http://au.ign.com/articles/2013/10/08/playstation-3-was-delayed-originally-planned-for-2005

The console had no GPU at one point, doesn't mean it was going to have a second Cell processor or no GPU at all, just means the GPU wasn't the focus during that part of the consoles development, Sony was simply fixated on developing the CPU to make it the best it possibly can be, to build the tools and the technology that was going to run on it.



Sony had actually designed a separate GPU in-house for the Playstation 3, but scrapped it and opted for nVidia's solution as thanks to the power of competition... nVidia and AMD were ahead by the entire industry by a significant margin.

Skip to 18 minuets.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/10/08/playstation-3-was-delayed-originally-planned-for-2005

Nah. x86 is the way to go. It's the most developer friendly option and as such contributes to getting more games on the platform. Also, this way Sony will finally have BC from the PS5 onwards. It would be a stupid move to shuffle the tech again for no apparent benefit.

Honestly I dont know where to start but consoles wont used PowerPC based Chip in the future anymore. X86 Chips are far more advanced now a days, especially scince apple switched from PPC to X86 back in 2005 or so. There is no market for consumer friendly PPC chips anymore, so the development slowed down and is far behind current X86 Chips. Just one out of dozens reasons.

Oh and one more: Clock speed =/= performance. Compare the transistor count on both chips.

Not even to mention that sony made a huge loss with the PS3 and the PS4 is printing money. Sony doesnt care about "having the best hardware", but about "producing a playstation that make profit"

IGN... Or from someone who was active in the development itself? Hard decision that.

Besides. Even the IGN link you posted also reinforces the argument that there was no second Cell chip for graphics.

The negatives outweigh the positives. I don't want to witness that again.

It's also a fact that the Cell was faster than the Jaguar in floating point calculations. That’s what the OP was hinting at.

Thanks for the false equivalency, arm vs x86 is not the same thing as power vs x86, and you know damn well it isn't.

And microsoft knows this as well, that's why when you slap a 360 game into an xbox one it has to redownload the whole game that's been recompiled to work on the xbox one, rather than run it directly off of the disk.

Yeah, it was a floating point beast. But only under the right circumstances. Being in Order and depending massively on perfect scheduling it could be extremely slow at the same time though.

Even low cost Jaguar cores from five years ago can easily outperform Cell in most disciplines.

And over ten years later, why should anyone need an outdated Cell for floating point related stuff if he can go for GPGPU? Doesn't make the slighest sense.

I know nothing about CPUs, GPUs and convoluted technical stuff.   But having that kind of price at launch means DEAD on arrival.