pieatorium
Member
I'm still sticking by my prediction from along time ago, 1080p @ s30fps for cinematic games and 720p @ 60 fps for games that thrive on performance likw CoD, 3d fighters, dmc(lol) etc
total power. Epic games mentioned that number. 1.8 is fine I guess.
edit
O well Samaritan looked cool...
I'm excited, I just hope devs survive with these specs lol.
I'm still sticking by my prediction from along time ago, 1080p @ s30fps for cinematic games and 720p @ 60 fps for games that thrive on performance likw CoD, 3d fighters, dmc(lol) etc
They are probably pushing some stupid version of windows.
why are people thinking 1080p is out of the question?
it's going to happen, but it's all up to the developers. there's not going to be a mandatory requirement.
we had 1080p games in this gen. they weren't amazing, but we had it. what makes you think it's not going to happen next gen.
a dev needs to pick a target to run @.. 60hz or 30hz and then see what they can pump out. if they can achieve 1080p, they'll do it... if they need to drop the resolution down a bit... they'll do that. we will see 720p 30fps @ the bare MINIMUM for sure. after that, it's all on the dev. i expect to see a bunch of 1080p games at full spec and also not at full spec (ie:1280*1080p or something like that)
But my W7 is currently running at 1.5GB and that's with a shitload of stuff on background that Xbox won't surely have on.
But my W7 is currently running at 1.5GB and that's with a shitload of stuff on background that Xbox won't surely have on.
It's not, people are stupid. Not many games today push past 1gig for vram, and these things run at 1080p, 60fps, with everything on.
Trophies were a copy. A lot of that however was the direction of the industry.
Do you think MS didn't take from the industry when they joined? Co'mon.
MS have brought PC functionality to consoles. Their biggest innovation has been digital, where I'd say Sony remains behind.
Why launch at $500? Nothing in these boxes that we know of warrants it, and don't you think it would be a bad idea to put the main SKU at a price that really hurt PS3's early years? Times have changed. Heck, I'm not even sure if $400 would mean selling at a loss.
why are people thinking 1080p is out of the question?
it's going to happen, but it's all up to the developers. there's not going to be a mandatory requirement.
we had 1080p games in this gen. they weren't amazing, but we had it. what makes you think it's not going to happen next gen.
a dev needs to pick a target to run @.. 60hz or 30hz and then see what they can pump out. if they can achieve 1080p, they'll do it... if they need to drop the resolution down a bit... they'll do that. we will see 720p 30fps @ the bare MINIMUM for sure. after that, it's all on the dev. i expect to see a bunch of 1080p games at full spec and also not at full spec (ie:1280*1080p or something like that)
Crysis 3 uses 2.5gb of VRAM.
http://www.mycrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=55167
I wonder if we will see 1920*1080p games that outclass Crysis 3 visually on those consoles at launch.
Posted: 12 03, 2012 /10:43
It was his mistake. He wanted to say "RAM". Not "VRAM".
Editor using 2.2GB RAM. And editor use more RAM than actual game.
I'm still sticking by my prediction from along time ago, 1080p @ s30fps for cinematic games and 720p @ 60 fps for games that thrive on performance likw CoD, 3d fighters, dmc(lol) etc
Most HD TV's back when the 360/PS3 came out were most likely 720p. Nowadays, 1080p is almost all you can buy, leading me to think they'll target 1080p. I just finally finished Uncharted 2 after deserted PS3/360 for a couple of years, and it didn't look pretty blown up to 3x the resolution.
Having said that, i don't plan on buying either of these, so i hope they go 720p, so that i get better graphics on the PC.
I hope. Oh, I plan on upgrading for next-gen...GTX 770 here I come !With MSAA turned on I'm assuming?
But my W7 is currently running at 1.5GB and that's with a shitload of stuff on background that Xbox won't surely have on.
We also have hard data on Orbis's memory set-up. It features 4GB of GDDR5 - the ultra-fast RAM that typically ships with the latest PC graphics cards - with 512MB reserved for the operating system. This is in stark contrast to the much slower DDR3 that Durango will almost certainly ship with. Microsoft looks set to be using an offshoot of eDRAM technology connected to the graphics core to offset the bandwidth issues the use of DDR3 incurs. Volume of RAM is the key element in Durango's favour - there'll be 8GB in total, with a significant amount (two sources we've spoken to suggest 3GB in total) reserved for the OS.
1080p will probably mean variable vertical resolution (1280x1080 and up) like in Wipeout. In crazy situations where the framerate would go down you really don't need the full 1920x1080 res.
Fuck me. Now I'm depressed. Wipeout in PS4 would've been GODLY.
Why would MS need 3 GBs of ram and 1-2 cores for its OS? Sounds too cray.
It's not, people are stupid. Not many games today push past 1gig for vram, and these things run at 1080p, 60fps, with everything on.
But my W7 is currently running at 1.5GB and that's with a shitload of stuff on background that Xbox won't surely have on.
I'm comparing 360 versus ps3 purely. Like I said, xbox os is above and beyond the ps3. That is a fact.
Sony makes great games. I am a sony console person through and through. I get the other consoles to play their exclusives. But I am also a realist. MS adds shit to their OS thats makes it better, and Sony really doesn't. They stagnate, possibly because of hardware?
Thats why I said Sony should just add the 8gb to the PS4. 720 is gonna come out with some cool shit, Sony fans will, as usual, ask for it as well, but won't get it because the OS ram is so paltry.
So many people taking conclusions. What happens when what we thought we knew, is no longer real.
Personally I have my decision already made, but it's weird that so many people are using rumors to justify theirs.
It has already been pointed that the article gets multiple things wrong.
I don't think you have to worry about the Orbis OS not having enough memory to do all the stuff you want it to do while it's running games.
Sony have learned their lesson. They're not stupid.
Crysis 3 uses 2.5gb of VRAM.
http://www.mycrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=55167
I wonder if we will see 1920*1080p games that outclass Crysis 3 visually on those consoles at launch.
720p won't require that many tflops.
When just browsing? There might be something wrong then.My Windows 8 uses 4GB (as did 7), so i guess it can find stuff to do with the RAM. Dunno what though, lol.
1080p will probably mean variable vertical resolution (1280x1080 and up) like in Wipeout. In crazy situations where the framerate would go down you really don't need the full 1920x1080 res.
Can use is different than uses, the recommended spec is 1GB VRAM. PC devs are very good at selling new hardware.
Xp worked fine with 512mb. No need for more if it's well optimized
It was explained in another PS4 RAM thread that you just can't tack on significantly slower DDR3 for RAM stuff. It's not a good design and it would be a major headache for everyone.
Can use is different than uses, the recommended spec is 1GB VRAM. PC devs are very good at selling new hardware.
So are we seeing yet another Wii vs PS360 yet again?
What game can possibly use all that RAM?
How does DDR4 compare to GDDR5?? Is there any chance it will be in the next Xbox?
so the only wrong thing worth pointing out is the gpu? Which is a lot better in actuality? I'll take it.The only point in contention I have with the Eurogamer article is it mentioning "7970m". You cannot just take an off the shelf part and apply the logic of performance. These parts are HIGHLY customized and the base part shares similarities, but the modifications can take it to a whole other level.
I already showed him that he was wrong, the guy meant RAM in general, not VRAM. Someone showed the editor took 2.2GB of ram. Those always use more ram than actual games.
How does DDR4 compare to GDDR5?? Is there any chance it will be in the next Xbox?
I don't know about that, that sounds weird.
AFAIK the only thing wrong is the GPU type. Not mobile. Which is better for both consoles. Not sure what other things are there.
But the rumors show the directions that both companies are going, someone might have a preference of one over the other.
Yeah. It's shortsighted. It's good if all you do is game but I want multitasking. 512MB is good at the start but what about 5 years for now? What if a Durango feature really blows up and Sony can't compete.
The only point in contention I have with the Eurogamer article is it mentioning "7970m". You cannot just take an off the shelf part and apply the logic of performance. These parts are HIGHLY customized and the base part shares similarities, but the modifications can take it to a whole other level.
Apparently it looks like Xbox vs Dreamcast.
When just browsing? There might be something wrong then.