Official February 20, 2013 Playstation event

I did really like the Killzone game with a lot of color. However, dude you are dead wrong.
I think Sony is going to be competing with the Wii U in sales because either Sony is going to lose a lot of money here or the consumer is and we know how that worked out for the PS3.

8 Gigabytes of Unified GDDR5 memory isn't going to be cheap. You also have the dual camera bar in the box with a controller. No PS move in the box I would obviously imagine.

$500 at the very least and that is if Sony takes a huge loss. Sony didn't really learn their lesson here and so, it's Microsoft's to really lose at this point. Sony didn't show a lot of exclusives that Microsoft couldn't have simular games waiting.

Besides Killzone and 8 Gigabytes I didn't see anything that blew me away. The rest was already expected.

Remote play over the internet @ someone else's house sure wasn't expected. Full BC with all old playstation games (all the way up to PS3) with the use of Gaikai also isn't.
 
I did really like the Killzone game with a lot of color. However, dude you are dead wrong.
I think Sony is going to be competing with the Wii U in sales because either Sony is going to lose a lot of money here or the consumer is and we know how that worked out for the PS3.

8 Gigabytes of Unified GDDR5 memory isn't going to be cheap. You also have the dual camera bar in the box with a controller. No PS move in the box I would obviously imagine.

$500 at the very least and that is if Sony takes a huge loss. Sony didn't really learn their lesson here and so, it's Microsoft's to really lose at this point. Sony didn't show a lot of exclusives that Microsoft couldn't have simular games waiting.

Besides Killzone and 8 Gigabytes I didn't see anything that blew me away. The rest was already expected.

Really? I'm not so sure this is such a dire situation.
 
Patsu has been speculating about games from the cloud for a while now, including PS3 games, etc.

Background downloads is basically expected for either console coming out and isn't really noteworthy. Downloading and uploading of data while the console is turned off is mildly surprise as I mentioned. But not totally so as it's something that Win8 can currently do. So something I was somewhat expecting at least for Durango.

Sharing and uploading of videos in the background as well has been speculated on. Ustream is a small surprise. I would have expected Youtube or even Twitch.tv instead of Ustream.

I'm also fairly confident that the OS or at least memory reserved for non-game related stuff is going to be far larger than the rumored 512 MB.

Basically it just confirms that PS4 is going to do basically the same things as Durango which I personally thought would be key for it to compete. Although I have no clue if MS will have something similar to Gaikai. Then again, I'm still skeptical of the business model for something like Gaikai, especially if there is a large demand for PS3 titles through Gaikai. 1x PS3 per user per data center is going to get very expensive unless they have some sort of PS3 blade server type thing. Now it comes down to how well they do things.

Regards,
SB

The whole sharing while playing is pretty new to me, and the demos from the cloud is a good idea to save time and bandwidth with and it's a clever use for Gaikai. I expect all the other Gaikai stuff to come slowly.
 
Remote play over the internet @ someone else's house sure wasn't expected. Full BC with all old playstation games (all the way up to PS3) with the use of Gaikai also isn't.

If they were going to stream PS3 games, it's not hard to do the rest and is expected.
Remote play is innovative that is true I forgot about that one. However, it probably won't be used much just like the PSP/PS3 play back in the day.
 
I did really like the Killzone game with a lot of color. However, dude you are dead wrong.
I think Sony is going to be competing with the Wii U in sales because either Sony is going to lose a lot of money here or the consumer is and we know how that worked out for the PS3.
.

So you mean people will pay $400 for a system with visuals comparable to 8 year old consoles, rather than paying $500 for a proper next gen console?
 
I did really like the Killzone game with a lot of color. However, dude you are dead wrong.
I think Sony is going to be competing with the Wii U in sales because either Sony is going to lose a lot of money here or the consumer is and we know how that worked out for the PS3.

8 Gigabytes of Unified GDDR5 memory isn't going to be cheap. You also have the dual camera bar in the box with a controller. No PS move in the box I would obviously imagine.

$500 at the very least and that is if Sony takes a huge loss. Sony didn't really learn their lesson here and so, it's Microsoft's to really lose at this point. Sony didn't show a lot of exclusives that Microsoft couldn't have simular games waiting.

Besides Killzone and 8 Gigabytes I didn't see anything that blew me away. The rest was already expected.

We also don't know all the other small details that they obviously didn't mention. We will find out before E3 I would imagine.

I don't think the PS4 will be 500 dollars,part of using an APU is saving cost.

Remember this was more to hype the social networking and other aspect of the PS4,it took 2 hours,imaging them having more games and leaving this for E3 it would have take them 4 hours or more,so they bring this out,and on E3 they focus on games and other points,considering it will release this holiday it is a sure bet that on E3 they will reveal allot of stuff.
 
Really? I'm not so sure this is such a dire situation.

Can you elaborate a bit? Because do you know any PC video card with 8GB of GDDR5 and do you know why that is?

That is fine if they want to do that, but they are going to price themselves out of the market again just like they did with the PS3, they can't sell it for $350 or even $400 at max this Christmas without losing tons of money so.....

There isn't a lot of options here.
 
I was impressed overall.
I thought we'd see a lot less, and I guess, they had to leave most for E3!
But now, I have to sleep!
 
I thought we understood from other comparisons of video cards that GDDR5 wasn't the biggest price differential in graphics cards?

What is the cost of GDDR5 when it goes into graphics cards? Just asking, would be an interesting thing to know. Is there a way to check that?
 
They're not going to price themselves out of the market since the silicon budget is far more conservative this time around, plus blu ray drives aren't expensive anymore.
 
Can you elaborate a bit? Because do you know any PC video card with 8GB of GDDR5 and do you know why that is?

That is fine if they want to do that, but they are going to price themselves out of the market again just like they did with the PS3, they can't sell it for $350 or even $400 at max this Christmas without losing tons of money so.....

There isn't a lot of options here.

Because this isn't going to inflate the unit cost by hundreds. They could probably sell this at like $400 for a reasonable loss here.. I mean the GPU and CPU are good, but they're not some crazy home brewed creation that them millions- like Cell. They're fairly standard parts courtesy of their relationship with AMD. The thing is an APU.. An AMD APU.

So, to me, the most expensive aspect will be the memory yes. But it won't drive it up to PS3 cost levels.

For that matter, GDDR5 while expensive is still not as exotic as the XDR they shipped with PS3 attached to Cell.

PS3's "high cost" components:
XDR
Cell
Blu-Ray drive

PS4's "high cost" components:
8GB of GDDR5


Because:
Blu-Ray drives are far, far cheaper.
They're not using a complex custom CPU or GPU.
They're not using highly complex and niche memory, like Rambus XDR.
 
Sony can probably make a Blu-ray drive for $3 these days so that's definitely not a factor.

Still mind-boggled by 8GB GDDR5 - the best reason I can think of is that they want to appear to be on par with PC's on numbers alone, and 4GB would look 2nd rate especially in a couple of years. That said, GDDR5 still isn't cheap I'm sure.
 
gpuq3280ufv.png


Does this help with working out GDDR5 costs?

BW is 176GB/s so that will help us work out frequencies, assuming they're going with 25 bit bus.

Could they be using stacking?
 
I guess my only question is, how feasible will it really be for developers to really use all that memory? I mean.. That's a ton of RAM.

Will the CPU and GPU even be capable of using that much effectively? Novice question I'm sure, but it just seems like developers have so much room to spread their legs out..

According to that chart, 8GB of GDDR5 would cost them like $70.

4.35 (512MB) x 16 (8GB) = $69.60
 
Er, Supercharged PC, with 8 cores, modified PC GPU with "almost 2 TF", 8GB GDDR5 at 176GB/s, and a hard drive.

Didn't they rate one of the current-gen consoles as 1TF, maybe the PS3? Or was that one already rated as 2TF? :LOL:
 
Back
Top