back to article PlayStation 3 to get 45nm Cell 'mid year'

A slimmer PlayStation 3 could hit the shops this summer, because Sony’s finally said when it’ll begin replacing the console’s 65nm Cell chip. David Reeves, President of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe, told The Guardian that Sony is looking to replace the console’s current 65nm chip – produced by Toshiba – with a 45nm one “ …


This topic is closed for new posts.


Just when Microsoft move to 65nm (see then Sony plan to move off it to 45nm?

How come MS, with infinitely more profit, is so far behind in this regard?

Currently, both devices are too big, noisy and power hungry...


Re: Confused

"Currently, both devices are too big, noisy and power hungry..."

Too big? Well, compared to, say, a slimline PS2 practically any console is going to be big - my biggest beef with the PS3 is the awkward shape, so it currently sits on top of my 360 (both have about the same footprint, but the curved top of the PS3 is awkward)

Power hungry? I'll give you that, but then I don't leave my consoles switched on I'm not using them. I'd thought of using a PS3 running Linux as a webserver but was put off by the power consumption figures.

Noisy? Granted, the 360 clatters a bit if you play games straight off the DVD drive (I don't - if I anticipate playing something a lot, it goes onto the HDD) but the PS3 is quiet - very quiet, even when playing a game or movie. If I do leave it switched on, then you hardly know it's there. Of course, the grand cru of 'quiet' is the PS2, but mainly because it has very few moving parts.

So, the 'too noisy' comment is BS, as far as I'm concerned - the size of the consoles doesn't bother me overmuch although I'd have preferred the 360 to have an internal PSU rather than the external brick/nuclear reactor. I'd certainly welcome a PS3 which consumes less power.

I'd also venture to suggest that the reason MS are so far behind in the chip stakes is that Sony have their own manufacturing/design capabilities in Japan as well as a JV with IBM for production of the Cell processors for the PS3 at IBM's Fishkill plant - Microsoft have no such setup, at least to my knowledge


re: Confused

Clearly you are confused. Whilst the 360 may be big and noisy, the latest 65nm PS3's are super silent. I can't even hear mine from a couple of meters viewing distance.

Why can Sony do it? Simple. Sony make hardware, Microsoft write Software. You wouldn't buy your car from a company that writes software, so why buy your console from one?

FYI. The current 80GB PS3, with 65nm Cell and 65nm RSX draws about 100w (I tested it earlier with a plugin meter). The 360 is a whopping 170w.... That's why it's so noisy.

As for Microsoft "with infinitely more profit", I also think you need to read less of Redmond spin, and more of reality. The XBox has lost so far about $9Billion. The PS3 about $4Billion (this includes development costs for both, and RROD for Microsoft). The only difference, is Microsoft hid all theirs in a single quarter, so the next quarter they could claim "profitability".

Neither console is profitable, but Sony is one hell of a lot closer to breaking even than Microsoft ever will be.

Gates Horns

James, go out an buy a PS3..

Really, you will love it.. How do I know you don't have one?

"PS3’s power brick"..

Only the big white turd has a big power brick at the back (sat next to the white elephant HD DVD bolt on).

Gates Horns


Microsoft does not know how to write software, they are a marketing company.........

and throw lousy products on the market!

Look at Xbox (RROD), and other MS products...... Sony is a reliable and promising company, unlike MS.....

PS3 is the best, there is no hardware comparison to the Xbox!

Anonymous Coward

@Simon Ward

I migrated from a PS2 to an XBOX360 - that's the perspective seen in my comments.

re: XBOX 360 - "I don't - if I anticipate playing something a lot, it goes onto the HDD". I had no idea you can do this - Halo3 and COD 5 are the most played games. I'll look into it; I am surprised because of the risk of copying (i.e borrow a game, copy it to the hard disk).

I did want to get a PS3 instead of the XBOX360 - however, most kids in my son's school have an XBOX360 and there is peer pressure because of XBOX Live. My comments on the PS3's size were based on how it seemed - the curves made me think it was bigger.

I'll get a 45nm PS3 this summer for viewing BluRay movies. The XBOX360 with Live will remain for gaming. The PS3 is the best value BluRay player out there.

My comments on Microsoft's profits and their poor performance are relative - I'd have thought Microsoft would at least be as influential as Apple were. I don't expect them to be a major manufacturer like Sony, but their "influence" should be significant and allow them access to the latest hardware I'd have thought. That said, no iMacs are Quad core and they all have underpowered graphics...


Re: @Simon Ward

"re: XBOX 360 - "I don't - if I anticipate playing something a lot, it goes onto the HDD". I had no idea you can do this - Halo3 and COD 5 are the most played games. I'll look into it; I am surprised because of the risk of copying (i.e borrow a game, copy it to the hard disk)."

Seems a lot of people didn't know this! I discovered it somewhat by accident because the clattering noise of the DVD drive whilst playing Fable 2 was driving me up the wall. You still need to have the original game disc in order to play, but with the HDD install option it reads the data off the hard disk rather than the DVD (duh!) - to do it, try the following steps:

- Go to "My Xbox"->"Game Library"

- Click on the game you want to transfer to HD

- Select the 'Install to Hard Drive' (or similarly worded) option

- Wait ... depending on the amount of data to transfer it'll take anything from a little while to

bloody ages. The amount of disk space taken by the game will vary, but 5-6Gb is usual.

From then on, the game should play from the hard disk until such time as you delete it - you still have fan noise to contend with, but I can live with that. The whole process is a bit of a ball-ache, but again, it's bearable.

As for the PS3, I'd be pretty pissed off if I'd paid full price for it (I didn't - it was second hand) - the range of games is, currently, pretty poor compared to the 360 although there is some promising looking stuff in the pipeline. On the other hand, compared to Xbox Live, PSN really is laughably poor. Lack of PS2 backward compatibility, at least on European machines, was a major shark-jumping incident from Sony, IMO - granted, the number of 'classic' Xbox titles playable on the 360 is limited, at least the capability is there.

So, of the three consoles I have, the PS2 gets wheeled out for the oldies that I like, the 360 is my main 'gaming' machine and no doubt the PS3 will get more usage when I've managed to dig up a few more games that appeal to me - in the meantime, it's a good enough media player.

Hope this helps.

This topic is closed for new posts.


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017