Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links

Sony CEO Jack Tretton: PS4 Only When Technology Exceeds PS3


Sponsored Links
229w ago - During a recent 'Year of the PlayStation 3' interview with [Register or Login to view links], 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!

Comments 25 Comments - Go to Forum Thread »

• Please Register at PS3News.com or Login to make comments on Site News articles. Thanks!

red8316's Avatar
#20 - red8316 - 229w ago
Intel announced that over 9000 years ago, it's old news and the rumours made it sound like it was sub-par so Intel probably has constantly been redesigning it in hopes of making it marketable.
That would be Larrabee: [Register or Login to view links]

"Larrabee's hybrid of CPU and GPU features should be suitable for general purpose GPU (GPGPU) or stream processing tasks."

"Larrabee was cancelled "as a standalone discrete graphics product" on December 4, 2009."

Neo Cyrus's Avatar
#19 - Neo Cyrus - 229w ago
I am not sure about the ps3 but i do know that intel have announced plans to integrate graphic rendering into the cpu so now cpu can also function as the gpu. It would make sense as cpus are getting more and more powerful so it might be able to handle the job of the gpu. This could be the case for the ps3 too.
Intel announced that over 9000 years ago, it's old news and the rumours made it sound like it was sub-par so Intel probably has constantly been redesigning it in hopes of making it marketable.

No it does not make sense for CPUs to handle the job of the GPUs considering how far behind CPUs in power. You could have a 12 core Nehalem architecture CPU at 5GHz and it will still fail miserably to the job of a GPU. The Cell was used a lot for number crunching in 'Folding at Home' because there simply wasn't a GPU version of Folding at Home for a while. Any old video card is several times faster than the Cell. I use an old GTX 280 from 2008 and it puts the Cell to shame when it comes to number crunching for that.

foresttree1's Avatar
#18 - foresttree1 - 229w ago
Really? That sounds like absolute nonsense to me, if it's true then the hardware developers at Sony are even stupider than I thought and that would explain why a lot of games lag badly. Do you have a valid source or is what you say based on some rumour you heard?

I am not sure about the ps3 but i do know that intel have announced plans to integrate graphic rendering into the cpu so now cpu can also function as the gpu. It would make sense as cpus are getting more and more powerful so it might be able to handle the job of the gpu. This could be the case for the ps3 too.

SwordOfWar's Avatar
#17 - SwordOfWar - 229w ago
Since we only "upgrade" consoles about every 5 or so years, obviously we are going to constantly lag behind the latest and greatest hardware components.

However, it costs a fortune if someone were to try buying the latest and greatest hardware all the time at the rapid rate new technology comes out. Who can honestly say on a computer 5+ years later get EXCELLENT looking games without spending more than 600 dollars on the computer (even though the PS3 is below 300 now)? I'm looking at the games we have now and I see what the computer gaming market offers and my PS3 AAA titles almost always look better and run smoother than what a computer of the same price can do.

When you have a console, you know your going to get your money worth out of it, and you know its going to bring many years of new games.

The biggest problem with Sony gaming/portable consoles is they ALWAYS lack heavily in RAM. I mean it took them forever to lower the XMB footprint (RAM usage) enough to let it run at the same time your playing a game. If they are going to advertise the PlayStation 3 and future consoles as an Entertainment/Multimedia system with all these functions, they need to include enough RAM to allow them all to operate well without scavenging for RAM resources.

As far as the CPU goes, as long as they don't use something completely different (like what they did with the PS3) then it shouldn't be as hard to develop for. They should stick with the Cell, or go to something easier to use without sacrificing performance.

So there you have it. Make it easier to use and add more RAM.

I can understand why some components in the PS3 were so old. It was already too expensive for most people (undoubtably because of the blu Ray drive). Upgrading the GPU and the RAM would have made it sell even worse.

But, we have a solid new media format now that is good enough to last us into then ext generation. I don't think we will move away from Blu Ray for a long time. We might see more support for multiple layer Blu Ray discs that hold even more, but we will still use Blu Ray.

Now that Sony has won the media disc war and Blu Ray technology has become increasingly cheaper, it should be easier to focus on other technology other than the disc drive with the PS4 (such as more RAM, better CPU, better GPU etc..). The price of adding BluRay to the PS3 at the time was expensive because it was new, which added to the PS3's total cost. That means they had to make price cuts somewhere else...and it still ended up at 600 bucks!

When you think about it, the PS4 should turn out a lot better than what happened with the PS3. The PS3 basically got gimped because Sony needed to push out Blu Ray.

If these discs get any bigger, you guys better hope internet speeds get faster and cheaper. Digital downloads of fully packed Blu Ray games is going to be a joke at 50GB+.

CJPC's Avatar
#16 - CJPC - 229w ago
don't you think that the hardware industry is head of the software one? there is nothing wrong with newer technology, those developers are being lazy for sticking up with the old tech, i mean we all know that in these days to improve a cpu u need to add more cores, coz the current generation is using cpus run at 3.2ghz clock i cant see an improvement in the clock speed it's already good enough, i just don't understand why does it take so long for developers to understand a console and get the best out of it?
Well, the issue I think is that the hardware guys are too far ahead of the software guys - namely, they come out with new amazing ways to utilize hardware (like, the Cell for instance), and it takes ages for the Software guys to "catch up" with it.

Of course, they could just make a run of the mill setup , so all of the software guys are happy, but then hardware does not really advance - its a double edged sword, which is the same reason Dev houses complain about the PS3, saying its hard to code for.

It may be more difficult than say, a XB360/WII port - but when its done right, it gets done very, very well.

Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links







Affiliates - Contact Us - PS3 Downloads - Privacy Statement - Site Rules - Top - © 2014 PlayStation 3 News