• 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.

PS4 Rumors , APU code named 'Liverpool' Radeon HD 7970 GPU Steamroller CPU 16GB Flash

Status
Not open for further replies.

onQ123

Member
So if PS4 had a 1.8 TF GPU but 2GB RAM, presumably GDDR5. Durango as rumored had a 1-1.5 TF GPU and 8GB RAM, albeit slower DDR3, that would be well, pretty interesting how it would turn out in practice and which would have better looking games.

I'm guessing third parties wouldn't love the massive RAM disparity there for porting.


I wonder if the 16GB of flash can be used to help with the fast 2GB of ram?
 
So if PS4 had a 1.8 TF GPU but 2GB RAM, presumably GDDR5. Durango as rumored had a 1-1.5 TF GPU and 8GB RAM, albeit slower DDR3, that would be well, pretty interesting how it would turn out in practice and which would have better looking games.

I'm guessing third parties wouldn't love the massive RAM disparity there for porting.



I really don`t think Durango will have that much. My money is on 4 GB, maybe 6 GB of RAM at best.
 

Takuya

Banned
These specs are pretty nice. Even though 2gb gddr5 should be goo enough, I'd like for them to push for 4 gb gddr5. Memory is one thing try can't go wrong on this cycle.
 

raven777

Member
they won't put the same retail specs. They will adjust/downgrade accordingly, just they did with PS3.

I still doubt it would be 7970 level
 
These specs are pretty nice. Even though 2gb gddr5 should be goo enough, I'd like for them to push for 4 gb gddr5. Memory is one thing try can't go wrong on this cycle.
Too many chips.

Something like 16 RAM chips would be needed.

That's a really complex board.

A fuckton more bruteforce. But lacking in memory in comparison to Durango, but much much faster.

I like more console oriented designs than what I've read of Durango.
 
So if PS4 had a 1.8 TF GPU but 2GB RAM, presumably GDDR5. Durango as rumored had a 1-1.5 TF GPU and 8GB RAM, albeit slower DDR3, that would be well, pretty interesting how it would turn out in practice and which would have better looking games.

I'm guessing third parties wouldn't love the massive RAM disparity there for porting.

It's definitely going to be interesting on how that plays out with Xbox 3. I would believe it would have to be a split pool (something like 6GB DDR3 and 2GB GDDR5 FB) in that case.

even the code-name Liverpool & 16GB of flash?

I can't vouch for the codename or the flash unfortunately, so everything other than that. :p

How do you know this?

How do you know? How does it compare with the 720?

The target specs have been out since last year.
 
But that is the only thing that mater in a GAMING console. So if you think about it, its the perfect move.

Yeah Intel is king but you probably wouldn't notice it at 1080p in a blind test. The kind of processor most need for gaming nowadays is really overblown.
 
I did want a 2tflop console but I wouldn't really call this underwhelming. And 1.5 GBs is about what most of the rumors say so.

If Sony goes up to the 4gb of ram those specs would be good .
It might not seem that way to some people but when they see games it should change there minds.
If Sony can go higher that also great but i not expecting much more than that .
 
But that is the only thing that mater in a GAMING console. So if you think about it, its the perfect move.

You're not equating Graphics = gaming console right?

Yeah Intel is king but you probably wouldn't notice it at 1080p in a blind test. The kind of processor most need for gaming nowadays is really overblown.

Not necessarily. There are games taking advantage of Quad and Hexcore processors on the PC and it certainly shows.
 

Cake Boss

Banned
Stupid question coming up.

Why are the companies so hesitant to put more RAM like the devs want? Isn't RAM pretty cheap these days?
 
Stupid question coming up.

Why are the companies so hesitant to put more RAM like the devs want? Isn't RAM pretty cheap these days?

Both costs for lower latency RAM, and physical limitations.

You attach RAM directly to the board in console designs. The more chips you need, the more space you take up with only that.
 
Stupid question coming up.

Why are the companies so hesitant to put more RAM like the devs want? Isn't RAM pretty cheap these days?

Because the RAM they use is not the same as the ram in your computer. Your computer uses DDR3 RAM, which is slower, but is cheaper. Game consoles, where speed is necessary, they use GDDR5, which is leaps and bounds faster, and is the same type of memory utilised in GPU's.
 
Liverpool and Steamroller (just like Bulldozer) sound more like AMD code names than Sony ones. And yeah, it never says that the GPU is going to be a 7970...

The GPU is an ATI r10xx at 800MHz with 1843 GFLOPS, this is code-named "Tahiti." This chip is also include on AMD Radeon HD 7970, both chips (CPU and GPU) are 28nm processors.
 

Durante

Member
Stupid question coming up.

Why are the companies so hesitant to put more RAM like the devs want? Isn't RAM pretty cheap these days?
RAM is pretty cheap, even GDDR5. However, with current tech, you would need 16 chips for 4GB, which increases board complexity. On the other hand, since the consoles are expected to be out in late 2013, 4 GB should be doable by then with 8 chips.
 

Clegg

Member
I imagine Sony fans looking like this whilst reading these rumours.

352840552_7a9a0a6ec7.jpg
 
RAM is pretty cheap, even GDDR5. However, with current tech, you would need 16 chips for 4GB, which increases board complexity. On the other hand, since the consoles are expected to be out in late 2013, 4 GB should be doable by then with 8 chips.

That's only if it's cheap enough to do so.

Any new tech does come with increased cost. If the costs outweigh the benefits they could still go with the lower maximum.


You vouch for a 7970!?
He couches for something with the same core underlying tech. Underclocked?

edit: That's supposed to say vouches.
 

Durante

Member
You vouch for a 7970!?
He's vouching for an 1.8 TFlop AMD GPU. Which is not extraordinary.


That's only if it's cheap enough to do so.

Any new tech does come with increased cost. If the costs outweigh the benefits they could still go with the lower maximum.
Well sure, if they want to cheap out. I can understand not going with 16 chips as a physical limitation. Not using 8 though is just weak.
 
Because the RAM they use is not the same as the ram in your computer. Your computer uses DDR3 RAM, which is slower, but is cheaper. Game consoles, where speed is necessary, they use GDDR5, which is leaps and bounds faster, and is the same type of memory utilised in GPU's.

Well, PCs use both. The actual 7970 has 3GB of GDDR5 ram on board.
 
Well sure, if they want to cheap out. I can understand not going with 16 chips as a physical limitation. Not using 8 though is just weak.
You can't really say it would be cheaping out.

Even an increase of 25% on each chip could make the platform pricier than they intended.
 

gatti-man

Member
A 7970 in a console? What a nice dream that woulf be...... make the console 699 to keep all the scrubs off of online mp like the days of launch ps3. Such sweet memories.
 
You vouch for a 7970!?

It's like Durante said. When the specs came out the only known 7000 series GPU was the Tahiti GPU and was used to describe it from what I remember. So it sounds like this came from the original target specs because now Pitcairn is available and is better comparison.
 

Takuya

Banned
Too many chips.

Something like 16 RAM chips would be needed.

That's a really complex board.

A fuckton more bruteforce. But lacking in memory in comparison to Durango, but much much faster.

I like more console oriented designs than what I've read of Durango.

The thing is, even if it is faster, the problem might not really be in the speed of the ram, but the quantity. In the end, are all the developers going to fine tune their games to maximize the efficiency of RAM usage or just stuff the channels?
 
The thing is, even if it is faster, the problem might not really be in the speed of the ram, but the quantity. In the end, are all the developers going to fine tune their games to maximize the efficiency of RAM usage or just stuff the channels?
Then they should all just cheap out and go with DDR3 for maximum RAMMING.
 

Durante

Member
You can't really say it would be cheaping out.
Oh but I can. 360 launched at 299 with 8 high-end (at the time) RAM chips. So unless they target a launch price below that (which I seriously doubt) I'll call anything less than 8 chips for unified RAM cheapening out.
 
Oh but I can. 360 launched at 299 with 8 high-end (at the time) RAM chips. So unless they target a launch price below that (which I seriously doubt) I'll call anything less than 8 chips for unified RAM cheapening out.

But that also caused supply constraints at launch.
 
Oh but I can. 360 launched at 299 with 8 high-end (at the time) RAM chips. So unless they target a launch price below that (which I seriously doubt) I'll call anything less than 8 chips for unified RAM cheapening out.
And it cost MS $2 billion.

Does Sony have that to piss away?
 
No the real issue here is abandoning CELL. When for years we were being told CELL was the future of all things. And that CELL would be in everything from televisions to toasters.

Cell seems to be getting used in other electronics like smart TVs so its fulfilling that purpose
 
Then they should all just cheap out and go with DDR3 for maximum RAMMING.

Or a compromise. A split ram pool. As long as they don't skimp on either side, which is what hurt the PS3, I don't know why it wouldn't be the way to go. 1.5-2 GB of GDDR5 and 4GB of DDR 3 and I think they would be in good shape for a generation. I'd have to imagine developers are sick of dealing with the limited memory at this point. If there really is a huge discrepancy between MS's machine and Sony's, memory wise, it's going to cause issues for multiplatform developers again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom