Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

New PlayStation 2 Chip 241

Posted by CmdrTaco from the little-is-better dept.
Iron Chef Japan writes "Sony has announced that they have fit the PlayStation 2 Emotion Engine, and the Graphics Synthesizer on to a single chip using a 0.13-micron process. This will allow Sony to make three times more PlayStation 2's annually, so it's all for the better."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New PlayStation 2 Chip More

New PlayStation 2 Chip

Comments Filter:
  • Too Bad I have to boycott sony because they are idiots, downloaded a bunch of Korn songs from WinMX and sent out about 60,000 legal notices. What a bunch of jerks. I really like GTA3 too, good thing in a month or two it will be out on PC, probably with better graphics.
  • Will this enhance the performance of the PS2 in a ny way?

    • Re:Performance boost? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by CMiYC ( 6473 )
      No. Since the console is a known hardware target, Sony can not alter its specifications on the fly. That would cause serioues problems to developers with writing uniform software. This is not to say it wouldn't be possible to increase performance, however. Developers rely on each console operating the same way. Very serious developers even rely on various operations to execute in a specific amount of time. If one spin of the board did certain operations faster, it would be a nightmare on developers. They have a hard enough time as it is.
    • Not likely; but we may see something akin to the PSOne [ebgames.com] with PlayStation 2 hardware.

      • That's what I was thinking, they'd slim down the case a bit, probably, to save on plastics and shipping. But, then, with the PS3 upgrade to the PS2 (the drive bay in the back) they may keep it the same size, just about, for 'upgradable' models and have a cheaper second line ..

    • Re:No (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 06, 2002 @12:35PM (#3295480)
      The new model will have exactly the same specs as the old one. This is not a PC based architecture, speeding it up could very well effect the playability (to do with timing) of existing games. One of the disadvantages of a highly low-level environment

      This is purely to:

      a: reduce the number of chips that they have to have custom made, thereby allowing them to more efficiently use their existing production facilities and make more PS2's per year.

      b: reduce the cost of the PS2 to produce so that they can sell it at a lower price, to make people want to buy it when given the choice of the pretty(graphics, can you say easy, low cost anti-aliasing) X-Box at a similiar price point.

      There is a possibility they may update the case somewhat to distingish the new model (eg: playstation vs PS1)

      Samn that made me look pro X-Box. I have a PS2, but the blocky graphics gets on my nerves. Pity anti-aliasing has to be done on the CPU and is therfore rarely done :-(
      • Yup. Take a look at the guts of a first run Playstation; it's crammed full of electronics, tended to overheat. Now, take a look at one of the last run of Playstation, before it was the PSone; same exterior case, but the inside is a little bitty circuit board, and lots of empty space.

    • Re:Performance boost? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by hattig ( 47930 )
      Although the new chip could theoretically run a lot faster (say 500MHz), the advantage of consoles is the fixed hardware over their lifespan. This means that games can be designed for the one fixed hardware platform to run on, and it will run on all PS2s ever sold.

      The architecture may also not be designed to be clocked that much higher - think short pipelines, etc.

      This means that the new PS2 is liable to be a lot cooler than the old PS2... and cheaper to boot with one less chip on the motherboard, and the other major chip costing less to make.

      Lets just wait for the overclocks :)

      There are two blackbirds shagging outside my window right this moment.

  • Allowing for a drop in price perhaps? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SexPig ( 464304 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @12:21PM (#3295432) Homepage
    They've probably been working overtime to get the production costs down on this thing to be able to drop the price and take a chunk out of X-Box's gains in marketshare. "Always wanted a PS2 but couldn't stomach dropping $300...well, here you go".
    • There's rumors to the effect that Nintendo may drop the price of the GameCube. If that happens, then it's likely Sony and possibly Microsoft will have to follow suit.

      The time frame I heard was E3'ish, but please consider that it is a non-substantiated rumor.
    • Hm...

      Considering that the Xbox launch in Japan, while not a total failure, isn't anywhere close to "good", there's rumors that MS may be dropping the price of the Xbox (at least in Japan, maybe perhaps but don't bet on it in Europe).

      The PS2 in Japan is around $200, the Xbox around $263, if I remember right. So if MS brings Xbox down $200 (in Japan - no way in hell they'll drop it that low in the US - well, maybe, this is MS (free browser, anyone?)), then Sony can fight back with another drop to around $150 with their new technology. (Figure they'd take a hit on "old" PS2 units, and hope they make it up later.)

      Either way, I'm actually glad that we've got 3 console makers in the market. Because it encourages competition (well, if you call all 2 good games for the Xbox compitition (and I'm not including PS2 remakes, thank you)), and competition is always good. (Except when I'm at a party trying to seduce a girl. Then I want monopoly power.)
      • well, if you call all 2 good games for the Xbox compitition

        How does a Troll get modded as insightful? Oh, it's against an MS product!

        Besides the obvious fact that "good games" is a subjective topic, there are a lot of good exclusive games on the XBox (RalliSport, Halo, JSRF, DOA3, etc...). And the "PS2 Remakes" (Like MGS X) are really "Game remakes with better graphics" and hopefully gameplay improvements based on feedback from the PS2 version. Just because it was on PS2 first, doesn't mean the game won't be at least as good, if not better on the XBox. There's no doubt that PS2's game library is incredible, but that doesn't make the XBox's (temporarily) smaller library something to scoff at. I also find it funny that you don't diss on the GC, considering that they have a lot less games, and aside from a few really fun games (like Super Smash Brothers), there are complete genres missing from it's library.
        • haha... halo good? DAO3 exclusive? (looks like 2 to me)

          the GC library is unthrilling at the moment, but then, they have secured one of the best game developers in the world (not square, themselves.)

          oh, and the square bit will help too ;)

          the day i see an xbox game that looks and plays half as good as all they hype will be the day that i buy one. Until then, between the GC, PS2, GBA and desktops, whats the point?

        • well, if you call all 2 good games for the Xbox compitition

          How does a Troll get modded as insightful? Oh, it's against an MS product!

          No, because it's true. The X-Box has exceptionally good hardware but a complete dearth of good games. DOA3 has no depth to the combination sets. Halo is boring and repetitive. Gotham is a pathetic racer. Just to add insult to injury, 30% of the release titles for the X-Box were snowboard sims: I fucking hate snowboard sims.

          Is it any wonder that almost every X-Box game review starts with something like "This game is visually stunning"? It's because the X-Box has great hardware, great graphics, and the game developers are using this as a crutch to prop up their lack-luster no-fun games. Meanwhile we have PS2 leading with FFX and Rez and GT3: the X-Box can't hold a candle to these titles.

          This isn't Microsoft bashing. I will buy the hardware when it has good games but that day has not yet come. There are no X-Box exclusive games that make me say "today I will get an X-Box". The only good games that the X-Box can offer are also on the other consoles, so I might as well buy the other consoles and wait for the X-Box price to drop.

          • I'll admit that it's pretty funny seeing like 1 snowboard sim a MONTH come out on the XBox. YASS ("Yet Another Snowboard Sim") should be a new game genre for the XBox. But, the fact that you don't like them doesn't mean that they suck. I held the same view as you, until I played Amped. My friend bought it, I scoffed him, played it, and bought it myself! It's pretty fun.

            GT3 is in a league of it's own, and is an awesome game. A lot of people don't want to be quite as "hardcore" though. Rallisport challenge is a great blend of realism and fun, and is easily the best rally game that I've ever played. I think it is much better then GT3's rally racing.

            Halo may be boring single player (I don't really have time to play it single so I don't know), but, to my surprise, is really fun multiplayer. At first I thought, hey, we have our PC's and can connect via the Internet to play awesome FPS's - we don't need them on the console. But there's nothing like bringing 2 or 3 XBox's and TV's together and playing 6-12 player Halo. Awesome.

            DOA3 is really fun. You're right it doesn't have the depth as other games, but remember, Soul Caliber 2 is coming out for all platforms, and Mortal Kombat may be an XBox exclusive.

            XBox also has the "Crash" name, which will lead to Crash Bandicoot, and hopefully Crash Team Racing.

            So, although PS2 has the best game library overall, I think that the XBox has enough developers (Sega,Konomai,Microsoft,etc.) and the hardware to be a very good console. The GameCube will be best for those who really like the Nintendo games that aren't available elsewhere. The PS2 does have the strongest overall library, but I think the competition will get more fierce within the next 6-9 months. XBox may still come in 3rd (they are the newbies, afterall), but it will be a much closer race. Personally, I'll continue to enjoy my current 7 game collection :-).
    • XBox has caused no slowdown in sales of the PS2 in any market.

      On the contrary, the XBox-hype about game consoles has caused 30% HIGHER PS2-sales in Europe in the week of XBoxes launch!!

      In Germany, vendors had to reduce the price to 400 Euros (instead of 480), some even to 300 Euros to sell any XBoxes at all.

      XBox is dead already.

  • While its nice to see a company keeping up with the latest technology in an effort to stay ahead, sony might have been better off doing this before everyone and their dog already owned a PS2.
    • I don't know, there are a lot of people that just can't see spending $200+ on a console, me included. If they dropped the price (quite) a bit, sub $200, I know I'd get one, just for Tekken Tag Team, GT3 & GTA3.

      Jaysyn

      • Good point, but given Sony's track record, I'd say that's doubtful, even though if I remember correctly switching to the 0.13 micron process for making chips allows them to get more chips out of the same material, significantly reducing the cost im the long term for the producer (Sony).

        It seems more likely that they'd pocket the difference and keep going until it looks like the market is starting to die down, then lower the price of the console to draw in any stragglers (ala dreamcast).
    • Well sure they might have been better off doing this but then this is a pretty spectacular achievement just the same and is highly worthwhile.

      They're selling 20,000 PS2s a week in the UK compared to 7,000 Xboxen. 85,000 PS2s vs 5,000 Xboxen a week in Japan. I don't have the figures to hand for the US but again, more PS2s being sold than any other console. It's selling an absolutely truck loads and shows no sign of slowing down significantly.

      Reducing the manufacturing cost and hence the retail cost of the console will make it's position even stronger against newcomers. Just in time for some decent games to turn up for the competition.

  • Rumors Rumors Rumors (Score:3, Funny)

    by KernelHappy ( 517524 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @12:27PM (#3295453) Homepage
    Wouldn't it be great if they could reengineer consoles so that the games were reasonably priced?
    • I'll second this off-topic post. You'd be hard pressed to talk me into dropping $50 for a console game and run the risk of it being rittled with unpatchable bugs. I give you GranTurismo 2 as an example. The Original US release was incompletable due to a simple math error in the conversion. I usually wait for a game to go into a second run, and possibly drop to a reasonable $35 (just bought Oni for $20).

      ~LoudMusic
  • and fit it in a pc expansion bay, like the apparently vaporware GD-Rom drive that Sega was thinking about making. Make it $150-$175 and I'll buy it & one for my brother...

    Jaysyn
  • Well, not great timing for me. The price is definitely going to drop on the PS2, probably to $200. And I just bought a PS2 last week, because I just had to have Maximo and Virtua Fighter 4. Oh well, still worth it I guess.

  • Chance to improve copy protection? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gpinzone ( 531794 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @12:37PM (#3295487) Homepage Journal
    Now that the protection on the currrent line of PS2s has been pretty much cracked to allow swaps using just non-evasive plugin-card, I wonder if Sony is planning to make these new ones different enough to foil hack attempts?

  • What this also means... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Jace of Fuse! ( 72042 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @12:39PM (#3295494) Homepage
    This also could improve chances of the PS3 being PS2 compatible.

    After all, as I understand it, the PS2's compatibility with the PS1 were mainly a side effect of the "Playstation On a Chip" design that was created for the PSone.
    • Total agreement - considering the odds of the PS3 coming out around late 2003/early 2004-ish (comptition with the Xbox spurring this), Sony will want to keep the backwards compatibility (ensures a huge library of games), and give gamers a reason to purchase the new without losing the old.

      Now, I'm still waiting for someone to make their console Dreamcast/Sega Saturn comptable. Bring back Panzer Dragoon Saga!
    • You're right. The PS2 actually has MIPS CPU called the IOP, normally just used for handling the ports and stuff but it doubles as being the core of the PS1 emulation.

      That said, there's a big difference between that and putting all the bits of the PS2 on a chip and slapping that in the PS3. It'd still cost plenty of money and my feeling is that they'd want to avoid 'unnecessary' costs. The PS2 hardware is insanely complicated, making a successor 100% backwards compatible would be pretty expensive.

      My money is on PS3 not being backwards compatible.

      • My money is on PS3 not being backwards compatible.

        The fact that Sony is already reducing its hardware real estate lends to the thought that the PS3 will be BC. The only reason the PS3 would not be compatible is if it took up a huge amount of board space. If the two major components of the PS2 can be combined into a 1 chip design, then that is a good thing. What we are seeing is the same progression from PS1->PS2. Use the next generation semiconductor technologies to build yesterday's (using yesterday loosly) silicon.

        Also, in the April 2002 issue of Playstation Mag, Ken Kutaragi ("father of the playstation"), has stated that the PS3 will be BC with the PS2. Granted that could be marketing hype. However, it looks like Sony is heading towards production simplification, which is what it would need to achieve BC.
        • Ken Kutaragi ("father of the playstation"),
          Books everybody who cares about this sort of thing should read include Revolutionaries at Sony, which is the story of the Playstation, Renegades of the Empire, which is the story of DirectX, and Game Over (Press Start To Continue) which is the story of Nintendo.
        • I know what's been said before (by Kutaragi) and I know how much Sony would like to be able to do this. However I work with the PS2 and have some knowledge of how insanely complex it is. It really is not the same sort of job to provide compatibility in a forthcoming console as it was with the PS1.

          One of the issues here is the fact that the PS3 is not likely to resemble the PS2 much. It wont use the same CPU, we know that already. It's unlikely that a new graphics subsystem will be like the PS2's GS either, current wisedom is that much of the work of graphics ought to be in hardware rather than using VU1 on the Emotion Engine to do a lot of the work in software.

          Those are the sorts of reasons why I tend to think Sony may have to make a clean start and drop backwards compatibility. I'd be happy to be proven wrong on this front but I think it unlikely.

  • Lame story... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RatOmeter ( 468015 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @12:44PM (#3295514)
    How lame is this? Our wonderful "story" is merely a reference to a post on gamefu which, itself, points to no credible source.

    Slashdot: "Sony says... cause Gamefu says that Nikkei Microdevice says that Sony says..."

    Good, God. I don't really doubt it's happened, but where's the interview? Where's the real scoop? I'd rather know a bit more than this. I'd like to know what else might get integrated; I don't consider squeezing 2 chips into 1 is going redefine the marketplace, or even Sony's bottomline.

    Mod as you will, and let's hope someone on Slashdot can post a link with more info...

    -

    • Re:Lame story... (Score:5, Informative)

      by CMiYC ( 6473 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @01:03PM (#3295567) Homepage
      I don't consider squeezing 2 chips into 1 is going redefine the marketplace, or even Sony's bottomline.

      No this is not going to redefine the marketplace, but it will signifcantly impact Sony's bottomline. If you do not understand how, then you do not understand the hardware design and manufacturing process. Once yeild is up on the new silicon, there will be significant savings on Sony's manufacturing process. For example, let's consider two invidivual chips with a large number of interconnections. By placing both peices of silicon on the same die, you have eliminated a very serious amount of redundent connections. Instead of going from Silicon -> Package -> Board -> Possible Vias -> Package -> Silicon you are now going from Silicon -> Interconnect -> Silicon (basically). This is a huge savings in board space, packaging, and a large increase in reliability. The increase in reliability comes because you have less overall connections. Each connection in an electronic device is a possible point of failure.

      The disadvantage is that this was not done already. Then again this is an excellent chance for Sony to debug this chip design for the PS3 (backward comabilitiy) and the creation of a PStwo.
      • I agree on several of your points:
        . less real estate
        . reliability
        . "...disadvantage that this was not done already."
        and 1 additional minor manufacturing point: ease of test

        However, in the economics of mass production, their new design must be MUCH less expensive or seriously advantagous in some other way, in order to justify the cost of retooling for new production. The production costs for their existing product must have already hit bottom, so why reinvent and retool? They must have a reason and I would like to know more!

        By the way, my experience in PCB design and manufacture is limited to small design, small runs ( 300 components, 500 board lots) and I realize the economics of scale must change motivations. On the point of "possible vias," I was told by me PCB manufacturer that number of vias/holes had very little to do with the end cost, especially compared to board size and production quantities. Part placement and test is a seperate issue and some real savings can be achieved by reducing component count, but is that the only reason Sony wants to do this?
        -

        • I think you've made two incorrect assumptions.

          First, Sony's production costs have not hit bottom yet. It was only recently that they began to break even on hardware sales. Their business model only allows them to realize profit through software license sales. That being the case, anything to reduce production costs, even a fraction, would be significant. Granted, MOST production does not fully benefit from the same revenue model that video game consoles do. Reducing part placement time, component count, and test time are all reasons Sony would being doing this. Anything they can do to reduce their production cost is worth it to them (in this revenue model).

          Secondly I did not mean to imply that Vias add extra cost to a board. Instead, they add complexitiy. For example, they are horrible for signal integrity. If you want to trash a high speed clock line, put a via on it. Although not a likely suspect, they do create another point of failure. However, in relation to the cost of the rest of a board design, vias are next to nothing (as you said).
          • Considering that Sony spent around 1.5 billion just to build the shop that manufactures the ps2 chips (I think they went in with Hitachi on it), anything to recoup a huge loss like that is a Good Thing. The reason the initial yield of PS2's was low was due to little bugs they had to work out in their new shop to get the yields up to par. That only lasted about 5 months after the initial launch and I'm sure they've got production down to a science now. Throwing everything on one chip can do nothing but cut costs and speed up production.
    • Here's an article [gamers.com] linked from the front page of the Official PlayStation Magazine [gamers.com] web site. That's pretty durned official, isn't it? There's no word from either IGN or GameSpot, but it looks like they take the weekends off and haven't updated since Friday.

      The article offers just a wee bit more information than the one linked to by Slashdot, however: "Sony's plant in Nagasaki, Japan will create the new chips, and this development is expected to nearly triple the possible yearly output of PS2 hardware."
      Ian
  • Heck why dont they put the Playstation on a PCI card. have some sort of a passthrough connector for your CD rom and Wa La! PS2 for a $100.00.

  • Now they can start pumping doctored photorealistic "screenshots", drop the PS2 price and eat the rest of the market cake.

    It isn't even about the games anymore... Everyone loses money on the consoles and yet still try to peddle as many as they can -- I will postulate that the game has become about establishing control through presence.

    Japan's reaction to X-Box was VERY weird. I mean, those people buy A LOT of junk. They live through the junk. They date and fish and hallucinate through the consoles. Japan is the pinnacle of consumption-based philosophy. Why didn't they go for the X-Box? National pride? It was as if old Yancy told everyone that they should ignore the american toy.

    Anyway, a question. Can we assess the "long run" outcome at this point? Has X-Box lost the war?

    ~zecg.
    • That's exactly it. A lot of Japanese didn't want to insult Nintendo (which is, as I recall, over 100 years old) or Sony, or even Sega, by buying this unproven Gaijin product.
    • Japan's reaction to X-Box was VERY weird. I mean, those people buy A LOT of junk. They live through the junk. They date and fish and hallucinate through the consoles. Japan is the pinnacle of consumption-based philosophy. Why didn't they go for the X-Box? National pride? It was as if old Yancy told everyone that they should ignore the american toy.


      And did X-Box have dating and fishing and hallucinating games when it launched in Japan?

      Doubt it. Those games all come out for PS2, which has enough market share to support niche markets. "Hmm," says Japanese Consumer, "think I'll get a PS2."

      Jon Acheson

    • I'll tell you (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Mongoose ( 8480 )
      1. Lack of Japanese style games on xbox

      2. Several faulty xbox consoles ruined MS' rep

      3. MS refused to admit (2) was true

      4. Till this day MS won't replace discs destoried by (2), just the console itself

      5. Two of Japan's largest retailers quit selling the console because of (2) and (4)

      ...so to answer no content for the market, and poor customer service.

  • game prices rant (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by Sludge ( 1234 )
    Note: All prices in this message are Canadian dollars.

    The price of games has gone up quite sharply in the last while. The first one I noticed was Return to Castle Wolfenstein which sold for around $80 here. That is a shitload of money.

    Now, if you go into Electronics Boutique (who do mark their games up more than anyone else in town), you can find games for consoles for as much as $85, as the norm. That's fucking steep. I remember paying $55 or $60 for a game in most cases. After taxes, the game comes to just below a hundred dollars.

    The gameboy advance games are being sold for more than the original gameboy games back in the day. I used to purchase original gameboy games in '91 for $35. Now they are $65. Hell, even the original gameboy games have a jump in price.

    It's just ugly.

    • Sorry to burst your bubble, but in a lot of cases, prices have actually gone DOWN when you look at it in the long run.

      What do I mean? Well (and prices here are in CDN as well) I can remember about ~6 years ago buying a game for the good ol' SNES. The price? Well, it was in the high $90 range. For even more proof I can pull out a copy of another SNES game, and check the price tag that's still on it. So, here I go:

      Earthworm Jim 2, copyright 1995... Price on the box? $92.99 CDN.

      I don't know about where you live, but around here most places don't even sell their PS2 games for that much...

      (Yes, GameBoy Advance games are expensive, but Nintendo's the only portable system maker on the market. And from what I've seen, most (normal) GameBoy games don't seem to have jumped all that much in price over the years.)

    • problem solved...... (Score:2, Informative)

      by Bobzibub ( 20561 )
      The Canuck Buck is now sitting around 63 cents US.
      In '91 it was 89 cents US.

      .89/.63 = 1.41
      $85/1.41 = $60

      Feeling a little poorer now? Well, keep voting Liberal or Conservative-- they are the economic wizards that were in charge all that time....

      Cheers,
      -B
      • Score: 1, Off topic...
        Sludge asked why games in Canada were so expensive.
        I thought I provided an explanation right down to the last Canadian Dollar.

        Weird.
        -B
        • I would've scored you insightful, obviously the moderaters got their crack shipment today from Big Daddy on the corner.

          Canadian money is nearing the peso level compared to US dollars. Unless you're making about $20 an hour in Canada (canadian money) you're probably pretty poor. Am I right in this assumption? Or is it just consumer goods from the US that are expensive?
          • It's a question of price levels. For tradable goods (such as videogames, or steel), where the price level is set by the world market, the price should float with the exchange rate. For non-tradable goods (such as the price of a haircut, or office lease rates), the price will rise at the domestic inflation rate, which has a much less direct relationship to the exchange rate. Something like a McDonald's hamburger, where part of the price is in the beef, but a very large part of the price is domestic labor and building rents, will fall somewhere in between.


            So yeah, the guy who's bitching is probably bitching because his (American or Japanese) videogames are going up with the exchange rate, but most of the things he buys are not commodities traded on the world market, so he doesn't realize how low the exchange rate has fallen.

    • Now, if you go into Electronics Boutique (who do mark their games up more than anyone else in town), you can find games for consoles for as much as $85, as the norm. That's fucking steep. I remember paying $55 or $60 for a game in most cases.

      I'm remembering when the N64 came out, and everyone was decrying the cartridge format as being 'too expensive'. Yet, I was able to buy games for it for $70ish most of the time.

      Now that everything's on CD, which cost pennies to press, games for the new systems cost MORE?!?!?!

      Oh wait, and casettes are still cheaper than CD's. This has nothing to do with economics, and everything to do with companies being able to gouge whatever the hell they want from the consumer. Seriously, anyone else remember Sony and Sega's attacks on the N64? "Our games will be cheaper because we aren't using the obsolete and expensive cartridge format". Well, we see the truth now, don't we?

      • I would argue that more effort is being put into games these days. How long was Blizzard working on Diablo 2? 3 years? More? Contrast that with the Atari days where they'd produce 6 games over maybe half a year, pick the best one out of those six, and release that. There's simply no way around it, today's gamers demand more quality, which means more cost.


        Also, the first guy was talking Canadian money. Is your $70ish figure for the N64 American or Canadian?

      • Now that everything's on CD, which cost pennies to press, games for the new systems cost MORE?!?!?!

        They're also a couple orders of magnitude bigger. Filling a CD requires creation of over 640 MB of data; filling a Game Boy Advance cartridge takes only 8 MB with the cartridges that nintendo is currently offering to licensees. It takes more labor to create 640 MB worth of data than 8 MB. Game companies have to pay for this labor somehow, and they do so by charging for copies of their games.

        Also, US$20 when the Game Boy first came out (1990-ish) is worth what now after inflation, $35? Coincidentally, that's how much Game Boy Advance games cost now; therefore, real prices for Game Boy games have not changed.

  • Evolution (Score:3, Interesting)

    by downix ( 84795 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @12:54PM (#3295538) Homepage
    This is a logical evolution to the PS2 chip design. Those 3 chips were so integrated in function, placing them into a single unit was a logical step. It would allow for a move to $200 and eventually $100 price tags for the PS2. Likely the incentive to move design is due to Sony having recouped their investment on the 3-chip solution. Otherwise, this move would not make sence. Plus this would allow for the PS3, in 2008, to have PS2 (and PSOne) compatability.
    • My guess is that with the new motherboard design for the PlayStation2, we may see a drop in price from US$299 to something more like US$229 initially and US$199 about a year from now. Sony is probably doing this because otherwise when the new 40 GB HD/broadband adapter becomes available it could cost a gamer over US$400 for the whole PlayStation 2 setup!
  • Ok... so they can now make 3 times as many Playstation 2's as possible... I don't know about where you live, but here there's not exactly a shortage of PS2's. What does increased production mean? Certainly not improved sales... To me, all that means is more units sitting on the shelf.
    • Not really. I think it's rather obvious that increased production means lower price. It's that simple.

      And I would be surprised if you don't see how lower price will mean more PS2 sold.
      As a matter of fact, I myself may consider it, since I am looking for a new DVD player, and with the multiregion mods for PS2 floating around, might be just the right choice.

    • Well, you can always take a conspiratory view at this news development.

      All of the PS2 initially shipped were developed with a built in hardware timebomb. (Which is somewhat confirmed by all the complaints on modding sites about defective dvd drives and such.) They simply will die after x number of months. Since Sony figured that the majority of the PS2 shipped were about to die, it was high time that they spent some effort making it easier for them to build more PS2's to fit the demand for new replacements.

  • Open Source Console (Score:2, Informative)

    by downix ( 84795 )
    I forgot to reply to the two folk that asked about the Atari chips source files, so here is the link:
    http://www.geocities.com/glenn_b18/jaguar/n etlist. htm
    It's in a custom HDL that can decode to Verilog simply. All you need to create your own Jaguar Tom and Jerry chips.

  • Quieter? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pinkpineapple ( 173261 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @01:37PM (#3295673) Homepage
    Does 0.13u also means that the fan won't have to be so noisy to dissipate heat on the new chip in this coming model. I found that fan on my current model way too noisy in a quiet environment (when you are not in a car in gta3.) The Nintendo cube has also a fan but it's quieter. Actually I always had trouble with Sony noise level for fans. The VAIO R505 I bought had this intolerable variable fan that made it even worse (constant noise is way better to cover with a pair of cancelling noise earphones.)

    That could also mean that Sony would be able to come with a System on a card for PCs. I would definitely buy a PS2 PCI/AGP card to play on my PC. My monitor and sound system in my office are way better than my TV/Stereo in my living room.

    PPA, the girl next door.

  • PS2 pricing and XBox... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by HiredMan ( 5546 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @01:38PM (#3295678) Journal
    Industry common knowledge (aka mostly semi-informed rumor) has it that Sony has been making money on the actual PS2 unit for a while now. (In terms of the production timeline it makes sense.) M$ is still losing a bunch of money on the XBox units themselves.

    I have a feeling that Sony's decision to lower prices have more to do with market positioning and the XBox. If they lower the price on the PS2 then M$ will probably follow suit on the XBox and that might make open it up to a wider market of shoppers - and since Sony has the numbers head start they may not want that. Remember - it's all about market share and Sony's winning that race with their big head start. But with both boxes at ~$200 the XBox might appeal to bigger audience and dilute Sony's advantage.

    Of course they'll have to drop prices sooner or later... if this chip advance means Sony could still make money (or break even) at $200 and M$ would be losing $200 a unit Sony might not be able to resist that. Against any other company it would be a pretty automatic move - but M$ can afford (and seems willing) to take that loss and keep pushing so Sony seems to be treading much more lightly.

    Don't forget Sony's price move with the PS1. It was $250 for months but the DAY before the N64 was officially announced Sony dropped the price to $200. Nintendo was then forced announced the N64 at $200 rather than $250 when it shipped. Sony literally took AT LEAST $50Million (probably more like $150Million+) from Nintendo with that move. Wicked.

    My point is - Sony is a very market/sales aware company... they have a short, medium and long range plan.

    =tkk
    • Don't forget Sony's price move with the PS1. It was $250 for months but the DAY before the N64 was officially announced Sony dropped the price to $200. Nintendo was then forced announced the N64 at $200 rather than $250 when it shipped. Sony literally took AT LEAST $50Million (probably more like $150Million+) from Nintendo with that move. Wicked.
      Of course, if Microsoft were to do this to somebody, everybody would be screaming. But if Sony, or anybody else does it, then it's exactly what it is; good business practice.
    • Don't forget Sony's price move with the PS1. It was $250 for months but the DAY before the N64 was officially announced Sony dropped the price to $200.
      And they dropped it to $100 unannounced on the day that Dreamcast shipped. For this reason, I was expecting a price cut on PS2 in November; didn't see it, but still knew it was coming.
    • I found a fascinating article on a website which i though was called the word of gourd or something like that, but now i can't find it.

      Basically, Sega Saturn v. PSX was where all of this got started, when sony announced the price on the same day as saturn, and announced it lower, and with "real" 3D - they were taking hits on the PSX.

      Since then, and to an extent, before then, console manufacturers have been selling consoles below price to compete - i.e. dreamcast.

      HOWEVER - the PS2 is NOT one of these. The PS2 has been making money since day one. Something like the production costs of the first batch of PS2's were covered by the cost of the sales of the first 10% of them.

      You have to remember, it's not like Nintendo and Sega who outsource their chip manufacturing. Sony develops, designs, and produces the entire thing. They make the whole deal. That cuts out the proverbial middle men and lets Sony keep overhead down.

      I love the PS2, and do not want an Xbox or any other system right now. However, I also understand that for a year Sony has made SO MUCH MONEY off the sales of the consoles that it's just sick. Not to mention royalties on games (you know that little PS2 symbol on devil may cry and tekken tag? yah, that costs money).

      Just so everyone knows, M$ is losing money on the Xbox. Buying an Xbox and no games hurts M$. Sony is MAKING LOTS OF MONEY on the console sales.

      ~z

  • Curious (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Does it amuse anyone else that Sony (of all people) has beat AMD to the 0.13 milestone ??

  • hrrm ... (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by phoxix ( 161744 )
    I for one believe the emotion engine and related are a joke

    I think that sony spent too much time hyping and marketing the chipset as opposed to actually spending time designing the chipset

    I say this for two reasons:

    First, one should look at Sony's competing rival Nintendo: I have no idea if the gamecube is better than the PS2 tech wise, however what I can say is nintendo seems to be doing fine on the gamecube's technology without having to deal with the lunacies of the PS2's chipset. Enouogh said.

    Secondly, aren't we trying to make chips smaller to begin with?
    Had sony thought this chip out a bit more carefully, I wholefully believe that sony wouldn't be in the current situation as they are in right now.
    Don't get me wrong, sony is a very smart company and they always know what they are doing, however the actions behind the PS2's chipsets make less sense to anyone. Only now does it seem like sony is trying to fix up the problems inherent with such a large chipset as the EE turned out to be.

    Just my two cents, all taxes included

    Sunny Dubey

    • I doubt the problem with Sony is a lack of careful chip design. The problem Sony is having with the EE is that it is freak-ass complicated. Read This ArsTechnica article [arstechnica.com] for details about why the EE is so complex. Also read This article [arstechnica.com] for information about why the GS is so complex. In total, the EE + GS consist of about 55 million transistors, which is comparable to the 63 million in the GeForce4. Unlike NVIDIA, however, Sony did not have the luxury of an established, evolving architecture (GeForce1 -> GeForce 4) that allowed NVIDIA to implement it's complex chips with relatively few problems.

      • Re:hrrm ... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Afrosheen ( 42464 )
        True. Like I said earlier, they had to build a new plant and design new processes/manufacturing techniques just to produce their chip. They (sony and hitachi) were trailblazers at the time. The complexity cost them quality with early development because even though they had the tech, they didn't have many good or easy to use tools to take advantage of it. The ps1 was no different in this respect.

        In contrast the Xbox developers have it easy. Mature development tools, a well-known platform, etc. Despite this the Xbox just doesn't have any must-buy games and the controller sucks. There's just no compelling, console-specific software on Xbox yet.

    • Re:hrrm ... (Score:4, Informative)

      by i_am_nitrogen ( 524475 ) on Saturday April 06, 2002 @06:14PM (#3296630) Homepage Journal
      Obviously you know nothing about the PS2 arch. The Emotion Engine is actually several SGI-based chips that were tweaked and modified by Sony and packed up into just a couple chips, with a 297MHz R5900 MIPS CPU. The EE is a very powerful and complex system, and I think it rocks from a developer and gamer standpoint. Using a Wintel CPU in a game console is, IMO, a big mistake. The EE is specifically designed to be a game console; the Wintel arch is just a generic architecture with stuff games will never use, and lacking in areas where MIPS and EE together shine.

      You speak of inherent problems with the EE. What are you talking about specifically? What situation do you say Sony is in now? PS2 outsold Xbox and GC combined last holiday season.

    • So how much does it matter?

      The N64 in its day had the coolest bad assed graphics chip ever (the SGIs of the day used lots of chips to do the same work).

      What happened? Did developers ever use it? Were the 3d libraries ever tweaked to used the custom programming? Based on the success of some of the emulators, I would say no. The hardware is still faster than most of the graphics chips in PCs today (gamers boxes excepted) but a few year old PC can run the games without any trouble.

      If you create your game engine so it only runs on one bit of hardware then it costs way too much to convert it to another platform. That will cost the developer money and it seems easier to work on other aspects of the game where more common tools can be used.
    • Had sony thought this chip out a bit more carefully, I wholefully believe that sony wouldn't be in the current situation as they are in right now.
      That's nonsense. Sony *did* predict the improvement in fab technology when it made the PS2. The GS was one of the largest and most ambitious bits of silicon the world had ever seen. The difficulty in manufacturing it was one of the reasons for the supply shortage when the console game out.

      Early PS2s, before the first die-shrink, had absolutely enormous heatsinks on them and ran damn hot. It's difficult to see what else they could have done to prepare for the future.

  • ...via an interview with the Nikkei Microdevice

    After rumamging through Google for a while, the best estimate to where the article is Here [nikkeibp.co.jp]. However, it gives a DNS/Server Down error. It may have already been /.ed by the people who originally read the article. Then again, I could be wrong. If GameFu is citing the right source, the above URL is where the news site for Nikkei MicroDevice should be. Maybe it will be up in a few hours.

    In any case, the new chip might not help benefit people who've already bought a PS2, but the technology used can help lessen the cost of making the PS3, as well as open up possibilities for backwards compatibility. Sure, it would have been great if the new chips came out sooner. However, not every advance is made at the best possible time. Look on the bright side: it can still offer a chance to help the PS2's potential. It'll be interesting to see what they do with the new chip.

  • 0.13 chips can usually run much faster than 0.18 .. Will we be able to overclock the new mini-PS2 chips?
  • Buying the first run of consoles isn't the best idea. The first versions of consoles tend to be less stable.

    I bet this new Playstation2 will generate far less heat.
  • I'm assuming the answer is yes, because the external interfaces should still be the same, but does this hose up device drivers or anything?

Slashdot Top Deals

Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.

Close