The Future of PlayStation is 300 FPS?

While Kaz Hirai is telling us the new PlayStation isn’t coming soon, and Nanea Reeves is telling us there may not even be another PlayStation, Sony Computer Entertainment CTO¬†Masaaki Tsuruta is talking about the possible future of PlayStation technology.

He tells M&E Tech that they are looking to create a console that runs games at 8K resolution and 300 frames per second.

Holy f–k.

OK, chill, there’s no way in hell that’s happening with a console that will probably be released in the next two years. It would just be too damn expensive, mane. But, when we have wallscreens, I bet you can expect a PlayStation that looks damn good on it.

But why would you need to run games at 300 frames per second? That seems kind of like a pointless waste of ¬†resources, as nobody it going to be able to tell the difference between 100 and 300. Let’s put a little bookmark on that point; I’ll bitch about it again when the time actually comes.

Join the Conversation   

* required field

By submitting a comment here you grant GameFront a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate or irrelevant comments will be removed at an admin's discretion.

4 Comments on The Future of PlayStation is 300 FPS?


On January 12, 2012 at 5:46 pm

It’s for the 3d games with the glasses. Having 4 players playing on one system each person gets their own view of the full screen by alternating the frames between the views. That means each person will see the game in 75 fps.


On January 12, 2012 at 6:29 pm

yeah I was basically going to say what Mr Flibble said.

3d has a high hardware demand.


On January 13, 2012 at 2:02 am

First I want to say 100 FPS versus 300 FPS is not hard to detect depending on the situation (what’s being displayed, to long to go into here), many people have a misconception that the human eye can only see at some ridiculously low framerate, which is absurd for the simple reason it doesn’t see in frames but in a constant stream. USAF testing their pilots apparently even found people can not only see an image flashed for 1/220th of a second but could even identify what kind of jet the image was of. Heck from what I remember no one has been able to prove what the upper limit is when it comes to what the human eye can detect FPS wise. So good luck to people like John Carmack that think 30 FPS is enough.

Most interesting news here is “there may not be another PlayStation”.

As for the tech there’s nothing shocking and won’t be anything shocking. Consoles reply on PC tech and will probably only become more reliant on it to keep prices down (profit up) and performance up. It’s not as if someone’s suddenly going to suddenly make a new faster alternative, to take just one simple reason is price (mass production/mass demand).

So whatever they release won’t be all that impressive when they release it on the hardware performance side. So if they do for whatever reason release something that does 8K resolution at 300FPS it will be because PC hardware will be able to do it and it won’t be anything to brag about.

If there’s anything noteworthy about a new console it will be feature wise and not performance wise, hell performance wise they’re obsolete within 12 months. Such as the 4 player 3D suggested (or like 4 player EyeFinity), though that is a hell of a lot of wasted performance, basically running at a best case 25% of what it could be which is a serious knock unless graphics isn’t important in the 4 player game which is sometimes the case, look at the Wii going with features over performance.

This happens every time, company X bragging about the performance of some new console and when it comes it’s at best par to high end PC for a while, nothing special while the ones with features are the ones that actually get and deserve the attention.


On January 13, 2012 at 3:28 am

@ JD

You are missing the point, 3D for a single person has to create what you are seeing twice so if you are pulling 100 fps with 3d off if you turn it on you’ll be getting 50 fps, most people understand the hole frames per second dribble when it comes to what are eye’s can see, but when you add video games that will most likely push the hardware really hard in the future with the added 3d you will find that 300fps might not really seem like vary much right now when those games are bogging the fps down to the low 30′s.

Hope this helps.