AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
PCs have system RAM (8-16GB) and video RAM (4-8GB). That is the equivalent of 12-24GB of total RAM.
-
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.
Rumor: Next Xbox To Feature Ray Tracing, 1TB NVMe SSD Storage; DevKit To Release After GDC 2019
- Thread starter Leonidas
- Start date
PCs have system RAM (8-16GB) and video RAM (4-8GB). That is the equivalent of 12-24GB of total RAM.
sendit
Member
The fact that you need to bring the job card tells me you are insecure.
This comment alone makes me question your "job". However, lets not get in to that
The two are not even remotely comparable. A built in cache would have more than sufficient space to store streaming assets, the only downside would be longer initial load times everytime you swap a game or two depending of how much space streaming assets take.
Im predicting 24GB with a small possibility they might get 32GB. Never said it was a sure thing
Also hardware manufacturers get special deals via high volume long term contracts the info you provided is based on 2000 units which is a far cry from a console launch which goes in the millions multiply that by 32 and you get a close to 100 million units first year alone. Current memory prices are inflated anyways
Not gonna happen.
Yes, I'm insecure
. However, this can be applied to any high volume order of anything. Inculding SSDs. What point are you trying to drive? The fact that it cost more to have an overkill of 24-32 GB of GDDR6 versus having a balanced system.
sendit
Member
So....this is your proposed idea:
Loop(Spindle Harddrive ---> Loop (Cache ---> Ram))
Just a hunch, but i'm pretty sure developers prefer simplified designs:
Loop(SSD --> RAM)
Additionally, to reduce any bottlenecks. The 100 Gb cache you're proposing has to be just as fast as the main system ram. Do you know how redundant and cost ineffective that sounds?
Last edited:
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
My two cents on the HDD discussion:
I feel 2TB is the bare minimum for base systems next gen. Because of that, a hybrid SSHD like the FireCuda 2TB 2.5" would be a good choice instead of a straight-up SSD. I think consoles limit transfer speeds with slower interfaces, but this video from Back2Gaming shows that hybrid/SSHD can be a decent way to speed game loading times...
I believe the FireCuda 2TB has 128MB cache and 8GB NAND memory. That setup seems to work best, maybe they could boost that to 16GB NAND.
I feel 2TB is the bare minimum for base systems next gen. Because of that, a hybrid SSHD like the FireCuda 2TB 2.5" would be a good choice instead of a straight-up SSD. I think consoles limit transfer speeds with slower interfaces, but this video from Back2Gaming shows that hybrid/SSHD can be a decent way to speed game loading times...
I believe the FireCuda 2TB has 128MB cache and 8GB NAND memory. That setup seems to work best, maybe they could boost that to 16GB NAND.
SonGoku
Member
which is why 32gb (or 24gb) its a much better investment than a ssd
Because
A) PCs are running current gen games, not next gen
B) PCs have a bigger 16 to 32GB (albeit slower) secondary pool of ram
C) Consoles would have to share gddr6 with OS (4GB+) and CPU in addition to GPU
Last edited:
SonGoku
Member
A balanced system is a hybrid system, don't know why you are in denial about that one
Memory prices are inflated and you get many memory chips per console unlike drives which are one per console, the possibility to get a better memory volume deal is over 10x.
No... you got it all backwardsSo....this is your proposed idea:
Loop(Spindle Harddrive ---> Loop (Cache ---> Ram))
Just a hunch, but i'm pretty sure developers prefer simplified designs:
Loop(SSD --> RAM)
Additionally, to reduce any bottlenecks. The 100 Gb cache you're proposing has to be just as fast as the main system ram. Do you know how redundant and cost ineffective that sounds?
The 100GB cache would serve the purpose of the SSD so it only needs to be as fast as the ssd, on first boot of a game all streaming assets will be loaded to the cache so that once the game starts running it streams from the fast cache instead of hdd. As i said the only downside to this will be a longer initial load time every time you swap one or two games, something akin to a game install but much faster.
This can be automated so developers don't have to move a finger, don't worry
Last edited:
if you have 32GB of GDDR6 how will you afford to have even a cheap HDD in the console? lol
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
We're not getting 32GB of any type of RAM in the next-gen consoles. Let's be realistic here.
24GB max, and even then that is a low chance I feel.
24GB max, and even then that is a low chance I feel.
Last edited:
Pimpbaa
Member
Because there will be open world games next gen and you don't want the same handful of textures applied everywhere. I can't believe you are repeating this nonsense in this thread as well.
sendit
Member
A balanced system is a hybrid system, don't know why you are in denial about that one
Memory prices are inflated and you get many memory chips per console unlike drives which are one per console, the possibility to get a better memory volume deal is over 10x.
No... you got it all backwards
The 100GB cache would serve the purpose of the SSD so it only needs to be as fast as the ssd, on first boot of a game all streaming assets will be loaded to the cache so that once the game starts running it streams from the fast cache instead of hdd. As i said the only downside to this will be a longer initial load time every time you swap one or two games, something akin to a game install but much faster.
This can be automated so developers don't have to move a finger, don't worry
Not sure if you know this but developers have to move their fingers to create automation. Automation creates automation?
Additionally, your proposal is missing a key element. The OS. I hope you're not wanting that to reside in the cache
The OS will have to reside on the slow spindle harddrive causing unnecessary bottlenecks.
Boss Mog
Member
1TB SSD would be a huge cost you could easily get 4TB hard drive for less. If they want to put a M.2 slot with NVMe support for people that want to get their own SSDs, great but don't force extra costs that a lot of consumers don't want or would rather be spent on other stuff. I'm pretty sure next systems will ship with 2TB HDDs, it's the best cost vs capacity compromise.
Last edited:
JimboJones
Member
Current gen consoles arn't even maxing out standard HDDs which i think is actually down to the rubbish cpu they have.
The same hard drive the consoles have put in a pc will seemingly run faster.
Seems a bit overkill to go straight to NVMe but a small boot drive or scratch disk might be cool.
The same hard drive the consoles have put in a pc will seemingly run faster.
Seems a bit overkill to go straight to NVMe but a small boot drive or scratch disk might be cool.
Insane Metal
Member
I still bet on 16GB for games and 4 to 8 GB of a different pool (cheaper ram) for OS and system resources.
Last edited:
kraspkibble
Permabanned.
there's nothing wrong with sticking in an ssd if they release multiple models
Xbox Two S - cheapo discless model with 2TB 7200rpm HDD but supports nvme installation.
Xbox Two - standard model with disc drive and 2TB 7200rpm HDD and nvme support.
Xbox Two Elite - enthusiast model that comes with 1TB nvme preinstalled + 1 or 2TB 7200RPM HDD. they would NEED to add a second drive because 1TB just isn't gonna be enough for next gen.
for the cheaper models provide nvme support but don't force the cost onto consumers. for those who are willing to pay extra for better performance then they can add in the nvme.
what are you talking about with maxing out HDD's? they don't really affect the performance of a game. SSDs will help with loading times significantly and maybe cut down texture pop in (although that is also dependant on RAM) but that's about it. it's not like they boost your framerate or anything...
i do think that going from HDD to NVME is overkill because between a standard sata3 ssd and an nvme there is pretty much no difference. my PC has an nvme drive and sata3 ssd and games perform/load no better on the nvme vs the sata3. even the games on my 7200rpm drive perform about the same but of course loading times are slower.
they should just stick a standard sata3 ssd in. nvme drives don't improve gaming performance. they are aimed more at PC owners who deal with large files (video editing, 3d work, etc)
Last edited:
TeamGhobad
Banned
sony sent their devkits out months ago at least 6months ago. why is MS so late with their devkits? not good.
I hope their tools are ready too so we dont have another repeat of what happened this gen.
I hope their tools are ready too so we dont have another repeat of what happened this gen.
JimboJones
Member
Not talking about framerate.
Basically you will see transfer speeds seemingly increase by virtue of the new console having better cpus.
We seen this already on the pro consoles, the stock drives perform better because the cpu is clocked higher.
I don't even think the PS4 uses a sata3 connection.
Last edited:
Nikana
Go Go Neo Rangers!
I don't think you know how this works.
I wouldn't say that because there is a off chance that Sony might try to push it's ReRam off on the PS5
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Not saying I wouldn't be pleasantly surprised, but I won't be holding my breath.
TeamGhobad
Banned
please explain
SonGoku
Member
I believe 24GB is the most likely target, i just pointed out 32GB is just as likely as 16gb which i agree its not very likely
The only one repeating nonsense here is you, if you cant understand how if you have ample amounts of memory you woulnt have to rely on streaming as much, then idk what to say to you.
And as I said if HDD became limiting a hybrid solution will take care of it.
No sure you know this but a similar more complex process is already automated by the OS, so game developers don't have to move a finger.Not sure if you know this but developers have to move their fingers to create automation. Automation creates automation?
Additionally, your proposal is missing a key element. The OS. I hope you're not wanting that to reside in the cache
If you already have an excess of 100GB+ cache having the OS reside in there would be a non issue if it really was needed to avoid in game bottlenecks the PS4 OS doesn't actually take 93GB its just reserved space for tasks such as video recording.
Such as? I dont think there is a case where having the OS on the HDD would bottleneck the actual game anyways. Sure having to move things around would make some OS/GUI transitions and load times longer but that's part of the compromise, as long as it doesn't affect the games its fine.
Last edited:
THE:MILKMAN
Member
I disagree that 32GB RAM is just as likely as 16GB. It would not only require twice the chips, it would then mean a bigger power supply (16 chips burn more watts than 8), a more complex, and therefore costly, motherboard and the same for the cooling system.
The extra cost would be pretty big I think.
The extra cost would be pretty big I think.
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
16 GB of ram with separate dedicated VRAM is more than fine.
SonGoku
Member
lol you missed the point entirely, do you really think i meant that from a cost perspective? of course 16gb is cheaper
16GB is not very likely because its not sufficient, 12GB is the bare minimum to run current gen games at 4k. For a proper next gen leap at 4k we need much more
32gb is not very like because of cost
Just like a 8tf GPU is not very likely because its not sufficient
Last edited:
THE:MILKMAN
Member
OK, but my point was that by going to 32GB wouldn't just be twice the raw cost of the chips. It has a huge knock on effect on most other things. With PS4's bump in RAM it just meant higher density chips as the console was already designed around 16 chips. We would need 4GB chips to happen for 32GB to be realistic I would think.
All of this is besides the point for me though as Matt was unequivocal about one thing in the PS5 Pachter thread and that was we're not getting 32GB RAM.
Pimpbaa
Member
Streaming performance will always matter for games. No amount of ram would make that not true. Unless it's a ridiculous amount, but then you would have load times worse than this gen.
SonGoku
Member
OG PS4 went with a clam shell design with same amount of chips no? PS5 memory configuration wouldn't be more complex than that
Actually the one thing that makes me doubt 32gb is not the memory cost itself but the memory bus. I don't think 256bit but would provide enough bandwidth and 512bit bus might be too expensive
and yet you still have not provided a single example where a game designed around high memory configuration is "bottlenecked" by a HDD
This gen is prime example of that, it rellied less on streaming than last gen which was memory starved
And as a i said, if they came to the conclusion HDD will bottleneck next gen games a hybrid solution can take care of it.
Last edited:
THE:MILKMAN
Member
It does use clamshell mode, yes. 8 chips on each side of the motherboard. What I'm saying is that as it stands 16GB of GDDR6 would only require 8 (2GB) chips on a 256-bit bus but 32GB would need 16 chips.
As soon as Sony could they halved the RAM chips to 8 and reduced the power supply rating and made a cheaper cooling system with the CUH-1200 model. If they could avoid that in the first place this time...
A 384-bit bus is unlikely IMO but can't yet be ruled out and a 512-bit bus a non-starter for cost and heat/power reasons as well as being one part that doesn't shrink well.
SonGoku
Member
16GB is cheaper, no kidding! lol Ik that but cost its not why its unlikely. Going by the same logic next gen should only use 6tf gpu because its cheaper than 12tf.
Just like the OG PS4 then?
What makes you think they couldn't do the same for PS5?
True but at least there's is a precedent for it on the X and 16GB is even more unlikely because its not sufficient.
Pimpbaa
Member
Again PC MMORPGs. That's as close as it gets because no developer is going to design a PC game for 32GBs of ram only. But if they did, that game would require a SSD just to keep up with the demand (if it were an open world game). Have to wait for next gen consoles and their games to truly see if this is true or not. Particularly on PC ports where people can see what benefits their performance more.
This gen had just as much streaming as last gen. Every goddamn open world games. That isn't going to change next gen. Loading everything in at the beginning is outdated and limiting which is why no AAA developer does it. I think almost every open world game I played this gen had moments where textures took too long to load in. Except for early cross gen games that didn't push current gen hardware.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
I didn't say Sony couldn't do it but I am saying they won't choose to go with a 16 chip design like PS4 and not just for costs. Also, until proven otherwise, I fully believe it when Matt says we're not getting 32GB RAM.
If it happens it will be a bigger shock than PS4s 8GB announcement.
ph33rknot
Banned
next gen or only on Microsoft side
CuNi
Member
Next gen.
SSDs are way to expensive for consoles, especially NVMe's and about RT, well we only have to look at nvidia and their sales numbers as well as the amount of games that support that feature.
If anything, it might happen in a mid-gen refresh, if at all, but I see it way more possible to happen in the gen after that.
NVMe prices are dropping fast & in 2020 1TB should be around $60 or less
Somewhere around that price
If you can get 1TB today for $144 what do you think will happen when they have a die shrink or stack the chips higher?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07J2Q4SWZ/?tag=neogaf0e-20
ethomaz
Banned
While it could drop...
"Samsung wants to slash the existing gap by 2020 and offer a 512GB SDD for the same price as a 1TB HDD today."
That means around $90-100 for a 1TB SDD if they reach that goal.
Last edited:
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
If I can buy a 1 TB NVMe SSD for 60 bucks within a calendar year from now I’ll eat my fucking microwave
What year is that quote from? because 1TB HDD are $49 now
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0088PUEPK/?tag=neogaf0e-20
Bani
Member
Plugged into the outlet
SonGoku
Member
Again how much ram and vram required for those games? those games run in a toaster and rely heavily on streaming to overcome memory limitations
Of course streaming will be used but it won't be critical to performance if you have a buffer that its constantly being updated in the background.
You are also wrong about last gen, PS360 relied on streaming much more heavily, gta 5 is prime example of that where they used both the hdd and disc drive to aid streaming.
For the record i dont think we are getting 32gb either though Sony certainly could surprise us
That being said a 16gb pool its just as unlikely but for different reasons
The most convincing reason why 32gb might not happen is the memory bus. Can you get 32GB GDDR6 at 800GB/s speeds at reasonable clocks using a 256bit bus?
btw why do you think it would be a bigger shock than ps4 8gb? what makes it different in your view im curious.
Last edited:
SonGoku
Member
So at the very least they could opt for a 256 to 512GB SSD in addition to the HDD. Best of both worlds type solution
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
Yeap with games at 100+GB.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
I just based my spec guesses around what Matt was saying/suggesting over 18 months ago. I've seen nothing since to convince me to change my spec guess yet and in fact Richard Leadbetter's video, and Albert Penello's subsequent comments at ERA, have solidified that in the last couple of days. ~ 3.0GHz 8c/16t Zen2, 10-12TF Navi, 400-500GB/s BW 16GB GDDR6 and 2TB HDD (I might swap that for a 1TB SSD if prices really crash).
I think Matt told us the best reason: 32GB isn't needed. I know yourself and many others would scoff at that reasoning but I believe Matt is a dev or works in some capacity with one?
If it turns out Sony do come out with a 32GB bomb at the announcement I will bump this post for you! (and supply the plate for the crow)
I’m not sure that kind of drive would be cheap enough to include on a next gen Xbox launching in 2020. Unless they come out with 256 and make it a user serviceable part.
They will drop HDD 1st chance they get & next gen is that chance
NVMe will let them make smaller consoles this is a 512GB & 1TB NVMe
https://www.samsung.com/semiconduct...hip/product-brief-samsung-pm971-bga-nvme-ssd/
https://basic-tutorials.de/en/ces-2019-toshiba-bg4-saves-1-tb-on-thumb-sized-ssd/
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
They will drop HDD 1st chance they get & next gen is that chance
NVMe will let them make smaller consoles this is a 512GB & 1TB NVMe
https://www.samsung.com/semiconduct...hip/product-brief-samsung-pm971-bga-nvme-ssd/
https://basic-tutorials.de/en/ces-2019-toshiba-bg4-saves-1-tb-on-thumb-sized-ssd/
Less weight for shipping costs as well.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked