• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

FRIDAYTON MK II: 5.5 million bears and salmon create unholy allliance to sack SONY HQ

Durante

Member
That is going to change. A Titan is not going to last you 8 years.
I wouldn't be so sure about that (if you only want to play at console quality). Of course, if you are the type of gamer to buy a Titan you won't be happy with it for more than a year.
 

Odrion

Banned
Also this whole thing with the Xbots is funny considering the history:

1. The PS4 was revealed with 8gbs of GDDR5, everyone assumed the "Durante" would come with equal amounts of ram, but of DDR3. People got hyped at the potential power difference. Same amount, but one has greater power.

2. The Xbox One was unveiled, with the expected amount of ram, but we discovered that 5gbs were only to be used for games.

3. Now rumors are spreading that the PS4 may have almost the same amount of ram used for games as well. Roughly the same amount, but one has greater power. And somehow the tables are turned.
 

Ryoku

Member
Jesus Christ, Sony really going to use 3.5GB of fucking GDDR5 for OS? I knew 8GB of GDDR5 was overkill for the tech that's going in there, but, really? 3.5GB GDDR5 for only OS functions? What a waste of money. The problem of a unified memory pool, I guess.

Should have gone with 4.5GB of GDDR5 with 3.5GB of DDR3 for OS. Would have been much cheaper, but introduces a little bit of complexity for developers (CPU can't access same pool as GPU, like on PC). They instead could have had a separate small CPU that handles the OS, and pulls from the 3.5GB DDR3 exclusively, leaving the unified pool of 4.5GB GDDR5 for the Jaguar cores and GPU.
 

farisr

Member
halogamer
Junior Member
(Today, 09:06 PM)



im so confused

I'll break it down.

Account was made in 2011 and he really loved (and could possibly still love Halo).

He is not a MS fanboy. Just loves Halo.

Or he could be like me, someone who loved the first 3, and their multiplayer (bought a 360 before the ps3, just because of Halo 3), was disappointed with Reach's multiplayer (and even moreso with 4's), and Halo just doesn't hold the same weight it did back in 2011.
 

Jarmel

Banned
A Titan is not going to be the best of the best fr 8 years, no. This has nothing to do with PS4 or consoles though.

The only way I can the see the ram not being an issue is due to the XBone in that 3rd party developers are going to take the XBone into account. Otherwise the memory required for PS4 ports to PC is going to increase.

I wouldn't be so sure about that (if you only want to play at console quality). Of course, if you are the type of gamer to buy a Titan you won't be happy with it for more than a year.

The people who have a Titan also have a top notch CPU.
 

brandnew

Member
Jesus Christ, Sony really going to use 3.5GB of fucking GDDR5 for OS? I knew 8GB of GDDR5 was overkill for the tech that's going in there, but, really? 3.5GB GDDR5 for only OS functions? What a waste of money. The problem of a unified memory pool, I guess.

Should have gone with 4.5GB of GDDR5 with 3.5GB of DDR3. Would have been much cheaper, but introduces a little bit of complexity for developers (CPU can't access same pool as GPU, like on PC).

LTTP. When you really consider what Sony wants to do with the OS, it doesn't seem like 3.5 is that much. Welcome to next-gen.
 
Ok, here ya go:
wGqwAnN.gif
Disturbing, almost satanic imagery.
 

_woLf

Member
I'm curious what Jonathan Blow has to say about this. Wasn't he tweeting at PS4 reveal about how good 8GB of GDDR5 is?
 
Well sony fans arn't dead yet. The problem with no playstation tears is this isn't as stupid as DRM on home consoles.

And when pitting the consoles side by side, it's GDDR5 vs GDDR3 +ERam, and then It's GPU difference.

But the real sweet part is still. 100 dollars less at retail launch, and no signs of shortages.
 
The OS memory footprint on both consoles diminished over the years so it wouldn't surprise me at all if they end up freeing even more memory for devs over time.

Someone asked earlier for how much OS footprint was shrunk

PS3 OS footprint was shrunk almost 60% from 120 mb to 50mb

http://www.dailytech.com/Sony+Shrinks+PS3+OS+Gives+Devs+70MB+of+Extra+Memory/article17775.htm

Can't find anything on the 360's OS footprint being shrunk but some places state it was 32mb which seems small (32mb was listed as the footprint not how much it was shrunk by)
 

Durante

Member
By the way, I think it's a really good idea for Sony to overprovision heavily on the OS at the start, I said as much ever since the 8GB announcement. It's not like any early games would benefit heavily from another gig of memory.
 

FINALBOSS

Banned
I'll wait until I hear some concrete information--especially given how all of us were upset with DF over their vague and incorrect info.

Now we all take their word as gospel?

This isn't me being a PS fan or anything, it's me questioning DF--as we all did less than a few weeks ago.
 

"D"

I'm extremely insecure with how much f2p mobile games are encroaching on Nintendo
I don't understand all the fear guys, this sounds like this is mainly aimed at developers looking to make games...8GB of DDR5 is good and all but what are NORMAL consumers gonna do with it, honestly? If you're a developer or plan to at least then I feel your pain but normal gamers like me, this just seems like something I shouldnt be too worried about. If the OS is hogging that much then maybe they're trying to make navigation and such as smooth and effortless as possible. Plus im sure as time marches on and people really start figuring out the machine then more RAM would be freed up like the PS3. Like someone said before The Last of Us was beautiful...all that on 512 of RAM.

If you're not a developer, relax. Let Sony come out and do the 'splainin'. The games they showed look damn good and im still looking forward to the console. Im not making games so this don't bother me
 

thuway

Member
Would you say developers are happy about the ram on both systems?

I really need to not talk so much, but one last thing. The RAM on Xbox One requires developers to jump through an extra hoop to take advantage of it. It adds an additional layer of complexity and has disadvantages (I'm not a programmer, don't ask me).

When year two or three of console life cycle is in check; the differences between these units will be glaringly obvious. Do not look to launch day to help you uncover hidden potential in either machine.
 

GodofWine

Member
So this change makes the PS4 50% more powerful than the xb1 now, and it makes the xb1 33% less powerful than a PS4 now.

Nothing changed to affect this right??
 

TheContact

Member
Jesus Christ, Sony really going to use 3.5GB of fucking GDDR5 for OS? I knew 8GB of GDDR5 was overkill for the tech that's going in there, but, really? 3.5GB GDDR5 for only OS functions? What a waste of money. The problem of a unified memory pool, I guess.

Should have gone with 4.5GB of GDDR5 with 3.5GB of DDR3. Would have been much cheaper, but introduces a little bit of complexity for developers (CPU can't access same pool as GPU, like on PC).

I don't want a choppy OS in like the ps3 has. 4.5ddr5 for games is still plenty
 

No Love

Banned
Absolute fail by Sony.

HOWEVER, despite the bad implications, Sony DID decrease the OS footprint considerably throughout PS3's lifespan. I wouldn't be surprised to see Sony slim down this massive bloated OS by 512-1536MB. This is just ridiculous. They could've had a 2GB advantage over Xbox One.
 
4.5 GB to devs, 1.5 GB to OS, 1 GB reserve for devs, 1 GB reserve for OS.

Pretty much what everyone expected. No issue here.

My problem is what is the issue here with this?

The point where Devs could even use 7 Gigs of Ram is so far in the future, and probably something only 1st party Devs would take advantage of.

Secondly 4.5 Gigs of GDDR5>> MS 5 Gigs Of Ram.

Thirdly As previous consoles have shown, patches can limit the OS and make it stream lined, thus making the the footprint smaller. Which affords more resources to the devs, who at this point btw are happy with the abundant amount of High Speed ram they have at their disposal.
 

farisr

Member
Halo fan who doesn't seem to like Microsoft? That might be a first. Or perhaps not, I don't even know sometimes.

Halo fan back in 2011. I was a big Halo fan in 2011 as well, despite being disappointed with Reach's multiplayer.

Got all giggly when Halo 4 was announced.

No longer a diehard fan. Enjoy the campaigns. But yeah, enjoying Halo =/= liking Microsoft.
 

Fracas

#fuckonami
Halo fan who doesn't seem to like Microsoft? That might be a first. Or perhaps not, I don't even know sometimes.

I loved Halo until Halo 4, and now I don't really care about it or MS. Only reason I still have this avatar is because it's what people recognize me by.
 
Background recording and downloading dude. I expect the PS4 to record 15 minutes of 1080p video footage now. That takes a lot of RAM, because writing to the HDD at all times is not very healthy.

Exactly. This is good news if the 15 minutes is cached in RAM. The amount of remaining memory dedicated to a game should be more than plenty.
 
Yes but they refrained\not allowed to say how the RAM is divided, and Sony has kept mum. It's a non-issue practically but image-wise it does make a dent. And they are making it to be a issue by not offering this info by themselves and being forthcoming earlier.
But why? Devs already knew it obviously. Why tell it to the public? Who really cares about the allocation of fucking RAM? No one besides enthusiastic gamers on this and other gaming boards. I don't like it either, but I have to ask myself why does it matter if all the devs are happy and knew about this before.

PS4 is still more powerful than the XBox. Yes it is more even now, that was to be expected anyway. Microsoft didn't say anything either, all we have are statements from sources.

Both companies didn't make a public statement, because this news doesn't have any worth for the common gamer. At worst they misunderstand it, like you can see today. Sony wanted to avoid this nonsense.
 

Crisco

Banned
Also, GDDR5 for the OS is hardly useless. This isn't Windows for Workgroups 3.11. Modern UIs are all hardware accelerated and use 3D graphics APIs to render.
 

dr_rus

Member
12 GB would be almost useless imo.

The difference between the two now is definitely less significant. A little upclock wouldn't hurt, but at this point the difference between the two will most likely be less noticeable .

Especially if the rumored 2 cores devoted to OS rumor from IGN is true.

No it's not. The main difference has always been in GPU and RAM speeds. Both had 8 GBs of RAM since announce days and that always meant that RAM sizes are comparable. Basically - nothing's changed.
 
Also this whole thing with the Xbots is funny considering the history:

1. The PS4 was revealed with 8gbs of GDDR5, everyone assumed the "Durante" would come with equal amounts of ram, but of DDR3. People got hyped at the potential power difference. Same amount, but one has greater power.

2. The Xbox One was unveiled, with the expected amount of ram, but we discovered that 5gbs were only to be used for games.

3. Now rumors are spreading that the PS4 may have almost the same amount of ram used for games as well. Roughly the same amount, but one has greater power. And somehow the tables are turned.

Durante? Hhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
 
It's around 1GB for 15 minutes at YouTube quality, which is 8000bkps for 1080p video and 384kbps for stereo sound.

That is, assuming CBR recording. The video would wind up smaller than that with VBR.

Actually, it's usually around 600MB for 15 min of 1080p in .mp4 for youtube.

Regardless, it's ridiculous if they are holding that in RAM.
 

amr

Banned
Devs don't need more than 4.5 GB for launch games.

Sony needs 1 GB on reserve for OS features they can't foresee.

And they have another 1 GB on reserve for when devs do need more RAM.

What a scandal.
 

Jonboy

Member
Just talked to one last guy who works with third parties. He has no idea what the numbers are (or that this is going apeshit on gaf currently) but said "How is this even an issue when every third party we talk to are happy as clams about how much memory we have and how fast it is?" And then referred to it as a 'complete non-issue.' Which is exactly what everyone else has said (both inside sony and at third parties).


So... certain people at gaf are upset but developers, seemingly, are not.
Quoted for emphasis.
 

mrklaw

MrArseFace
By the way, I think it's a really good idea for Sony to overprovision heavily on the OS at the start, I said as much ever since the 8GB announcement. It's not like any early games would benefit heavily from another gig of memory.


But it takes time to respond to changes, if it takes Sony a year to figure out if they can free up more memory from the OS, the it'll take another 12-18 months for games to adapt. So you're already 2+ years down the road.
 
Top Bottom