Rumor: PS4 to be released in 2012

[Isildur´s Heir]

This is just a rumor, so, take with a grain of salt

After earlier reports about the new GPU for PlayStation 4 Sony is now told that the IBM Power CPU 7 has selected the next generation console the PlayStation 4.

Further reports in English, it is a rumor and not confirmed by Sony.

“We can officially reveal in this world exclusive that SCEI has officially chosen IBM's currently in development POWER7 architecture for it's PlayStation 4 system, currently scheduled for a 2012 worldwide release.

IBM shall debut POWER7 for the server market in the summer of 2010. IBM shall POWER7 debut for the server market in the summer of 2010. The PlayStation 4 shall use a cost effective version of the architecture custom designed for Sony's specific needs. The PlayStation 4 shall use a cost effective version of the architecture custom designed for Sony's specific needs.

The only information FGNOnline currently has available regarding specifications and performance is that the PS4 implementation of the chip shall use 6-8 cores, 24-32MB shared L3 Cache, Quad threading per core, and a double precision performance approaching 200GFLOPS. The only information available regarding FGNOnline currently has specifications and performance is that the implementation of the PS4 chip cores shall use 6.8, 24-32MB shared L3 cache, Quad core by threading, and a double precision performance approaching 200GFLOPS.

The CELL chip which powers the PS3 is capable of 15 double precision GFLOPS. The CELL chip which powers the PS3 is capable of 15 GFLOPS double precision. This would give the PS4 a performance leap of over 10 fold over it's predecessor. This would give the PS4 a performance leap of over 10 fold over it's predecessor.

Interestingly, the primary reason IBM cancelled development on the CELL based PoweXcell 8i is because of SCEI's change of stance. Interestingly, the primary reason IBM canceled development on the CELL is based PoweXcell 8i because of SCEI's change of stance. The company wanted to move away from the exotic architecture employed for the PS3 to a more traditional architecture favored by third party developers. The company wanted to move away from the exotic architecture employed for the PS3 to a more traditional architecture favored by third party developers.

As displayed by it's choice of processors, the server based POWER7 and the TBDR based PowerVR 6, SCEI once again has sights set for performance leadership in the next round.” As displayed by it's choice of processors, the server based POWER7 and the TBDR based PowerVR 6, SCEI has sights set once again for performance leadership in the next round. "

So what do you think?
IMO, the thing that makes me not believe it is not the 2012 date, but, last time i heard, didn´t Sony turned their back on IMB after the all "Xbox 360 IMB CPU incident"?

 

[Timstuff]

It might be 2012, however I think that the recession is going to push it back a bit later, especially since the current generation still has tons of untapped potential. It will take some very powerful hardware to top what we're already seeing, as well as development tools that can take advantage of it without bankrupting the publisher, like Unreal Engine 4 or Cry Engine 4 (and those don't even exist yet). My guess would be 2013-2014 depending on whether or not there are delays. We're getting to the point where hardware is becoming less important, and console generations could potentially be getting much longer. Both of these are good things IMO.

 

[Fading]

I'm not sure if the rumor is true or not, but I'm sure they're working on their next console already, as is MS and probably Nintendo. They probably do have deals in the works with various hardware vendors already. 2012 is a decent date as well, tho I agree that with the recession, and late taking off of the PS3, the date could be pushed back. Just as long as it's not this year or next year I'm fine, tho I wouldn't mind them waiting until 2013-2014.

I feel the current consoles have a lot of life left in them. However by 2012 I will have had lots of good gaming experiences with the PS3 (I mean I already felt like I got my monies worth), and would be willing to upgrade I guess. I'm kinda a late adopter anymore, I buy a console 6 months to a year after release anymore for good titles to get released, hardware problems to be kinked out, so I probably wouldn't even pick up a PS4 until closer to 2013.

IMO tho, it all comes down to MS. If they release a new console sooner than later, Sony will feel pressured to follow suit shortly after or MS will get a lot of early exclusive games, and a huge 10 million sales lead again. I think Nintendo will just take it's sweet time tho and release a new console whenever Wii sales slump enough, or they just feel like it.

 

[Superhero 101]

maybe they will reveal it

 

[Danalys]

you couldn't edit out the repetition?
you couldn't edit out the repetition?

i figure they'll take until 2013 atleast to release a PS4. only by that time will the PS3 be the budget second option. and they can finally stop selling the PS2 in 1st world countries in the next year or so.

they need a noticable leap over PS3 at a reasonable price. with diminishing returns on graphics for the power used to produce them and the high initial price of the PS3, doing that in 2012 just doesn't seem feasable.

also could they produce a fast enough bluray drive to feed the machine the extra data it'd need without really long load or install times.

 

[The Squirrel]

If it's true I hope they make it backwards compatible with the PS3. I guess if they announce it to be true, I will start saving up the possible $1,000 it will cost to buy it.

 

[deathshead2]

Dang I've barely even played games on my Wii and Xbox 360 and were already moving on to the next systems.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I just can't see Microsoft or Sony release the next Xbox and PlayStation by 2012. I mean only now has the PlayStation 3 started getting it's mojo going and both consoles have a lot to offer still.

 

[Timstuff]

If it's true I hope they make it backwards compatible with the PS3. I guess if they announce it to be true, I will start saving up the possible $1,000 it will cost to buy it.

If the processor has got a number of cores equal to or greater than the number of the Cell's PPU and SPUs, then B/C should be possible since the cores could theoretically emulate the structure of the Cell (since the cell basically works like one core with a few little helper ones).

 

[Timstuff]

Another thing to consider with the PS4 is that it could very likely be the first Playstation console not to adopt a new disc medium. Sony has invested a ton of money into Blu-Ray and it's only just now becoming popular, and I think it will be close to mainstream adoption by the time PS4 comes out (if it has not already been adopted by most mainstream consumers). Sony is not going to kill Blu-Ray before it has a chance to reach the peak of its popularity, so my guess is that the PS4 will have a faster Blu-Ray drive than the PS3. The PS3's drive is actually slower than what you find in most Blu-Ray players, so while it gets the job done just fine it does often require games to be installed to keep the load times reasonable, and also some Blu-Ray movies have load screens that must be waited through.

I think the PS4 will be much more affordable than its predicessor. People are not going to want to upgrade if they have to pay $600, and I think Microsoft showed that the most people are willing to pay for a premium model is $400. Depending on where the economy is by 2013 or 2014, Sony might even opt to sell the system for $300 on launch day. We'll see.

So basically, these are the conditions under which the PS3 will probably be released:

• PS3 will be cheap enough to sell at a bargain ($100-$150)
• The technology for PS4 is affordable enough to sell the system for $300-400
• There is affordable technology that shows a significant improvement over he PS3
• Middleware tools make game development affordable enough that a publsher doesn't risk bankrupcy by making a game for it

 

[Soapy]

I think the next generation as a whole will depend largely on the success or failure of Natal.

 

[Havok83]

I just can't see Microsoft or Sony release the next Xbox and PlayStation by 2012. I mean only now has the PlayStation 3 started getting it's mojo going and both consoles have a lot to offer still.

IA. Theres till too much juice in the PS3, and as you mentioned, Sony has finally gotten to a good point with it. Development alone costs so much money and they lost alot on the PS3. I dont see them jumping to push out another system especially when they dont need to. I dont think gamers want to be hearing about the next generation of consoles yet

 

[KALEL114]

I just can't see Microsoft or Sony release the next Xbox and PlayStation by 2012. I mean only now has the PlayStation 3 started getting it's mojo going and both consoles have a lot to offer still.

QFT. I can see Nintendo bringing a new system out '11-'12, but Sony is not going to.

 

[Havok83]

QFT. I can see Nintendo bringing a new system out '11-'12, but Sony is not going to.

Nintendo is the one that can afford to. They are in the best position to do so considering how many Wiis sold from the getgo. Despite its success, its hardware is very limiting to developers which is why its third party efforts have been trailing behind the PS3/360 and thats not going to change

 

[Clobberin' Time]

The thing that really hurt Sony was the fact that Microsoft had a whole years head-start on them. I can't see them repeating that mistake again, can you?

 

[Fading]

I think the next generation as a whole will depend largely on the success or failure of Natal.

Honestly, I don't think Natal will take off like MS wants it to. This is all theorycraft of course, but just like with the PS Eye, it wasn't a core feature with the console at launch like it was with the Wii and Wii remote. Most likely it'll be treated like a peripheral like the Guncon, PS Eye, and others like that, and will reach a much smaller base. Not saying it won't sell well, I just don't see either it or the Sony motion controls becoming a game changer, let alone this gateway to the future a lot of ppl treat it as being.

That's not to say an upgraded Natal, or Sony motion controls won't be included with the next gen consoles. I just don't see them being a core feature like the Wii remote is to the Wii.

I also think we'll see massive 300-500GB harddrives become standards, atleast on the PS4. A new, upgraded Cell and graphics card are a must. More ram as well. The PSP2 will probably come out around that time and have integrated connective abilities with the PS4 as well. Beyond that I don't see next gen consoles being as big a leap up as other generations have been, just probably improve on current features (online play, online features, XMB functionality mid game, etc.), and make games even prettier.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

Honestly, I don't think Natal will take off like MS wants it to. This is all theorycraft of course, but just like with the PS Eye, it wasn't a core feature with the console at launch like it was with the Wii and Wii remote. Most likely it'll be treated like a peripheral like the Guncon, PS Eye, and others like that, and will reach a much smaller base. Not saying it won't sell well, I just don't see either it or the Sony motion controls becoming a game changer, let alone this gateway to the future a lot of ppl treat it as being.

That's not to say an upgraded Natal, or Sony motion controls won't be included with the next gen consoles. I just don't see them being a core feature like the Wii remote is to the Wii.

I understand where you´re coming from, but i don´t agree, at least, not on Microsoft´s part.
Natal will not only be about games, it will about everything on the 360, so, it will more of an add-on of the console than a peripheral for the games.
Besides, i don´t see MS not use it to full extend, in fact, i see all games using it one way or the other.
More even in my understanding, we have seen only 50% of Natal will be able to do, i still expect full 3D/RV in all games without the use of glasses and new TV.
Why?
Because Johnny Lee did that on the Wii and, like we all know, he is working with MS on Natal.

Now, back on the PS4 for 2012....
Analysts say this will be the biggest generation ever, that it will last for 10 years (if that´s true, and looking at the 360 that came out in 2005, that means, 2015) and whatnot.
I don´t see it happening.
Next gen will start in 2010 with the PSP2 (it´s almost a given) and maybe the DS2, so, if that´s true, the next iteration of the home consoles will not be that far behind.
In fact, i see the next xbox in 2011, unless the rumors are true and, Natal will make the 360 better than the PS3.
I´ve read plenty of rumors that say that, the all "new xbox in 2010" thingy (even Ballmer say that, and quickly was said to be a mistake) are "true".
Inside Natal there will be a new CPU, GPU, RAM and internal HDD of 16Gb; and all of that, connected to the 360 will make it more powerful than the PS3 and give it new life.
Oh yeah, and it will have DirectX 11.

So, if that´s true, the all thing i kept saying since the E3 that MS would release a "xbox 360.1" are true (and updated console in the likes of portables); if not, i see the next xbox in 2011.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

Besides, a lot of developers are already making games for next gen, and i´m sure they are not talking about games to be released 3 years from now.
The only thing i can say about Sony is that, before they release the PS4, they need to kill the PS2, because it will be totally ridiculous to have 3 Playstation consoles at the same time.
So i say that the PS2 will see it´s demise in 2010, with PS2 games going for download in the next year as well.

 

[Havok83]

B
So i say that the PS2 will see it´s demise in 2010, with PS2 games going for download in the next year as well.

Ive said it before and Ill say it again...the PS2 wont die until the PSP does (which doesnt look likely for 2010). Until Sony releases a true PSP-2, the PS2 will remain in production and get a relatively healthy stream of game releases

 

[KALEL114]

The thing that really hurt Sony was the fact that Microsoft had a whole years head-start on them. I can't see them repeating that mistake again, can you?

I don't think Sony sees that as a mistake. They held the PS3 back from release to put in the BR drive.They saw a golden opportunity to kill two birds with one stone. It actually worked out well. The PS3 single handedly won the high def war for Sony. Despite releasing one year late it is finding it's groove in the gaming aspect as well. Would they have loved to release it at the sametime as 360? Heck yes, but it still worked for them.

MS released the 360 early despite knowing it had issues just to beat Sony to the punch. It has still sold very well and that head start, without competition, has them sitting pretty in second place.

I think Sony and MS will release thier new consoles closer together around '13-'14. Nintendo in '11-'12.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I think the price difference was a major issue, as well. I think if the PS3 had started off on a better foot in that aspect it'd be interesting to see if this steam they're picking up now had shown up sooner.

 

[Timstuff]

The cheapest PS3 was $100 more than the most expensive Xbox. You certainly got your money's worth, but most customers seemed more interested in a low price point than added value.

I'm curious to see what the price point is for the next generation of consoles. It took the PS3 three years to get down to what was last generation's starting price point ($300), so I'll be interested in seeing where they go. I can't possibly see them asking for more than $400 for any of the systems after what happened with the PS3's launch, but even $400 might be too rich for many people's blood. It's possible that if it's far enough in the future (like 2013-14) that the current generation will have dropped in price enough that $300 once again brings with it some prestige, but at the same time it's hard to imagine them not charging more than that if it really is that big of a jump over current consoles. We'll see, I suppose.

 

[Soapy]

Honestly, I don't think Natal will take off like MS wants it to. This is all theorycraft of course, but just like with the PS Eye, it wasn't a core feature with the console at launch like it was with the Wii and Wii remote.

I don't think it will be a huge success either, but theoretically I'm just saying that if Natal turns out to be really popular I think we'll start hearing about the next generation of consoles sooner than we expected. At least on Microsoft's end. Maybe even at the 2011 E3.

Most likely it'll be treated like a peripheral like the Guncon, PS Eye, and others like that, and will reach a much smaller base. Not saying it won't sell well, I just don't see either it or the Sony motion controls becoming a game changer, let alone this gateway to the future a lot of ppl treat it as being.[...]

Of course it will be treated like peripheral because that's precisely what it is. Despite the list of Natal developers Microsoft released I don't think it will get heavy support. There will be a few games made specifically for it, but by and large I don't see games like Gears of War 3 or The Elder Scrolls V utilizing it in any meaningful way. Probably just optional stuff like menu navigation or something. No way anyone would make an expensive AAA game for a fraction of a fraction of their potential audience.

The cheapest PS3 was $100 more than the most expensive Xbox. You certainly got your money's worth, but most customers seemed more interested in a low price point than added value.

I'm curious to see what the price point is for the next generation of consoles. It took the PS3 three years to get down to what was last generation's starting price point ($300), so I'll be interested in seeing where they go. I can't possibly see them asking for more than $400 for any of the systems after what happened with the PS3's launch, but even $400 might be too rich for many people's blood. It's possible that if it's far enough in the future (like 2013-14) that the current generation will have dropped in price enough that $300 once again brings with it some prestige, but at the same time it's hard to imagine them not charging more than that if it really is that big of a jump over current consoles. We'll see, I suppose.

At the very beginning of this console cycle Microsoft took a lot of flak for offering a stripped down Core version of the 360 next to the fully featured Pro model. What was seen as an odd move then turned out to be one of Microsoft's smartest decisions for the 360. When the economy started going south the Core model became a very attractive alternative to average consumers. I would be willing to bet Microsoft and Sony are going to take that idea and run with it for their next console launches.

Since it's pretty much fact by now that $400 is the max anyone, even gaming enthusiasts will pay for a new console, I think the higher end versions will be right around that price. On the opposite end I could see them also offering extremely basic, stripped down versions nearing half the price of the premium models. I know that seems like a stretch, but offering a cheap version worked out really well for Microsoft and I can imagine both companies would want to make their low end versions as cheap as humanly possible.

 

[hippie_hunter]

The thing that really hurt Sony was the fact that Microsoft had a whole years head-start on them. I can't see them repeating that mistake again, can you?

Absolutely not.

Sony releasing the PlayStation 3 a year after the Xbox 360 was actually good for them. It allowed them to develop a console that is very reliable hardware wise and allowed them to get blu-ray to take off (blu-ray was not ready in 2005). The Xbox 360 on the other hand is a rushed piece of hardware because Microsoft was so adamant on releasing a year ahead of Sony and Nintendo, if they weren't so determined to have that head start, you wouldn't be seeing the massive RROD problems that has plagued the Xbox brand's image.

What really hurt Sony was that they decided to release a console at $599 US Dollars with only one game worth playing (Resistance: Fall of Man). With the Xbox 360 you had it launched at $399 and had several titles that were pretty damn good launch titles and followed up with their momentum while PlayStation 3 owners have waited quite a while for Sony to start building some. And dare I say that their advertising campaign was utterly atrocious.

And in the end, the year head start has really amounted to nothing with the Xbox 360 in last place in Japan and Europe and is expected to fall from second place to third place (which is something that Microsoft did not want at all). Nintendo has slaughtered both Sony and Microsoft with the Wii and Sony has picked up massive momentum with the PS3 Slim, excellent first party titles, and an advertising campaign that isn't ******ed (the Kevin Butler ads are freaking awesome ).

 

[KALEL114]

I think the price difference was a major issue, as well. I think if the PS3 had started off on a better foot in that aspect it'd be interesting to see if this steam they're picking up now had shown up sooner.

Well they go hand and hand. The only reason the price was so high was because the cost of the Blu-ray diodes and basic manufacturing was, were so expensive. Remember, Sony was taking a big loss on each console sold. Once the diodes went down in price, we got a price cut. If they hadn't used BR, they would of had to stick with DVD9 and not move forward. It was a huge risk, but in the end it has worked quite well for them.