Technical feasability of PS3Portable

tuna

Veteran
I was just thinking that we will never get a Vita 2, but I think there is a niche market for a portable "hardcore gamer" console. If Sony would like to reach this market they would have a nice product if they could create a portable PS3.

It should have the following specs.

OS/Game wise everything should be like the "normal" PS3.

It should have the same dimensions as the Vita (maybe slightly bigger) and thicker at the top so you can get two triggers.

No physical media, SD card for storage.

720p screen.

The SOC would be a combined CBE+RSX+new memory controller. You would pair that to 1GB LDDR4 RAM and the new memory controller can emulate the standard PS3 memory setup. Having 1GB memory would make it possible to have two games running concurrently like the PSPGo.

Have a HDMI out and make it possible to connect more controllers.


Do you think the above would be technically feasible? I guess the most difficult question is whether the SOC draws too much power or not.
 
I don't think sony has the capability to handle two systems at once tbh. I think something like MS's plays anywhere is the right more. Ms should split an xbox one controller that can be used on either side of a tablet and target it for 7 to 10 inch screens. Make a play anywhere certification for the hardware and boom you got a portable console.

I think the time for dedicated hadnhelds is over , it appears from the leaks that even Nintendo thinks that
 
Do you think the above would be technically feasible? I guess the most difficult question is whether the SOC draws too much power or not.
Having not been designed for low power operation, would a shrunk Cell and RSX be power efficient enough? My gut says no. VitaTV was a small, low power dongle, based on Vita. If PS3 could be shrunk that well, wouldn't Sony have been better off making a PS3 micro? And wouldn't we be seeing $99-150 PS3's now? I think the silicon there is just too much and too uneconomical to shrink, so never going to make it into a mobile device. A high power gaming device would use current state-of-the-art mobile graphics - Shield X1 outperforms last gen consoles with mobile Tegra.
 
you mean by ignoring the ps3 ? By putting out upresed games on ps4 ? How is the vita doing during this time also ?

This has to be one of the most pointless and uninformed comments I have ever read here.

First, I never mentioned Vita.

Second, Sony pushed out a lot of big titles the calender year PS4 was released. But it is very natural that Sony, after PS4 has been released, move developing focus from PS3 to PS4. Otherwise, what is the point of releasing the PS4?

Third, a lot of people (me included) really appreciate the fact that we can play better versions of games like TLoU and GOW3 on our PS4s.
 
Having not been designed for low power operation, would a shrunk Cell and RSX be power efficient enough? My gut says no. VitaTV was a small, low power dongle, based on Vita. If PS3 could be shrunk that well, wouldn't Sony have been better off making a PS3 micro? And wouldn't we be seeing $99-150 PS3's now? I think the silicon there is just too much and too uneconomical to shrink, so never going to make it into a mobile device. A high power gaming device would use current state-of-the-art mobile graphics - Shield X1 outperforms last gen consoles with mobile Tegra.

CBE+RSX+new memory controller would not be power efficient regarding FLOPS/watt. But the question is if that combo is low power (electricity) to put in a portable console.

I also think it would be really difficult to remake the chips, and making a PS3 micro is not motivation enough. But a portable console is a new market and then it might be economic justification for the engineering costs.
 
I also think it would be really difficult to remake the chips, and making a PS3 micro is not motivation enough. But a portable console is a new market and then it might be economic justification for the engineering costs.
I'd have thought the market for a super-cheap PS3 is greater than that for a portable console. Think how many PS2's sold after the $150 price point. PS3 sales are certainly being capped by a high entry price. PS3 isn't past 90 million yet, where PS2 managed 150 million, so there's probably tens of millions of entry-level gamers who'd value a very cheap platform (perhaps a bit too late now though). Whereas the market for a high-end portable is demonstrated by Vita as small.
 
This has to be one of the most pointless and uninformed comments I have ever read here.

First, I never mentioned Vita.

Second, Sony pushed out a lot of big titles the calender year PS4 was released. But it is very natural that Sony, after PS4 has been released, move developing focus from PS3 to PS4. Otherwise, what is the point of releasing the PS4?

Third, a lot of people (me included) really appreciate the fact that we can play better versions of games like TLoU and GOW3 on our PS4s.

That's great that you appreciate that you can play better editions of the same game for more money I guess but that wouldn't be the case with Sony supporting the Ps4 , Neo and then a new portable. They've already shown they can't support more than one console. They were already sunseting the ps3 when the ps4 came out and pushed out what was left in the pipe for it. They weren't actively developing new titles for the ps3 and ps4 at the same time. They also only did that for about a year or a year and a half. Its much different than being able to support a console plus a handheld. The psp and vita both prove that sony isn't capable of doing it. What's more you can even say that by trying and failing to move handhelds they let their home console said languish.
 
They weren't actively developing new titles for the ps3 and ps4 at the same time.

Gran Turismo 6 was released December 6, 2013 for the PS3
Killzone Shadow Fall was released on November 15, 2013 for the PS4.

Please do not lie.
 
The SOC would be a combined CBE+RSX+new memory controller. You would pair that to 1GB LDDR4 RAM and the new memory controller can emulate the standard PS3 memory setup. Having 1GB memory would make it possible to have two games running concurrently like the PSPGo.

From what I can tell, there would be two major difficulties in making that, even with FinFet:

1 - 3.2GHz in continuous operation is still too much for a handheld. Top-end SoCs are just now going above 2GHz but only in quick bursts for hopelessly single-threaded code like javascript in webpages. Even the highest-end 15W Skylake U models will only touch above 3GHz for short periods of time, in single-core operation.

2 - Finding a way for the LPDDR4 to emulate two very distinct RAM types (XDR + GDDR3) with different clocks, latencies, etc. would probably be hell. If it was an UMA like the X360 this might have been possible, but not with the exquisite PS3.


Making a mini-PS3 would be such a waste nowadays. Performance-per-transistor has greatly increased within the past ~12 years.

Besides, developers would be much more interested in developing for a platform that would scale up or down with the same assets (e.g. Vulkan on Snapdragon 820 up to a Fury X), than to go back to the PS3's ancient GPU architecture that needed pixel shaders to be run on the vector units.





The new consoles, OTOH, seem to have been built with this possibility in mind. SoC, low clocks all-around, UMA and eDRAM, a cpu instruction set that is deeply rooted in other markets so it'll definitely be supported by IHVs in the long term.. All of that should make a possible low-power transition a lot easier.

For example, given Polaris 11's projections I don't doubt the PS4 could be shrunk to high-end tablet form in FinFet + HBM2 single-stack + UFS, if Sony really wanted to (it'd probably be expensive as hell though).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can we stick to technical discussion in this technical thread. Those wanting to discuss Sony's release schedule (easily verified by a quick Google) should do so in the Console Industry thread.
 
Going to put aside the complications that'd be involved in getting IBM and nVidia IP both ported to some common updated process, since I assume this is more of an economic and political barrier than a technical one.

PS3 SuperSlim draws about 70W at the wall. It has a 45nm Cell and 40nm RSX. From what I can find SuperSlim has about 82% PSU efficiency, although that might be somewhat lower by the time it hits 70W input. So let's say around 55W after regulation. I won't count any further DC/DC regulation since I expect that have efficiency about on par with what you'd get in the theoretical portable.

I'd guess RSX + Cell would be something like 40W of that, after you take out the RAM, storage, and other support chipsets. We'd be looking at savings provided by about 2 or 2.5 node shrinks to 14nm/16nm with FinFETs. I'd expect the end power consumption after shrinks to be around 40-50% of the original, at best. Let's say a minimum of 15W.

For comparison, Vita draws around 1.5W to 2.5W total from its battery, which results in a battery life that is considered borderline acceptable. This is for everything in that system: the SoC, RAM, screen, storage, and wireless chipsets. The SoC itself probably can't exceed 1.5W under a high load (including power regulation loss). Perhaps even less when you consider that the highest loads are probably more from maxing out display brightness than anything.

A little more could be edged out with a larger battery, but it wouldn't take a lot to push the dimensions of the device beyond what people would be comfortable with. Even if I'm way off on the power buildup and the hypothetical Cell + RSX SoC only consumed 5W it'd still be way too much.
 
A little more could be edged out with a larger battery, but it wouldn't take a lot to push the dimensions of the device beyond what people would be comfortable with. Even if I'm way off on the power buildup and the hypothetical Cell + RSX SoC only consumed 5W it'd still be way too much.

It really depends on the size. You have the surface line up with its intel chips pulling 15w before ram , screen , wifi and other stuff. Yes its much bigger but its also powering a larger 12 inch screen.

If sony went with a 5.6 inch screen it would be larger than a vita so you'd be able to put a bigger battery in not including the small gains batteries have made in the last 4 years or so.


However the ps3 is dead and buried. I would think they would have better luck putting out something based on Polaris and puma. A 5-10watt apu targeting ps4 games at 720p with some reduced effects should be possible. With such a small screen compared to what a person would have at home most might not even notice diffrences
 
It really depends on the size. You have the surface line up with its intel chips pulling 15w before ram , screen , wifi and other stuff. Yes its much bigger but its also powering a larger 12 inch screen.

If sony went with a 5.6 inch screen it would be larger than a vita so you'd be able to put a bigger battery in not including the small gains batteries have made in the last 4 years or so.

However the ps3 is dead and buried. I would think they would have better luck putting out something based on Polaris and puma. A 5-10watt apu targeting ps4 games at 720p with some reduced effects should be possible. With such a small screen compared to what a person would have at home most might not even notice diffrences

Surface Pro 3 has a 42Wh battery. That's over 4 times what's in the Vita. There's nowhere remotely close to enough savings in the screen alone. You can't shove a much higher capacity battery into the unit unless you want it to look more like a Shield Portable, which has a pretty undesirable form factor that won't sell well. A mere move to a 5.6" screen will come nowhere close to allowing such a large battery, and that would already be pushing the limits of the form factor people would be willing to accept. A gaming handheld with a 5.6" screen is going to be a lot larger than a phablet with one because it needs substantially extra room for controls. If people can't fit it in their pockets it won't work.

The use cases for a tablet are also totally different from how a portable PS3 would be used. Tablets (and phones, for that matter) can be designed with much higher peak than typical/average power consumption in mind because users will generally want the peak loads in short bursts. That's not true for gaming, but users are willing to accept that the battery will be killed if you only use it for gaming because no one is only using it for gaming. For a gaming handheld, on the other hand, a 1-2 hour battery life during normal use is unacceptable.
 
Surface Pro 3 has a 42Wh battery. That's over 4 times what's in the Vita. There's nowhere remotely close to enough savings in the screen alone. You can't shove a much higher capacity battery into the unit unless you want it to look more like a Shield Portable, which has a pretty undesirable form factor that won't sell well. A mere move to a 5.6" screen will come nowhere close to allowing such a large battery, and that would already be pushing the limits of the form factor people would be willing to accept. A gaming handheld with a 5.6" screen is going to be a lot larger than a phablet with one because it needs substantially extra room for controls. If people can't fit it in their pockets it won't work.

The use cases for a tablet are also totally different from how a portable PS3 would be used. Tablets (and phones, for that matter) can be designed with much higher peak than typical/average power consumption in mind because users will generally want the peak loads in short bursts. That's not true for gaming, but users are willing to accept that the battery will be killed if you only use it for gaming because no one is only using it for gaming. For a gaming handheld, on the other hand, a 1-2 hour battery life during normal use is unacceptable.

you wouldn't need a 42Wh battery however since your now powering a 12 inch high res screen. You'd be pushing a 5.6inch 1080p screen.

You would only need to get 3+ hours of battery life and if sony got with the times and just put a usb c plug for charging there are a myriad of charging solutions for on the go that didn't exist or were just emerging when the vita came out. I got a 20,000 mah battery pack from amazon for $22 bucks last week. So I mean I dunno how many times a person will play a portable for 3 hours where they can't plug it in to charge or connect it to a battery pack.

What do you think is going to happen with the NX if the rumors are true it will kill battery pretty fast
 
Back
Top