Print Story PS4 musings part 1.1 (HD vs SDD)
By dark ally (Sun Dec 21, 2008 at 04:15:27 PM EST) (all tags)
This is a revision to part 1 of the series on my thoughts regarding the next game console from Sony, i.e. the Playstation 4.

I hereby release all rights to the following ideas.

In part 1 I suggested there should be two models of the PS4:

$300 - $200 with a DVD drive and a 1GB SSD
$500 - $400 with a Blu-Ray drive and a 100+GB HD

As part of the comments, Imperial Mince brought up the HD in the PS3 as a distinct advantage for caching.  Dan's Data recently did a comparison of various SSDs which had me reviewing my ideas.  Although an SSD might be adequate for storage of save data and downloads, it probably can't replace a HD.  And there is value to have a HD in every PS4 (unlike the Xbox 360).

There is probably still value in having two models, one with a Blu-Ray drive and one without.  And just like the current PS3 two different hard drive sizes.
< Please just one more day | Attention various infidels >
PS4 musings part 1.1 (HD vs SDD) | 10 comments (10 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
I dont have a TV by cam (2.00 / 0) #1 Sun Dec 21, 2008 at 05:43:56 PM EST
but that sounds like an xbox. I would buy one of them if I was you.


Freedom, liberty, equity and an Australian Republic
I can say nothing but... by ucblockhead (1.50 / 2) #2 Sun Dec 21, 2008 at 06:01:08 PM EST
You mean to have no backwards compatibility to PS3?
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
backwards compatibility questionable value by dark ally (2.00 / 0) #3 Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 10:11:18 AM EST

Correct.  I believe the "cost" of backwards compatibility never pays for itself.  Although backwards compatibility may lead to some previous generation game sales, only current generation game sales count when it comes to enticing developers to invest in making more games for a system.   Also, making a system backwards compatible puts heavy restrictions on what kind of innovation can be put into the console.

[ Parent ]
say what? by greyshade (2.00 / 0) #4 Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 12:00:19 PM EST
making a system backwards compatible puts heavy restrictions on what kind of innovation can be put into the console

We aint talking NES ->SNES here.  I have plenty of old PC games that, if they don't still work out the box, are trivial to get working.  We are talking current and future gen consoles, right?  Those things that have hard drives and connectivity to the intertubes?

"The other part of the fun is nibbling on them when they get off work." -vorheesleatherface
[ Parent ]
sure. by garlic (2.00 / 0) #5 Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 12:55:45 PM EST
those things that have special designed processor chips that still have fixed costs that cut into profits on selling the hardware, and sell minimal if no extra software. This is why the new PS3 runs are not compatible with the PS2.

[ Parent ]
yeah by MillMan (2.00 / 0) #6 Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 11:31:32 PM EST
although I wonder if we're getting to the point where development costs are just too high to use anything other than standard or lightly modified AMD/Intel/Nvidia/ATI technology. Even using IBM as they all do currently might be pushing it.

"Just as there are no atheists in foxholes, there are no libertarians in financial crises." -Krugman

[ Parent ]
The 360 has the right idea by garlic (2.00 / 0) #7 Tue Dec 23, 2008 at 04:34:14 AM EST
if only they hadn't had that overheating problem. Standardized PC hardware should be the fastest to develop for because of ubiquitous of the development tools and knowledge

[ Parent ]
"standardized" PC hardware by dark ally (2.00 / 0) #8 Tue Dec 23, 2008 at 08:04:20 AM EST
Sorry to burst you bubble, but the Xbox 360 CPU is PowerPC based.  The original Xbox used an x86 Intel CPU.  The reason no other consoles use x86 CPUs is they have lower performance per watt than the PowerPC or ARM CPUs.

And there ain't no such thing as a "standard PC" since the VGA Compaq 386, especially on the GPU side.  The only reason you can use the same software on the PC ecosystem are the Windows device drivers.  Without device drivers those fancy graphics cards would be no more than a VGA.

[ Parent ]
my bubble isn't burst. by garlic (2.00 / 0) #9 Tue Dec 23, 2008 at 09:16:19 AM EST
the xbox 360 is a standard set of hardware, with very minimal varients that need to be designed for or accounted for. And using a powerPC vs x86 isn't a big deal since they're still commercial equipment, vs a special order Cell processor.

[ Parent ]
let's say "conventional" by dark ally (2.00 / 0) #10 Mon Jan 05, 2009 at 08:05:59 AM EST
I will agree with you that the Xbox360 Xenon is a more conventional design than the PS3 cell; i.e. a homogenous multi-core CPU versus a heterogenous multi-core CPU with a single primary core and multiple secondary cores.  But even the Xenon isn't a standard off-the-shelf part, nor is its Xenos GPU.

[ Parent ]
PS4 musings part 1.1 (HD vs SDD) | 10 comments (10 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback