169w ago - During a recent 'Year of the PlayStation 3' interview with FastCompany.com, Sony's CEO Jack Tretton stated that PS4 will only come when technology exceeds the PS3.
To quote: What of the successor to the PlayStation 3, the PS4?
Jack Tretton doesn't seem to know, telling Fast Company that he "can't even imagine what can be done technically beyond the PlayStation 3 in the near future."
Tretton continued to reiterate the same "ten year" message - the proposed shelf life of the PS3 - that the Sony team has followed since even before the launch of the system. With 2010 marking the fourth year of the PS3's life cycle, it seems increasingly likely that Sony will stick to that goal.
Of course, that's not to say the "PS4" won't ever be realized. We'll see the PS4 "when somebody can craft the technology that exceeds what we're able to do on the PS3," Tretton offered, adding "we are still just starting to harness [the PS3].
JoyStiq (linked above) also shared a cool YouTube PlayStation 9 mock-up video, check it out below!
Stay tuned for more PS3 Hacks and PS3 CFW news, follow us on Twitter and be sure to drop by the PS3 Hacks and PS3 Custom Firmware Forums for the latest PlayStation 3 scene updates and homebrew releases!
Yes it is true that the Cell processor is suited to physics calculations since they are just that calculations which is what any CPU can do, the degree to how well they do it depends on the way the physics is implemented and whether or not it is tailor made fit that CPU, in the case of the Cell obviously since games are designed to run on the PS3 and the PS3 only developers will make adjustments to tailor make physics instructions to fully utilize the power of the CPU.
Please go back and reread what I wrote, I never said the i7 family were a better CPU to the Cell I only referred to it since it is a current generation CPU and how CPU's lack behind GPU's.
As above I'm agreeing that a GPU will run physics and other tasks better than the CPU, the post I was replying to was stating that the GPU is not needed in the PS3.
The Cell processor is unique just not for the right reasons coding for it is a pain and the only reason it can deliver is because some developers (Naughty Dog) will spend a lot of time perfecting the way everything is implemented to use the Cell to the best of its ability, but the Cell is in no way a cut above the rest of the current generation CPU's, had Sony implemented something more conventional like an i7 the same Physics computation (seen in Uncharted 2) still would have been possible.
you sir are wrong and i quote from an article;The STI Cell Processor found in the PlayStation 3 operates in a manner similar to the Ageia PhysX hardware; its design was driven by similar considerations. Unlike ATI/NVidia's GPGPU solutions, and like the PhysX, this design is more about providing each parallel thread with a large working set and more of the inter-thread communication and control found in a general purpose processor. As such it is very well-suited to physics calculations
notice that u used i7 as a better cpu just because it's newer which is completely wrong i7 is better in some areas but the cell outperform i7 in other areas including physics
GPUs are know from being able to handle physics better than the CPUs it was proven that PhysX apps ran around three times faster on the GPU in comparison to the CPU, although the exact amount varied depending on the game being tested – some cases were up to four times faster.
yeah that's why the cell processor is unique and powerful in handling physics, so they accomplished that realism using that wonderful chip don't make it sound like they built an engine for a typical cpu.
i suppose what D3MON2009 said is true. Console will never be the latest and greatest be cause it was not suppose to be that. I suppose the purpose of the console is more to provide a cheaper method of enjoy games for a longer period. (ps3 sorta fail the first part). If you want the latest and greatest then there is always the pc but it gonna cost you arm and a leg to keep up with the rate technology is advancing.
You have to remember that a console will never be fitted with the latest and greatest hardware since it wouldn't be cost effective and the end result would be a overly priced machine which not many people will buy (the PS3) and your competitor will release something something with a lower price and presenting the same, slightly worse or slightly better graphics (the Xbox 360), than lastly you have the company that could sell pretty much anything just by putting their logo on it (the Wii).
Funnily enough the Wii has the worst hardware in this generation and still sells massively well, showing that hardware isn't everything, you need something to back it up for the Wii it was the implementation of a motion controller and a catalogue of games that used the motion controller completely removing the gimmick part of it. Unlike the PS3 motion controller which is completely terrible.
But if we return to the topic at hand about hardware of course hardware exists that is better than the PS3's current hardware the PS3 has been outdated for a long time and whoever thought of implementing the Cell processor should have been fired, that was clearly a stupid idea.
Clearly you have no idea what your talking about so lets put it this way the Cell is not nearly as powerful as you think, CPU's do not come close to the power of a GPU, even in the current generation i7 chips are not as powerful as a current generation or last generation graphics card.
Ok lets look at physics from a hardware point of view at the moment Nvidia PhysX is the hardware solution available for PC and yet not many game developers implement it since they can recreate similar physics using software, the only recent game I can think of that implemented Nvidia PhysX was Batman Arkham Asylum.
In short real life physics in every game will never happen at least not without a dedicated physics processor, what you saw in uncharted was software physics handled by the CPU and it was more than realistic enough in my eyes.