OmniGamer Writes "Most industry sources are convinced that Sony's next generation console will not have a Cell based CPU. In my opinion if these rumors are true, this will be a huge mistake! I understand why Sony might think they should ditch the Cell technology; developers are complaining about the difficulties of extracting processing power from Cell."
30°
30°
40°
20°
Ad 
20°
For backwards compatibility's sake then maybe but, as far as I'm concerned, down with the old stuff and in with the new.
I won't even pretend to know about the intricacies of the processor so I guess my opinion is as useful as a one legged man in an arse kicking contest. I just know that a lot of developers had some trouble getting acquainted with the system and I'm all for making it easier for developers to make games. I severely doubt Sony will go down the same route again. They can't afford to do so. The VITA's architecture possibly offers an insight into what Sony's future endeavours are.
I hope Sony skips Cell for their own sake!
we really know nothing about gakai or how it will work with the ps4 or even the current ps3 so lets set that off to the side for now.
as to the cell, it has shown to be a good chip design in the hands of those who know how to use it. Its not meant to be a drop in replacement to traditional programming but the amout of time and effort put into it has been rewarded with some really great games that appear to be unlike ones we have seen/played before. That feat could be either the work of the cell or just really patient and talented programmers.
To keep production costs low, the ideal path would be an advanced cell. One with more cores but using an easier programming language to get them all to work on tasks independently.
A bump in speed and performance can go a long way in this next gen of consoles. We know they will play games and we know they will have more smart features.
To think this next gen will be the big revolutionary experience is somewhat of a misnomer. These companies and game developers are more interested in making a return on investment (time/labor) than having to go back to the drawing board to do it all over again with a new set of tools that havent been fully realized.
The ps4 and 720 will more than likely take the same path that the wii-u did. Utilizing tried and true design but improving on the weaker points to make a more robust and well balanced platform.
Are you referring to yourself when you claim that people think that because I doubt anyone ever thought that.
Sony isn't going to stay with the cell. Sony made it evident that they are going the developer friendly route as they put emphasis on that with the Vita. I really hope Sony finds a way to do BC though while still making the console affordable.
from what your saying seem to me Sony an MICROSOFT
agents purchase a wii-U dissasemble it, tweek for their specification. apply the technology as ps4-720 tablet console. with that bing said
having consumers think it is a new technology but in reality a clone of wii-u tech.
"Its not meant to be a drop in replacement to traditional programming but the amout of time and effort put into it has been rewarded with some really great games that appear to be unlike ones we have seen/played before."
NO! Don't confuse great games as a result of hard work and talent to ones resulting from technology. There is nothing special about the Cell that has enabled any revolutionary game mechanics unseen before, unlike the Wii with motion control.
Sorry, this entire generation is a small advancement in games except for the Wii and maybe Kinect. Ironically, the Wii is weakest of the bunch of consoles in the past 6-years!
the moment you admitted to not knowing anything about the CELL, you threw your own opinion out the window and into the rubbish garden. c'mon don't do that to yourself.
I think you are widely confused (without knowing it) due to all the techno mumble jumbo marketing speak companies feed you.
The Cell architecture is indeed very fast, but excelling in one area and loosing in another hardly makes it ideal. It's like saying a sprinter is super fast, and everyone says it therefore he must be an excellent swimmer.
The Cell approached (at the time) super computer capabilities given the right type of computation. Give it another and it chokes faster than ARM processor. Physics where there is little input data and huge computations is ideal for Cell, but branching code with lots of logic, or that needs large amount of data chokes it.
"Clearly sony has experience with all this tech and had along time to perfect it, i vote their staying with a newer CELL."
Some things aren't fought with just experience, but the right decision making. Sony made a huge bet on the wrong horse. I hope for Sony's own sake that they drop the Cell, implement some of what they learn from it into the next and move on.
"it even helped look for a cure for cancer!"
So can any computer, older than the PS3. More importantly you should ask, what is it good for, rather than getting hung up on "but it does x, y, and z" i.e. I don't care how fast a car drives, if I can fly faster or how faster a plane can fly over a car if I *need* to drive!
you are wrong! Chuck Norris is the one who powers everything not the cell, don't you read the internet!?
Anyway: I would like to see an improved and beefed up version of The Cell (<--brilliant marketing name btw, sounds cool), a more powerful version that is also way more flexible and easier for developers to port from/to. Maybe that is best done with a really solid SDK.
Excited for next gen, personally I will be disappointed with the specs of the PS4 (and 720) if both are AMD's APU+GPU-thingy - just not enough power in those to run highly detailed games in 1080p @ 60 FPS. =(
(Edit: they might be able to _today_, but they are supposed to have some juice left for the future)
Sony should and will ditch the architecture because it is outdated and no longer very relevant in the post GPGPU computing world. Computing moves very fast, so there is little reason besides backwards compatibility to continue using the chip inside a games console.
Sony will switch to something much more sophisticated and streamlined, cheaper to manufacture most likely but much more flexible.
The right choice.
"but branching code with lots of logic, or that needs large amount of data chokes it. "
Stop..just Stop right there, you have no freaking Idea ABOUT ANYTHING ON THE CELL, BECAUSE YOU ARE JUST REPEATING WHAT YOU HEARD FROM OTHER DEVELOPER'S, AND NOT FROM YOUR OWN EXPERIENCE!
How do i know, for one Branch prediction is not what you use for the Cell, its a prefetch call memory system, why in the hell would you use Branch prediction? Oh that's right because that is the way your Game engine was made for other types of processor's and you would have to have tool's made or make one's your self.
Just keep talking, this is very amusing.
Why are ARM processors known to choke a lot?
Also, i know this may be a little bit off topic, but does the Cell run at 3.2Ghz or 3Ghz? cuz i thought it was 3.2ghz but know im starting to wonder. And the even bigger question for me is, does the GPU run at 550Mhz or 500Mhz and GDDR3 run at 700Mhz or 650Mhz?
Reported for blasphemy. Cell is a dead skin cell of Chuck Norris.
RSX's CORE speed is 500mhz, GDDR3 speed is 650mhz as shown in dumps from machines running linux. 700mhz modules have been used in models but their speed is still set to 650mhz.
Sony were ambitious with their vision for PS3's hardware but ultimately it never quite came to fruition, the idea of using two CELLs, trying to sell the CPU commercially and getting it into consumer devices like desktop PCs/smart TVs (as Toshiba tried etc etc)
Plan B after the dual CELL failed was to jam in an Nvidia GPU, which was less than ideal. 360 had a hugely advanced (for the time) custom core designed specifically for Microsoft's requirements. RSX was just an off the shelf part that was already a year out of date by the time PS3 launched.
The worst mistake with RSX was the decision to cripple it's memory bus and ROPS performance. This was made with intentions of improving yields no doubt.
Sony need to focus better on their new hardware and make sure it is right, and will work.
Im not gonna write a wallotext like i usually do.
Cell is Cool in ways but it doesnt have the scope to compete with the next generation of home boxes largely for the reasons stated by vulcanproject.
Microsoft got a unified shader GPU with several DX10 style features like a hardware tesselator an entire year before PS3 turned up with a DX9 class GPU that wasn't even that good in the first place, the Radeon X1k parts were better.
So yeah I'm right, go look it up.
Also while you're at it, go look up what a paragraph is mkaaay?
@below
tis true... glad I didn't say cell phone. But I'm sure they'll try to apply it to SOMETHING.
They no longer have the influence within the industry to dictate how games are made.
IMO this is all FUD from those in the industry that don't like the possibilities the CBE has shown for game simulation on a truly massive and next gen scale. They'd rather keep status quo for architectures where they are top dog and don't have to rebuild their visual studio libraries for Sony's architecture.
I was wondering what would happen if Sony decided to combine the Cell chip (hypothetically, 16-cores, remember the Cell chip was initially suppose to be a graphics chip and maybe Sony finally figured it out) with the AMD APU. What would the reality be of doing this and what would it yield. I ask because of the article that was posted on NeoGaf regarding the Sony Patten for two GPUs, One for standard processing and the other for high yield processing.
that would also mean 2 cpus and a low end gfx chip rather than 2 gpus as formetioned in the neogaf post.
my expectations are an apu and a decent gfx card...hofefully an a-10 5800k apu and a hd 7970. should be enough to run launch games at 4k 60 fps for a price of $500 early to mid 2014.
And for the love of god @ZoyosJD, da hell are you talking about? 4k/60 frames with an HD 7970? Are you nuts? XD
First, the HD 7970 doesn't has the power to render that. In fact, no single card has the power for that. And second, that card costs almost $500 so get real. Just look at the benchmarks: http://www.hardocp.com/arti...
Sleeping Dogs: 5040x1050 at only 20 frames with HD 7970
is DEAD!!!
AWESOME chip but in a x86-64 world the Cell just has NO DEMAND.
MS/Sony are going x86-64 thus allowing more Devs to easily program for, allow other non gaming programs to easily run, and allows for greater flexibility in the future.
Sony is gonna use Gaikai for backwards compatibility and also if the PS4 is powerful enough a software Emulator will work for ps3 games.
Toshiba IBM and Sony are the 3 companies that were responsible for the Cell
1. Toshiba no longer uses the Cell in it's products.
2. Sony bought the Cell manufacturing plant back from Toshiba
3. IBM has shut down all it's Cell servers
4. and nothing Big or news worthy has come from the Sony Toshiba IBM Center of Competence for the Cell Processor....except IBM's Cell servers which were shut down and taken offline!
The Cell could make a comeback but right now I just have NO info on what it would be in!!
Most games are written in C++ not pure assembly. It is up to the compiler to translate the C++ to assembly then machine code. You can do almost everything you can do in x86 processor as you can with a PowerPC core ISA.
PS. This is not a x86 world. I strongly believe everyone has more ARM products that x86 around their homes.
to keep the Cell. They already own majority of the stock and the manufacturing plant for the CEll. We'll never know until we get the final product. But wouldn't it be cheaper to do it in-house rather than outsource and pay another company?
People claim oh Gaikai is how to do backwards compatibility. Well if I just bought a PS3 game in 2014 gaikai isn't going to play that disc. Not buying it again if I trade my system. No, no. PS4 will have Blu-Ray, and 6 times the power of what this generation of consoles has done.
The best way for compatibility is full emulation on PS4 or for it to read my PS3 discs. Sony owns Cell. They own Blu-Ray. Only problem with that I see is RSX, but AMD has products that can utilize the same APIs that NVIDIA has that the PS3 used with only a few tweaks. It shouldn't be a hard thing to do.
No other way works out with fan appeal. Sure Gaikai could let older games be played, but likely you would have to rebuy them if that is the case. A majority won't. PS1, PS2 titles I can understand, but not PS3.
For power though any AMD CPU while still underdog to Intel will goes miles ahead of the Cell. AMD's top of the line is comparable to a mid-card Intel CPU. Still though x86-64 has many advantages that RISC does not have. One is being that 99% of game developers are accustomed to seeing x86-64/x86(32-bit) applications and code. So everything in general would be easier to craft.
I suspect we will get lower thread count from x86 CPU, but more impressive power output thanks to raw speed. There is no ARM or RISC powered game that can measure up to an x86 title head to head in 2012.
yes more arm around their house, but x86 has about 20 years r&d behind it from the massive community. other architectures have only started to take hold and therefore have almost none of the speed enhancing extensions like intels sse instruction set.
not to mention there is a lot more dirt lying around the earth than there is gold. which one is worth more.
gross oversimplification but my point is billions of research hours vs a smaller number which is arm. arm is good for many things from missiles to calculators, even handheld devices but its limitation is its "designed for a specific task" history. arm has only been general purpose for like 10 years and 4 of which it was only used in industrial environments.
Next generation Sony I expect we will see a powerful custom APU/GPGPU + Side GPU or some combination like that. As well as Cell 1 or Cell 2 design. If they go with Cell 2 it will likely be for enhancing PS3 games mostly, but there is a chance it could be utilized to assist if it exists. I could see a parallel set of 2-4 Cell CPUs working out really well honestly if that was their direction. Either way I hope Sony makes the right choice. If not give us a delay and make it right.
The patent filled recently for PS4 states [0033] The CPU 301 may include one or more processing cores. By way of example and without limitation, the CPU 301 may be a parallel processor module, such as a Cell Processor. Doesn't confirm anything, but suggestion is there that PS3 games might be compatible in the PS4 at least in the first batch of consoles.
"The Cell design itself was meant to be a GPGPU overall that's what it looks like to me."
EXACTLY!
the Cell is a :
PPE+Multicore GPU Accelerator chip = CPU+GPGPU hybrid chip this was stated by DR. Hofstee
http://www.gamezero.com/tea...
EXAMPLE:
Cell is multi-core, but what is unique about it is the fact that it has two different types of cores sharing memory, which allowed us to optimize each more for their own tasks.
kinda read's like this :
“We expect the Samsung part is the first big.little processor,” said Kevin Krewell, senior analyst with market watcher Linley Group (Mountain View, Calif.). “The A7 cores should be capable of handling most [smartphone] tasks, with the A15 cores only required for maximum performance needs, like video games,” he said
http://eetimes.com/electron...
or this
Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc.
Graphics processing in a computer graphics apparatus having architecturally dissimilar first and second graphics processing units (GPU) is disclosed. Graphics input is produced in a format having an architecture-neutral display list. One or more instructions in the architecture neutral display list are translated into GPU instructions in an architecture specific format for an active GPU of the first and second GPU.
http://appft.uspto.gov/neta...
So with the Cell it was A CPU+GPGPU ALL ON THE SAME PACKAGE Die = The Cell
So with the next chip in the new Playstation it could be CPU+ GPGPU+GPU all on the same Package Die.
best hint is this:
the recent patent+ this interview in jan of last year:
PlayStation 4 - was pushed out again late last year.
Its designed-in longevity is largely a matter of economics. The Cell Broadband Engine that powered the PS3 cost $400m to develop; the main SoC for the incoming console is likely to be a 3D stack incorporating thru-silicon-via technology and could be the first $1bn hardware design project.
Sony- Masaaki Tsuruta
http://mandetech.com/2012/0...
Way to frame an argument! :)
But they have to port it to pc?
I dont want to hear soo much until its announced everyone calm their titties
Pass on consoles, get a PC or the steam HTCP real PC knockoff for console poor people.
Edit:
Actually people will find anything to complain about. Especially if it's Sony related.
I'd would prefer for them to get rid of it, as it only helps Sony's first party studios, as they get access to more info and in-house engines. Not very 3rd party friendly.
Technically not true. Their exclusives were good because of great development teams and mostly polish. It has less to do with the hardware.
it helps when your CPU can do GPU centric tasks well!
example:
PhysX Demo
"Mark Rein: One thing AGEIA’s done that’s really smart is that–well, if you’ve seen our PS3 demo, and this is really version .1, really not a finished performance at all, but we’ve got some really great cool physics things going on PS3. They’ve done a really good job of optimizing their library to work well with the SPUs in the Cell processor, which means we’re going to be able to get a lot of physics performance out of PlayStation 3. Also on Xbox 360 to some extent, but definitely on PS3 we’re going to be able to get a lot of physics capabilities out of that. Which means that, to bring [games using those methods] to a PC, you’re probably going to need the hardware. Or you could maybe scale it up even further on the PC, I believe, with their hardware. I think that bodes really well for them if developers go nuts and do really cool physics on PlayStation 3, then if people want to play it to that level on PC, they’ll buy the card. So it’s a matter of them coming out with great applications, great games that use it. I know Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter will be using the hardware, and Unreal Tournament 2007 will be using the hardware. Not today, but eventually. So I think that’s pretty exciting for them, and I think it’s going to be pretty cool."
http://www.ps3blog.net/2006...
The problem was not really the Hardware it was the expense that 3rd party developer's and Publisher would have to expend on making game engine or tool's in order to take advantage of the system design of the PS3's chipset.
which even 1st party made their own tool's for that purpose, which many 3rd party did not have the luxury or the time or man power to do.
Unlike 1st party. Like you stated it was a trade off, but by using the Cell type of chip design this design made Sony 1st Party developer's better prepared for what type of chip would be in the next playstation and would also help be better in their clean code implementation.
Why wouldn't they keep the cell? All most developers already have their head around how to program for the cell. DICE, Naughty Dog, Infinity Ward (not treyarch), Crytek, Ubisoft. I mean I covered the main three publishers in games. It would cost them less to just reduce the size of the Cell down 22nm than outsource to AMD. It also doesn't make sense for Sony to buy the rest of Toshiba's stock if they were just going to abandon it. Like people say this isn't 2008 anymore. Most developers know how to program for CELL and Sony first studios excels in it. It puts them in a better position if you ask me.
Now I know why I got all the disagrees. When I said "multi-plats included", I was talking about exclusives = better than multi-plats in terms of technical aspects.
I didn't want to turn it into PS3 VS 360, so when I said that ps3 exclusives outshone the competition, I also wanted to draw attention to the multi-plat competition. Multi-plats have generally been better on 360, I can admit that.
N4G always starts this whole 360 VS PS3 thing. I just wanted a nice, simple opinion.
It's not just opinion when it becomes the prevailing consensus, despite what you'd like to have others believe.
Simply put, the best the PS3 has to offer trumps the best the 360 has to offer, and it's not just due to having great in-house developers. It's also due to the difference in hardware, and one of the components that's key in that difference is the Cell utilized by the PS3.
Also, no, it wouldn't be great to have a 7 yo CPU in a new console just cause it can make great games.
I imagine you didn't want the emotion engine to power the PS3 just because God of War looked great on PS2 ?
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
But Crytek basically confirmed that the PS4 will not have a CPU based on the Cell.
Only real worry is backwards compatibility. Thats it. Sony will do something to make the hardware awesome, I just hope the architecture is more simplistic.
This is why microsoft has cut so far into sonys market share, despite their faults they respect the developers and programmers more than the competition. This is why windows is on top, and why xbox will be on top eventually.
It's not too hard sleeping in cots if you are getting paid for it. And some of them just quickly port the game over to PS3 to make a few extra bucks.
If these same "lazy developers" don't want to be called that, then how about respecting the customer? No more timed exclusive crap, and above all else, stop releasing half broken 5 hour long games at 60 dollars a piece? Then further ripping us off with DLC.
And Microsoft sure does "respect the developer." Is that why Bungie left to make a new game instead of being tied to Halo non-stop? And why Rare is only allowed to make crappy Kinect games? lmao Heck how many exclusives and new IPs do they have again? Not counting Kinect crap. Microsoft has it strengths, that aint one of them.
I really dislike this lazy argument. You gave the answer to your own comment in this line.
" And some of them just quickly port the game over to PS3 to make a few extra bucks."
Developers do a lot of work to get even the most basic of games made. Compounding that into a AAA game is an incredible amount of work. On top of that development teams do not get paid more for sleeping at work, most of them are salaried employees, and they work an incredible amount of hours to make a game.
The fact is is that it isn't about being lazy. In some cases they can be unmotivated, but that's actually pretty rare. Most programmers take great pride in being efficient and getting things to work where they shouldn't.
What it comes down more to is publisher and investor demands. There is no reason to spend the extra time in the eyes of the money holders for them to delay a game to make it work on another system. It's the reason why after patches usually fix a lot of the problems that games may have on release.
@Soldier - Do you know how much an AAA game cost to make and how much time is put into it?
The Cell is difficult to program with and even Sony admitted it - the reason why PS3 exclusives look so good is becuse Sony made the cell and trained all of there 1st party developers on how use the cell.
When Portal 3 was being made Sony sent a team of there developers to help out with the game and it paid off. Unfortunatly Sony can not afford to do this for every 3rd party game release so hence the reason we get a bad 3RD party ports.
Why should developers have to spend extra time and money on learning how to master the Cell when in the end no benefit is gained from it - Sony got caught up in its own arrogance and realized that people arent sheep...yes the PS2 sold extreamly well but that does not mean that you should launch a $600 console and put some hard to program chip in it.
really? no benefit?
"Why should developers have to spend extra time and money on learning how to master the Cell when in the end no benefit is gained from it "
"master the Cell when in the end no benefit is gained from it - Sony got caught up in its own arrogance and realized that people arent sheep..."
you do know it was not meant to be Sony only processor, right?
IBM and TOSHIBA BOTH INVESTED INTO SUCH CHIP DESIGN. want to know why? because it make's their programmers better prepared for the upcoming chip designs going into consumer electronic's right now. you do know the Hybrid SOC's are now the standard in CHIP DESIGN RIGHT?
back in 2005 and 2006 it was not, but in every freaking Consumer electronic product now day's from smartphone's to Tablets to Smart TV's to Hell DVD player's all are getting advanced chips in them that for all intents and purposes's make them advanced computing platform's far above what their intent was designed for at first.
do you want your developer's to change their idea of just relying on tool's made by other's or get them into the idea to making their implementation of their code clean to the hardware?
just look at Naughty dog's results, hell they even made their own tool's to be used on the hardware. remember its not just about 3rd party tools they have their own 1st party developer's also and if you want to compete you need to have an edge. Not just marketing dollars spent $$$$ if you want to make sure your in house developer's can grow in skill.
yes that does not mean your product will sell more, it just means instead of your developer's may not being able to keep up they will have at least a better chance to grasp the changes of system designs in the future that they may need to work on.
How is it logical to think that it is Sonys job to make sure 3rd party developers are good at their jobs? Last I checked those developers are talented and they also charge the same price as everyone else for their games so they should put in the same effort to provide a good game.
Why should developers have to spend extra time and money on learning how to master cell? Um. Because they are trying to sell us their game for the same price as other games that are better? Its call competition? If they provide a bad game then guess what they won't sell well compare to a developer who puts in the effort and will lose money! How about for pride in what they do for a living!
Stop trying to hide the fact that some developers just arent that good and talented as others, and it isnt Sonys fault, its theirs.
You guys have such warped minds. Everything is always someone elses fault. Never any accountability.
If yiu thought like that in the workplace then you would be losing out on pay raises and promotions to every joe smoe whibis willing to spedn the extra time and work harder.
Soldierone on this one. Just look at the Wii U launch games from 3rd party developers. You can't say that they were stumped because Wii U has essentially the same architecture as the XBox360 with a better GPU. Yet games looked worse on Wii U than XBox360 or ps3 in some games. One word, lazy. They didn't even try any type of optimization to take advantage of any of Wii U's pluses. Wii U ran Rayman demo at 1080p @ 60fps without a single dip. Check out DigitalFoundry.
@Soldierone,
First parties do amazing jobs because when one studio created a new technique with the Cell, they uploaded it to SOny Dev internal servers. Another studio would take what was done and improve on it. The trend continued throughout ps3's life cycle and that's why ps3 games always looked better and better with time. A sony product will have 3rd party support, that's just a fact. But the more first party games people buy, the more money coming back from SONY's investment.
I'd go even further to say include BC for the PS2 and PS3 in one unit.:)
Seriously though, you do have a good point. I guess it would depend on what was required to make it work. If it was just a cell chip then an expansion port in a well ventilated area would probably work, but knowing how these consoles are made it's not likely. A separate attachment, similar to say the original Sega-CD that fit underneath may work, but it's unlikely.
I'm still holding out hope for a way to do it without using cloud (if that is their intent with it). I still play older games quite regularly, and I like not having lots of consoles hooked up through a bunch of switches.
I hope they go with the AMD and leave the cell behind. Maybe stream with Gakai.
Small independent developers are put in a bad position when developing for multiple platforms because of PS3's more complex architecture. CD Project Red said they would have had to split their programming team to work on both the PS3 and Xbox 360. This is one of the reasons why The Witcher 2 ended up being launched on the 360 and not the PS3. I believe 4A Games (developers of Metro 2033) were put in a similar situation.
Looks like AMD processors will power both the next Xbox and Playstation.
Related image(s)
just a lame article from a guy that apparently doesn't read many CPU and GPU tech breakdowns - try reading some Arstechnica or Anandtech.
36 cores, instead of the i7's 4. They could probably halve the number of SPUs to 16, and put out-of-order processing, good branch prediction, and triple or quadruple the L2 cache on the 4 PPU cores, if they were smart (i.e. effectively make them Power7s). 4 Power7 cores + 16 SPUs would demolish every other CPU (for gaming) on the market.
Too late now though. You got to plan these things years in advance.
graphics have reached a point where they will only start to mimic real life.. how much better can they truly get.. not much..
the key now is the hardware behind the software... many people dog on Nintendo.. but they have done something that no other company can claim to match as of now.... in terms of graphics.. today it boils down to art design..
anyway that's my two sense take it or leave it!
If it takes 2 $500 cards running in sli or a $900 card and we are still not at true life like quality, i think graphics still have a long ways to go before being maxed out. Especially for consoles, which are typically 7-10 yr behind pcs.
"anyway that's my two sense take it or leave it!" It's cents dumbass not sense, as in the 6 senses people have.
Graphics encompass a hell of alot more than art design(art style maybe), graphics will eventually max out, but not anytime soon.
Then the focus will have to shift to any other gameplay advances that have yet to be implemented if any.
"take it or leave it!" I'll laugh at it just like all the other mindless sheep screaming you graphic whores or rave on and on about innovation.
I have a message for the older generation of gamers crying about every bs cliché, lack of innovative games, graphics are good enough, previous gens were 10,000 times better than this generation ect. (at least i assume it's older gamers)
Stfu everyone of those are a flat out lie, i was there for alot of it, it was good for it's day but gaming has thankfully advanced. There are plenty of nifty/innovative games out, if you idiots would look instead of bitch you would see them.
Yes a game doesn't need incredible visuals to be a good game, but that isn't an excuse to not try to push graphics/atmosphere to be better regardless of stylised or realistic graphics. Because nintendo is still stuck in the past and refuses to adapt to modern times.
Pong was nice back in the day but beyond a minute or 2 not so much.
They were good games but, lay off the annoying excessive retro pride speech.
Excuse me while i enjoy games with both good graphics and fun gameplay.
assassins creed 3 great graphics but shit gameplay
The cell was okay for its time but CPUs have progressed a lot since then as well while the cell has only been shrunken to new process nodes with no further R&D for a next gen chip.
Sony doesn't need the financial burden of producing a new chip anyway when all it does it make developers jobs harder for roughly the same performance in the end. I think next gen will be great for Sony's first party Devs. They will have a cpu and gpu that just works as simply as possible and can spend all the extra time they save making games better, rather then trying to maximize/optimize a unique cpu.
4 GB XDRAM
Quad RSX