step further, leaving out that media processor and driving everything via OpenCL/CUDA style programming on the GPUs exclusively.

as long as PS4 can play crysis, the world will still turn, our girlfriend/wife will continue to cheat, and AT&T will still be the least hated mobile phone service provider of all time.

An upgradable console is absurd. The whole point of a console is to spare the user the trouble and expense of upgrades...and also to rape the consumer on game prices.

However...if they could figure out a way to jam PS4 guts into a PS3 case while utilizing the old disk drive(s)...that would be cool. Call it a complete brain swap. PS4s would have to be backward compatible with PS3 user interfaces though.

They would need to develop a standardized form factor for console motherboards.

"Sony and MSFT need to design their next gen systems around an SLI/Crossfire platform."

Very unlikely to happen, the whole point of the consoles is to have baseline configuration to aim for. Even if you had the opportunity for expansion games would still have to be coded, or would be anyway, for the least common denominator.

Which is why consoles need to die in a fire, or at least see more significant upgrade cycles, as they hold back game development due to relying on outdated hardware for most of their lifecycle.

Anyway, you want a more general purpose console? Get a PC.

they did make an upgradeable console, I think the name was PC.

I find it very hard to believe that sony is giving up the cell processor, they spent a billion or two on development.

I thought the PS2 had the same issue with developers hating developing for it, but eventually they got used to it and starting pumping out hundreds of titles.

I think sony should stick with the cell, and sell the PS3 for cheaper, that way more developers would want to develop for the PS3, get used to it and be ok with development for the PS4 if it did use the cell processor.

Any way you slice it, sony will never be as developer friendly as a MS console, MS is in the business of making development tools and dumbing stuff down. Sony has to move lots of units, as long as there is a large install base and developers can make money it does not matter how hard it is to develop for.

@ The people talking about upgradeable consoles... The only actual upgrade on a console that was used in games was the N64 RAM expansion pack. Turok did look nice with it though.... The advantage of a console is its single hardware design mind set, also price of components can be kept down to a minimum adding an unneeded slot on 50 million machines is expensive.

PS4 should be interesting. I hope they get a kick ass CPU lol

I really don't see the advantages of sticking with a cell processor. Yes... Sony spent a ton of money on it. But it's a bust. For gaming purposes you don't need a hefty CPU. Especially at high resolutions, nearly all the benchmarks show this to be true. I expect the next gen to be Full 1080P native all the time. Get in cozy with AMD or Intel and use a cheap solution. Spend the extra on a hefty GPU. Like previous posters I think that upgradable consoles will never work. However, I think that a Dual GPU solution should be strongly considered this time around. Perhaps a custom solution to keep heat under control.

Die in a fire? More significant upgrade cycles? Rubbish.

I own every major gaming platform (PS3, XBox 360, Wii, PC, etc). They all have their strengths and weaknesses. Chief among the strengths of consoles is the fact that you don't have to upgrade them frequently. The average consumer doesn't want to replace a game system every other year. They also don't want to break open the box to install anything. Period. They want a system with high performance, is easy to use, reliable and long lasting with limited maintenance and user intervention. That's a tall order for any manufacturer.

But even with all that said, consoles don't hold back game development. They actually drive the industry forward. The reason for this is simple, economics. The number of console gamers dwarfs the number of PC gamers (leave aside the fact that many PC gamers also play on other platforms). Because of this, game developers are encouraged to actually produce games in quest of profit. Without the profit potential provided by the console market, fewer games would be developed. Ten years ago, I gamed almost exclusively on the PC. In those days, I would anxiously await the next big game. There were maybe two or three a year that were truly excellent. Today, because of the intense competition in the console space, that number is more like two or three a month.

Long live the consoles. Long live the PC.

the worst thing about console is they always make them with small amounts of ram. i hope with ram prices these days they will finally use GB of ram. i don't really know where console can go from here i mean if they beef the hardware up anymore all console makers will have to sell them for the price of a PC.

upgradable consoles would be a mess. the day a console game has to come with a table with system requirements is the day the game console industry dies

Most likely they will use the hybrid of what IBM has gone into. Taking the technology that Cell brought to the table and developing it in a different path. I seriously doubt they will drop off Cell completely. There are plenty of large and small games developed with ease on the system, but changing directions to make it as easy as possible vs going down the same road is a much better option.

If anything it seems like they would have the basic multicore technology which would be easy access and familiar. While having SPU like technology in there to get much more out of the processors. This plus a really good gpu makes for an amazing system.

I'm actually still thinking about this upgradable console concept. It's a dead idea for sony, i'm afraid. for the 360 there might be a slight hope. Why do I say this? Because sony is a stick in the mud for their own stupid crap that isn't compatible with any other brands. The only reason sony does well is that their stupid crap is awesome. way awesome, actually. But no one else wants to utilize sony shit in their products. So it's a dead end. Seems to me that M$ could do a clean sweep by locking in intel and locking intel out of the japanese consoles and developing a new STANDARD form factor for console motherboards. They have the muscle to pull off such a power play. Game controllers need to be USB3.0 and compatible with PCs. Offer a factory outhorized emulator program to PS3/PS4/wii owners for free. Or at least LEAK an unauthorized crack. sell more games. M$ becomes the ibm of consoles.

game over

I agree with you that sony products are way to restricted, but they are still awesome. The rest of your post not so much. A 360 controller already exists for the PC and the wiimote and Dualshock 3 are also compatible through some tweaking. They are also wireless so why would they need usb 3.0. A legal emulator would kill sales actually because the only truly illegal part of an emulator is the BIOS needed to run it. Give the BIOS legally then everyone would just download ROMS online. Also I doubt any of the three companies would allow this because say you can play a 360 exclusive game on a PC or different console then why would you need to buy the 360, when you can get their games and the exclusives for the other console.
Even if M$ became the IBM of consoles they would jack prices on all games seeing as there is no competition. While your stance makes sense from a business stand point, besides the fact M$ would be deemed a monopoly, it doesn't make sense from the consumer standpoint nor is it good for the consumer.

The upgrade/expansion approach worked for the N64, and is continuing to work for the Wii (in the sense that the specialized controllers can be considered expansions). It would be a very effective method to keep the console on par with PC systems.

Personally, I hate consoles for holding graphics back on the PC front. It's ridiculous how horrible games are just because they're developed for the console and ported to the PC, just look at Red Faction Guerrilla, Fallout 3, Lost Planet, etc...

An expandable graphics core would be a perfect introduction some 1-2 years after the console is released, and it would be extremely affordable for both manufacturers and consumers. I'd imagine double the graphics power of the console would only cost some $50 seeing that fabrication processes would be so much more efficient after that 2 years.

You guys/gals type too much and repeat the same thing over and over. Console manufacturers make their consoles as easy as possible to program on so developers can kick games out the door faster. Yet they also try to make their systems different enough that they can release proprietary games/hardware that are unique and at a premium. If that doesn't work then they resort to Mafia tactics and insist game developers only produce for thier hardware. But, there is a fine line and can lead to the console makers downfall ie ATARI.

The next batch of consoles will not be about the graphics or cpu chips.

It will be about the download service, the costs and content for the service from each company will be key. Could end up costing a fortune if you get it wrong. It would not be a shock if everything was download only. You'll be lucky to get a CD/DVD/BD on anything. Think of it as steam for consoles or Apps for Iphone.

So long as I don't have to get up off the sofa to change a game DVD I'll be happy. I need a DVD multi-changer for the PS3. There is upgrade I'd love.

put an i9 in it, and give up..merge sony with intel IMHo

That is the lamest possible PS4 mockup logo.

"But even with all that said, consoles don't hold back game development."

True, they do hold back advancement though.

Anyone looking forward to seeing DX9-games, developed around 512MByte shared memory, being released in 2014? Anyone?

Really, look at the Crapbox 360. Upgrades are there for it. A HD DVD was for sale, WiFi is for sale!

I remember an upgrade for the Sega Genesis. I think it was called the Genesis 32X. I remember marveling at the "awesome" graphics of Star Wars Tie Fighter that came out for the 32x. WOW, 32-bit graphics!!!

We're all forgetting the need for kids to 1-up each other. If Sony makes a graphics expansion module for the PS4 and one kid has it, then all of his friends will want one so they can play GTA6 or SOCOM 7 or whatever.

So true, but when I grabbed a 120gb hdd for $50 on my system. Way worth it.

Yeah the 32X was awesome, it almost single handedly killed off the Genesis as a platform, all it needed was some help from its brother the Mega CD. Combine the 2 and you get the Mega CD 32X (they actually made a few games that required this combo) Another problem with upgrades is that it effectively divides your sales base. So while you may sell 50 million consoles X% will buy some add on needed to play the new games. So if that % is say 50% thats 25 Million, then not everyone who bought the add on will buy your game so it gets trimmed down even further.

I would love to know the sales numbers of the games made for MegaCD 32X... I am pretty sure it was abysmal lol (awesome games though btw if you have the right emulator you can play the Rom's all 5 of them)

First the Sega-CD, then the 32X. Unfortunately, they didn't give much of an edge to the Genesis, though neat concepts. I especially loved Lunar for the Sega-CD.

They should really release a fully-established sdk, that sort of converts usual and easily written code to "cell" code.

Interesting. At one point we're going to have console gamers playing on a system with a 500 million-ish transistor system with like 256mb of memory, and PC gaming enthusiasts are going to be using GPUs with like 6-9 billion transistors and 2-4GB of memory. I guess we'll end up running with SSAA, Triple Buffering, like 32xAF with like 6 screens hooked up to Eyefinity at 5760x2400 resolution, while making it run Crysis benchmarks in the background for fucking giggles, and still be like "Goddamn consoles. I'm still limited by the refresh rate of this 240Hz monitor".

In all seriousness though, 2014 is a freaking long time to wait for progress. I hope PC gaming makes a bit of a comeback soon... I'm already sick of DX9 based console ports. I can only imagine how boring things will get 2 years from now if this console dominance continues.

Ok Noobs,
First off upgradeable cpu and graphics are absurd, that would only add variations to the hardware that would make developing games much more expensive.

Secondly, Why dual graphics solution? How about a multicore graphics processor with a built in physics engine?

I expect that Microsoft will do a bit of the same. Go with a more powerful PowerPC derivative, a custom GPU from ATI or NVIDIA with a mix of DX11, and whatever they have planned for DX12, and a development kit that isn't too hard to transition to for those currently familiar with the 360 development kit.

Who knows what Nintendo will do. They should keep Wii backwards compatibility, but we'll see. As for Sony, they need to make development for the PS4 easier and cheaper for developers. They are now at the bottom of the race so they can't impose their will and expect developers to follow like they did with the PS2 but failed to do with the PS3.