Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[Pete]

are you implying that xboxnext / PS4 would cost less than 500$ in retail with their jaguar or any other chipset they choose for fall 2013 ? are you serious ?

No, I'm implying that saying Intel + "less expensive," 32GB RAM + 64GB SSD, 7850 + >200GB/s, off-the-shelf components means no R&D costs, and now $500+ (unless you're assuming Kinect / Move will be standard) all seem like pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking.

But that's just my gut talking.

PS - expensive = costly, expansive ~= big or wanting to get bigger.

 

[bkilian]

I posted on the Semiaccurate forum a quote from bkilian from this thread that seemed to imply that Microsoft didn't receive Durango first silicon. Apparently, the adminstrator of the forum didn't like it.

And neither would I. Please don't go posting things I say on other forums, especially when I'm being vague. you guys know my background, other forums don't.

Although you're welcome to tell Charlie I say he's a fraud.

 

[DoctorFouad]

By now Sony is probably beyond the point of any real fundemental changes to the chips so in the case of xbox720 being much faster, there isn't much they could do even if they wanted.

Besides, it's also a matter of investment vs return. Would it really be smart for Sony, in their current state (or any state at all if you think about it) to potentially lose a lot of money just so they can claim they have the fastest console? Having the fastest console doesn't mean you will make the most money at the end of the day.

but you forget the image of sony consoles, image in marketing is very important, sony suceeded, until now, to convince gamers that their consoles are the most powerful in the market, be it for ps1, ps2, ps3, psp (vs handhelds), Vita (vs handhelds). They even suceeded in doing that with ps3 albeit multiplatform sub hd and poor performance problems VS xbox360 multiplatform superiority....

my question : why would it be any different with ps4 ? they always had this advantage....technological superiority in the eyes of consumers....otherwise it would be a catastrophy for them...so personally I think sony would push for the same strategy with ps4, I wont be surprised if they push this time for 4k blu ray or 4k version of GT5 or something like that...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

PS - expensive = costly, expansive ~= big or wanting to get bigger.

One thing I've learnt from the internet - people that make clothes for stage and screen have to concern themselves with the size of technology. Often we hear of tech being "too expansive for costumers".

No offence intended over these simple, common spelling mistakes.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

my question : why would it be any different with ps4 ?

Because Sony can't afford it! Have you seen their financials this gen? They wiped out all their profits from PS2 in launching PS3 and securing the 'power' crown that didn't really exist in real terms versus the less lossy rival. There's no sense in blindly following that philosophy.

 

[tunafish]

my question : why would it be any different with ps4 ? they always had this advantage....technological superiority in the eyes of consumers....otherwise it would be a catastrophy for them...so personally I think sony would push for the same strategy with ps4, I wont be surprised if they push this time for 4k blu ray or 4k version of GT5 or something like that...

They are broke. Doing a console that pushes the boundaries like that, and doesn't sell for $999, costs billions of dollars in subsidized hardware sales. That was okay when you have a ginormous profitable (non-gaming) electronics business behind you that you can use to pay for the initial expense.

Sony no longer has that -- the company made a $5B loss last year, and while they have managed to stem the bleeding somewhat, they are still far from profitable. As it stands, even if Sony though that shipping awesome 4k-able hardware would be a good idea, they simply would not be able to pay for it's manufacture. They don't have the cash at hand, and right now, Moody rates their debt as Baa3, that is, literally the worst rating for debt that is still investment grade.

 

[DoctorFouad]

Because Sony can't afford it! Have you seen their financials this gen? They wiped out all their profits from PS2 in launching PS3 and securing the 'power' crown that didn't really exist in real terms versus the less lossy rival. There's no sense in blindly following that philosophy.

a company can achieve the same results using less resources, its about efficiency, moreover a more powerful ps4 compared to xboxnext wont be this time around as difficult a task or as expensive (with e lol) as it was with last gen era.

Microsoft wont try to repeat the same feat they achieved with xbox360 hardware which costs them billions of $ due to rushing out their cutting edge hardware (from a QA point of view the xbox360 wasent ready at all and was rushed to the market as illustrated by the % of failure of their hardware).

What I mean is that it wont cost sony as much this time going for the technological lead, Microsoft with their future xboxnext, according to their business strategy these 2 last years, would be more interested in their software business regarding Xbox Live subscriptions, micro transactions, streaming tv shows and movies , kinect in the living room...etc than just producing graphics for the hardcore gamers. I say its an opportunity for sony not to loose.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

a company can achieve the same results using less resources, its about efficiency, moreover a more powerful ps4 compared to xboxnext wont be this time around as difficult a task or as expensive (with e lol) as it was with last gen era.

We don't know that yet.

Microsoft wont try to repeat the same feat they achieved with xbox360 hardware which costs them billions of $ due to rushing out their cutting edge hardware (from a QA point of view the xbox360 wasent ready at all and was rushed to the market as illustrated by the % of failure of their hardware).

Sony and MS have terrbile failure rates this gen. My friend's PS3 just died and he's replaced it with a superslim, managing to heatgun fix it long enough to transfer account to the new system. AFAIK these faults are primarily down to the new use of lead-free solder. The engineering tolerances weren't well understood and machines designed around a particularly heat level just overstepped the limits of the manufacturing process.

What I mean is that it wont cost sony as much this time going for the technological lead, Microsoft with their future xboxnext, according to their business strategy these 2 last years, would be more interested in their software business regarding Xbox Live subscriptions, micro transactions, streaming tv shows and movies , kinect in the living room...etc than just producing graphics for the hardcore gamers. I say its an opportunity for sony not to loose.

Except the rumours, some of them anyhow, are MS pushing the envelope. Given we don't know what MS are doing, and MS can definitely afford loss-leading hardware more than Sony (especially if they want to push Windows as a platform across devices), I expect them to come out with a big box that Sony will struggle to match in terms of cost. One-upping MS in hardware power certainly not a given as you believe - it'd be one hell of a gamble, and one that history shows isn't worth paying on the whole. PS2 wasn't the most powerful console of its gen. Nor was PS1. Both were followed shortly by more powerful hardware. What Sony got right with them was the price, performance, marketing and software. That's the only way they'll succeed next-gen, and dumping all their cash into better hardware would be suicide.

 

[Ruskie]

my question : why would it be any different with ps4 ? they always had this advantage....technological superiority in the eyes of consumers....otherwise it would be a catastrophy for them...so personally I think sony would push for the same strategy with ps4, I wont be surprised if they push this time for 4k blu ray or 4k version of GT5 or something like that...

Unfortunately for Sony, in last couple of years they had inferior products with "superior" prices coming later than competition. I think that the Sony brand awareness and customers expectation of their products went down under after 2000s when Apple, Samsung and others leapfrogged them in just about everything.

So, I'm not really sure they want another big and hot money pit on their hands. I'm sure they will aim for solid performance jump, but there is only so far they can go. What I wonder is if MS is going "all out" to try and push them completely out of the market.

 

[Nesh]

PS2 wasn't the most powerful console of its gen. Nor was PS1. Both were followed shortly by more powerful hardware. What Sony got right with them was the price, performance, marketing and software. That's the only way they'll succeed next-gen, and dumping all their cash into better hardware would be suicide.

Its the things you say that contributed to the success of the past PS consoles but hardware performance was just as important.
They released the right hardware at the right time. PS1 was considered the most powerful hardware upon its release with only competitor the Saturn which was slow on delivering matching quality (3DO and Jaguar arent even worth mentioning). The N64 came a few years later and lacked a CD ROM. That timeframe was enough to build a certain reputation and a strong line up of which many games could only be delivered only on the PS1 due to the CD ROM.
PS2 was also released at the right time. It was the most powerful console when it was released. People were getting updates of the most successful PS1 franchises plus more at an unprecedented quality. Competition came too late
But PS3 did everything wrong. They were the ones that came late at a bad price and without a performance difference.
Since Sony will most likely release with MS they will have to come up with something that will show better performance. If MS comes with a more powerful hardware people will notice directly and it will be hard for Sony to convince the consumer to choose their console over the competitor's

 

[DoctorFouad]

PS2 wasn't the most powerful console of its gen. Nor was PS1. Both were followed shortly by more powerful hardware. What Sony got right with them was the price, performance, marketing and software.

Thats not really true,

Panasonic 3DO : 4 october 1993, USA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panasonic_3DO

Sega Saturn : 22 november 1994, japan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_saturn

Playstation 1 : 3 december 1994, japan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation#PlayStation_.281994.29

Nintendo 64 : 23 june 1996
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_64

even if you consider the N64 as being more powerful overall than PS1 (which also is very debatable, I believe the opposiit is true) the N64 wasent launched shortly after ps1, but 1 and a half year later.

So PS1 was overall the most powerful (capable of running more impressive games engines) console for its generation.

Regarding the PS2, eventhough the xbox1 was more powerful, you cant say the same with certainty about Game Cube (I doubt game cube could run GT4 at 60fps, or JAK3 at 60 fps, or even MGS2 at 60 fps even xbox struggled with that), and with both examples, certainly the xbox and game cube (november 2001) werent released shortly after the ps2 (march 2000), its almost a 2 years gap, more than the gap in time between N64 and PS1. it means PS2 enjoyed technical superiority for almost 2 years, thats not negligeable, its no technical feat for microsoft to come out with a console more powerful after 2 years.

Concerning the PS3, I would consider it more powerful than xbox360 in terms of overall processing power (uncharted 3, GT5, last of us...) but I dont want to enter into a debate of this sensitive question...of course in some aspects xbox360 has the edge (mainly transparencies, and MSAA) but in all other aspects of game engines, the ps3 is capable of more impressive things than xbox360, thanks to the CELL monster.

Thats in terms of overall processing power, but sony had always the edge in terms of multimedia capabilities, the PS1 had an incredible sound chipset and DAC for its time and price, it was used in its time as a preferred CD audio player for audiophiles, the ps2 was also used as a DVD player, and ps3 was the best blu ray player available in the market for more than a couple of years, its also the ONLY console allowing for 7.1 lossless audio for video games.

What I mean is that hardware superiority in at least a lot of technical aspects was a signature of ALL sony consoles until now, if thats changes with PS4 I would consider it as a real surprise.

 

[Rodéric]

I love bias and brand loyalty, makes me giggle.
*sigh*

 

[DoctorFouad]

Its the things you say that contributed to the success of the past PS consoles but hardware performance was just as important.
They released the right hardware at the right time. PS1 was considered the most powerful hardware upon its release with only competitor the Saturn which was slow on delivering matching quality (3DO and Jaguar arent even worth mentioning). The N64 came a few years later and lacked a CD ROM. That timeframe was enough to build a certain reputation and a strong line up of which many games could only be delivered only on the PS1 due to the CD ROM.
PS2 was also released at the right time. It was the most powerful console when it was released. People were getting updates of the most successful PS1 franchises plus more at an unprecedented quality. Competition came too late
But PS3 did everything wrong. They were the ones that came late at a bad price and without a performance difference.

exactly !

Since Sony will most likely release with MS they will have to come up with something that will show better performance. If MS comes with a more powerful hardware people will notice directly and it will be hard for Sony to convince the consumer to choose their console over the competitor's

I agree with that, sony should be more desperate than microsoft coming out with a more powerful hardware, eventhough multiplatform games were better running in xbox360, sony convinced consumers to buy PS3s (to play call of duty and Fifa lol) I dont think sony can repeat the same marketing feat again with an inferior hardware...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

What I mean is that hardware superiority in at least a lot of technical aspects was a signature of ALL sony consoles until now, if thats changes with PS4 I would consider it as a real surprise.

This isn't the thread to discuss Sony's business strategy. Suffice to say, regardless of what Sony's past history may or may not have been, there are plenty of issues preventing them from releasing the most powerful hardware of the next range of machines. It's certainly not a given, and certainly Sony can't plan to wait on what MS release and add 25+% as their system a year later.

 

[DoctorFouad]

This isn't the thread to discuss Sony's business strategy. Suffice to say, regardless of what Sony's past history may or may not have been, there are plenty of issues preventing them from releasing the most powerful hardware of the next range of machines. It's certainly not a given, and certainly Sony can't plan to wait on what MS release and add 25+% as their system a year later.

I absolutely agree with you that this time sony has plenty of financial issues that could prevent them from being competitive hardware wise this generation, but this is just a hypothesis, we must not forget that different departments in companies could have their relative financial autonomy and different strategies, I mean if for example the department of TVs is doing badly, this is not an execuse for Kaz Hirai to sanction his old department of entertainment which is making profits for the company by not providing enough financial suppport for its next important project (PS4)....anyway...as you said this is not a thread for the business strategy of sony so i will not develop extensively here my thoughts about this subject.

and certainly Sony can't plan to wait on what MS release and add 25+% as their system a year later.

I agree that sony should release their console this fall 2013 and go head to head with microsoft (I am sure that this would happen, sony dosent have the choice if they dont want to repeat the ps3 mistakes), but this dosent mean that sony and microsoft are working in a vacuum completely independently from each other, I dont believe that, I do believe they both are more than very interested on what eachother is doing technically, and they are modifying and copying each other....microsoft did the same thing for the development of its xbox360 processor as a reaction to the CELL from sony....they explicitly asked IBM for that...

 

[Ruskie]

Not exactly. IBM was only feasible partner for MS to deliver multi core CPU by the 2005 where MS holds IP rights, it had nothing to do with Cell. I'm sure they would want to know what each of them are doing, but they have their own plans set couple years back and thats what they are aiming for, no matter the competition.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

...but this dosent mean that sony and microsoft are working in a vacuum completely independently from each other, I dont believe that

If they're not, and know what each other is doing, then they are both indulging in industrial espionage with illegal contract violations. Within a corporation like IBM or AMD, the development teams will be walled off so there's no cross pollination and potential for contract infringement.

microsoft did the same thing for the development of its xbox360 processor as a reaction to the CELL from sony....they explicitly asked IBM for that...

Maybe MS asked for more Flops power thanks to Cell, asking for VMX128 on top of what IBM would design anyway (and IBM wanted Xenon instead of Cell anyway, so it may be entirely IBM's design), but Cell was public knowledge so MS could react to it. There is no public knowledge about Durango and Orbis other than illegal leaks, so there's nothing for either party to respond to.

 

[Hornet]

If they're not, and know what each other is doing, then they are both indulging in industrial espionage with illegal contract violations. Within a corporation like IBM or AMD, the development teams will be walled off so there's no cross pollination and potential for contract infringement.
Maybe MS asked for more Flops power thanks to Cell, asking for VMX128 on top of what IBM would design anyway (and IBM wanted Xenon instead of Cell anyway, so it may be entirely IBM's design), but Cell was public knowledge so MS could react to it. There is no public knowledge about Durango and Orbis other than illegal leaks, so there's nothing for either party to respond to.

Like a previous poster said, if one of the two platforms is significantly weaker than the other in some aspect, I expect multi-platform developers to push the platform vendor improve the design in that regard. E.g., if initial specifications for the PS4 had half the memory than the next Xbox, I would be surprised if developers didn't push Sony to increase the amount of memory.

 

[MrFox]

There a lot of indirect info coming out of third parties, they're trying to influence the console makers by making these info public (without actually saying anything specific). The worst thing that can happen to third party devs is a large difference between consoles.

- They really should put more RAM in there
- I SAID they REALLY should put around *ahem* twice the RAM, because *ahem* it's what we need

Then both consoles magically have the same amount of ram and it's just a coincidence

 

[Grall]

Who says MS hold any IP rights? I certainly don't take that as a given. Seriously, considering that the PPE CPU in Cell is virtually the same chip as used in Xenon it wouldn't make sense to assume MS hold IP rights.

This is one of those great internet legends which gets thrown around and repeated as fact without any real evidence to back it up.