Support NeoGAF

[Brad Grenz]

if you can magically built it into the APU, then you have to account for it's needed bandwidth and memory latency, the XDR memory on PS3 has 25G/s even then XDR is a very low latency memory when GDDR is the exact opposite. Spursengine that Toshiba made I see it uses XDR too, maybe there is a technical reason for requiring this kind of low latency memory to work effectively with parallel SPEs. then there is the interconnections between main CPU/GPU and this SPE array....

The way SPEs only operate from their 256KB of local storage actually makes them pretty much immune to changes in external memory timings and latency. The array can be connected to main memory via a crossbar connection just like the Jaguar 4-core modules use. Emulating the original memory timings are more a problem for the software emulating the PPE, but you have 8 Jaguar cores, a lot more L2 cache and tons of main memory bandwidth to bring to bear on that problem.

 

[Betrayer of hope]

Wat?

Hardware materials?

Gakai is just video and audio streamed over the web, something pretty much any device can "decode".

You are going to need ps3s to stream those games. Just how may do you think sony is going to need for a cluster farm?

 

[Globox_82]

So the big leak is expected to be released today but when?

i wrote on prev page when.

 

[mrklaw]

You are going to need ps3s to stream those games. Just how may do you think sony is going to need for a cluster farm?

Initially? I'd expect the percentage of PS4 owners that want to play PS3 games would be quite small, and the number playing simultaneously even smaller


Probably just going to be used for instant demos from the store, or to update their video store though

 

[Vormund]

I'd be just happy with an add-on to enable BC. I'd buy it.

 

[paradise_circus]

Using stick for PS4 doesn't have any sence. Stick would be used for simple hardware like TV or DVD/BD.

or discrete GPU like in the vaio z product line.
i guess, the ps4 would need the entire cell + xdr + gpu combo but it would be possible.

On its own, the VAIO Z relies on Intel’s integrated HD 3000 graphics, but of course, that’s not the case when it’s got the Power Media Dock within a cord’s length. The dock is an interesting beast, and as Thomas detailed, the vertically standing unit uses Intel’s Light Peak via a USB 3.0 connector to attach to the laptop. While the technical details may be confusing, setting up the docking solution couldn’t be easier — the dock comes with its own power source as well as a USB / power cable which connects to the laptop. Plug in the joint USB / power adapter to the laptop, watch the blue LED light illuminate, and you’ve powered on the dock’s AMD Radeon HD 6650M graphics and the optical drive. You will get a notification on screen and the screen itself with flicker black for a short second. It’s definitely simple to set up, but Sony could have done a bit more to inform users that the GPU is powered on — the only way to figure out that the GPU is on is to go into AMD Catalyst Control Center. I assume most will spend a minute or two searching for a GPU-on indicator, just as I did.
http://www.theverge.com/2011/10/24/2510531/sony-vaio-series-review

 

[Binabik15]

The way SPEs only operate from their 256KB of local storage actually makes them pretty much immune to changes in external memory timings and latency. The array can be connected to main memory via a crossbar connection just like the Jaguar 4-core modules use. Emulating the original memory timings are more a problem for the software emulating the PPE, but you have 8 Jaguar cores, a lot more L2 cache and tons of main memory bandwidth to bring to bear on that problem.

I so hope you are right. Not only would BC rock, but a few SPEs for MLAA, physics and stuff? Looking at GoW, that would be awesome.

I NEED BC, since my PS3 died last week. Even if I can get it fixed or get a new one, that is my at home PS3, since I'm away studying most of the time, I'd need second PS3 (I almost bought one for christmas) as well as a PS4 to be albe to play PS3+PS4 games in my room. Don't break my heart, Sorny.

 

[Tomcat]

someone should leak the leak lol

 

[daveo42]

BC is going to be there. I wouldn't think they'd launch a console that doesn't allow users to access everything they've already downloaded from PSN. The backlash from PS+ users alone could be devastating. Most, I would assume, are the core audience Sony is trying reach next gen.

 

[Manmademan]

Initially? I'd expect the percentage of PS4 owners that want to play PS3 games would be quite small, and the number playing simultaneously even smaller


Probably just going to be used for instant demos from the store, or to update their video store though

you forget that literally every psn game (outside of ps1 classics and portable titles) is a "ps3" game. This rockets the number of PS4 owners playing "ps3" games up substantially, especially if those owners are a part of PS+ which gives away free psn games every month.

100% of ps+ subscribers are going to want Ps3 compatibility. do you think this gives sony financial incentive to include it?

 

[H_Prestige]

you forget that literally every psn game (outside of ps1 classics and portable titles) is a "ps3" game. This rockets the number of PS4 owners playing "ps3" games up substantially, especially if those owners are a part of PS+ which gives away free psn games every month.

100% of ps+ subscribers are going to want Ps3 compatibility. do you think this gives sony financial incentive to include it?

I seriously question the "no BC" crowd. Is Sony going to keep and maintain two different PSN stores, one for ps3 and another for ps4? Or are they just going to remove all the ps3 software from psn and thus make the ps3 a much less attractive purchase? Both options make no financial sense.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

I seriously question the "no BC" crowd. Is Sony going to keep and maintain two different PSN stores, one for ps3 and another for ps4? Or are they just going to remove all the ps3 software from psn and thus make the ps3 a much less attractive purchase? Both options make no financial sense.

"Two different stores"? It is absolutely no problem to only display PS4 titles on the store, why would that make no financial sense? Just look at the PS Vita, you can't access/view PS3 content there. It could be similar with PS4, and it won't be empty at all. I guess they will make all titles for PS4 digitally available from day 1, give use demos and videos. And they will of course think about something for PS+ subscribers.

you forget that literally every psn game (outside of ps1 classics and portable titles) is a "ps3" game. This rockets the number of PS4 owners playing "ps3" games up substantially, especially if those owners are a part of PS+ which gives away free psn games every month.

100% of ps+ subscribers are going to want Ps3 compatibility. do you think this gives sony financial incentive to include it?

Wrong, I do not want it. As an option, ok. But not as a mandatory feature.

 

[metareferential]

I seriously question the "no BC" crowd. Is Sony going to keep and maintain two different PSN stores, one for ps3 and another for ps4? Or are they just going to remove all the ps3 software from psn and thus make the ps3 a much less attractive purchase? Both options make no financial sense.

Why would they need to change the store?

Content not suited to run on the ps4 won't download, that's all.

Same way you can't download Wipeout HD on a psp or Vita.

 

[Manmademan]

I seriously question the "no BC" crowd. Is Sony going to keep and maintain two different PSN stores, one for ps3 and another for ps4? Or are they just going to remove all the ps3 software from psn and thus make the ps3 a much less attractive purchase? Both options make no financial sense.

exactly. Sony is pushing PS+ REALLY hard- as they should, since it generates them 50 bucks a year. It makes literally no sense that sony would break the PSN store and cripple the primary reason for signing up for PS+ to save themselves 30 bucks or so a unit in hardware cost.

PSN compatibility (unlike adding more ram, or disc based bc) is a serious revenue driver. sony loses a LOT of money by not having the PSN library available on the PS4, not to mention the hassle of having to release two separate versions for every PSN game that releases from here until the EOL of the PS3.

Sony may not make the best decisions, but they aren't stupid.

Why would they need to change the store?

Content not suited to run on the ps4 won't download, that's all.

Same way you can't download Wipeout HD on a psp or Vita

this argument works against you, since there's no expectation that portable titles would ever run on a home console. If we're just speaking portable title compatibility (i.e. legacy content on similar platforms), Sony went out of their way to make sure downloadable titles on the PSP *DID* work on the Vita.

The PS3 is in the same position, only there is significantly more content than there is on the PSP, and a lot of that content is marketed not as "PS3" content, but "PSN" content. Good luck explaining to irate consumers why their "PSN" content no longer works on the PS4.

 

[H_Prestige]

"Two different stores"? It is absolutely no problem to only display PS4 titles on the store, why would that make no financial sense? Just look at the PS Vita, you can't access/view PS3 content there. It could be similar with PS4, and it won't be empty at all. I guess they will make all titles for PS4 digitally available from day 1, give use demos and videos. And they will of course think about something for PS+ subscribers.

Sony isn't going to get PS+ subscribers to buy a ps4 if they can't access their digital collection.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Sony isn't going to get PS+ subscribers to buy a ps4 if they can't access their digital collection.

Nonsense. I am a PS+ subscriber and I want to buy a PS4 to play PS4 games, not because I want to play PS3 games. I couldn't care less about some old content when they will release all those incredible new games with amazing graphics. Just accept that there are people that don't need this feature, you are acting like all people are thinking like you and therefore Sony must have BC, or else they will "die". This is melodramatic nonsense.

 

[H_Prestige]

Bullshit. I am a PS+ subscriber and I want to buy a PS4 to play PS4 games, not because I want to play PS3 games. I couldn't care less about some old content when they will release all those incredible new games with amazing graphics.

And would you continue to subscribe to PS+?

PS4 is not going to have all these incredible new games with amazing graphics at launch. It will take years before that happens.

 

[metareferential]

this argument works against you, since there's no expectation that portable titles would ever run on a home console. If we're just speaking portable title compatibility (i.e. legacy content on similar platforms), Sony went out of their way to make sure downloadable titles on the PSP *DID* work on the Vita.

The PS3 is in the same position, only there is significantly more content than there is on the PSP, and a lot of that content is marketed not as "PS3" content, but "PSN" content. Good luck explaining to irate consumers why their "PSN" content no longer works on the PS4.

It was just used as an example, but I see your point.

I personally think BC will definitely be in, it wouldn't make sense to think otherwise.

I was just imagining how things could look like in that particular scenario (i.e. they look bad).

 

[Manmademan]

Bullshit. I am a PS+ subscriber and I want to buy a PS4 to play PS4 games, not because I want to play PS3 games.

And are PSN games like Journey, super stardust, flower, and Unfinished swan "PS3" games? or are they PSN games?

when buying these, they were marketed as persistent downloadable titles, NOT PS3 exclusive games.

you are acting like all people are thinking like you and therefore Sony must have BC, or else they will "die". This is melodramatic nonsense.

no one is saying that. What I'm saying is that from a financial perspective, sony loses more money by breaking PSN compatibility than it gains by not including a $30 per unit part. A three month subscription to PSN is 30 dollars. a year is 50. If most PS4 users sign up for PS+ for three months or a year (and the driver here being access to all the content and discounts that exist on the PSN back catalog), BC makes sense from a profit perspective, even if none of them buy any games. if any of them buy games that exist on PSN, the decision is wildly profitable.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

And would you continue to subscribe to PS+?

PS4 is not going to have all these incredible new games with amazing graphics at launch. It will take years before that happens.

Of course. It's <5&#8364; per month, that's not much and I am currently unemployed/a student soon.

And are PSN games like Journey, super stardust, flower, and Unfinished swan "PS3" games? or are they PSN games?

when buying these, they were marketed as persistent downloadable titles, NOT PS3 exclusive games.

They are PS3 games. And how often do you play those games? Journey? Flower? Unfinished Swan? Super Stardust I can understand, but why can't you play them on your PS3?

 

[H_Prestige]

Of course. It's <5€ per month, that's not much and I am currently unemployed/a student soon.

What would you be getting out of it?

 

[Wolves Evolve]

I love this attitude of "I buy a new console to play new games". It's like, Jesus, have a look around. You think publishers are going to be okay with that? First thing I'd ask when Sony or Microsoft told me they're planning a new system - they wouldn't even get a word out - I would just stand up and bellow 'BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE' until the flesh melted off their bones.

The store IS THE PRIZE now. The purchasing environment is the key. Both will be ready to go, maybe Sony will need extra hardware, but it would be business suicide not to.

 

[pharmboy044]

So, one more hour for new info?

 

[Gemüsepizza]

What would you be getting out of it?

At a minimum cloud saves, automatic updates etc., but I am absolutely sure that Sony will give people an incentive to be a PS+ subscriber on the PS4.

 

[DBT85]

And are PSN games like Journey, super stardust, flower, and Unfinished swan "PS3" games? or are they PSN games?

when buying these, they were marketed as persistent downloadable titles, NOT PS3 exclusive games.

So can you play them on any other PS device?

 

[mrklaw]

What would you be getting out of it?

I'd be getting PS3 games I might not have played to play on my PS3 - which, as I have a backlog, I'd be keeping around for a while (and there is bound to be a post-launch drought on PS4 which will give me time to catch up)

I'd also be getting Vita games.

And within 12 months or so I'd expect some PS4 content.

the subscription is clearly for PS3 (and vita), not PS4.

 

[Dax005]

You BC guys should just keep your PS3's. I do not want my PS4 to be 100€ more expensive only for BC. If i could choose i would rather it be a 100€ more stronger in terms of graphics/processor power or something. For BC ill have my PS3...

 

[H_Prestige]

At a minimum cloud saves, automatic updates etc., but I am absolutely sure that Sony will give people an incentive to be a PS+ subscriber on the PS4.

You may not care, but Sony and its publishing partners want to continue selling all the PSN content to new owners. Not let all that stuff rot on their servers, which is a huge amount of wasted money.

It would be like Apple releasing a totally redesigned ipad with new architecture that isn't BC with all the existing apps.

You BC guys should just keep your PS3's. I do not want my PS4 to be 100&#8364; more expensive only for BC. If i could choose i would rather it be a 100&#8364; more stronger in terms of graphics/processor power or something. For BC ill have my PS3...

So you prefer a far less capable product? Why would it be $100 more expensive if all it requires is some SPUs plugged into the main APU (which would also boost ps4 graphics), or an external module?

 

[Gemüsepizza]

I love this attitude of "I buy a new console to play new games". It's like, Jesus, have a look around. You think publishers are going to be okay with that? First thing I'd ask when Sony or Microsoft told me they're planning a new system - they wouldn't even get a word out - I would just stand up and bellow 'BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE' until the flesh melted off their bones.

The store IS THE PRIZE now. The purchasing environment is the key. Both will be ready to go, maybe Sony will need extra hardware, but it would be business suicide not to.

I doubt that they will earn that much money with old content. Have you seen the prices of some titles on PSN? Right, and now imagine how many of them are sold at that price point. Publishers will probably have a few cross-generational titles to mitigate having less consoles as a target, and a new generation also has it's advantages, because new titles on the new store are in an extremely bright spotlight.

 

[Manmademan]

So can you play them on any other PS device?

PSP downloadable titles are playable on the vita. PS minis are playable on ps3 and vita.

There's also the issue of cross play titles (PS all star battle royale, wipeout, SF x Tekken, Retro City Rampage) and "free" games that you are supposed to be able to access as long as you keep up your subscription.

NOT including PS3 compatibility breaks the hell out of PSN. Cross play no longer works, existing minis won't work, and free titles you're paying a yearly subscription to keep access to no longer work.

it's a bad move.

 

[Globox_82]

you guys need to drop CELL thing. You are not going to get cell into PS4, end of story.

 

[Manmademan]

I doubt that they will earn that much money with old content. Have you seen the prices of some titles on PSN? Right, and now imagine how many of them are sold at that price point. Publishers will probably have a few cross-generational titles to mitigate having less consoles as a target, and a new generation also has it's advantages, because new titles on the new store are in an extremely bright spotlight.

why do you assume this is only about old content? Do you think PSN games will stop being made as soon as PS4 hits the shelves?

PSN games as they exist now will continue to be released long after the PS4 is out, and likely until the EOL of the PS3. This is 3 years at minumum, possibly longer since the WiiU may keep ports going longer than usual as the Wii did for the PS2.

Do you think devs will just make a PS3 and a PS4 version of every upcoming PSN title? Do you think Sony expects gamers to keep both the PS3 and PS4 hooked up and swap between them to gain access to a title they like? Or does it make more sense to have the upcoming machine be fully compatible with PSN?

 

[JonathanPower]

I so hope you are right. Not only would BC rock, but a few SPEs for MLAA, physics and stuff? Looking at GoW, that would be awesome.

I NEED BC, since my PS3 died last week. Even if I can get it fixed or get a new one, that is my at home PS3, since I'm away studying most of the time, I'd need second PS3 (I almost bought one for christmas) as well as a PS4 to be albe to play PS3+PS4 games in my room. Don't break my heart, Sorny.

If they want to have hw BC, they need at least 7 SPEs. Having a module with 7 SPEs would mean having 175 GFLOPS of additional power that can be used for processing audio, video, physic and to help the CPU with vector intestive code. It would make the PS4 a monster.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

@Manmademan: There is no such thing like a PSN title. Those are PS3 titles.

 

[DBT85]

PSP downloadable titles are playable on the vita. PS minis are playable on ps3 and vita.

There's also the issue of cross play titles (PS all star battle royale, wipeout, SF x Tekken, Retro City Rampage) and "free" games that you are supposed to be able to access as long as you keep up your subscription.

NOT including PS3 compatibility breaks the hell out of PSN. Cross play no longer works, existing minis won't work, and free titles you're paying a yearly subscription to keep access to no longer work.

it's a bad move.

You will have access to those titles all the time you have a PS3. That is exactly what you paid for. They don't magically stop working because you bought a PS4.

PSN game does not = PS3 game. PSN game just means "Game not sold at retail". There are loads of "PSN" games that are on the PS Vita that I also can't play on my PS3. They are Vita games, not "PSN" games.

Can you play any of the PS3 PSN titles you listed on any other device other than a PS3? They were sold as PS3 games that you bought over the PSN Network. As are retail games which you can download over the PSN network. They were never marketed as anything else.

Minis will still work just fine even without BC, they don't access the low level PS3 power because they also run on the PSP and the Vita.

Now, they should include BC so that you can still access that content however they are not obliged to in any way. You bought that content for the PS3, you got PS+ content for the PS3, you will always be able to play that content on a PS3.

As I have said before, I don't really care if I can play PS3 games on my PS4. If it's there then great, if not then I'll still buy a PS4 regardless. No fucks shall be given. But they should include it if it is possible, technologically and financially.

From their point of view being able to leverage every PS1,PS2 & PS3 title on one device would create a library accessible on one device that is probably unparalleled. People will still buy PS1 and PS2 games on it. Of that I have no doubt.

 

[Raist]

If they want to have hw BC, they need at least 7 SPEs. Having a module with 7 SPEs would mean having 175 GFLOPS of additional power that can be used for processing audio, video, physic and to help the CPU with vector intestive code. It would make the PS4 a monster.

Probably only 6, since out of the 8 one was disabled and another one locked for OS/security functions IIRC.

But this is seriously never gonna happen. I doubt they can just make chips with SPEs only, and even if, it would probably be a nightmare to adapt it. Not sure hte SPEs can really function on their own, they've been designed to work with a PPE.

 

[H_Prestige]

Probably only 6, since out of the 8 one was disabled and another one locked for OS/security functions IIRC.

But this is seriously never gonna happen. I doubt they can just make chips with SPEs only, and even if, it would probably be a nightmare to adapt it. Not sure hte SPEs can really function on their own, they've been designed to work with a PPE.

Doesn't the SPURS engine only contain SPEs? I don't think PPE is a requisite, especially if that part can be emulated in software.

You will have access to those titles all the time you have a PS3. That is exactly what you paid for. They don't magically stop working because you bought a PS4.

Can you play any of the PS3 PSN titles you listed on any other device other than a PS3? They were sold as PS3 games that you bought over the PSN Network. As are retail games which you can download over the PSN network. They were never marketed as anything else.

Minis will still work just fine even without BC, they don't access the low level PS3 power because they also run on the PSP and the Vita.

Now, they should include BC so that you can still access that content however they are not obliged to in any way. You bought that content for the PS3, you got PS+ content for the PS3, you will always be able to play that content on a PS3.

As I have said before, I don't really care if I can play PS3 games on my PS4. If it's there then great, if not then I'll still buy a PS4 regardless. No fucks shall be given. But they should include it if it is possible, technologically and financially.

From their point of view being able to leverage every PS1,PS2 & PS3 title on one device would create a library accessible on one device that is probably unparalleled. People will still buy PS1 and PS2 games on it. Of that I have no doubt.

Nobody said they're obliged to have BC. Just that they'd be complete morons not to.

 

[Manmademan]

@Manmademan: There is no such thing like a PSN title. Those are PS3 titles.

Those aren't marketed as "ps3" titles, those are marketed as "psn" titles. This is especially true for PS2 classics, which will require ps3 compatibility to run, despite not being PS3 games.

and i ask you again- which scenario is more realistic? a separate copy of every downloadable title on PSN *including* PS2 classics, or maintaining compatibility?

do you think it's rational to expect owners who shelled out for a PSN title to have to buy it AGAIN if they want to play it on their PS4 instead of their ps3? Sony didn't think so for PSP owners who bought downloadable content, and it's not likely to be the case for the PS4. Face it, expectations for digitally distributed content are different than disc based games. PSN is marketed as a persistent network, not a platform tied to a single machine.

from a financial perspective, sony gains more money by giving PS4 owners full access to the PSN, and not breaking the store into "everything downloadable up to the ps4 launch" and "everything after that."

 

[Raist]

Doesn't the SPURS engine only contain SPEs? I don't think PPE is a requisite, especially if that part can be emulated in software.

Well then maybe. But PS3 games have been designed to work on a complete CPu. If they somehow graft an SPE array to the main CPU, how straightforward would that be?

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

The only way to do BC without any if's, but's or maybe's, is to have the full chipset. Cell+PPE, RSX and 256MB XDR/256MB GDDR3.

Putting all that on the MOBO even at 28nm would cost too much and Sony didn't even bother shrinking the chips for the PS3 super slim..........

If they do BC it would have to be the dongle option for me.

 

[Manmademan]

The only way to do BC without any if's, but's or maybe's, is to have the full chipset. Cell+PPE, RSX and 256MB XDR/256MB GDDR3.

Putting all that on the MOBO even at 28nm would cost too much and Sony didn't even bother shrinking the chips for the PS3 super slim..........

If they do BC it would have to be the dongle option for me.

Probably not realistic. PS2 compatibility was 100% with just the EE and GS, and 90% or so with just the GS.

If sony can get 95% compatibility with just the Cell for 30-40 a unit, vs. 100% by including *everything* for say, $100-150, they'll go for 95%.

 

[gofreak]

Thinking of the GameCube game boy player comparison made earlier, I wonder how thin they could make a hdd-less and bd-less PS3. Such a peripheral would be at least $150 I think...though I would get one.

 

[phosphor112]

Oh you guys. So many people arguing. It's funny, because most of the people arguing against the inclusion of the PE's into the PS4 are the ones that don't know what they are talking about.

It'll happen. ;]

Gotsta believe!

 

[DBT85]

And are PSN games like Journey, super stardust, flower, and Unfinished swan "PS3" games? or are they PSN games?

when buying these, they were marketed as persistent downloadable titles, NOT PS3 exclusive games.

For reference, I've just checked on the store and all of these are sold as PS3 games, not just "PSN" games. It says PS3 really quite clearly right under the title.

As I said, I'm not arguing that BC shouldn't be there. There are many reasons why it should. But your argument that all "PSN" games should work because they were not sold as PS3 games is bollocks.

 

[metareferential]

Thinking of the GameCube game boy player comparison made earlier, I wonder how thin they could make a hdd-less and bd-less PS3. Such a peripheral would be at least $150 I think...though I would get one.

I would buy it only if it takes advantage of the ps4 significantly enhancing the game experience (1080p rendering, aa, etc.).

Otherwise I'll just keep my ps3 or I'll buy a new one. 150 to play upscaled games is stupid.

 

[H_Prestige]

The only way to do BC without any if's, but's or maybe's, is to have the full chipset. Cell+PPE, RSX and 256MB XDR/256MB GDDR3.

Putting all that on the MOBO even at 28nm would cost too much and Sony didn't even bother shrinking the chips for the PS3 super slim..........

If they do BC it would have to be the dongle option for me.

Why are you assuming this?

The GPU can't emulate the RSX?

The 4GB GDDR5 can't simulate the ps3 RAM?

The 8 core Jaguar CPU can't emulate a single PPE?

 

[phosphor112]

Why are you assuming this?

The GPU can't emulate the RSX?

The 4GB GDDR5 can't simulate the ps3 RAM?

The 8 core Jaguar CPU can't emulate a single PPE?

You don't need a PPU ;]

 

[H_Prestige]

You don't need a PPU ;]

Exactly. If that part can't be emulated, then the only way MS could provide BC is by throwing in the entire 360 SoC.

 

[Betrayer of hope]

The only way to do BC without any if's, but's or maybe's, is to have the full chipset. Cell+PPE, RSX and 256MB XDR/256MB GDDR3.

Putting all that on the MOBO even at 28nm would cost too much and Sony didn't even bother shrinking the chips for the PS3 super slim..........

If they do BC it would have to be the dongle option for me.

You don't need the full chipset.

You need the Cell and high memory bandwidth connected to it which is the XDR in the ps3.

 

[gofreak]

You don't need a PPU ;]

Emulating a PPU on jags might actually be non trivial...you'd have to split the work up over multiple jaguars. Not as easy, anyway, as emulating it using one high performance core.

I think there's still also the question about whether such an emulated PPU would be able to communicate with an array of SPEs somewhere else in the system with the same functional and performance characteristics as a real, full Cell. No?