Alternate Sources:

Rumor: Sony planning on basing the PS4 on the PS3's Cell ... (qj.net)

Sony Playstation 4 to be based off the PS3 Cell Processor?

Final Blade | October 01, 2008 | Rumor | Playstation 3 Company Misc

According to a Japanese website, PC Watch, has stated that Sony is indeed working on the next Playstation system, and that its going to feature a money saving system. Wonder how thats going to work? By basing it off the PS3 Cell Processor which should, in theory, make sure the console doesn't cost half a grand, or a grand in some countries.

Now this makes sense due to the fact this is brand new technology that the PS3 Cell hasn't reach its full potential, and Sony wouldn't make a brand new technology if the current one hasn't been untapped.

The only thing is, this has yet to be stated by Sony themselves, so I think its a good idea to put this in the rumor mill til any official word from them is announced.
Also please see the alternate source cause the main one is in Japanese.

We've heard Crytek discuss and predict the arrival of the PS4 sometime in 2011 or 2012. Now, Japanese website PC Watch is saying that Sony is indeed working on the next money-making machine for the PlayStation family, and that it's gonna adopt cost-saving measures.

How exactly? Why, by recycling the Cell processor that's currently being used in the PS3, that's how. Well, of course they didn't exactly say "recycled". But basically, that's the idea. Says the Japanese site, big ol' Sony "has begun seriously considering" basing the PS4 on the exact same CP of PS3.

News Story attached to:

PlayStation 3 Hardware [PS3]

5 comments | go to source (pc.watch.impress.co.jp) | Add to favorites!

favourite this article |

send to friend

77	45nm Cell Processor will start going into PS3s next year (3) September 22, 2008
101	Sony to Remove PC based PSN Store (11) October 30, 2008
49	Former SONY PlayStation Europe CEO Chris Deering Joins PlaySpan (0) October 23, 2008
48	What does MTV and Will Wright think about the Cell Stage in Spore? (0) September 9, 2008
116	Sony: PS3 is worth your money (30) November 14, 2008

Comments

1 thumbs!
BlackLabel | October 01, 2008 | reply

Well that does make sense and that doesn't mean they won't use one of the newer Cell processors, which has more than 8 cores and is much faster than we now have today. I mean save on the processor which is indeed a powerhouse and will be for years to come, that would allow them to work more on the RAM and give them are seriously good GPU. I personally feel Blu-Ray and Cell really kicked the RAM and GPU to hell as Sony really couldn't afford anything seriously major, the GPU now is good but not brilliant.
- 0 thumbs!
  Koloth | October 01, 2008 | reply
  
  The PS3's RAM is better tahn you think. You're only looking at one side of it. Consider PC RAM for a minute. Which is better 256MB of PC6400 or 500MB of PC3200? The answer is the PC6400 because you can take advantage of the faster bus speeds. In other words the CPU gets the data faster.
  
  The PS3 uses 256MB of main memory on a 3.2Ghz FSB. Which is insanely fast. Far faster than anything on any PC out there today. And frankly more expensive too. The Cell and Blu-ray didn't hurt the RAM at all. And more megabytes isn't always better.
  
  Still, I kind of figured Sony would do something like this. Makes perfect sense to simply upgrade the hardware rather than once again rebuilding everything. A newer faster model of the Cell, newer faster Blu-ray drive, better GPU, bigger HDD, and more, or at least faster RAM. What more do we really need?
  - 0 thumbs!
    Final Blade | October 01, 2008 | reply
    
    _{How about Robots to destroy the world?}
  - 0 thumbs!
    BlackLabel | October 01, 2008 | reply
    
    Ah you said what i was trying to say i just didn't have the knowledge or the intelligence to get it accross. When i said it affected the RAM i was thinking possibly 512Mb at the same speeds, but as you clearly stated more of it isn't necesarily better. Thank you for clearing that up.
    - 0 thumbs!
      Koloth | October 01, 2008
      
      Yea I think it is a common misconception that more RAM is better. Certainly it can be in some instances. But faster RAM is always going to be better.
      
      That's why the PS3 is actually better off with 256MB of main memory and 256MB for the GPU than the 360 is with 512MB of shared memory. The PS3's RAM is significantly faster, Plus it isn't shared with the GPU. The only advantage the 360 has in that area is that it can allocate more to either processor when needed. But why would it be needed when you can move it through as fast as the PS3 can?