Apparantly the PSP2 exists.

[ergem]

Well iPod Touch sales cover that market, which is a fraction of the iPhone market. While I agree that some concession to this market should be made, it's definitely the wrong direction for Sony and Nintendo to move in.

The iPod touch is an iPod first and gaming platform second. Gaming is just another reason to buy an iOS device. If Sony were to go this route, they'd have to mimic Apple's business model and beat them at their own game; I simply don't think this is worth it. Sony makes money off game licensing and takes a loss on hardware, Apple sells hardware with healthy profit margins and uses either inexpensive or free content as an incentive to buy. Which is why iTunes accounted for only 2% of Apple's revenue last quarter, while sales of iOS devices accounted for 65%. I also doubt all those iPod touch users would migrate to a PSP2 even if it aped Apple's device, and doing so would effectively alienate the PSP's core audience.

As for those who bought iPod touches primarily for gaming, PSP2 would definitely be an appealing replacement.

I'm kind of wishing Sony combines the PSP business model with Apple's business model.

First SKU = Sell the device at a loss at release and then rip profit as the cost of the hardware drops, dropping the price in the process. The hardware remains pretty much the same as when it was launched.

Second SKU = Apple's business model. Sell the device probably break even at launch and continue to improve on the hardware. Sell the device at the same price it was launched. The hardware and features are evolving yearly. This will continue the interest and hype for the device as a whole. Examples of hardware evolution could be better screen, faster processor, faster loading times, better camera, better battery life, or slimmer form factor. The most important thing for Sony here is to hype the device yearly on every refresh just like what Apple does.

 

[ergem]

Well iPod Touch sales cover that market, which is a fraction of the iPhone market. While I agree that some concession to this market should be made, it's definitely the wrong direction for Sony and Nintendo to move in.

The iPod touch is an iPod first and gaming platform second. Gaming is just another reason to buy an iOS device. If Sony were to go this route, they'd have to mimic Apple's business model and beat them at their own game; I simply don't think this is worth it. Sony makes money off game licensing and takes a loss on hardware, Apple sells hardware with healthy profit margins and uses either inexpensive or free content as an incentive to buy. Which is why iTunes accounted for only 2% of Apple's revenue last quarter, while sales of iOS devices accounted for 65%. I also doubt all those iPod touch users would migrate to a PSP2 even if it aped Apple's device, and doing so would effectively alienate the PSP's core audience.

As for those who bought iPod touches primarily for gaming, PSP2 would definitely be an appealing replacement.

I don't agree that following Apple's model would alienate PSP's core audience. PSP's core audience follows the games, and as long as there are good hard-core games coming out of a ipod-like PSP2 device, the fanbase will follow suit.

IMO the PSP2 needs to compete with ipod and iphone as the ultimate entertainment device. And Sony could only do that if they burrow some of Apple's business model.

 

[SedentaryJourney]

To clarify what I mean by aping Apple's device, this would entail making the PSP2 pocketable like an iPod and eschewing the gamepad controls in favour of just a touch screen. I do think PSP2 should have a touch screen, however.

BTW the original PSP was supposed to be Sony's first attempt at the ultimate entertainment device and is sort of the inverse of the iPod touch.

 

[ergem]

To clarify what I mean by aping Apple's device, this would entail making the PSP2 pocketable like an iPod and eschewing the gamepad controls in favour of just a touch screen. I do think PSP2 should have a touch screen, however.

BTW the original PSP was supposed to be Sony's first attempt at the ultimate entertainment device and is sort of the inverse of the iPod touch.

The PSP though became a portable gaming haven. The iPod touch was the true king of entertainment portable device. Based on my personal observation, the popularity of iPod touch was skyrocketed by its fast web browser coupled with the fact the it's so easy and cool to browse the net using the touchscreen. PSP's web browser doesn't even compare. The appstore was another ace from Apple. PSP homebrew was not made official thus Sony wasn't able to market it.

The PSP2 may not be pocketable as an ipod but the growing interest in tablets open a market for Sony to position the device as an alternative to tablets. Only with smaller screen but more handy.

 

[SedentaryJourney]

I agree that the media aspects of the PSP aren't as good as iOS devices, and like you said this is mostly a technical issue that doesn't exist anymore. However, I still want the PSP to retain that gaming focus.

Homebrew probably won't be sanctioned on a Sony device unless it were done in a way that didn't allow for easy piracy. One way to do it is to run homebrew in a separate environment like PS3 linux.

 

[patsu]

I haven't been following this topic closely. Has there been discussions or rumors that the PSP maybe a tablet similar to the ipad, because thats the only way I think PS3 power could be feasible? Strip out the BluRay, put in a more power efficient, more up to date GPU, a slightly stripped down Cell on a smaller process and a big battery and a PS3P tablet maybe possible.

Maybe there are two devices, with intermingling rumors.

There are rumors about 3 devices: The PSPhone, the PSP2 and the tablet/iPad.

Given the PS3 power rumor, I thought the PSP2 was the pad too. Then again, there are rumors about PSP2 supporting dual sticks, plus a leaked photo of a PSP-like device. Kaz mentioned that PSP2 won't have a 3D screen, but later commented that the pad may have one. So I don't know anymore ! ^_^

 

[jeff_rigby]

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/sony-psp-2-what-we-know-about-the-new-psp/

I would think this is probable:

For awhile now, we have been hearing that the PSP2 would feature a four-core Cell CPU, making it as least as powerful as the original Xbox and close to the PS2, so you would be able to play modified versions of PS2 games. But according to more recent reports, that might be thinking too small.

The newest darling of the rumor ball is that the PSP2 will be able to generate graphics that are on par with the PS3, even though it will be half as powerful as Sony’s video game mothership.

Because the render resolution for a portable system would be much smaller than the 1080p resolution the PS3 renders in, the PSP2 might be able to keep pace with the much larger system.

If that is true, it opens up a whole lot of crazy potential. Imagine playing a game at home on your PS3, but you have to leave. Rather than taking the pedestrian route of simply saving your game and playing later, you may actually be able to continue the same game on your PSP2. It would likely be a modified version of the game, and developers would almost certainly have to design it with the cross-platform compatibility in mind, but it might happen.

And "Home" would work with the PSP2

This is all still rumor and the quad core could turn out to be an Arm processor. (I can see a reporter hearing half the power of a PS3 and quad core and thinking 1/2 the CELL or 4 SPU cell.) There are issues with battery life and heat using a Cell.

Points to remember are the release date falls in line with new more efficient die size tech for IBM (Cell) plants and Sony is a developer/manufacturer of batteries.

I'm out of my field here so correct me if I am wrong. The cell is a super RISC chip and could more easily be scaled down to 20nm than an ARM chip. ARM chips are scheduled for 20nm in 2012. End of 2011 is close enough for this to apply to a cell or a faster more efficient ARM quad core in the PSP2. http://androidfreeze.info/development-cell-processor-is-not-stalled-ibm-cto-says/
http://armdevices.net/2011/01/21/arm-and-ibm-develop-32nm-28nm-22nm-20nm-14nm-and-smaller-processors/

There are two new developments for Li-ion batteries announced by other companies. Ice cream cone shaped nano anodes and magnesium coated anodes. These don't affect the power density but do increase the battery life and reduce heat waste caused by high current draws on a battery. This also increases the battery efficiency and allows for fast charging. Charge too fast and the internal resistance of the battery is turned into heat which damages the battery during the charge. Too fast a discharge does the same. Reducing the battery internal resistance also eliminates waste due to that resistance in both charge and discharge.

The magnesium in li-ion electric car batteries will "double the life" and eliminate the need for high discharge capacitors in electric cars.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/sony-psp-2-what-we-know-about-the-new-psp/

We've already had that one, and it doesn't pan out. 4 SPE's wouldn't be half the power unless clocked at the same speed, yet they'll generate too much heat at 3.2 GHz. Halve the SPEs and halve the clock rate, you have a quarter the power. That's ignoring completely the GPU side of things. As for resolution, PS3 games generally don't target 1080p, so you won't get left-over performance targeting a smaller screen, although 720p down to 800x400 would be a third as much pixel work to do.

Hence no matter how you cut it, PSP2 cannot have the power of PS3. There're two arguments; one based on comments from human beings, and one based on engineering evidence of what can and can not being crammed into a handheld. I side with the latter on this one. And if their comments are relative, Sony will still get stick for it. Would have been better for eceryone if there were no rumours, only an amazing reveal showing mibe blowing graphics on an exciting piece of hardware.

 

[patsu]

Yeah, I doubt it's a 4 SPU Cell "as is". They may need to do more work to make it competitive against the latest ARM tech.

The RemotePlay speculation also has holes. If PS3 can deliver games to PSP2, it would mean that the former has reserved resources to do so for GT5, Uncharted 3, KZ3, R3, Versus XIII, etc. I am not sure if 1 reserved system SPU can do it.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

One reserved SPU could. The requirement is only on the fly video compression. The game content would need to be downsampled to PSP resolution, compressed which is easy work for a SPE at 400x272 or whatever PSP screen is, and then broadcast. That's a PS3 firmware issue though, not a handheld capability. If PS3 can do that to PSP2, it can do it to PSP and PC and iPhone etc. with the right protocols in place.

 

[jeff_rigby]

We've already had that one, and it doesn't pan out. 4 SPE's wouldn't be half the power unless clocked at the same speed, yet they'll generate too much heat at 3.2 GHz. Halve the SPEs and halve the clock rate, you have a quarter the power. That's ignoring completely the GPU side of things. As for resolution, PS3 games generally don't target 1080p, so you won't get left-over performance targeting a smaller screen, although 720p down to 800x400 would be a third as much pixel work to do.

My understanding is that 2 SPUs are used for shader work in the PS3 which would probably be done by a GPU in the PSP2. So 4 SPUs are being used in both the PSP2 and PS3 for CPU functions. 4 = 4 but 1/2 the clock speed in the PSP2 = 1/2 the power. (Actually it's 5 in the PS3 but we may see a different DRM scheme and another SPU will be free on the PSP2)

Hence no matter how you cut it, PSP2 cannot have 1/2 the power of PS3. Likely correct here but could be close.

There're two arguments; one based on comments from human beings, and one based on engineering evidence of what can and can not being crammed into a handheld. I side with the latter on this one. And if their comments are relative, Sony will still get stick for it. Would have been better for eceryone if there were no rumours, only an amazing reveal showing mibe blowing graphics on an exciting piece of hardware. Agreed

Yeah, I doubt it's a 4 SPU Cell "as is". They may need to do more work to make it competitive against the latest ARM tech.

I agree with all of the above. Please read the edited version I posted. I was doing research and citing articles as you replied. Patsu; I cited an article that stated IBM is continuing to work on CELL and it is evolving and being supported for Game platforms. PS4 could have a next generation IBM PPC that is backwardly compatible with the cell. PSP2 could have a more efficient 4 SPU Cell.

And with those games rendering 1080P on the PS3, 1/4 of that would probably be the render resolution of the PSP2. Another point, why would we ASSUME an OLED screen would have a scan rate and display the same as in a TV. Might updates to the screen happen at a more efficient rate for the hardware. OR that a 15 FPS could be unconverted efficiently to 30 or 60 by GPU hardware just as TVs are reducing judder in 24Hz blu-ray.

The transition from one state to the other is where transistors are inefficient. Only change the state of OLED driver transistors for those that need changing and you have a more efficient display.

I don't see how the PSP2 can use the same encryption on the fly to hard disk as the PS3. If read/writes to SD memory are going to be encrypted it won't be on the fly requiring a reserved SPU and that would require the rumored 1 gig of ram for the PSP2.

 

[Arwin]

We've already had that one, and it doesn't pan out. 4 SPE's wouldn't be half the power unless clocked at the same speed, yet they'll generate too much heat at 3.2 GHz. Halve the SPEs and halve the clock rate, you have a quarter the power..

SPEs in the PS3 are the smallest power consumers in the whole system basically though. I think people time and time again underestimate how power efficient SPEs are. The original 90mm die version of one SPE at 3.0 GHz consumes 2 watts of power at 0.9 volt at full load ... I have no idea how little it is now at 32mm or whatever we are now, but it's not much! All the other components in the PS3, GPU, PPU etc. are much less efficient.

 

[jeff_rigby]

SPEs in the PS3 are the smallest power consumers in the whole system basically though. I think people time and time again underestimate how power efficient SPEs are. The original 90mm die version of one SPE at 3.0 GHz consumes 2 watts of power at 0.9 volt at full load ... I have no idea how little it is now at 32mm or whatever we are now, but it's not much! All the other components in the PS3, GPU, PPU etc. are much less efficient.

A little misleading as 2 watts at .9V = 1.8 amps. W= V * I With efficient switching power supplies and a 12 volt battery we are back down to .1 something amps..

Still it's a full load figure for the most inefficient cell made. Cell is scalable and when only one cell is needed only one cell is drawing full power.

ARM has a hard time running at the same speeds as a cell but is more efficient at the same clock speed. The industry is going ARM for handhelds and with smaller die sizes a faster clock speed is possible with ARM. 1.2 Ghz with 40nm and possibly 2 Ghz with 20nm.

I'd say this is too close to call and we will have to wait for confirmation. I'm hoping for CELL for IP sharing, distributed processing and on the fly DRM between cell platforms.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

SPEs in the PS3 are the smallest power consumers in the whole system basically though. I think people time and time again underestimate how power efficient SPEs are. The original 90mm die version of one SPE at 3.0 GHz consumes 2 watts of power at 0.9 volt at full load ... I have no idea how little it is now at 32mm or whatever we are now, but it's not much! All the other components in the PS3, GPU, PPU etc. are much less efficient.

You can't have just SPEs though, and a 1:4 Cell will have the PPU, memory, yadayada. SPURSEngine is supposedly 10-20 watts at 1.5GHz at 45nm. Just for the processor, where handhelds are wanting single digit wattages to last a few a hours.

 

[Npl]

You can't have just SPEs though, and a 1:4 Cell will have the PPU, memory, yadayada. SPURSEngine is supposedly 10-20 watts at 1.5GHz at 45nm. Just for the processor, where handhelds are wanting single digit wattages to last a few a hours.

Well, the Spursengine has just 4 SPUs. Its not a Cell compatible processor though, rather some sort of accelerator.

1 downclocked SPU handling vector-loads in addition to a couple regular MIPS cores would be possible 1 suppose, but still not a good idea.

 

[jeff_rigby]

You can't have just SPEs though, and a 1:4 Cell will have the PPU, memory, yadayada. SPURSEngine is supposedly 10-20 watts at 1.5GHz at 45nm. Just for the processor, where handhelds are wanting single digit wattages to last a few a hours.

The Spurs engine is not a 4 SPU cell as seen above. Shifty, given your figures for the above, a 4 SPU at 2 Ghz and 20 nm is in the ballpark.

 

[Xmas]

A little misleading as 2 watts at .9V = 1.8 amps. W= V * I With efficient switching power supplies and a 12 volt battery we are back down to .1 something amps..

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here.

 

[Arwin]

You can't have just SPEs though, and a 1:4 Cell will have the PPU, memory, yadayada. SPURSEngine is supposedly 10-20 watts at 1.5GHz at 45nm. Just for the processor, where handhelds are wanting single digit wattages to last a few a hours.

All assumptions though. It may not have a PowerPC core at all.

All in all I'm just saying that whatever you have in your PSP2, the SPEs do not add that much. It all depends on what you are not putting into it - what components would you have otherwise put in there to do what the SPEs do best? Does it replace the second MIPS that provided media processing functionality in the original PSP? Does it help the GPU? Does it do a combination? Something else entirely? What GPU will be in there? A standard off the shelf one? One that has features replaced by SPEs? What CPU will be in there? How much memory? No idea.

For me personally all this is too much guesswork. I have no idea whatsoever what will be in the PSP2. If the SPEs make it in there, I definitely didn't see that coming, but at the same time I'm not ready at all to rule them out based on power consumption, that is all. If the PSP2 is very powerful though, I personally think the SPEs could definitely be part of the reason for it. I don't personally know anything out there that beats it in terms of power/watt.

 

[Sjamaan]

http://translate.google.fr/translat...ration-de-la-psp-2-en-avant-premiere/&act=url

Recap:

- Less broad but more high than the original PSP (PSP dimensions: 17X7.4X2.3 cm)
- 5" OLED multi-touch screen (12.7 cm)
- Multi-touch trackpad
- Resolution: 960 x 544
- Quad core ARM Cortex A-9
- PowerVR SGX 543 MP4+
- 512MB LPDDR2 RAM (1GB devkits)
- 16GB flash + SD slot
- Wifi, 3G, bluetooth
- Acelerometers, GPS, gyroscope, front and back camera
- November 2011

 

[NathansFortune]

The Spurs engine is not a 4 SPU cell as seen above. Shifty, given your figures for the above, a 4 SPU at 2 Ghz and 20 nm is in the ballpark.

Doesn't leave much scope for cost reduction.

Everything in low margin consumer electronics is built with cost reduction in mind. Even an expensive product like the PS3 was cost reduced massively (from ~$1100 for the first production run units to around ~$250 now) and still has 32/28nm process nodes to go.

If you build a product on 20nm with already razor thin margins or even at a loss you won't be able to reduce the price at retail for a very long time. You would have to wait for semi-conductor producers to move onto more advanced process nodes, but looking at the latest news from the industry anything below 22nm is going to be crazy difficult and only Intel look as if they can get below 22nm any time soon. We have already seen TSMC drop 32nm because of difficulties and 28nm delayed by 2-3 quarters. PSP2 will be built on 45/40nm so future revisions of the unit can be cost reduced and made smaller like the PS3 or Xbox 360. It will also allow Sony to market PSP2-2000 like they did for the original, thinner and lighter with more battery life.

Also the SpursEngine doesn't have any general purpose cores, well none that I can see on that diagram at least. I very much doubt that Sony will go with a design that completely eschews a traditional processing core. Even the PS3 has the one PPE...