[ik999]

I don't know

If the refreshed product turns out to be worse than the original (sony -has- been screwing up a lot in recent years), then I will have regretted not buying the 60GB.

also, if a crack comes out which lets you play backup PS1/PS2 games, then my PS2 purchase will have been for nothing.

the safest option at this point is to wait until at least November, when GT5 will be released before making a decision. I guess it's just a matter of patience.

 

[Zanth]

From what I have read, there is NO way they will make anything close to the level of the 60. The 60 cost them at least 1/3 more to produce than what they sold them for. Even with economy of sale and the trickle down effect of new tech...I can't see them implementing hardware backwards capability as they did with the original 20 and 60. Sony has released numerous press releases which explicitly indicate they are doing away with support PS2 and concentrating fully on the PS3 games and blu-ray film.

If I were in your position, I would buy a 60 and if you need more space, buy a bigger HD or connect one via usb. Having spoken with the techs at Sony, I know they have plenty of parts for 60s for years to come so having them repaired will not be a problem.

 

[analogbox]

From what I've read, back up compatibility is a pain in the butt to implement for PS3. The reason they don't offer it on the 40G is because they just take too much resources when executed. And just they put it on 60G only because they didn't want to get bashed for not having it since it was early in the console war. Now that the tide has turned and PS3 is selling steady now, I wonder if they're ever going to put it on the new versions to come.

 

[Zanth]

Because the current 80GB model has software emulation, it does seem this is very easily implemented on the 40GB units and any future consoles too. I can't see them completely discontinuing it though as I have stated, they sure don't want to emphasize this as a selling feature. They want to sell PS3 games, not old cheap PS2 games. If the software emulation is difficult and resource heavy (a main reason why the hardware compatibility was so sought after by myself and others) then I really don't see why anyone would want to hold out for a newer model unless PS2 games really aren't a big deal for them.

PS3 upgrades the PS2 experience by that I mean, when playing PS2 games. It makes them appear smoother and more modern gfx-wise. The PS3 also has far more power so no lag when a lot of action hits the screen. Some have recommended just buying a cheap new PS2, though this is a solution it may not be right for everyone. For someone like myself, my wife wants less clutter not more. We are not heavy gamers so the once in a while loading of a PS2 game on the PS3 is fine, but having another box just sitting there for those infrequent events would not be her thing.

Two, it means more money and worrying about yet another electronic device (not to mention taking up more inputs on the TV or receiver).

Current PS3's are backwards compatible so why not go for them if PS2 games are a must?

Finally, regardless of what happens with newer PS3's, games will have to be fully capable of being played on all units of any generation, so although new cpus may tend to be better designed, cooler running and perhaps more efficient I doubt they will be more powerful or clocked higher.

In the end it really does come down to 1) patience 2) willingness to be or be without PS2 support.

Only the user themselves can determine the priorities there.

 

[Audio-Fi]

Software emulation can also be enhanced via firmware updates. IMHO playing a game on PS3 vs PS2 is kind of no brainer. The PS3 certainly make games look better such as anti-aliasing and increasing resolution. 80GB is not discontinued as Metal Gear Solid 4 bundle will come out on June. 40GB I think is here to stay since they are implementing another bundle with GTA IV on it.

 

[analogbox]

I think I have read somewhere Sony saying that software emulation on 40G will never happen; not even through update. Although you can take that with a grain of salt, I think it's got something to do with the new 65nm cpu have because they were saying that it just doesn't have enough power to emulate PS2's cpu and PS3's GPU at the same time.

Now, that they've already discontinued the hardware-compatible models completely and implemented new low-power-hungry chip, I'd be surprised to see if they continue to support backward compatibility.

I'm not saying that it's a good thing, it just looks to be the trend Sony is going at. I was wrong about the whole format war so I could be wrong here too.

 

[LORD-eX-Bu]

why would the ps3's cpu need to emulate the ps3's gpu when it already has a dedicated gpu(nvidia RSX)?

The die shrink to 65nm just means a cut to production costs due to it being on a smaller process, reduced heat and lowered power consumption.

Besides those three things it is exactly the same powerpc processor as its predecessor.

I think software based emulation is still a possibility in the future but it would definately be something that you would have to buy.

 

[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LORD-eX-Bu /img/forum/go_quote.gif why would the ps3's cpu need to emulate the ps3's gpu when it already has a dedicated gpu(nvidia RSX)? The die shrink to 65nm just means a cut to production costs due to it being on a smaller process, reduced heat and lowered power consumption. Besides those three things it is exactly the same powerpc processor as its predecessor.

Well, PS2 has totally different cpu/gpu achitecture. The old discounted PS3 models had "Emotion Engine" MIPS CPU which was used to run PS2 games. Since the new models don't have that chip any more and because PS2 games are not compatible with the new gpu, it would have to be emulated through the new PS3 cpu, hence the 'emulation'.

Now, I can't find any other difference between 40G version and 80G version other than 65nm vs. 90nm chip and hard drive space, that's why I was thinking it's the cpu although they say there are no difference in performance between those two chips.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LORD-eX-Bu /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think software based emulation is still a possibility in the future but it would definately be something that you would have to buy.

That still maybe a possibility if it really isn't the hardware issue they say they are.

 

[dj_mocok]

When will FFXIII out?

 

[Zanth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj_mocok /img/forum/go_quote.gif When will FFXIII out?

Late this year.

 

[Audio-Fi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think I have read somewhere Sony saying that software emulation on 40G will never happen; not even through update. Although you can take that with a grain of salt, I think it's got something to do with the new 65nm cpu have because they were saying that it just doesn't have enough power to emulate PS2's cpu and PS3's GPU at the same time. Now, that they've already discontinued the hardware-compatible models completely and implemented new low-power-hungry chip, I'd be surprised to see if they continue to support backward compatibility. I'm not saying that it's a good thing, it just looks to be the trend Sony is going at. I was wrong about the whole format war so I could be wrong here too.

It does not need to emulate PS3 GPU as it already have nVidia RSX (GPU). Also shrinking the die from 90nm to 65nm doesn't mean lowering the technical specs, it's just physically shrinking it to lower production cost, reliability, and power consumption. Even if the PS3 does not have any hardware from it's predecessor it will still work via software emulation regardless. Sony is just not activating it on 40GB. The Cell Broadband Engine alone is enough to emulate PS2. I don't know what you are reading but you are really misinformed. It's already mentioned that Sony might sell CD installation for 40GB to have software emulation because the PSN store has upcoming PS2 downloadable games.

 

[analogbox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Audio-Fi /img/forum/go_quote.gif It does not need to emulate PS3 GPU as it already have nVidia RSX (GPU). Also shrinking the die from 90nm to 65nm doesn't mean lowering the technical specs, it's just physically shrinking it to lower production cost, reliability, and power consumption. Even if the PS3 does not have any hardware from it's predecessor it will still work via software emulation regardless. Sony is just not activating it on 40GB. The Cell Broadband Engine alone is enough to emulate PS2. I don't know what you are reading but you are really misinformed. It's already mentioned that Sony might sell CD installation for 40GB to have software emulation because the PSN store has upcoming PS2 downloadable games.

I don't know where'd you get your information but like I said PS2 games have totally different architecture so for them to run they need a dedicated chip to read it's architecture and process it. The only other way of doing it is to emulate it through software using the all new hardware.

If PS3 GPU can process different architecture games, you wouldn't even need to emulate it and they would have no problem running any games from XBOX 360, Wii, Nintendo DS, etc..

GPU's themselves doesn't have capabilities to run emulators, they just take the informations from the bus and process it.

Now, I maybe have been misinformed about Sony's take on backward compatibility as I don't work for them. I, myself, want it to be wrong cuz I have a few PS2 games that I want to go back to and enjoy.

 

[Zanth]

You are essentially right. The PS3 basically had the PS2 processor built in along side the new cpu/gpu combo. Then, with this being too costly, Sony decided to scrap the PS2 chip and run emulation software using the PS3's crazy powerful cpu. However, the compatibility, though impressive was not perfect and many preferred the essnetially 100% backwards compatible emotion engine chip in the first gen 20 and 60 GB units.

Now the new 40 GB doesn't even have the emulation software and from rumors...may never get it. Though this is easily provided through a firmware upgrade so saying never isn't necessarily never. Also, with improvements in the code, there is no reason to think that the emulation software can't get to near 100% or 100% in time. Of course the 60 GB can run that and still has the chip...so one can understand why the 60 GB units are so sought after.

They have all the extra ports and wifi as compared to the 20 GB model and they have the hardware based ps2 capability that the 80 GB lacks.

 

[LORD-eX-Bu]

just look at the way ps1 games are emulated on windows based PCs... heck even PS2 games run pretty good now

thats emulating whatever ps2 processor there was and converting it over to x86 instructions in real time... not to mention emulating ps2 graphics with D3D or OpenGL.. its pretty awesome stuff when you think about it.

I'm sure Sony could pull it off without a problem on the 40gb model, maybe their strategy is just to get people who already own a 40gb to buy another system later on with full BC.

 

[Kirosia]

I've heard the 60GB isn't 100%, there are some games that have issues.

Anyways, if you just wanna play backups/isos, just get a PS2 with either swap magic or a mod chip. The PS3 may never get hacked, and even if did, PS2 backups may not be playable.

Quote:

When will FFXIII out?

I hope it's nothing like XII.