Topic: PS5 option with PS3 Cell processor built-in

With Microsoft recently reaching its limits with their backwards compatibility initiative via emulation & the complexity of emulating PS3 titles got me thinking, what if Sony introduce a PS5 model with PS3's Cell processor built-in as a new premium option? Essentially a PS5 + launch PS3.

Given that backwards compatibility is something everybody wants but almost nobody uses, it's a great option for those who truly care about it.

Pros:

• Play almost every PlayStation title dating back to the PS1.
• Bigger catalogue of backwards compatible title vs Microsoft's.
• Still sell PS3 titles on the PlayStation Store without relicensing.
• Easily phase out PS Now & retire PS3 sever blades that powers the service.

Cons:

• Higher price tag, low volume machine
• Feasibility of doing so in the middle of a chip shortage
• An even bulkier PS5
• Cannibalising the rumoured 3rd tier PS+ subscription
• Negative PR (paying for backwards compatibility, despite Microsoft monetizing the programme)

What do you guys think? Is there something I'm missing out here which may be why Sony hasn't already pursue it?

No. Cell incorporates PowerPC architecture, which would mean you’d have to rewrite a whole bunch for basically 0 benefit. It’s undoubtedly a worse option than emulation, which isn’t there yet for PS3 either. This is just the sort of thinking that ended up with the very silly overpriced launch PS3.

When the time comes to retire the old PS3 hardware from the servers. It would make more sense to remaster the remaining PS3 games on the service. Than it would to create new hardware to play them.

i’d dig it , i loved the cell processor aesthetically despite how slow it was . i liked the ps3 as whole so anything ps3 related i’m down with .

$ony has the money to do it , look how suped-up the ps5 is , that’s no cheap design . it tied with the ps3 for me as the best looking console

@nomither6 I’m not really sure what you mean by aesthetics. Games written for a Cell system don’t look really look any different than the 360 versions. In fact, most 360 versions looked better because the PS3 needed to be heavily optimised to be even playable. It wasn’t anything to do with the processor that the PS3 era exclusives had that muddy grey and brown look, it was more a symptom of the direction Hollywood had taken around the time and the consoles being powerful enough to employ (and overuse) colour grading. The advantage of the horrible oversaturation and such was that it covered up a lot of the lighting issues of that generation. The Cell processor also wasn’t slow. At all. In fact, it’s the opposite. In terms of sheer clock speed, the PS3 is faster than the PS4. It was just designed for very well optimised multithreaded games, which didn’t happen often at all.

@nessisonett What do you mean by rewrite? I was suggesting Sony installing the Cell processor separately from PS5's processor. Like how the PS2's Emotion Engine was installed into launch PS3s.

@Ryall Remastering PS3 titles is great but Sony can't possibly remaster every single game the PS3 has to offer. Some 3rd party publishers may not even want to do so & even if they do, not all of them would turn out to be high quality ones.

@shamirqushairi Well they’d have to entirely rewrite the basic functions of the console for starters, to make them interact with the Cell chip at all. It’s PowerPC and the PS5 is an x86 system, meaning it does certain important tasks entirely differently and interacts with the other parts differently. Then there’s the dependencies games took for granted, if you’re running a Cell chip but with completely different amounts of RAM, an SSD, the PS5’s GPU etc. These things aren’t plug and play, especially given that the processor in the PS5 is an entirely different beast. Imagine plugging PC parts into a Mac, that’s the level of fundamental difference we’re talking here. X86 is CISC and PowerPC is RISC.

Let’s say you’re doing A = B + C. If you’re using an x86 system, then if you know where B and C are located in memory, you add them together to get A and that’s it. One line of code. In a PowerPC system, you individually spell out the steps such as B and C being copied to registers, added together etc. The way they go about things is fundamentally different. I’m honestly not sure that most modern graphics cards and the like would even want to work with PowerPC architecture, I think there would be some horrible issues down the pipeline. Basically, just adding the one entirely different processor onto an existing console, with modern parts elsewhere would be inviting catastrophe. Emulation is a far far better idea.

@shamirqushairi The main reason against BC is it's cost vs return (few people would use it and those that would use it probably already own the games they'd use it for) and your solution is extremely costly. It'd basically combine the expense of the cell architecture with the supply issues of the PS5s. Emulation is the only direct way to do it. Even then, Sony would need to do at least some work on essentially porting each game. Better yet is Sony and MS getting VG streaming off the ground and accessible to the masses.

It would never happen. To produce the Cell Processor now would require machinery and tools not used in over a decade, plus much more. Think of the power usage on a 15 year old chip, too.

However, what could work is a newly developed co-processor that translates or computes the old Cell instructions to the newer x86 CPU and GPU. Such that it would just work with existing PS3 binaries without modification. Hopefully with upscale options and so on that could work natively to translate the PS3's mostly 720p outputs into 4k

Another drawback to the OP suggestion would be the PS1 & PS2 playback would not be that good coming from the PS3 chips directly. PS1 is better emulated on the PS5 directly. They already own really good x86 emulation software that ran full speed on old Pentium CPUs back around 2000.

Personally, I would buy a PS5 with a dedicated PS3 co-processor as described above. They'd likely be able to find a use for the extra co-processor in general use as well, I'm sure.