PSP firmware 3.50 enables full 333MHz clockspeed
Sony has confirmed to Shacknews that developers working on games currently in development (your existing games aren't going to run faster) now have access to the full CPU speed of the post-3.50 PSP. The clock speed was believed to have been limited previously to conserve battery power, leading to obvious speculation that this change would be made possible by a newly redesigned PSP, replete with increased battery life. If that's the case, what about these new 333MHz games running on our old battery-addicted PSPs?
[Via PSP Fanboy]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
NeverSage @ Jun 22nd 2007 7:02PM
Good? I guess? I don't know. My PSP battery dies super fast already. Stupid UMD drive. Who puts a disk drive in a portable system??
gozer @ Jun 22nd 2007 7:06PM
now let the wifi work on g only networks sony.
Sean @ Jun 22nd 2007 7:15PM
The real question is are games written last year going to screw up and run too fast on this new firmware?
Even though devs are supposed to sync to the timer, when you're developing on hardware that never changes, it's easy to write software that accidentally relies on the clockspeed being constant.
Arno @ Jun 22nd 2007 7:22PM
Is this the update that makes the PSP fun?
losttoys @ Jun 22nd 2007 7:28PM
Yes, yes it is.
TheGuy @ Jun 22nd 2007 7:35PM
Hmmm...full 333MHz clockspeed enabled for future games that'll probably be released around the time supposedly the redesigned PSP with longer battery life is being released. If this doesn't affirm rumours of a PSP Redesign I don't know what will.
Retrofied @ Jun 22nd 2007 7:47PM
#3
People have been running their PSP's at 333MHz in the homebrew community since practically launch. It doesn't harm games at all.
Supino @ Jun 22nd 2007 7:51PM
us pirate bitches have run that little devil at 333 MHz for a long time.
and yeah - it drains battery
ThornedVenom @ Jun 22nd 2007 8:02PM
266MHZ to 333MHZ? This could be interesting for development if the gained amount of raw processing power is significant enough (I'm no game developer, so I don't know much about technical limitations).
But concerning its effect on battery life, thus portability... it should be asked whether the PSP should be considered as a portable handheld console, a true console you'd pop out and play on the road, or just a portable version of a home console experience, where you would mostly play it at home plugged into your socket (kind of like what laptops are to PCs).
I don't have a PSP (only a DS) but if I did have one, I would consider it as a multimedia player (to justify the price) and a portable home console, thus including me as someone interested in newer games utilizing this new-found/unleashed processing power.
The only problem I can think about is that not everyone hooks their portable consoles onto the internet (one of the reasons being the lack of wi-fi), meaning that the firmware wouldn't be as universally widespread as intended, thus the possibility of PSPs not being able to play newer games which require higher limitations.
SYN @ Jun 22nd 2007 8:04PM
@#9: newer games usually require the latest updates to play, the updates are on the disks
James @ Jun 22nd 2007 8:10PM
This is great news -- I remember a few devs commenting that they had to lower the poly count to play nice with this artificial cap. I was pretty pissed about the cap, actually -- I paid for a 333 processor, but Sony's marketing droids wanted to claim an artificially long battery life, so guess who won?
Anyway, I never had a battery life problem, and if you do, just buy a bigger/extra battery!
syco @ Jun 22nd 2007 8:15PM
They should redesign the PSP to use carts instead of disks, and be $150. A touchscreen would also be nice. That would be a good redesign.
Brooks Brothers @ Jun 22nd 2007 8:28PM
266MHz, 333MHz. It really doesn't matter, the PSP is still a piece of shit.
TheGuy @ Jun 22nd 2007 9:50PM
@syco
lol, consoles have already evolved past using cartridges. It's the DS that needs to ditch cartridges and go to disks, just like everyone else. I wouldn't mind a touchscreen, but I don't want game controls to focus entirely on the use of touchscreen controls and prefer they be used with fingers like the iPhone rather than using a stylus.
@Brooks Brothers
Right. PSP has borderline PS2 graphics (which will probably be easier to achieve with this higher processor speed enabled) and the DS doesn't even have N64 quality graphics but it's the PSP that sucks. Nice try.
Raikage @ Jun 22nd 2007 10:01PM
@ TheGuy
Yeah thats why the PSP is owning the DS. Carts are the only viable choice for a hanheld (right now) but I don't see why they don't use SD cards of some sort for more space, even more than the UMD. Oh yeah, graphics are not everything! (I've always wanted to say that...)
PS: I have a DS, but I think I am the only one who doesn't play it (I'm not sure why, I can't wait for Ninja Gaiden though). . . I would also like to get the PSP redesign.
John @ Jun 22nd 2007 10:58PM
That's really impressive. Crap, that thing is faster than a ps2, now. I wonder if they do this to see if people want 'faster'-- so they can design better batteries for an improved psp in the future?
Speaking of carts and all... maybe a future psp would use flash cards, akin to cartridges, but not hard-written? Am I being ignorant?
I side with the commentor, why a drive? The batteries have to power a motor. Why not instant RAM?
Sony being the backwards compatible stalwart they are, perhaps they are trying to figure out how to make a new flash-based psp compatible with the original psp's dependence on a drive.
I'm not sure what I'm saying, I know little about the psp, except that I think increasing the clock rate could give certain developers (GOW, anyone) quite an advantage, that is a pretty significant increase.
Or maybe Sony is just working on better batteries, to better power a machine that drains batteries quicker.
Oooh, I know: okay, the new PSP will be backwards-compatible with the old, and will still have a drive.
But it will run at a native 333 mHz, and have new batteries, while costing less.
That's my prediction.
I have this Sony Camcorder. It was sitting in my friend's garage for 6 months. Suddenly, I wanted to film something, but I had no electricity. I pulled the camcorder, hoping for 5 minutes of battery life.
The Sony battery still had 265 minutes on it. I filmed what I wanted to, and the battery didn't die. Now it has 240 minutes. The thing is a beast.
Sony IS a hardware company.
Jamesology @ Jun 22nd 2007 10:59PM
Yeah I have both too, but I use to only play with my PSP until I went to Japan and got myself an R4DS. Now all my DS games are FREE!!!!!! But the only game I play is Lost Blue 2,Themepark and Club House Games. I more of a MGS OPs guy thats why I prefer the PSP. Then again FREE games is pretty so my DSLite is getting more love from me now. Come on Simcity rom come out already :(
I don't really notice the battery life dying on the PSP though, but I'm pretty sure its true. They should redesign the PSP into clamshell it is a AWSOME idea.
Mike Sylvester @ Jun 22nd 2007 11:30PM
@ #3
The PSP clock has always been variable, only with an official max of 222MHz (and half that for the graphics processor). It runs at lower clocks while browsing the XMB than while playing something like Metal Gear Solid.
x3sphere @ Jun 22nd 2007 11:48PM
Cap was increased from 222 MHz to 333 MHz.
No PSP game has ever ran at 266... the stuff about Ratchet and Clank running @ 266 were just rumors.
NaviePoo @ Jun 23rd 2007 12:24AM
Faster processor =/ better games
gullum @ Jun 23rd 2007 1:39AM
Very cool. For those hating on the PSP, all I can say is Final Fantasy VII Crisis Core and God of War Chains of Olympus.
BiggerBoat @ Jun 23rd 2007 4:31AM
I agree withe a few of you above. It looks like the PSP Lite will have a more efficient battery allowing Sony to ramp up the CPU's clockspeed to maximum. Obviously for the current PSP to run games designed around the new specs the it needs the clockspeed increase which 'll mean shinier future games but shoddier battery life.
In summary clockspeed increase good for PSP Lite, not necessarily so good for the origional.
Daran @ Jun 23rd 2007 1:21PM
cost elliot, cost. do we want $80 games again? discs are cheaper. methinks it just became viable for nintendo to use the 32mb cards for ds. the higher capacitys still cost alot more. ... or sonys just trying to shove another proprietry format.
Aberu @ Jun 23rd 2007 1:24PM
*Rumor*
The clock speed was limited previously to conserve battery power.
*Rumor*
Seriously I don't remember any official saying that. It's always been a rumor. Having built computers for a long time, I have never had to raise voltage to get a 25% increase in clock speed when overclocking. It would make no sense logically that it would require more voltage. Will it generate more heat? Yes. Will it make the machine less reliable? Yes. Use up more battery power? Most likely not.
And to everybody that keeps saying their battery dies super fast, maybe there is something wrong with it. I consider 6 hours of playtime plenty. You would have to be playing the system like an obsessed hardcore console gamer to need more battery time than that.
Aberu @ Jun 23rd 2007 1:28PM
@15 Probably because SD cards that could carry more than the dvd-storage-per-square-inch UMD format would be more expensive than 20-30 bucks per game. Nintendo is all about profits. We've seen that with the Wii's $99 production costs reported by analysts, and the $50 production costs reported by analysts for the DS lite. They always price old, worn out technology at too high a price. This includes their carts which probably cost them less then a cent to make nowadays.
xboxer @ Jun 23rd 2007 2:08PM
@Aberu
It would make no sense logically that it would require more voltage.
Will it generate more heat? Yes.
Will it make the machine less reliable? Yes.
Use up more battery power? Most likely not.
Not more voltage dude. More current.
More heat = more power consumption!!!
It scares me when people fabricate some form of "common sense" physics that is based in absolutely nothing.
bobartig @ Jun 23rd 2007 2:24PM
@Aberu, Logically, your post is impossible.
So basically we have this processor, and currently it operates A times per second. Each of those cycles demands a certain amount of power. It really varies depending on what the processor is doing, but there is a mean power level per cycle, M, that can be calculated from all the processor's activities.
A byproduct of these cycles is wasted energy, which is thermodynamical necessity, and is dissipated largely as heat, H. So A x M power in for A cycles performed, and A x H heat produced.
Now, we're going to increase that amount to 1.3x (or whatever, I don't know if its 222 -> 333 or 266 -> 333, so I'm just making up a number). Assuming we're running the same software, we now require A(1.3) x M to perform all those cycles and are generating A(1.3) x H heat.
There are a lot of other factors not being accounted for above, but even if you don't believe what I'm saying, you EVEN state that the chip will produce more heat from running faster. Do you actually think there is any way to take this system, have its heat output increase, and NOT increase its power requirement?
You may not have to raise the voltage setting of your processor from bios to OC a particular amount, but that voltage setting is not indicative of how much power your cpu is consuming at any given point in time. It's consumption and heat output varies depending on activity.
Extinction @ Jun 23rd 2007 2:39PM
"but I don't see why they don't use SD cards of some sort for more space"
Cost.
-UMDs cost less than a dollar to manufacture at 1.8 gigabytes. SD cards cost 20 times that of UMD
-Developers will now have file sizes as a limitation. This means they will have to sacrifice to keep file sizes down. This means no more high quality graphics, no voice acting, no bonus features, etc. This is the whole point of PSP, not being limited like that
-Users will now be limited to carrying as many games on them as they are willing to pay for SD space. I have more PSP games than what could fit on the largest SD card.
-Sony makes memory stick. It costs them less to use that than SD cards.
"Faster processor =/ better games"
Actually Faster processor does = better games
Justin @ Jun 23rd 2007 3:40PM
If 333mhz is what it takes for game designers to break that terrible bond holding back FUN and INNOVATION then I'm all for it. Otherwise, at this stage, what's the point?
333mhz, now 25% more fun!
I'd buy that in a heartbeat.
benjipwns @ Jun 23rd 2007 3:47PM
Well, some would contend the SNES had better games despite half the processor speed of the Genesis...
p-diddy @ Jun 23rd 2007 3:50PM
Well, as a consumer, cartridges are the only thing I'll buy used. I realize this has absolutely zero impact on developers, and they'd prefer I buy a game new, but I'm just saying that a cartridge is pretty guaranteed to work absent someone dunking it in water. I'm a disc freak and take care of all my CDs and games, but anytime I look at a used disc I have to wonder what the hell other people do with them. Skeet shooting?
As for the PSP, I'm tempted to get one. I love my DS and think it has some great games, but I was crying a little inside when I saw these guys at the movie theater playing Virtua Fighter on their PSPs. It doesn't look like VF is on PSP. How'd they do it? Homebrew and a ripped game? Trust me, I KNOW it was VF.
Regardless, the question is: get a PSP now or wait for the redesign? And will the redesign be $250, because that's flipping steep.
-p-
Elliot @ Jun 23rd 2007 4:19PM
Daran, please do note that I did say future. As of now they cost more. I remember a few years ago it would cost nearly a hundred bucks just to get a good 256mg sd card. Now its 20 bucks for a gigabyte or two... Now fast forward ten years. 6 or 8 gigabytes for twenty dollars maybe? Thats only ten years. I am, of course, estimating. That would also signal that a 2 gig card would cost like 6 or 7 dollars. Seems pretty cheap to me. Also, think of it this way. People say that downloadable content is the future especially with internet 2.0 being talked about. Dvd's and such cost several times more to be rewrite....able. Whereas flash cards come rewrite-able. So imagine a system that would hold like 10 flash cards at a time. Pretty easy to do right? Now imagine paying for 10 of these for like 150 dollars? Then imagine paying like 20 dollars for a game because they dont have to worry about making hard copies and such. I know its very unlikely. But its even more unlikely with discs. Games would cost like 30 dollars more with rewriteable discs, discs also take a very long time to write, while flash cards can be written on very quickly. Each disc on the system would need its own drive. I know discs are easier to use now, but it might not ever change if we don't start pushing companies near compact flash cards. This can also be compared to America's card industries. We have to give them a push to make them create more fuel efficient cars. In the long run it will pay off.
Emmanuel @ Jun 24th 2007 11:25PM
Actually for the voltage thing.
Voltage and amperage determine the power usage. Think of voltage as a hose, you can upp the voltage (bigger hose) but you don't have to increase the water flow (amperage), obviously there is some legroom built into the system and it can use more amperage (and thus more watts) with the same voltage.
Elliot @ Mar 31st 2009 5:22PM
Maybe nobody here noticed, but if you look at flashme sites some of them list games you can download. Few ds games are over 128mb. Why would it need a disc? Few Psp games are over 512 megabytes and most aree around 300. Flash cards can easily satisfy those needs. Heck, 360 games arent over a gig or two. This is why I must say that flash cards are indeed the future of memory storage. Hard drives are too slow and bulky. All discs require a motor to spin which takes too much power, discs are also easily scratched and make a lot of noise with the motor. Flash cards are faster loading, are constantly being increased in memory size, require no motor to use, and are smaller than any other portable storage. If you think otherwise, please, do reply.