I have my doubts about a backwards compatible PS3. Seems like an important feature for a lot of people but:

First problem is that Sony would limit themselfs to Nvidia. And I doubt Sony would do that .it makes negotiations very hard. If Sony gets an offer from AMD which is better then Nvidia offer they will go for it. Ok maybe AMD GPU could emulate the RSX.

But this is not the only problem. The Cell is a nice chip indeed but look at it from todays perspective. It has something like 250 Million Transistors. Thats super tiny. A full blown Power 7 has 1200 Million and thats gona be outdated soon.

To make the Cell able to compete with future CPUs it has to be 4 times bigger then now. 4 PPEs and 32 SPEs. Also get rid of XDR Ram interface its ancient by now. It would need countless Millions to redesign the Cell properly. IBM has moved on already and the design philosophy behind Cell pretty much failed. Sony wasnt investing the Millions into the Cell directly but into the ideas behind it. Those Investments were wasted. The Cell although succesful in SuperComputer and Server never catched on in the market Sony hoped for (Consumerelectronics). In the PS4 would have to be a Cell 2 and since IBM has no interest in it Sony would have already given Millions to IBM for further developing the concept.

IBM has a very very successful new Chip. The Power 7. Which is very strong and rules the server market. Its also easy to programm for and the Wii U has a small Version of it.Sony and MS could take the Power 7 in different Variations (would also immensly help reduce costs for Multiplat Development) They wouldnt have to spend too much money to customize it. And Sony could safe costs on the Hardware site (No XDR(2) and on the Software side-> easier programming less cost. And yes the Devs are good with the Cell but its still more time intensive to programm for. Cell 2 could open up new problems.

Also with a strong GPU the Cells single precission performance wouldnt be as benefical anymore.In the PS3 the RSX and Cell have comparable SP Gflops. But with a modern GPU that wouldnt be neccessarly the case even if Cell2 would have 4 times more SP Gflops.

The Cell lacks in Double Precission flops. But those could be more important with a next gen GPU.

I doubt that the Cell/XDR is going to be in the PS4 and I doubt that Nvidia is the only possible GPU manufacturer option for Sony. That makes a BW compatible PS4 less probable imo. Also Sony wont put the Cell/XDR additionally into the PS4 because it would lead to a price explosion.

Sure even with Power 7/AMD GPU inside a Software Emulation could be achieved but it would be significantly harder. (Would make things very easy for Microsoft and 360 Emulation though.)

To OP .

Sony needs to have the games that people want and they need to differentiate themselfs from this Gen through Graphic and Online portal. Also they cant be more expensive then MS.

Netyaroze said: I have my doubts about a backwards compatible PS3. Seems like an important feature for a lot of people but: First problem is that Sony would limit themselfs to Nvidia. And I doubt Sony would do that .it makes negotiations very hard. If Sony gets an offer from AMD which is better then Nvidia offer they will go for it. Ok maybe AMD GPU could emulate the RSX. But this is not the only problem. The Cell is a nice chip indeed but look at it from todays perspective. It has something like 250 Million Transistors. Thats super tiny. A full blown Power 7 has 1200 Million and thats gona be outdated soon. To make the Cell able to compete with future CPUs it has to be 4 times bigger then now. 4 PPEs and 32 SPEs. Also get rid of XDR Ram interface its ancient by now. It would need countless Millions to redesign the Cell properly. IBM has moved on already and the design philosophy behind Cell pretty much failed. Sony wasnt investing the Millions into the Cell directly but into the ideas behind it. Those Investments were wasted. The Cell although succesful in SuperComputer and Server never catched on in the market Sony hoped for (Consumerelectronics). In the PS4 would have to be a Cell 2 and since IBM has no interest in it Sony would have already given Millions to IBM for further developing the concept. IBM has a very very successful new Chip. The Power 7. Which is very strong and rules the server market. Its also easy to programm for and the Wii U has a small Version of it.Sony and MS could take the Power 7 in different Variations (would also immensly help reduce costs for Multiplat Development) They wouldnt have to spend too much money to customize it. And Sony could safe costs on the Hardware site (No XDR(2) and on the Software side-> easier programming less cost. And yes the Devs are good with the Cell but its still more time intensive to programm for. Cell 2 could open up new problems. Also with a strong GPU the Cells single precission performance wouldnt be as benefical anymore.In the PS3 the RSX and Cell have comparable SP Gflops. But with a modern GPU that wouldnt be neccessarly the case even if Cell2 would have 4 times more SP Gflops. The Cell lacks in Double Precission flops. But those could be more important with a next gen GPU. I doubt that the Cell/XDR is going to be in the PS4 and I doubt that Nvidia is the only possible GPU manufacturer option for Sony. That makes a BW compatible PS4 less probable imo. Also Sony wont put the Cell/XDR additionally into the PS4 because it would lead to a price explosion. Sure even with Power 7/AMD GPU inside a Software Emulation could be achieved but it would be significantly harder. (Would make things very easy for Microsoft and 360 Emulation though.) To OP . Sony needs to have the games that people want and they need to differentiate themselfs from this Gen through Graphic and Online portal. Also they cant be more expensive then MS.

I think backwards compatibility is very important in the video game market, especially with new systems and their previous ones. If a newly released console doesn't have a strong launch lineup, then BC will help it with the backlog of the previous system's games. Plus, not everyone has the room to keep 3-4 consoles hooked up at once, so the less systems needed, the better.

kitler53 said: sony is probably going to be a lot worse off next gen -- they should just give up. in today's market it is the software/services that are making money not the hardware. as long as sony still positions itself first and foremost as a hardware company that makes some software instead of a software company that also makes some hardware they are going to lose more and more ground as time marches on.

Sony Entertainment Network.

Sony has an online games store, cloud music service, video/film store, book store and it makes a ton of good games.

Sony have a much better software ecosystem than the vast majority of modern technology companies. 

Netyaroze said: I have my doubts about a backwards compatible PS3. Seems like an important feature for a lot of people but: First problem is that Sony would limit themselfs to Nvidia. And I doubt Sony would do that .it makes negotiations very hard. If Sony gets an offer from AMD which is better then Nvidia offer they will go for it. Ok maybe AMD GPU could emulate the RSX. But this is not the only problem. The Cell is a nice chip indeed but look at it from todays perspective. It has something like 250 Million Transistors. Thats super tiny. A full blown Power 7 has 1200 Million and thats gona be outdated soon. To make the Cell able to compete with future CPUs it has to be 4 times bigger then now. 4 PPEs and 32 SPEs. Also get rid of XDR Ram interface its ancient by now. It would need countless Millions to redesign the Cell properly. IBM has moved on already and the design philosophy behind Cell pretty much failed. Sony wasnt investing the Millions into the Cell directly but into the ideas behind it. Those Investments were wasted. The Cell although succesful in SuperComputer and Server never catched on in the market Sony hoped for (Consumerelectronics). In the PS4 would have to be a Cell 2 and since IBM has no interest in it Sony would have already given Millions to IBM for further developing the concept. IBM has a very very successful new Chip. The Power 7. Which is very strong and rules the server market. Its also easy to programm for and the Wii U has a small Version of it.Sony and MS could take the Power 7 in different Variations (would also immensly help reduce costs for Multiplat Development) They wouldnt have to spend too much money to customize it. And Sony could safe costs on the Hardware site (No XDR(2) and on the Software side-> easier programming less cost. And yes the Devs are good with the Cell but its still more time intensive to programm for. Cell 2 could open up new problems. Also with a strong GPU the Cells single precission performance wouldnt be as benefical anymore.In the PS3 the RSX and Cell have comparable SP Gflops. But with a modern GPU that wouldnt be neccessarly the case even if Cell2 would have 4 times more SP Gflops. The Cell lacks in Double Precission flops. But those could be more important with a next gen GPU. I doubt that the Cell/XDR is going to be in the PS4 and I doubt that Nvidia is the only possible GPU manufacturer option for Sony. That makes a BW compatible PS4 less probable imo. Also Sony wont put the Cell/XDR additionally into the PS4 because it would lead to a price explosion. Sure even with Power 7/AMD GPU inside a Software Emulation could be achieved but it would be significantly harder. (Would make things very easy for Microsoft and 360 Emulation though.) To OP . Sony needs to have the games that people want and they need to differentiate themselfs from this Gen through Graphic and Online portal. Also they cant be more expensive then MS.

You do realize the Cell has the cheapest processing power to price ratio right? Also the gpu isn't all that important when talking about BC, as long as it more powerful then the last one there shouldn't be any major issues. Sony also went on record and said the ps4 only needs to be about twice as powerful as the ps3, which is easily do able with the Cell processors available today and wouldn't be that expensive, it was blu ray that hurt the ps3s price the most not the Cell, and they did go a little overboard with the processing power of the Cell in the ps3, it's raw power is twice that of 360s (though they haven't refined the dev kits to take full advantage of it as of yet, they are constantly getting better). I think a 16 spe Cell for the ps4 would be the best way to go. EDIT I actually googled 16 spe Cell and there are leaks from IBM that that is what Sony is going to use for the ps4 http://www.ps4-hacks.com/2011/09/16/sony-planning-to-use-16-spe-cell-processor-for-ps4/ though not sure how reliable those leaks are, it seems more rumors come true then don't when it comes to gaming (aside from the ridicules ones)

S____M____C____C said: kitler53 said: sony is probably going to be a lot worse off next gen -- they should just give up. in today's market it is the software/services that are making money not the hardware. as long as sony still positions itself first and foremost as a hardware company that makes some software instead of a software company that also makes some hardware they are going to lose more and more ground as time marches on. Sony Entertainment Network. Sony has an online games store, cloud music service, video/film store, book store and it makes a ton of good games. Sony have a much better software ecosystem than the vast majority of modern technology companies.

apple has an oline games store, cloud music service, video/film store, book store.   so why is apple so sucessful and sony not?  ...because sony doesn't do it as well.

launch for $399 in before or same time as X720 launch

have big launch games and exlcusives ready

big marketing campaign as in $500million for the first year itself

with internet TV and all video services

innovate big time with hardware

They need to advertise as well as MS did for starters, Have big time games like Halo, and Gears, and not have the most expensive console on the market.

kitler53 said: S____M____C____C said: kitler53 said: sony is probably going to be a lot worse off next gen -- they should just give up. in today's market it is the software/services that are making money not the hardware. as long as sony still positions itself first and foremost as a hardware company that makes some software instead of a software company that also makes some hardware they are going to lose more and more ground as time marches on. Sony Entertainment Network. Sony has an online games store, cloud music service, video/film store, book store and it makes a ton of good games. Sony have a much better software ecosystem than the vast majority of modern technology companies.  apple has an oline games store, cloud music service, video/film store, book store.   so why is apple so sucessful and sony not?  ...because sony doesn't do it as well.

No point continuing.......

@Mastervg

You are right Backwards compatibility is important I just see a lot technical hurdles to overcome. And I am curios to see if and how Sony is going to solve the problems.

Netyaroze said: @Mastervg You are right Backwards compatibility is important I just see a lot technical hurdles to overcome. And I am curios to see if and how Sony is going to solve the problems.

Backwards compatibility is very important to me, seeing as how many PS3 games I own right now (will probably double or even triple by the time PS4 comes out). I was deeply saddened whenever they said they were removing BC from the PS3.