Mark Cerny Explains Why The Cell Processor Was Not Included In The PS4

Mark Cerny explains how he invested his entire 2007 holiday in to researching x86's 30 year old history.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Timesplitter141991d ago

I trust Cerny on every decision he has made.

Just try to imagine Cerny being a hypocrite or an asshole. It's literally impossible

ThatCanadianGuy5141991d ago

Cerny Computer Entertainment.

It's got a nice ring to it.
Agreed tho, i trust cerny entirely with his PS4 decisions.This guy knows his stuff.

MWong1991d ago

I gotta agree, he looks too calm to be aggressive like that.

The Cell was/is an impressive piece of hardware, the development time & costs are too great. By making the Cell more powerfull, it would still be difficult to develop for at times.

VanguardOfCalamity1991d ago

great vid - very insightful .. nice to know that learning from one's mistakes and the use of reason and logic are not dead... greatness may truly await

MajorLazer1991d ago

I have total faith in the Cerny. That guy is just so calm and peaceful and he knows his s**t, which gives further confirmation the PS4 will be perhaps the most epic videogame launch of all time

gaffyh1991d ago

Thing with Cerny is, because he is a developer, he actually knows what he is talking about, and it shows. The whole thing with MS proved that execs should not talk about the console unless they actually KNOW, and it was clear that they know nothing.

assdan1991d ago

I was a little creeped out by Cerny at first, but he's becoming more and more awesome. They really made a great console. Anyways, let me explain why the Cell isn't in PS4. It's theoretically really strong, but sucks in consoles. I don't understand why they put a server CPU in a gaming console.

Godlovesgamers1991d ago

It's actually quite easy, we've all been/are hypocrites and have all been a-holes at one time or another.

RBdrift1991d ago

Cerny is an awesome nice guy but he could totally pull off an evil mastermind Bond villain.

AsimLeonheart1990d ago

The guy is just so calm, honest and straightforward in everything he says. That is what makes him so charismatic and great! I would really like to get to know a person like him personally.

Consoldtobots1990d ago

its gonna be interesting to say the least to see what naughty dog does with a 1000gbs eDRAM.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 1990d ago
SheenuTheLegend1991d ago

lol, wherever he stands, we will vote for him...
the guy is a genius

Mr Tretton1991d ago


Gimmemorebubblez1991d ago

When Kuturagi resigned Sony sold their rights to use the CELL to Toshiba and from then on it was evident the CELL wasn't going to be used again on a Playstation console.

Persistantthug1990d ago

Are you aware that Sony bought those Cell fabs back?

Gimmemorebubblez1990d ago

They have the fabs and rights to the existing CELL processor used in the Ps3, they sold all future uses or development of the CELL to Toshiba.

elhebbo161990d ago

I wonder... what the hell is gonna toshiba do with the cell now?

Consoldtobots1990d ago

they should make their own console and show the world what a mature cell design can do?

dedicatedtogamers1991d ago

I'm glad Sony has learned a bit of humility over the last several years. They're checking all the right boxes with gamers, with developers, with indies, even with people who hated the Dualshock 3 (they made massive improvements to the DS4).

SpitFireAce851991d ago

Know all we need is Microsoft to do the same

araman1991d ago

No we don't. Gaming doesn't *need* a 3rd console.

elhebbo161990d ago

@araman it does if you want competition. competition= better games.

araman1990d ago

I agree with the competition aspect, but MS doesn't need to be the one competing. Another could step in or Nintendo could push to get closer to the real next gen level. There's lots of potential outcomes, and a 3rd console doesn't need to be one of them. Look what happened to Sega during the PSX/N64/Saturn gen.

Consoldtobots1990d ago

MS competes with its checkbook not with their talent(or lack thereof).

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1990d ago
YNWA961991d ago

dedicatedtogamers, well said. Its all about games, which 'true gamers' claim. The disdain for anything Xbox by some people here is disgusting. Competition in the console market is only ever a positive for all. I do believe Sony went on a major Ego trip with PS3, but slowly they changed and for the better as we can see now. MS now in that same boat, but still there is great games and I am happy with the other features available. As much as I love playing games, I am really excited about the Skype feature, as I live far away from most of my family, and it will be better for me than holding an ipad which gets hot and heavy. There are many people like me and will love these features just as much. The time for this stupid fanboy crap has to stop, both sides, its very immature and futile. Heres to the future....

iceman061991d ago

I can agree...accept for the "major Ego trip". That has been blown so far out of proportion that it's ridiculous at this point. That was one man that got caught up in some PR hyperbole...(get a second job, blah blah blah). It wasn't like they treated consumers like crap. They released the console at a huge loss (over $130) because they believed in everything that PS3 had to offer at launch (de facto Blu-ray player, changeable HDD, network adaptor, etc.) All things that drove the price of an Xbox up. No, it wasn't cheap. But, the value (per cost of feature) was there.
As for the console wars, it's just the nature of the beast. Competition breeds competition..."winners and losers" ...and ultimately fanboys. Both consoles offer something for gamers...enjoy your choice and game on!!!

YNWA961991d ago

I hear ya iceman... I loved PS2, but got 360 because it was out earlier... Was looking forward to PS3, but man, the price blew me away, then from the start it was obvious games were going to be on short supply, so I ended up waiting a couple of years. The bluray thing bothered me too. I knew after a couple of years they would be dirt cheap anyway so that was not a factor for me. It turned out to be an excellent console, but the early years were more about getting bluray into people's homes rather than games. Turned out well, but priorities were wrong at first I think.

karl1991d ago

it was great hearing him say that they had the wrong attitude with third party developers with the ps3

and the hole questionary they send to third party devs...

and how they took that feedback..

ive always trusted sony but i feel soo secure with this guys holding the reins of the ps4

mmofanatic1990d ago

Yeah, I'm not a fanboy but the whole vid was very humble in tone and I really like how they listen to the actual developers.

staticdash221991d ago (Edited 1991d ago )

Same here, but I'm thinking it was also the amount of firings and company shake ups after the PS3 launch. They probably looked back to the "work two jobs to afford a ps3" comments and the overall vibe in 2006, and saw it as unnecessary. I'm thinking the ax probably came hard on the marketing team, and in the hardware team as well.

iceman061991d ago

As a Japanese company, it was probably more of an honor thing. I know...sounds strange. But, in Japanese business culture it is not unheard of for higher ups to demote themselves when goals aren't met. Restructuring came because there were divisions that were just plain unsuccessful (mostly computers, cameras, and TV's). They were impacting the bottom line. Add to that, the fact that the PS3 wasn't selling like they forecast.

James-GAMES1991d ago

am the only here that prefers the dualshock 3 over 360 controller? I thought the dual shock was already an outstanding controller and it looks like it be even better on the ps4.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1990d ago
Lovable1991d ago

Th3 pOWA Of th3 c33L!!!

JsonHenry1991d ago

^^ hahahaha, I remember those posts half a decade back. I am so happy Sony learned their lesson after that whole CELL fiasco. It doesn't matter how great a piece of hardware is. If it is so "exotic" that it costs a significant amount of time and money to dev for compared to the competitor it is wasted hardware. This time around Sony went straight forward and powerful from the start. Hopefully they take the inevitable success of the PS4 and realize why it was so successful and never make a CELL mistake again.

cee7731991d ago

now its the POWa of the clouds lmao

cris cross

#inmypetergriffin voice

JsonHenry1991d ago (Edited 1991d ago )

^^LOL! I cloud computing IS an awesome thing. But no where near able due to the pathetic state of broadband internet to provide what MS has promised and touted.

ZeH poWA of dA clowdsz!!!!!!!

blackstrr4111991d ago

Cell is shit. Sony knows that now

ybadr1991d ago (Edited 1991d ago )

Cell is what ? sometimes people's ignorance makes me sick ...

Consoldtobots1990d ago

personally I'm not sure I agree with the lunchline philosophy for developers. WHERE is their responsibility to look ahead and rework their old tired engines for the new technology of the day?
WHY is all that burden on the console maker to do backflips to make their lazy coding still work on new technology?

Dir_en_grey1991d ago

No, the Cell architecture was AMAZING.
Just look at the quality of late PS3 exclusives.

It definitely gave out more power than other hardware at equal price point.

Only thing was developers didn't want to/can't adapt to coding for it since it does take up resources for coders to learn new stuff.
And because of that most 3rd party companies had to use middle-ware so they can still code with what they know (for windows) and use the middle-ware to do most of the transferring job for it.
Almost all 3rd party companies will use old middle-ware for as long as they can, because it does cost money to buy or update middle-ware even when it's a in-house one. Anyway can't really blame them because of the situation, cuz they still make money with mediocre or poorly ported games even.

If coding for the cell architecture was adapted by all developers, consumer would benefit like they did when dvd switched to blu-rays, ei we would get more for what we paid for.
But Microsoft pretty much forced Sony out of that option. It's why I don't like Microsoft, they do nothing for the advance of technology, they don't invest in the development of anything except for their crappy Windows OS.
There's stuff like Kinect and Skype, well MS just bought them up; and MS also bought many more other developing tech companies just to let it sit so the competition can't use them, halting possibility of advancement and development entirely.

It's also why I support Sony, because they always try to develop better tech to bring to their customers. Not all new tech catches on due to higher cost and late adaptation though.
It's a shame, but the situation couldn't be helped with Cell.

theWB271991d ago

So you blame Microsoft for developers having a crappy time using a piece of hardware they weren't familiar with and most didn't even want to learn? It wasn't an advancement if majority didn't like it.

So Microsoft should have adopted the CELL..for what? It obviously wasn't the end all be all since Cell talk has died down considerably across all fronts, not just games. They should jumped on that wagon and make developers learn something they didn't want to. Then what would the quality of games have been?

Sony made a mistake with Cell. Simple as that. It cost too much to develop for and companies shouldn't have had to spend the money to learn it when, obviously with the PS4, you can make a powerful machine with familiar architecture.

That's a new blame Microsoft for developers having a crappy time with the Cell and Microsoft should have used it even though they had no part in development. DvD still outsells Blu ray btw...

Dir_en_grey1991d ago (Edited 1991d ago )

No, I said the situation couldn't be helped.

But MS's whole plan when entering the gaming market was to bring windows brand into the OS and development kits of consoles. They made a good decision that benefited them which is to sell you a cheap PC cuz it's cheaper to built and costs less to develop (original xbox), where any other console before xbox had it's own unique architecture.

It's all business decisions to make money, but the result doesn't necessarily benefit the customer at the end. Sure it's cheaper, but some others might prefer newer technology. Who's to say what is "correct".
It's a give and take situation and it is what it is. I am just saying I prefer the advancement of technology instead of rebranding and sell you old tech, and some times even stopping new tech just to crumple your opponent.

I wasn't talking just about Microsoft and Sony btw, Microsoft does it in every department of theirs, it's how they run their business.

gamer20131991d ago (Edited 1991d ago )

If the Cell was so amazing then the PS4 would have a significantly beefed up version of it.

What's this "quality" you take about? Its silly. Power differences between the two consoles were miniscule at best. It all came down to the developer, that's all.

I'd also like to add that out of all the "graphically superior" games that Sony fan boys like to boast about not one of them is graphically consistent! It's all smoke and mirrors due to the limits of the hardware. A great example of this GT5. It looks great in some places and pretty mediocre in others. The graphical quality of the cars also varied, which a lot of people complained about.

Dir_en_grey1991d ago (Edited 1991d ago )

Sounds like you don't know anything about programing. It's ok.
Read my first post again, google anything you don't understand in it, then talk.
Because the questions you asked is already answered in it.

Baka-akaB1991d ago

Some people refuse to understand what's plainly written in front of them . Everyone acknowledge the cell was amazing , hardware wise .

It was just too out there for most devs to adopt it universally .

Had it been a success for the pc world , and massively adopted , then we would have seen a shift . But obviously it was unlikely to happen and didnt happen .

Umb1991d ago

The best technology may never see the light of day if the cost factor and ROI is not achieved within certain time-frames. This is corporate mentality - maximise profit minimise cost. Some companies adhere to the process more than others.

If Cell was developed 30 years ago or had a high adoption rate early in its life then we as the consumers would have seen the benefits.

New technology is always tricky to get your head around it and I believe the x86 was no different when it was first released all those years ago.

andibandit1990d ago


"If coding for the cell architecture was adapted by all developers, consumer would benefit like they did when dvd switched to blu-rays, ei we would get more for what we paid for.
But Microsoft pretty much forced Sony out of that option."

what option exactly??

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1990d ago
sAVAge_bEaST1991d ago (Edited 1991d ago )

The Cell was Complicated. -get it right.

ZBlacktt1991d ago

A disagree with facts, lol. You are a sad lonely person in real life.

Salooh1991d ago

Pure blackness. It looks soo beautiful. Love it >.< . I would kill my self if i saw this in 2007. I hardly managed to buy one , it was soo cool when it's released. People always shocked when they know i have a ps3 in that time. Good old times T_T ..

ZBlacktt1991d ago (Edited 1991d ago )

If people would take the time to look. You'd see how the PS3 is a world used super computer. From Space to the bottom of the earths oceans. To the human brain, to medical research to the US military. They've all used a PS3.

RedHawkX1991d ago

perfect cell would like a word with you.

elhebbo161990d ago

when it comes to video development yea kinda (at first). but the architecture of the PS3 cell was pretty fucking advance for its time.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1990d ago