backtop


Print 61 comment(s) - last by Icelight.. on Oct 2 at 5:13 PM


New Sony PS3 FCC Label  (Source: FCC)
FCC documents show new Sony PS3 model on its way

With the slow but steady disappearance of the 60GB PlayStation 3 from store shelves, the effective entry-price for Sony’s newest console is once again $599 for the 80GB bundle. It’s unlikely that Sony will head into the holiday season at the same price point as it did last year, which is why industry analysts are predicting an upcoming price drop for the 80GB model.

Even at $499, the PlayStation 3 would still be priced well above its prime competitor – the Xbox 360 Premium at $349. Earlier this month, a report surfaced saying that Sony will introduce yet another PlayStation 3 iteration that could potentially occupy the $399 level.

The $399 model is speculated to come with a 40GB hard drive with no pack-in title. Sony would be expected to carry the 80GB model at $499 with MotorStorm or other title. Furthermore, Sony may sweeten the deal by bundling with either one or both SKUs with Spider-Man 3 on Blu-ray Disc.

A recent FCC filing by Sony may have revealed several new details about an upcoming PlayStation 3 model. Although the majority of technical details and photographs have been blocked from the public’s view at Sony’s request, the information available is able to confirm that the upcoming model – designated CECHG01 – is indeed a PlayStation 3 at the core.

Technologies described in the filing include Bluetooth, 802.11b/g WiFi, along with a number of I/O ports. The FCC report states that only two USB ports were tested (current PS3s have four ports) and there were no mention of memory card reader tests. Since the FCC is a radio test, it may not have required extensive testing of select PS3 features.

Earlier this month, Sony enlisted the help of top computer manufacturer Foxconn to manufacture low-cost PlayStation 3. The FCC filing could well be the first sign of the new product development agreement between the two companies.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Only if
By omnicronx on 9/27/2007 2:27:41 PM , Rating: 2
First off the ps3 and 360 for that matter looks much better on analogue TV's compared to their ps2/xbox predecessors. Polygon count and source resolution will always make a difference. Second, your forget the majority of people in the world do not have HDTV's, and i am going to be ballsy enough to say that number is close to 60% of ps3/360 owners.

ATSC is not an international standard! its a north american standard (most people would call it an american standard). DVB is the standard most nations have chose to adopt. ATSC does technically support the capability to carry PAL and SECAM video, but i do not think it is currently being used in any country.

Furthermore i was not talking about tuners, an ATSC tuner can not be used as an input for your console, its currently only used for OTA (over-the-air) digital TV signals and does not need to be HD and supports NTSC resolutions.

ATSC tuners are also not an option for everyone as it is still line of sight, and is an all or nothing situation, unlike old OTA reception where a bad signal results in static or colour distortion, ATSC is either you get the signal, or you don't which usually means you need a strong signal to get a channel. I personally use it to get local channels from buffalo NY, as ATSC signals are usually much less compressed and look much better than the compressed signals you receive from your cable/satellite company.


RE: Only if
By softwiz on 9/27/2007 3:05:56 PM , Rating: 2
Considering people most likely connected their PS2 to their TV via composite (RCA) cables rather than component cables (which were available), I can see why you might think it looks better.

Upscaling on the PS3 is disabled when using any other output than HDMI and therefore is subject to the 480p resolution limitation just as the PS2 is. This, of course assumes you're talking about games that can be played on BOTH PS2 and the PS3. Otherwise, I can't see how it could really be any better "technically" regardless of how it may "look" to you.

ATSC stands for Advanced Television Systems Committee. Which is an international organization establishing broadcasting standards for digital (including high-definition and data). While it's used outside north america, I will concede that's not totally universal yet. I also didn't mean to imply that any console would use it to connect to the TV. It was mentioned as another example of how the NTSC / PAL issue might be side stepped. Sorry for any confusion.

Short of buying a new TV, ATSC tuners can be bought as aftermarket add-ons. They may cost more people want to spend but they are an option that is available to most people. Okay, enough talk about tuners.


RE: Only if
By omnicronx on 9/27/2007 4:07:00 PM , Rating: 2
Are you really implying the only difference between the ps3 and the ps2 is resolution? First off the difference between component and composite cables were negligable with the ps2, imagines may have appeared sharper but composite was still 480i and component was still 480p(480i still if used on an analogue tv). The polycount in the ps3 compared to the ps2 is night and day and the ps2 does not have shaders, AA, etc..

I had a ps2, i have a 360, i play the same games on the same TV. I am not saying the look better to me, i am saying with 100% certainty that all games will look graphically superior to all people. Another example of this is i have a 100 inch wide screen EDTV, that means although it accepts HD resolutions it still converts the signal into 480p, and once again the difference is day and night.

Hell go play a game like madden and look at the crowed on the ps2, they look like 2d pieces of paper, compare that to the same game on ps3 or 360 the crowed somewhat looks 3d and real, even on SD


RE: Only if
By softwiz on 9/27/2007 5:18:58 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Are you really implying the only difference between the ps3 and the ps2 is resolution?


Of course not, I already stated before the bounds of my comparison which you may have missed or ignored. I was debating nothing more than the lack of PQ improvement between the PS2 & PS3 while using games common to both consoles (i.e. PS1 / PS2 titles) on analog displays.

However, if you've been arguing that PS3 games look better than PS2 games (even on SD or ED display devices) then you indeed deserve a "Captain Obvious" award because you're definitely right about that!


"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki