SCE Executive: 'PS4 May Not Have Better Graphics Than The PS3'

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"]if i ha to guess ill say 60%, thats not the vast majority1stPlaceWinner

Enjoy console graphics kings while you can, Sony fans.

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] Yeah it is....

i5750at4Ghz

Enjoy console graphics kings while you can, Sony fans.

Silverbond

Looks like they want to go the Nintendo route.Stevo_the_gamer

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"][QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"]no i dont think it is

1stPlaceWinner

If this is a real statement, then he has a point. Graphics will not change for a least 4-5 years. The technology just isn't ready. There are some advancements being developed like the graphene transistor, that can theoretically do speeds up to 100 GHz. Couple that with carbon nano tubes that will connect the graphene transistors inside the CPU's of the future (carbon nano tubes carry a current much more efficiently, close to no resistance, which means very little heat dissipation, more effecient CPUs, and extremely fast clock speeds), and then we will see a major jump in technological prowess. But the software developers must make new tools to build graphics with this new technology to be effective.

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"][QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] You just said it's 60% yourself....i5750at4Ghz

sony quotes translated for next gen:

"it's probably too powerful."

"we want you to think, hey, i don't want to work extra hours to get one."

"it can no longer instill discipline."

"if you can find a ps4 anywhere on shelves in north america you should prolly just leave it there."

"the first five million will buy it even if we pack old pinball machine parts in there and it struggles to run tetris."

"nobody will ever use 100% of the ps4s capabilitys...wait i meant everybody will."

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"] thats a little more than half, vast majority is like 85 percent, thats a shooter, not uncharted1stPlaceWinner

If this is a real statement, then he has a point. Graphics will not change for a least 4-5 years. The technology just isn't ready. There are some advancements being developed like the graphene transistor, that can theoretically do speeds up to 100 GHz. Couple that with carbon nano tubes that will connect the graphene transistors inside the CPU's of the future (carbon nano tubes carry a current much more efficiently, close to no resistance, which means very little heat dissipation, more effecient CPUs, and extremely fast clock speeds), and then we will see a major jump in technological prowess. But the software developers must make new tools to build graphics with this new technology to be effective.

dream431ca

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"]

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"] Considering you listed stealth and platforming on top of shooting as gameplay elements (3 things). 60% is a vastly bigger number than 33%.

i5750at4Ghz

As long as it will have Call of Duty, everybody will be happy.CallOfDutyXxX

[QUOTE="i5750at4Ghz"]

[QUOTE="1stPlaceWinner"] thats a little more than half, vast majority is like 85 percent, thats a shooter, not uncharted1stPlaceWinner

And I´d say that the shooting in the Uncharted games covers around 70% of the gameplay to be honest.

I'm just gonna go ahead and call bull**** on that one.

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]Looks like they want to go the Nintendo route.KC_Hokie

Say what you want about Krazy Ken, something like this would never happen under him.

so will microsoft follow? or will they stuff a quadcore and card with full DX11(custom 5770?) and 3 Gb of system RAM? I hope they do. but then again they want to build the Kinect up. 299$ console gen confirmed? wait... 50$ motherboard, 2GB RAM 25$, custom quad-core CPU 75$, case 25$, custom 5770- 60$, ECT(PSU, USB,Sound, ECT,) 70$, a 1Gb 5770 with a gimped quad-core seems possble to me. mayceV

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]

If this is a real statement, then he has a point. Graphics will not change for a least 4-5 years. The technology just isn't ready. There are some advancements being developed like the graphene transistor, that can theoretically do speeds up to 100 GHz. Couple that with carbon nano tubes that will connect the graphene transistors inside the CPU's of the future (carbon nano tubes carry a current much more efficiently, close to no resistance, which means very little heat dissipation, more effecient CPUs, and extremely fast clock speeds), and then we will see a major jump in technological prowess. But the software developers must make new tools to build graphics with this new technology to be effective.

KC_Hokie

Define better. Is better just a couple FPS difference or 30 FPS difference? Can better be described as a small change in lighting and particle effects, or a substantial change? What I'm describing is the next leap in graphics, not just the next step. Yes there have been small advancements, but those are just tricks of programming. Graphics cards for PCs, come out with new revisions every year stepping up the clock speeds and RAM by a small amount, not really a huge difference. If you compare this year's graphics cards to last years graphics cards, there will be a small difference, but not enough to warrant a purchase if you have a graphics card from last year. Consoles like the PS3 and 360, will advance even slower due to budgets and time constraints. The next Xbox console may run DX11, but by that time DX12 will be out for PC, and Nvidia's next gen graphics cards will completely blow away any console graphics. PC will always be ahead of consoles in graphics. Getting back to my main point, I believe that we won't see a substantial change in graphics for at least 5 years.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]

If this is a real statement, then he has a point. Graphics will not change for a least 4-5 years. The technology just isn't ready. There are some advancements being developed like the graphene transistor, that can theoretically do speeds up to 100 GHz. Couple that with carbon nano tubes that will connect the graphene transistors inside the CPU's of the future (carbon nano tubes carry a current much more efficiently, close to no resistance, which means very little heat dissipation, more effecient CPUs, and extremely fast clock speeds), and then we will see a major jump in technological prowess. But the software developers must make new tools to build graphics with this new technology to be effective.

dream431ca

Define better. Is better just a couple FPS difference or 30 FPS difference? Can better be described as a small change in lighting and particle effects, or a substantial change? What I'm describing is the next leap in graphics, not just the next step. Yes there have been small advancements, but those are just tricks of programming. Graphics cards for PCs, come out with new revisions every year stepping up the clock speeds and RAM by a small amount, not really a huge difference. If you compare this year's graphics cards to last years graphics cards, there will be a small difference, but not enough to warrant a purchase if you have a graphics card from last year. Consoles like the PS3 and 360, will advance even slower due to budgets and time constraints. The next Xbox console may run DX11, but by that time DX12 will be out for PC, and Nvidia's next gen graphics cards will completely blow away any console graphics. PC will always be ahead of consoles in graphics. Getting back to my main point, I believe that we won't see a substantial change in graphics for at least 5 years.

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]The GPU in the PS3 is from 2006. And consoles can't even run DirectX 11. You're saying they can't be better but they already are.KC_Hokie

Define better. Is better just a couple FPS difference or 30 FPS difference? Can better be described as a small change in lighting and particle effects, or a substantial change? What I'm describing is the next leap in graphics, not just the next step. Yes there have been small advancements, but those are just tricks of programming. Graphics cards for PCs, come out with new revisions every year stepping up the clock speeds and RAM by a small amount, not really a huge difference. If you compare this year's graphics cards to last years graphics cards, there will be a small difference, but not enough to warrant a purchase if you have a graphics card from last year. Consoles like the PS3 and 360, will advance even slower due to budgets and time constraints. The next Xbox console may run DX11, but by that time DX12 will be out for PC, and Nvidia's next gen graphics cards will completely blow away any console graphics. PC will always be ahead of consoles in graphics. Getting back to my main point, I believe that we won't see a substantial change in graphics for at least 5 years.

Enlighten me please.

It has more exclusive shooters. i5750at4Ghz

You mean it has more exclusives. Don't forget it launched LBP earlier and InF2 now.

Still i prefer to have these many shooters than kinect games.. urgh... However shooters are mainstream and Sony is trying to adapt, more like the consumers fault.

On topic, i wonder whats in store for us next gen. If they aren't upping the graphics and all we get is shooters from both Sony and MS i doubt i want a new console :/

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="dream431ca"]

Define better. Is better just a couple FPS difference or 30 FPS difference? Can better be described as a small change in lighting and particle effects, or a substantial change? What I'm describing is the next leap in graphics, not just the next step. Yes there have been small advancements, but those are just tricks of programming. Graphics cards for PCs, come out with new revisions every year stepping up the clock speeds and RAM by a small amount, not really a huge difference. If you compare this year's graphics cards to last years graphics cards, there will be a small difference, but not enough to warrant a purchase if you have a graphics card from last year. Consoles like the PS3 and 360, will advance even slower due to budgets and time constraints. The next Xbox console may run DX11, but by that time DX12 will be out for PC, and Nvidia's next gen graphics cards will completely blow away any console graphics. PC will always be ahead of consoles in graphics. Getting back to my main point, I believe that we won't see a substantial change in graphics for at least 5 years.

dream431ca

Enlighten me please.

And AMD's GPUs took a huge leap after MS spent hundreds of millions researching new and more powerful GPUs.

I doubt he knows what he's talking about. It's usually the Japanese branch that gets to decide the hardware and making something more powerful than PS3 this days cost pennies, so I expect a PS4 many times more powerful than the PS3. themyth01

[QUOTE="2_Quiet_2_Riot"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

Hey, Sony: Nintendo did that six years ago. Get with the times, bro.

God, it must suck being behind the curve all the time. :lol:

charizard1605

Same can be said about WiiU :lol:

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]You clearly have limited knowledge of existing GPUs let alone what might be out in 2013/2014. KC_Hokie

Enlighten me please.

And AMD's GPUs took a huge leap after MS spent hundreds of millions researching new and more powerful GPUs.

I don't think were on the same page. Why are you mentioning GPUs from 2005?? It's been more than 5 years since those have been out and yes it has been a significant leap, but that a very small leap compared to what's coming. Remember when I mentioned graphene tranistors? When those are finally easy to produce, you will see speeds on GPU's leap from 2 GHz to at least 40 GHz, possibly even faster. The leap from 2005 to now? from 700 MHz to around 2 Ghz. CPU's will have even a larger leap. Quote from Wikipedia:

In February 2010, researchers at IBM reported that they have been able to create graphene transistors with an on and off rate of 100 gigahertz, far exceeding the rates of previous attempts, and exceeding the speed of silicon transistors with an equal gate length. The 240nm graphene transistors made at IBM were made using extant silicon-manufacturing equipment, meaning that for the first time graphene transistors are a conceivable—though still fanciful—replacement for silicon.

Graphene transistors are still the early stages of development and may take 5 or more years to come to market in computers.

What I could see is Sony using a Moddified GTS 260 (To keep costs low) and make the system have 2 GB's of RAM, and have the processor a dual core at 2.5 GHz (I doubt it will be a quad). Is it powerful? No, is it better than a the current PS3, yes.

Maybe but I doubt it for some strange reason.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

[QUOTE="dream431ca"]

Enlighten me please.

dream431ca

And AMD's GPUs took a huge leap after MS spent hundreds of millions researching new and more powerful GPUs.

I don't think were on the same page. Why are you mentioning GPUs from 2005?? It's been more than 5 years since those have been out and yes it has been a significant leap, but that a very small leap compared to what's coming. Remember when I mentioned graphene tranistors? When those are finally easy to produce, you will see speeds on GPU's leap from 2 GHz to at least 40 GHz, possibly even faster. The leap from 2005 to now? from 700 MHz to around 2 Ghz. CPU's will have even a larger leap. Quote from Wikipedia:

In February 2010, researchers at IBM reported that they have been able to create graphene transistors with an on and off rate of 100 gigahertz, far exceeding the rates of previous attempts, and exceeding the speed of silicon transistors with an equal gate length. The 240nm graphene transistors made at IBM were made using extant silicon-manufacturing equipment, meaning that for the first time graphene transistors are a conceivable-though still fanciful-replacement for silicon.

Graphene transistors are still the early stages of development and may take 5 or more years to come to market in computers.

I just don't understand your logic. I remember back when the Xbox 360 was announced so many Xbox owners couldn't believe another console was announced. It couldn't be possible for GPUs to be that much better. Well they obviously were.

God, it must suck being behind the curve all the time. :lol:

DarkLink77

lololol what did i say to everybody?like sony is smartening up good move if sony does do it a very good move

[QUOTE="delta3074"][QUOTE="-Unreal-"]

I get the feeling they're having trouble cooling hardware in a console-sized case.

-Unreal-

True. Even my mid-range HD 6850 has more cooling than a PS3 or X360 has for all components.

That being said cooling can be done efficiently. I mean, there are laptops out there with HD 5870's or better GPU's! They could pull it off. Unfortunately most people just shove their console into a shelf/cabinet or whatever which effectively cooks the console. Many many 360s fell victim to this.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

God, it must suck being behind the curve all the time. :lol:

AmazonTreeBoa

wow that was the point to have the competition do a complete 360.....the point was to have a console thats hd at this point now its strategy nothing wrongth that

Wont happen. PSmove is sonys attempt at motion. I doubt they are going to kill there fanbase like nintendo did with an entire console dedicated to soccer moms and toddlers. Especially since the ps3 fanbase isn't like the remaining Nintendo fanbase who screams innovation every-time a remade mario comes out.

Hey, Sony: Nintendo did that six years ago. Get with the times, bro.

God, it must suck being behind the curve all the time. :lol:

DarkLink77

[QUOTE="-Unreal-"][QUOTE="delta3074"]that's not an issue now with the current die sizes, you would need 2 xenos chips now (45nm) to match the power consumption and heat output of the original xenos chips (90 nm)Tezcatlipoca666

True. Even my mid-range HD 6850 has more cooling than a PS3 or X360 has for all components.

That being said cooling can be done efficiently. I mean, there are laptops out there with HD 5870's or better GPU's! They could pull it off. Unfortunately most people just shove their console into a shelf/cabinet or whatever which effectively cooks the console. Many many 360s fell victim to this.

True my BIOS flashed XFX HD 6950 to HD HD 6970 has a massive cooling fan on it. I was surprised how large and heavy this gaming GPU was. I guess it takes this big of a cooling fan/heatsink to keep a massive gaming GPU like the HD 6970, along with all the capacitors and other components in my XFX HD 6970 to keep it cool.

Sony SPAIN: We have no idea what the main branch will actually do...so I'll just say something random.

Sony SPAIN: We have no idea what the main branch will actually do...so I'll just say something random.

Jynxzor