Specific Rumors about the next PS (Orbis)

W

Wheresatom

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 20, 2007
Messages
1,390
There is an article on Kotaku about the next Playstation console. It is not official, but they do try to cover themselves about the validity of the rumors saying:

The details in this story come from a reliable source who is not authorized to talk publicly about next-gen hardware but has shared correct information with us before. What they're telling us in specifics matches much of what we've heard and reported in generalities in recent weeks.
Click to expand...

The highlights:
Name: Orbis
CPU: AMD
GPU: AMD Southern Islands
The former, that's largely something we've heard before, but the latter is interesting. That's the name given to many of AMD's 2012 roster of high-end PC cards. The PS4's GPU in particular, we're told, will be capable of displaying Orbis games at a resolution of up to 4096x2160, which is far in excess of the needs of most current HDTV sets. It'll also be capable of playing 3D games in 1080p (the PS3 could only safely manage 3D at 720p).
Click to expand...

Coming out next year
No used games
No backwards compatibility

I know there are those that say the PS3 has plenty of headroom left and that we are just now fully utilizing the potential etc etc, but I dont think there are many of those on this forum. I think Mass Effect 3 is a good example of that. I am about 8 hours in and there have been a few times where my PS3 just wasn't able to keep up with the action, letting the screen freeze or having the framerate drop significantly. I am really interested in the other services that a new console might allow for though. I'd like the next one to have a low power standby mode that allows you to buy downloadable games away from your system and have them automatically start downloading. And if they are going to go with a digital distribution model, or at least allow for it, I would like to be able to preload the game and just install a final patch at midnight to start playing. I dont think they can do some of these things with the current console but might be able to with the next.

I am just curious about this source that Kotaku has so much faith in. I wonder if this is going to turn out to be true or not. The good news about the GPU is especially encouraging.
 
Kotaku is about as unreliable as they come. I could start a thread here on [H] and say I have insider knowledge and within the hour they would have it on their front page.
 
A new console will be capable of delivering 4096x2160 just like the PS3 was "capable" of 1080p.
Next year? I'd be willing to put money on that not happening.
 
If the rumors are true and the next PS3 is really going to be built from customized off the shelf PC parts then there's just no way it outperforms whatever is the most screaming PC. Some people insist the specialized nature of consoles is basically magic dust that allows 5 year old hardware to crank out graphics comparable with modern tech, but that's a fairy tale. Sony and AMD can specialize all they like, but if PS4 is a $400 box built with PC parts and PC built with $2000 parts is going to smoke it, and within a year a PC built with $500 parts is going to smoke it just as bad.
 
RIPATI said:
If the rumors are true and the next PS3 is really going to be built from customized off the shelf PC parts then there's just no way it outperforms whatever is the most screaming PC. Some people insist the specialized nature of consoles is basically magic dust that allows 5 year old hardware to crank out graphics comparable with modern tech, but that's a fairy tale. Sony and AMD can specialize all they like, but if PS4 is a $400 box built with PC parts and PC built with $2000 parts is going to smoke it, and within a year a PC built with $500 parts is going to smoke it just as bad.
Click to expand...

Specialized or off the box has nothing to do with performance. It has to do with standardized hardware across the board. They only need to create one version that is tweaked and tuned to the best efficiency with one hardware configuration that they gain experience on for years.
 
All one has to do is compare launch titles with year 4+ titles. Night and day. The hardware doesn't get better, the programming does - as mentioned, they don't have to worry about 50 different video cards, sound cards, cpu's, ram speeds, etc. With consoles it's all set in stone.
 
If nothing else, Kotaku has gotten some crazy traction with this story. I'm seeing it all over the place - even the front page of Yahoo news.
 
Sony would have to be D U M B to do this. They are already behind MS, and to take away the ability for people to by used games (Which is a huge market) they'd basically be shooting themselves in the foot.

I don't get all the "usd games are killing blah blah" bullshit.

Virtually EVERY good has a used market, from cars, to music, to movies. You don't even see the MPAA bitiching about "Oh used dvd sales are KILLING US"
 
Stiler said:
Sony would have to be D U M B to do this. They are already behind MS, and to take away the ability for people to by used games (Which is a huge market) they'd basically be shooting themselves in the foot.

I don't get all the "usd games are killing blah blah" bullshit.

Virtually EVERY good has a used market, from cars, to music, to movies. You don't even see the MPAA bitiching about "Oh used dvd sales are KILLING US"
Click to expand...


Music and movies are probably the worst things to compare games to, in terms of your argument, considering that they're already moving towards either an online distribution store or a limited play digital rental platform. In order to combat piracy, and to a lesser extent the used market, things like iTunes and Netflix have popped up. Anything that can be digitally dstributed is moving, albeit very slowly, in that direction precisely to kill off the used and pirate markets. Note, also, that they're relatively cheap services, not because of competition from the used market but from brick and mortar as well as competing digital stores.

I'm not a fan of eliminating the used market (though it is largely a rip off that I'm surprised most consumers tolerate, especially for newer games), but I don't think it would be shooting Sony in the foot. They see $0 from used sales. The only argument that that could be made in terms of them making money from used sales is in the promotion of the purchase of new hardware.

I'm not exacly sure how many people go out and say, "I'm buying system X because I can get used games for it." I'm pretty sure it's an, "I'm buying system X because I can get blah blah blah game for it". Most media consumption devices, outside of gaming, don't use any kind of physical media and have a digital store attached to them. It's surprising that it's taken the gaming industry this long to move in that direction. The used market alternative is still there, but it's much smaller than the used game market, and sometimes much more difficult for the average Joe to figure out (seriously, I've watched non-tech people try putting a dvd on an iPad, it was painful).

All that it means is the gamer that wants to spend $40 on Uncharted instead of $60 has to wait for the price to drop, which would happen even if there's no direct competition from outside sources. Assuming Sony is the ONLY seller (which I doubt since eliminating brick and mortar sales would be shooting Sony in the foot, just in terms of the customer base), Naughty Dog/Sony still have the internal competition of other game developers/publishers they need to outsell. People don't say, "I'm going to buy every game, screw the cost!" They have a limited amount of money and they're (hopefully) going to spend it on the one they feel gives them the best value. With no used market, this becomes the cheapest high quality new game.

Take, for example, the iOS game market. It's huge, undeniably so, and there's no direct competition for the store that sells the games (i.e. no used market, no brick and mortar stores to edge in a bit of profit [outside of maybe the itunes cards, but really]). And there's still price fluctuation and drops (Dead Space is on sale for $0.99 this week, down from $7.99, when do you see new games, even two years, drop 88% in price?). The Android market doesn't drive these price drops, since Android apps aren't in direct competition with iOS apps, rather they're often made by the same people and follow the same price drops as their iOS brethren. The device manufacturers compete to get you to buy their device, and then you're tied to the market where devs compete to get you to buy their app.

And Sony wouldn't even be going entirely digital, they'd just be eliminating the used market. That keeps another aspect of competition, the brick and mortar stores. The only way Sony would be shooting themselves in the foot is if they said No Used Games and All Games Always $60! Target and Walmart still need to compete, just as Activision and EA do.

Hell, I could see a limited seller space bringing back things like pre-release/release day demos. The developers still have to compete with each other.

This would probably also mean a rise in platform exclusive titles, though (to try and minimize on the aformentioned competition, as well as entice new buyers to their distribution system).

All Sony needs to do to make this wildly succesful is hand complete control of game pricing to developers, and charge a percentage (not a flat licensing fee) and then over haul (and by that I mean open up) their game patching set ups (approval should be in the hands of the devs, if they break a game, it's on them).
 
Last edited:
I just started gaming heavily on my PS3. I hope there isn't a new console for the next year or two.
 
Domingo said:
A new console will be capable of delivering 4096x2160 just like the PS3 was "capable" of 1080p.
Next year? I'd be willing to put money on that not happening.
Click to expand...
The PS3 did 1080p as it's maximum graphical resolution for some PSN games. I expect the same out of the PS4. 2160p (4k) will be the maximum output but only a few graphically light games will be able to have that native resolution. The truth is this really is needed. Have you ever seen a 70"+ tv up close? Even 1080p looks like shit. 4k resolution is going to be nice for big TV's.
 
Calm down, I would bet money that the rumors are getting confused here. Sony has just released a new 4k front projector and they are trying to ramp up 4k blu-ray discs. I bet money the ps4 outputs 4k for the dashboard and 4k BD playback only.

You can't even get a decent 720p game on ps3, 4k isn't possible.
 
Bomo said:
Music and movies are probably the worst things to compare games to, in terms of your argument, considering that they're already moving towards either an online distribution store or a limited play digital rental platform. In order to combat piracy, and to a lesser extent the used market, things like iTunes and Netflix have popped up. Anything that can be digitally dstributed is moving, albeit very slowly, in that direction precisely to kill off the used and pirate markets. Note, also, that they're relatively cheap services, not because of competition from the used market but from brick and mortar as well as competing digital stores.

I'm not a fan of eliminating the used market (though it is largely a rip off that I'm surprised most consumers tolerate, especially for newer games), but I don't think it would be shooting Sony in the foot. They see $0 from used sales. The only argument that that could be made in terms of them making money from used sales is in the promotion of the purchase of new hardware.

I'm not exacly sure how many people go out and say, "I'm buying system X because I can get used games for it." I'm pretty sure it's an, "I'm buying system X because I can get blah blah blah game for it". Most media consumption devices, outside of gaming, don't use any kind of physical media and have a digital store attached to them. It's surprising that it's taken the gaming industry this long to move in that direction. The used market alternative is still there, but it's much smaller than the used game market, and sometimes much more difficult for the average Joe to figure out (seriously, I've watched non-tech people try putting a dvd on an iPad, it was painful).

All that it means is the gamer that wants to spend $40 on Uncharted instead of $60 has to wait for the price to drop, which would happen even if there's no direct competition from outside sources. Assuming Sony is the ONLY seller (which I doubt since eliminating brick and mortar sales would be shooting Sony in the foot, just in terms of the customer base), Naughty Dog/Sony still have the internal competition of other game developers/publishers they need to outsell. People don't say, "I'm going to buy every game, screw the cost!" They have a limited amount of money and they're (hopefully) going to spend it on the one they feel gives them the best value. With no used market, this becomes the cheapest high quality new game.

Take, for example, the iOS game market. It's huge, undeniably so, and there's no direct competition for the store that sells the games (i.e. no used market, no brick and mortar stores to edge in a bit of profit [outside of maybe the itunes cards, but really]). And there's still price fluctuation and drops (Dead Space is on sale for $0.99 this week, down from $7.99, when do you see new games, even two years, drop 88% in price?). The Android market doesn't drive these price drops, since Android apps aren't in direct competition with iOS apps, rather they're often made by the same people and follow the same price drops as their iOS brethren. The device manufacturers compete to get you to buy their device, and then you're tied to the market where devs compete to get you to buy their app.

And Sony wouldn't even be going entirely digital, they'd just be eliminating the used market. That keeps another aspect of competition, the brick and mortar stores. The only way Sony would be shooting themselves in the foot is if they said No Used Games and All Games Always $60! Target and Walmart still need to compete, just as Activision and EA do.

Hell, I could see a limited seller space bringing back things like pre-release/release day demos. The developers still have to compete with each other.

This would probably also mean a rise in platform exclusive titles, though (to try and minimize on the aformentioned competition, as well as entice new buyers to their distribution system).

All Sony needs to do to make this wildly succesful is hand complete control of game pricing to developers, and charge a percentage (not a flat licensing fee) and then over haul (and by that I mean open up) their game patching set ups (approval should be in the hands of the devs, if they break a game, it's on them).
Click to expand...


Games already have digital distribution like movies as well.

Xbl, Psn store, Steam/Origin, etc.

The PC game market has alreadly moved a LOT closer to the digital side of the market then consoles.

My point is that there are plenty of people out there who spend most of their money for games on buying used games.

To make sure they will pay 59.99 full price for any game they buy on the system isn't going to gain favor with Sony or help sell any console, it's going to have the opposite effect.

Then you throw in the non-backwords capability for ps3 games.

That's ripe for MS to come out an dsay they support 360 games on their next system and won't be killing the used market.
 
Orbis... really? Sounds like a brand of chewing gum.
 
Stiler said:
Games already have digital distribution like movies as well.

Xbl, Psn store, Steam/Origin, etc.

The PC game market has alreadly moved a LOT closer to the digital side of the market then consoles.

My point is that there are plenty of people out there who spend most of their money for games on buying used games.

To make sure they will pay 59.99 full price for any game they buy on the system isn't going to gain favor with Sony or help sell any console, it's going to have the opposite effect.

Then you throw in the non-backwords capability for ps3 games.

That's ripe for MS to come out an dsay they support 360 games on their next system and won't be killing the used market.
Click to expand...

This post, despite quoting me, makes me think you read maybe the first paragraph of my post. Read it again.

A comparison to the successes of a PC digital distribution platform works against you. There is no used market in modern PC gaming.

Also, prices won't stay at $60, develeopers need to compete with each other. Look at Steam, absolutely no used market, but very rarely high priced games for long periods of time. Hell look at Sony's own digital store. Games drop in price. Even beyond that, Sony's Vita store has their digital copies cheaper than MSRP of the physical ones. New release games are about $5 cheaper when bought used.

Further, if backwards compatibility mattered for someone going from ps3 to ps4, how would 360 backwards compatibility on Microsoft's next console remedy that? From people who previously bought multiple consoles? Who will probably also buy multiple consoles the next generation. Clearly buying full priced games is a problem there, considering they own two consoles.

A used market is not necessary for the success of a console. Frat Boy Dave will still be among the 5 million people to buy Call of Duty Rehash: PS4 Edition on day one at full price. Then Madden of the Year, Fifa, and Halo and repeat the next year.
 
Last edited:
RobustDude said:
Right, but the download doesn't start until you next turn on your system (in current form)... unless something has changed in the last few months.
Click to expand...

Nah, it downloads in like a "sleep" mode and powers off completely when it's done.
 
Focker said:
Umm who ever said anything about a computer?
Click to expand...

You can login to your xbox account from any computer and download games, avatar items, etc. I guess in a way its actually scheduling them to download once your xbox is turned on.
 
Focker said:
Umm who ever said anything about a computer?
Click to expand...

If you go back to the original comment that started this. The downloads have nothing to do with originating on the console. I am well aware I can start a download on my 360 and it will take care of itself and completely power off when it's finished. However, as already indicated by the guy above me, this is not the case when you choose to download something away from your 360.
 
PanzeR- said:
more details on gpu and cpu:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/04/04/sources-detail-the-playstation-4s-processing-specs
Click to expand...

The APU/GPU thing could work well. That rumored APU alone is more powerful than an X360 or PS3 game console. With a discrete graphics option to back it up, it could be very powerful.
Although a 7670 is hopefully weaker than what it will ship with. Remember it's well over a year away. I'm sure in 2013, AMD will have a more energy efficient and powerful GPU in that price segment. That would be funny if Sony and MS use the same GPU, and the difference comes down to the CPU and memory architecture.
 
Stereophile said:
The APU/GPU thing could work well. That rumored APU alone is more powerful than an X360 or PS3 game console. With a discrete graphics option to back it up, it could be very powerful.
Although a 7670 is hopefully weaker than what it will ship with. Remember it's well over a year away. I'm sure in 2013, AMD will have a more energy efficient and powerful GPU in that price segment. That would be funny if Sony and MS use the same GPU, and the difference comes down to the CPU and memory architecture.
Click to expand...

If it's a only a year away, then it'll have to be finalized really soon . They still have to get prototypes and dev-units built to test everything out before letting 3rd party developers having their chance to get some launch titles (or soon after launch) worked out. Even if late 2013 was the planned launch period, I'd still be hard pressed to believe that they don't already have 75% of the hardware nailed down, particularly the CPU and GPU
 
Would doing an apu/gpu combo make the console harder to develop for? If MS and Sony do it, then its kinda null. I know its not going to happen, but honestly i would love to see one console maker.. Would love to be able to get my mario, halo, and god of war/twisted metal on one console.
 
ryan_975 said:
If it's a only a year away, then it'll have to be finalized really soon . They still have to get prototypes and dev-units built to test everything out before letting 3rd party developers having their chance to get some launch titles (or soon after launch) worked out. Even if late 2013 was the planned launch period, I'd still be hard pressed to believe that they don't already have 75% of the hardware nailed down, particularly the CPU and GPU
Click to expand...

Well I'm sure they do have the CPU and GPU hardware nailed down. But what if they are using a GPU that won't go into production until 2013 ?

I.E. The First PS3 dev kits had SLI 6800 GPUs since the 7800s weren't being mass produced. Also the first PS3 dev kits only had the Cell BE running at like 2.4GHZ.

If true, the Orbis rumored specs are likely in the ballpark. But it would make more sense for them to end up using contemporary 2013 tech than the same literal GPU that is in the dev kits.
I think there is definitely a possibility in the end, PS4 will end up more powerful than the first dev kits presumably going out. Apparently with current tech, they can fit a pitcairn class HD7000 GPU into a space the size of X360's original Xenos.

After the GCN based Sea Island/HD 8000 arrives, I wouldn't be surprised to hear one of them has pitcairn class performance in something like 60-70% of the die space. So there is really plenty of room to add a better GPU than a 7670, it's like a $50 GPU tops, that is unless they are trying to launch this system for $299 on day one and make a nice profit like Nintendo's business model. Sadly, even a crappy 7670 could blow away whatever is in Wii-U, if the rumors concerning that system being no better than current gen are true.
 
Zohar78 said:
Would doing an apu/gpu combo make the console harder to develop for?
Click to expand...


No, it should be easier I think. There are supposed to be a lot of synergies in using an AMD APU AND GPU in the same box.

I think one of Sony's number one priorities was to make it easier for devs to make games on PS4 than PS3. As everyone knows, programming cell proved to be quite a challenge and required techniques outside of the norm. PS4 should change that. If it's using an X86 processor with AMD's HSA and GPU, it's going to be easier to get results. I expect a really integrated design, possibly an SOC. I'm sure AMD is taking what they learned with the X360, and applying it into the PS4 design.
 
Stereophile said:
Well I'm sure they do have the CPU and GPU hardware nailed down. But what if they are using a GPU that won't go into production until 2013 ?

I.E. The First PS3 dev kits had SLI 6800 GPUs since the 7800s weren't being mass produced. Also the first PS3 dev kits only had the Cell BE running at like 2.4GHZ.

If true, the Orbis rumored specs are likely in the ballpark. But it would make more sense for them to end up using contemporary 2013 tech than the same literal GPU that is in the dev kits.
I think there is definitely a possibility in the end, PS4 will end up more powerful than the first dev kits presumably going out. Apparently with current tech, they can fit a pitcairn class HD7000 GPU into a space the size of X360's original Xenos.

After the GCN based Sea Island/HD 8000 arrives, I wouldn't be surprised to hear one of them has pitcairn class performance in something like 60-70% of the die space. So there is really plenty of room to add a better GPU than a 7670, it's like a $50 GPU tops, that is unless they are trying to launch this system for $299 on day one and make a nice profit like Nintendo's business model. Sadly, even a crappy 7670 could blow away whatever is in Wii-U, if the rumors concerning that system being no better than current gen are true.
Click to expand...

Nvidia's G70 series was launched in June 2005 with the 7800 GTX, which was well over a year before the PS3 launched. Sony had plenty of time to play with the chip during development of the console before anyone even knew what the PS3 was going to be.

Sony using a GPU that might be released a few months before the rumored launch date of the PS4 is just not likely. They would have very little time to make sure the system they launched is as solid as possible, and there would be too much risk that a serious design flaw would set them back months, giving MS (and Nintendo?.. ok no) another generation being first to market.
 
A 7670 seems extremely underpowered especially if they are wanting these consoles to have a 10 year or even greater life span. I just cannot imagine that that GPU would be good enough to last even 5 years, let alone double that.
 
It'd be interesting to see what kind of performance they'll be able to wring out of the AMD APU near the end of the new consoles life cycle (if rumours are proven true).

As for the '10 years or more' goal of previous generations, I'd be doubtful if they'll start that marketing again. I think it was their way of justifying the exuberant pricing of the PS3 (at its launch) and their development into it.

Truth be told, I'd love to see more upgrade options using a more modular design, but I'm not entirely sure if that'd be all that possible in the console market (splintering user bases ala 32x and SegaCD, etc).
 
theNoid said:
Kotaku is about as unreliable as they come. I could start a thread here on [H] and say I have insider knowledge and within the hour they would have it on their front page.
Click to expand...


Yup, how many ps3 games are actually 1080p for starters?


Can't be but a few.
 
I recently bought my first PS3. I bought 2 games for it, a used copy of Viking Battle for Asgard, and a new copy of Dark Souls. I dunno what resolution it is running these games at-- my craigslist special Sony XBR 910 CRT TV does 1440X1080i, and the console is set for 720p-- all I know is the console struggles big time keeping frame rates in the playable range for both titles.

All this talk about powerful hardware in consoles is questionable. My PS3 has a hard time running the titles that were made for it! Really, how can there be powerful cutting edge hardware in a machine that sells for $500 or $600 when it launched? And that includes a Blu ray player and a hard drive!

That said, I am enjoying the system. It's sleek and cool looking. I have grown accustom to the system's lower resolution, choppy frame rates, limited draw distance, and enjoy the console for the games it plays that are not available on my PC. These consoles will never be powerhouse gaming machines. They never have been and never will be. They are made for mass market gaming, and you get what you pay for. That's the reality of it.
 
Poordevil said:
All this talk about powerful hardware in consoles is questionable. My PS3 has a hard time running the titles that were made for it! Really, how can there be powerful cutting edge hardware in a machine that sells for $500 or $600 when it launched? And that includes a Blu ray player and a hard drive!
Click to expand...

They sell the consoles at a loss and make the money back from licensing fees.
 
Poordevil said:
All this talk about powerful hardware in consoles is questionable. My PS3 has a hard time running the titles that were made for it! Really, how can there be powerful cutting edge hardware in a machine that sells for $500 or $600 when it launched? And that includes a Blu ray player and a hard drive!
Click to expand...


You can put together a very impressive console with a $600 budget. This go around, a fast BD player will be cheap. And a hd is less than $50. They won't even need to go that high end. I'm thinking a $400 launch price, with anywhere from zero to a $100 loss.

I read on B3D, using the same silicon die area and thus roughly equivalent manufacturing cost of the X360, a $400 console today could easily have a 2 Tflop AMD GPU. The Kaveri spec AMD APU arriving in first quarter 2013, has 800 Mflops with the built in GPU. That's 2-3 times this gen's X360 spec Xenos alone. Combined with a discrete GPU, PS4 could end up comfortably hitting 2Tflops, which is almost a 10x increase from this generation. Sure PCs are a lot more powerful, but the efficiency of this unique all AMD platform will be amazing and the results in a closed box should be comparable to PCs with much better numbers.

Yeah console performance is hit or miss, whereas with PC you can always throw brute force at a problem. But it is amazing how good some PS3 games look considering it's running on a 2005 era GPU.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top