People where complaining about the PS3's price when it was released. The machine having more RAM would only increase the price and people would be even more offset to buy it due to the increased price.
PS3 hypotheticals thread
- Thread starter PS3MAN
- Start date
People where complaining about the PS3's price when it was released. The machine having more RAM would only increase the price and people would be even more offset to buy it due to the increased price.
Yes but how much of that is due to the bluray player at the time of launch ? The ps3 won the high def disc war for sony , but it left the system under powered and very expensive and is costing them alot of sales .
I think without blueray they could have easily shiped a $500 1 gig system and most likely added other things as well .
If they implemented 2 and 4, plus doubled the GDDR3 bus width to 256bit. Plus added another 8 ROPs, then it would almost equal a 7900GTX
Betanumerical
Veteran
I would do either up the clockrate of the Cell or up the clockrate of the RSX.
Other then that, If I could make my own option, it would be to double the vertex pipelines on the RSX.
Other then that, If I could make my own option, it would be to double the vertex pipelines on the RSX.
archangelmorph
Veteran
It's probably a better idea from what i've seen to store your textures in XDR due to faster access to CELL.. This will provide a suitable base for SPU graphics related processing & free's up the RSX from having to copy data from GDDR3 to XDR for the CELL to eat..
Lucid_Dreamer
Veteran
I think that is highly unlikely. I believe adding the Blu-ray drive allowed them to be able to subsidize the PS3 to that great amount in the first place. No console has EVER taken a $300 loss per unit. The Blu-ray drive was around $125 per console at launch. That STILL leaves $175. That would have been an acceptable loss per console at launch. According to reports, the X360 was losing around $150 per console at launch.
I believe cross-promotional allowances, from the Blu-ray format war effort, basically allowed consumers to have the Blu-ray drive...free.
Therefore, I don't believe it is reasonable to believe Sony would have still taken a $300 loss per PS3 without a Blu-ray drive included. Plus, it has good gaming benefits as we are starting to see.
That aside...I would choose option #2 (not thinking financially). :smile:
Blu-Ray was a risky, but ultimatly very smart move by Sony. The PS3's increasing popularity, especially here in the UK is IMO almost completely attributable to its BR drive. Hell, even though i'm a PC gamer with a 360 that barely gets touched, I have toyed with getting one for the BR drive alone.
What your opinion if Sony release new PS3 SKU with
What your opinion if Sony release new PS3 SKU with
-45nm Cell processor @ 3.2 GHz
-65nm RSX @625MHz with 16ROP and 256bit GDDR3 interfaced.
-1GB XDR DRAM @ 3.2GHz
-512MB GDDR3 @ 1400MHz
-4X/2X BD+RW-Drive
cost around 700 USD.
The new SKU may use as Video Editiong workstation or Game Editor Tools.
How about the cost above for you all? Too expensive or fair price.
What your opinion if Sony release new PS3 SKU with
-45nm Cell processor @ 3.2 GHz
-65nm RSX @625MHz with 16ROP and 256bit GDDR3 interfaced.
-1GB XDR DRAM @ 3.2GHz
-512MB GDDR3 @ 1400MHz
-4X/2X BD+RW-Drive
cost around 700 USD.
The new SKU may use as Video Editiong workstation or Game Editor Tools.
How about the cost above for you all? Too expensive or fair price.
woundingchaney
Regular
I wouldnt be interested and Im fairly sure the mass amount of consumers wouldnt either. I dont see anything about the build that would attract many people to it other than perhaps bragging rights. I cant help but feel it would only add additional confusion to the SKU scenario and it would repel consumers with its high cost.
What your opinion if Sony release new PS3 SKU with
-45nm Cell processor @ 3.2 GHz
-65nm RSX @625MHz with 16ROP and 256bit GDDR3 interfaced.
-1GB XDR DRAM @ 3.2GHz
-512MB GDDR3 @ 1400MHz
-4X/2X BD+RW-Drive
cost around 700 USD.
The new SKU may use as Video Editiong workstation or Game Editor Tools.
How about the cost above for you all? Too expensive or fair price.
No I wouldn´t buy that, but I would buy a new PS3 SKU with
- =< 45 nm Cell processor @ 4.0 GHz (with 8 working SPUs)
- 512 MB XDR DRAM @ 4.0 GHz
- =< 45 nm RSX @625MHz (with 7 working quads, see link)
- 512MB GDDR3 @ 900 MHz (1800MHz bit rate)
- 4X/2X BD+RW-Drive
I think that would be a much cheaper alternative for Sony because they could have the same motherboard layout as the standard PS3 SKU and use the top crop of the Cell and RSX yields. Performance wise it would give about 30-40 % more processing power. The doubling of the memory size would also come in handy and I think it could speed up the browser functionality which isn´t that good at the moment, not to mention it would make an even better Linux workstation.
If games were allowed to take advantage of the hardware it would allow quite a leap in the graphics department.
archangelmorph
Veteran
What your opinion if Sony release new PS3 SKU with
-45nm Cell processor @ 3.2 GHz
-65nm RSX @625MHz with 16ROP and 256bit GDDR3 interfaced.
-1GB XDR DRAM @ 3.2GHz
-512MB GDDR3 @ 1400MHz
-4X/2X BD+RW-Drive
cost around 700 USD.
The new SKU may use as Video Editiong workstation or Game Editor Tools.
How about the cost above for you all? Too expensive or fair price.
Why would a general consumer want something like that for Video Editing or Game Editing Tools?
Why would developers want to provide those Editing Tools for their games to consumers in the first place? (unless you're talking purely mod tools & in such a case why would the consumer need such a SKU to use the tools when they could probably run them on their PC comfortably..?)
I don't think there's a market for such a SKU & technically speaking, if they we're hoping to encourage devs to utilise all the increased hardware (thus destroying the market for the platform through seggregation) then it wouldn't really be a new SKU, it would be a new console..
why would sony spend so much money on developing basicly a new platform. That new rsx would require alot of dev work and alot of additional cost to produce. It also like the psx would most likely barely sell . They might as well just wait two years and make a new playstation
Yes but by all acounts the ps3 wont have a 90m unit lead over the other consoles like the ps2 had. Actually it will fall further behind than even the ps1 . Some estimates put it at only 20-30m over microsoft. Which means they would have lost 2/3rds their lead over ms in a single generation .
We still don't know if bluray will take off and replace dvd either. Its only beaten hd dvd , the sleeping giant is still kinda napping waiting for bluray to start pecking at its heels
Basically every camera and mobile phone got video recording capabilities these days and quite a few people like to edit films for their family or YouTube, so yeah I think there is a market.
Not saying Sony will do this, but I don´t think it´s that far-fetched as you make it sound.
What your opinion if Sony release new PS3 SKU with
-45nm Cell processor @ 3.2 GHz
-65nm RSX @625MHz with 16ROP and 256bit GDDR3 interfaced.
-1GB XDR DRAM @ 3.2GHz
-512MB GDDR3 @ 1400MHz
-4X/2X BD+RW-Drive
cost around 700 USD.
The new SKU may use as Video Editiong workstation or Game Editor Tools.
How about the cost above for you all? Too expensive or fair price.
I'm not sure it would be interesting I read news about companies developping tools for that kind of tasks running on GPU.
People are likely to already have a computer and are more likely to upgrade the gpu and buy the software, than having two different products.
Last edited by a moderator:
archangelmorph
Veteran
I didn't say there wasn't a market for video editing..
I questioned why consumers would want that particular SKU specifically for it..
The average PC nowadays is pretty powerful enough to do some fairly sophisticated video editing without the need for a Video Editing Game Console Platform (which in itself seems like it really doesn't know exactly who it's aimed at targetting...)
Therefore such a piece of hardware really doesn't cater to that market very well at all..
