660°

IBM may introduce the new CELL chip for Sony next-gen console ?

Sony and IBM still together?

IBM still supports the CELL Broadband Engine, signed Sony Playstation! The official website continues to offer the chip created for the Playstation 3 and displays it proudly in the company's history with the symbols of buttons on the pad, and has signed also agreements with Toshiba (the CELL is present in his REGZA TV) and have achieved server supercomputer.

Read Full Story >>
translate.google.com
user39158004153d ago

No it wont happened, Sony already stated they are going with multi procesors, so no cell and to be honest im glad there is no cell on the ps4.

decrypt4153d ago (Edited 4153d ago )

Cell is over rated imo, its only Sony fanboys cheer leading it, hell even Sony themselves have stopped.

Its a fact had Sony released the PS3 with a normal CPU and GPU like the 8800GTX, the PS3 would have easily been capable of running most of its games in 1080p @ 60fps.

While Cell is better than a standard CPU when it comes to doing graphics, thats because CELL was designed to do graphics a CPU isnt designed for that job. However against a real GPU Cell stands no chance. It would absolutely fail even against the RSX, let alone anything that was relevant at the time the PS3 was released aka the 8800GTX.

CELL tried to do everything at once CPU tasks and GPU tasks and ended up being bad at both of them. It cant compete with a Dual core CPU when it comes to general purpose tasks, while it absolutely gets devastated by 4-5 year old GPUs. Proof is in the pudding, With Sony running at the last moment to Nvidia for help. Had their been no RSX in the PS3 there was no way it was going to compete with Xbox 360 even with 2 cells on it.

Coming to the current time. It takes billions of USD to develop chips. IBM is no where near a contender in the graphics business. Even if they did update the CELL it wouldnt stand a chance against any of the current offerings from Nvidia or AMD. Hence it would be in Sonys best interest to go with a standard CPU and a good strong GPU from AMD.

AMD and Nvidia have put in years or work and billions of USD into these chips, there is no way IBM can compete in this department with either of them. Sony would be better of putting the extra money toward a better GPU than to invest in upgrading the Cells ancient design.

Edit:

Here come the disagrees lol, for the disbelievers go ahead put together a 4 year old PC with a dual core CPU and a 8800GTX watch as it will play most console ports in 1080p. Something which PS3 will barely do in 720p, despite any sort of optimization from the Cell.

Hence for the PS4 it would be in Sony best interest to drop the Cell watch and see as thats exactly whats going to happen.

blackbeld4153d ago

Maybe, if so then it will easy be backward compatible.

Still rumour, we should wait and see.

yewles14153d ago (Edited 4153d ago )

*sigh* decrypt, WHY are you comparing the PS3 to a graphics card that had cost $50 MORE than the whole console at launch?

zebramocha4153d ago

@yewles do you have a time frame for your next video? I like them and your intros,going up and down my inner tubes.

steve30x4153d ago

@ decrypt : If you put an 8800GTX into a console the console would die within an hour because the 8800GTX got extremely hot. With the stock cooler it would reach up to 95 celcius.

4153d ago
4152d ago
DeadlyFire4152d ago

Only reason I see is for PS3 compatibility for PS3 games. Which is very likely to be in at least the first wave of consoles.

Cell is not necessary anymore. Power series is a parallel or better to it now really. I personally believe Power7 is the successor to the Cell tech.

32 threads in 8 core Power7 Cell 2 was aimed to have 32 SPUs. What is the real difference between 32 SMT threads and 32 SPUs. Its possible the performance was equal or lesser than Power7 series CPUs that were coming out which could be the main factor in it getting canned.

Cell up to 256 Gflops.
Power7 264 Gflops and is more efficient at keeping that pace.

Power8 Could possibly stomp both of them, but doubtful Power8 is coming along side AMD APU, but it technically could. Just doesn't seem like enough room in the system.

sikbeta4152d ago

2 things:

.CELL is dead as a viable chip

.Unless you want to buy a $599 console again and Sony want to be the laughing stock for another generation... it's just better to cut expensive PS3-BC and go for an affordable console that is easy to sell

Now, when Sony unveil the PS4 and tell there is no PS3-BC, people will RAGE! and XBX8 will have another advantage compared to PS4

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 4152d ago
Enemy4153d ago (Edited 4153d ago )

Nope, the Cell Saga is over, folks. They're moving on to better, simpler things.

Unless you were expecting:

Sony: And now for our worst kept secret...the PS4!
Crowd: YEAHHHH!! HOO HOO HOO HOO!
Sony: ...to be powered by the most advanced and most complex architecture ever put into a single chip. PlayStation fans, I give you the Cell 2!
Microsoft: (laughs)

nukeitall4153d ago

I hope Cell isn't returning for Sony's own sake. I want to see the PS4 flourish and be a serious competitor in the industry.

The industry needs it.

Ulf4153d ago (Edited 4153d ago )

Enemy, you just stuck a red sign on your head, with the word "CPU clueless" on it.

The next gen platforms will probably have barely the performance of the Cell, when it comes to some tasks, like movie-quality animation, and good physics -- its a real shame, from a CPU and gamer standpoint, that we won't see a quad-core, 16-32 SPU Cell this next gen.

DragonKnight4152d ago

@nukeitall: BAHAHAHAHAHA! That was a good one. Oh wait, you're serious? Gee, what can one say to that. Hmm, well I guess the PS3 didn't have the best looking console games of the gen. Oh, it did? Well damn. I guess the PS3 didn't sell at a faster rate globally than the 360 (meaning it was more desired throughout the world) and has likely surpassed it now. Oh, they did that too? Gee, I wonder how anyone could come to the conclusion that the Playstation brand isn't flourishing. Oh, an MS fanboy? That explains a lot.

nukeitall4152d ago

@DragonKnight:

The Playstation brand is the weakest it has ever been as reflected by the marketshare of each respective company.

Seeing how I hurt your feeling with a pretty innocent comment, it is clear who is the real fanboy is!

hesido4152d ago

It wasn't Cell that held back PS3, it was the RSX. CELL's cycles were used to make up for it (e.g. Vertex skinning on Xbox is usually done straight on Xenos, while for PS3, this had to be done on the Cell to get better performance.)

I hope PS4 has an butt-kicking graphics card where you can throw anything including aiding the cpu for some tasks, not like on Ps3 where it was the other way around. Then it can have whatever CPU they like.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4152d ago
ATi_Elite4153d ago (Edited 4153d ago )

although "SOME" people believe The Cell is the second coming, can cure Cancer, and get them a date with Megan Fox or Megan Good........

hate to bust your bubbles but the Cell is Dead!

. IBM has taken it's Cell Servers off-line
. Toshiba has no plans for the Cell in it's Next Gen TV's
. Sony has already said x86-64 for PS4
. Toshiba sold the Cell plant back to Sony and Sony will use the Cell manufacturing plant to make sensors for cameras and other parts but NO Cell manufacturing!

The Cell was a nice chip but it just doesn't fit in too nicely in a x86 world no matter how much power you give the PPE part of it!

True no PS4 News has been given but Sony saying NO to the Cell for the PS4 did slip out and you only have to read a SOny or IBM or Toshiba Financial report to know that Sony is not making any Cell Processors and Neither is IBM or Toshiba!

trenso14152d ago (Edited 4152d ago )

Yell Dead Cell!

(hope they get the reference)

DarkHeroZX4152d ago (Edited 4152d ago )

Sony has not confirmed anything on the ps4. They where testing how much power it would take to run GT5 at 4k resolution and it took 4 ps3's to do so. So at minimum they need 4 cells which 1 new one blows the current cell out of the water. They need a minimum of 1 gig of vram and 1 gig of system ram to play a ps3 game at 4k, and atleast a 660 gtx or equal graphic card. We'll what Sony does though. This could help keep cost low for the next console.

4153d ago Replies(3)
Irishguy954153d ago

I hope they stick with Cell, so the system will be backwards compat with the Ps3.

IG-884153d ago

well if they do not go with the cell next gen than Gaikai could be used for backwards compatibility.

guitarded774153d ago

Yeah, but I have a collection of about 200 disc games. If they go cloud, they damn well better have a system in place where I can play the games I already paid for, for free or I'll be pi$$ed.

Cueil4153d ago

how about this... keep your PS3... when you're done with your PS3 sell it and all your games on EBay... till then keep it hooked up. It's not going to poison your PS4 because you play with it more. They are consoles, not women.

Saigon4152d ago

A while back I asked a question if Sony decided to use the cell chip with the supposedly graphics chip they implied from AMD. I received some various answers.

What if the APU is a custom chip using the cell technology (not necessarily the cell chip) with a weak GPU for the low end processing and an off the shelf high end GPU + APU (Previously mentioned) for high end processing. Do you think that will work.

Or what if they decide to use the cell chip as the main processor and the APU + GPU will be used for all game processing, of course in combination with the cell, could that work?

Grandmaster-B4153d ago

I hope so, the re-bought cell fabrics could consider this.

Cell2 FTW

TheBreezyBB4153d ago

Wouldn't it be better if Sony are indeed using a new Cell Processor?
Think about, BC and easier workflow for most developers, as they would not need to start all over again with some new hardware.

MasterCornholio4153d ago

True some people are freaking out because they believe that CELL is difficult to develop for but the truth is that developers have had 6 years to program for the processor so its normal that they get used to it. I really dont see why sony cant use a better version of the cell processor.

Pandamobile4153d ago

Maybe they got tired of seeing their platform get the ass-end of pretty much every multiplatform game?

Use a more standard architecture: More happy devs, more happy players because multiplatform PS4 games don't look inferior to the same game on a next-gen Xbox.

Consoldtobots4152d ago

I dont know what's been hated on more this gen the cell or the PS3.

Show all comments (94)
80°

The MSI Claw Gaming Handheld Sees Another Game Performance Boost Through New BIOS and MSI Center M

MSI is proud to announce that its gaming handheld, Claw, has achieved a significant performance increase of up to 30% through a new BIOS and MSI Center M update. Furthermore, the new BIOS and MSI Center M enable Claw to smoothly play all of the top 100 po

purple1014d ago (Edited 4d ago )

is this the one with the switch2 chip inside.?

this is Intels first try at the format

probs not though, as it's $799. so not good for switch actually

Huey_My_D_Long3d ago

Well thats nice considering Ive heard it consistently performs worse when it really shouldn't.

Now if only Lenovo would do the same for the legion go

430°

PS6 Graphics – Can it Approach Photorealism?

If the PS5 Pro leaks are accurate, the eventual PS6 is slated to be one powerful console. But if modern GPUs still lag behind true photorealism, can the PS6 get there?

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
Hugodastrevas8d ago

I hate to be "that guy", but we have go ask ourselves do the industry need photorealistic graphics at this point or actually good games, good content, less anti-consumer practices?
This graphical obsession has brought nothing but years upon years of waiting for a game to launch with huge detailed empty worlds, bad stories and predictable gameplay and (micro)transactions everywhere. Sorry for the rant.

MrGameAndWatch8d ago

Same. I really don't want to be in an interactive film and, to me photorealism is not needed for immersion.

RaidenBlack8d ago

Why always target photorealism?
Why not use the extra horsepower for better, complex & diverse AI?
Why not target more interactable world? Why not use the new performance headroom for more physics effects?
Player choices that drastically affect and changes the game world?

Cacabunga8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

Let’s first see what PS5 graphics look like.. we’ve seen nothing yet

RaidenBlack7d ago

@Cacabunga
For that, first Naughty Dog's PS5 single-player exclusive, then Guerilla's PS5 single-player exclusive

OtterX8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

If anything, the massive layoffs in the industry right now are showing that investors are pulling out and not wanting to invest as much as they are right now into AAAs. Much less push for even higher detail, unless many parts of it are automated by AI for a cheaper price. Not saying I support people's jobs being replaced by AI, just stating a reality of what the money people want.

DarXyde8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

Photorealism should be reserved for games like Gran Turismo. It costs far too much to incorporate that level of detail.

Even then, if it comes at the cost of physics calculations or frame rate given the shared resources of consoles, I'd scale it back in favor of a smoother experience.

Nintendo was quite smart to never pigeonhole themselves into that. Great foresight on their part, I'd say.

8bitAssassin8d ago

But they've gotten very lazy on their games. I still like their approach don't just make game play your biggest innovation.

DarXyde8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

8bitAssassin,

I assume you're talking about Nintendo.

I think it works for them. I'm honestly glad that it's nothing like PlayStation or Xbox. It's a great reason to own one.

8bitAssassin7d ago

Yup!! I am. Yes it works for them and I love it. I want them to have better than average old tech so the scope of some of their games can drop jaws. I'm not talking about counting pixels either.

anast8d ago

I think we need both. Why lower the standard? A photorealistic Bloodborne or Elden Ring game would be insane.

isarai8d ago

Nah im with you on that, like visually games look fine, maybe up the resolution on average but i would much rather resources be spent on things that actually make the game FEEL good to play at this point.

shinoff21838d ago

Don't forget about the budgets.

ROCKY288d ago

agreed - stop with the expensive photo realism and just create amazing games that are less expensive that are not a risk to create an original game within 2-3 years and not 7 years of development - like the OG PS2/Xbox era !

WolfSeed8d ago

There are individual goals for individual parameters. Graphics, gameplay, scale, geometry, AI Sophistication, etc.

This article touches one of them. No need to cancel the conversation because you care more about other things.

Amplitude8d ago (Edited 8d ago )

Some photorealism is much cheaper to produce than what devs are currently forced to do.
If all games could have path tracing, there would be no need for developers to manually map ambient occlusion, shadowmaps, reflection probes, etc. It's a huge undertaking that's making games cost way more to produce on account of the rather pathetic-for-2024 RT and general performance of the current gen consoles.

As much as i hate to say it, we need new consoles as soon as feasibly possible. These consoles launched at the absolute worst possible time, right before RT/DLSS2.0/3.0 were able to quickly skyrocket games in quality on the PC side of things, leaving a ridiculously large gap between PC and console almost immediately after launch and preventing things like CyberPunk Pathtracing Mode in other games. They're holding everything back and making games take longer to produce.

I think Microsoft may be smart if they end up adopting a model where multiple companies (including NVidia) can release multiple spec variant "PC" boxes with the XBox OS. One console every decade doesn't cut it with how quick technology moves in this new era we're in.

smolinsk8d ago

I would love the Next step in graphic to be massive but it always turns out that it takes a long time so the ps6 graphics are gonna be like the best we have now Just with 60fps in every game. World love to se the big ass large worlds with fantastic graphics and depth. Gta 6 are gonna bring that for sure.

just_looken7d ago

@hugo

100% agree but it also made the use of upscale tech the norm which made games worse and the fact console now are just tablets we need a console with a real gpu real cpu real ram setup.

It would be so amazing to see a game like you said made like the ps2/ps3 era using today's pc parts pushing the hardware.

There are titles out there that make my pc run like its still on the desktop

Barlos7d ago

Agreed. For me at least, games are escapism. I don't want them mimicking real life. Graphics don't have to be photorealistic to be impressive. As with you, I'm more about the story, and I would prefer innovation in other ways. The PS5 did it with the DualSense. This it more important to me than just shinier graphics.

+ Show (10) more repliesLast reply 7d ago
Zenzuu8d ago

Personally for me, graphics have already gotten to the point where I don't really feel the need to see having it to make anymore realistic or better.

At this point, I rather game developers focus on quality/engaging stories, gameplay, & contents. Also not every every single game needs to opened world just for the sake of it.

anast8d ago

I'd rather they focus on both. It's a trillion dollar industry. They should be able to do both.

neutralgamer19928d ago

Zenzuu

Believe it or not when it comes to consoles and games graphics are still the biggest factor. Why do you think we still see CHI trailers or in engine footage. The first impression is very important. Not for us core gamers but for millions of casuals who are quite easily impressed with wow factor graphics

TiredGamer8d ago

"More, more, more!!! I don't care what it takes - I deserve more! And I won't PAY a dollar more!"

That's the mindset of some people out there.

JEECE7d ago

I mean, can we still say that's the case even when casuals flock to mediocre looking battle royales? PUBG became huge among casuals, and it looks like a PS3 era shooter with textures that didn't load properly. And casuals have embraced the cartoon aesthetic (Fortnite is the easy example here, but there are others). What is the recent graphics focused game casuals have flocked to? Are you counting COD for that?

anast7d ago

@1992 Candy Crush and Monopoly Go

@Tired Like I said. It's a trillion dollar industry. They could definitely do more. Customers are paying a ton of money.

WolfSeed8d ago

There are individual goals for individual parameters. Graphics, gameplay, scale, geometry, AI Sophistication, etc. No need to cancel the conversation because you care more about other things.

smolinsk8d ago

Graphics are the biggest selling point and will always be.

neutralgamer19927d ago

Agreed especially for those who aren’t hardcore gamers. We core gamers look at everything through core gamers POV. But there is a much bigger casual market who likes looking at pretty things

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 7d ago
andy858d ago

Honestly with UC4 I thought we were close but things don't really seem to have improved much in 8 years. Hellblade 2 seems to have raised the bar a bit though

MrBaskerville8d ago

I don't think publishers have the money to make that happen. They can barely sustain the current level of fidelity.

Sciurus_vulgaris8d ago

The goal post for what photorealistic graphics are has always been moving. I remember some 360/PS3 sports games being called photorealistic way back in the mid 2000s.

bRuud838d ago

Simply, no! Graphics wise there is barely any difference between the PS4 and PS5 just a little more particle effects and very minimal use of ray tracing. I expect even less diffence between PS5 and PS6. Just better implementation of Ray Tracing.

purple1018d ago

you are correct, but there ram has doubled, and now we have ssd not a spinning disk drive, I think we have not yet scratched the surface of next gen personally,

Show all comments (99)
170°

New and improved ASUS ROG Ally X battery life is just what it needs to compete with the Steam Deck

Yet another leak for the ASUS ROG Ally X points towards as much as 8 hours of battery, but how does that compare to the competition?

Vits11d ago

Honestly, I really like this updated version. But it doesn't solve the biggest flaw that the original had for me: the Z1 Extreme APU. Yes, it's an extremely powerful part, but it is not part of AMD's Adrenalin driver update program, so it's dependent on Asus for driver updates. And unfortunately, Asus doesn't have a stellar record of support for their devices.

Goodguy0110d ago

Up to 8 hours basically just means the least demanding games. AAA gaming at highest wattage would probably be about 2-3 hours which is good compared to just about 1 hour with the current ally. The OLED Deck can do about 2-3hrs.

mrcatastropheAF8d ago

With much less performance so that makes sense.

The Steamdeck shines at the lower TDP end but gets absolutely mopped at the high end.

Similar longevity with much better performance is a big win for the Ally X

Killa789d ago

Too bad Asus are all awful company.

PRIMORDUS9d ago

They used to be the best when it comes to motherboards, now I will never buy anything from them again.

Firebird3609d ago

8 hrs yea right. Running tetris?

Skuletor9d ago

Only after setting the screen brightness to the lowest level, of course.

Notellin8d ago

They tested the battery life watching a game of Tetris in 360p. Running Tetris natively brought the number down slightly to 1 hour and 38 minutes. 😂

Asuka9d ago

Nope. The only improvements I want to hear is better customer support. Otherwise, I can't be bothered.

Show all comments (16)