Igor Antunov
Banned
Even on pc 8gb of cheap no-brand ram will set you back $80-100. That would be a nasty financial addition to a console.
-
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.
Crytek wants 8GB of RAM in next-gen consoles
- Thread starter shinobi602
- Start date
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
One thing I never understood is why they don't have any general purpose RAM just to offload some of the easier tasks to. Sony tried to do with this with the PS3, but IMO they fucked up the numbers so it made it appear the unified ram arch was a better idea. You wouldn't even really need that much. Just like well in now terms even a cheap 512 stick (if you could even get shit that low) to help offload all the menial tasks to the RAM, and then have the dedicated VRAM just you know be the VRAM.
Unified is nice in theory, but you aren't gonna get that because of the cost and usage. I think the PC arch is right in this regard, but you'd get more benefit since well the OS footprint would still be small. It would just help with general overhead IMO though you'd have to free up a 2nd lane for say the next MS console since MS has one unified set of ram currently. Not like that would really hurt anything though.
PS: If anything I'd be happy with the current 360 way of RAM handling just with 1 gig verses 512, but they need to not fuck up the edram this time around. Great idea that was cock blocked by the fact that they didn't add enough of it to make it 100% usable as in the original design theory.
Unified is nice in theory, but you aren't gonna get that because of the cost and usage. I think the PC arch is right in this regard, but you'd get more benefit since well the OS footprint would still be small. It would just help with general overhead IMO though you'd have to free up a 2nd lane for say the next MS console since MS has one unified set of ram currently. Not like that would really hurt anything though.
PS: If anything I'd be happy with the current 360 way of RAM handling just with 1 gig verses 512, but they need to not fuck up the edram this time around. Great idea that was cock blocked by the fact that they didn't add enough of it to make it 100% usable as in the original design theory.
Death Dealer
Member
Ranger X said:
I think their statement was to garner some attention, and not necessarily what they think is a realistic demand. Maybe it's preemptive PR, so years from now they can say, yeah we could have made Crysis 3 so much better, we told you we wanted 8gb. :eyeroll:
I'm sure they would love to be able to use the same assets and codebase for their next gen console and PC games, and not have to strip things down like Crysis 2. 8gb would allow a lot of slop in the coding. But for developers that specialize in making console games from the ground up, 8gb sounds ridiculous. I can't fathom next gen consoles having more than 2gb for video, so that leaves 6gb of system ram for running games. Insanity.
Warm Machine
Member
I don't know. Every time you want to increase texture resolution you have to increase the map size 4 fold. Going from 1024x1024 to 2048x2048 is a 4x increase. Then every layer of the shader that requires a unique map ideally should have a matching res size. You could argue that to go up a single resolution set The memory is going to increase exponentially.
Typically you have a color,spec, and normal map. So 3 textures for every single material at the base minimum. If you need alpha that is another map, parallax, displacement, subsurface scattering, or emissive texture then that is another map.
The beauty though with modern graphics methods is that they are actually less texture dependant. Ssao, and realtime lighting forgo the use of texture based lighting maps. In some ways memory requirements have actually dropped. Individual assets though could certainly benefit from a much larger video memory pool.
Typically you have a color,spec, and normal map. So 3 textures for every single material at the base minimum. If you need alpha that is another map, parallax, displacement, subsurface scattering, or emissive texture then that is another map.
The beauty though with modern graphics methods is that they are actually less texture dependant. Ssao, and realtime lighting forgo the use of texture based lighting maps. In some ways memory requirements have actually dropped. Individual assets though could certainly benefit from a much larger video memory pool.
CouchMaster
Member
Why are we talking about DDR3 ram in videogame console thread?
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Decarb said:
Because the intellectually weak cannot distinguish the difference between PC specs and console specs.
Now THIS makes sense. It will give them every excuse they can come up with to say why Crysis 3 is not as great as it could have been because they 'did not get' the hardware they wanted.Death Dealer said:
Lol so true, and quite possibly they will come up with all sorts of excuses for why their games aren't so great on consoles.Malvolio said:
Suck it up Crytek. You made this call when you decided to go multi platform not us.
Warm Machine
Member
Sorry, what should Crytek have done? Make another PC only game or something?
Houston3000
Member
ITT people don't really understand how RAM works and overestimate how quickly technology is moving forward.
When 360 originally launched a good gaming PC had about 2GB of RAM, five/six years later a good gaming PC has about 4GB of RAM. Everyone with 8GB of RAM or more these days is either future proofing or using their PC for graphic, video, or audio work. (Actually, more than likely they don't know any better and RAM's so cheap anyways, might as well put it in there).
Also there's a thing called Video RAM, I could possibly see a 2GB VRAM / 2GB RAM split but even that's kind of crazy to think about.
When 360 originally launched a good gaming PC had about 2GB of RAM, five/six years later a good gaming PC has about 4GB of RAM. Everyone with 8GB of RAM or more these days is either future proofing or using their PC for graphic, video, or audio work. (Actually, more than likely they don't know any better and RAM's so cheap anyways, might as well put it in there).
Also there's a thing called Video RAM, I could possibly see a 2GB VRAM / 2GB RAM split but even that's kind of crazy to think about.
considering the length of console cycles these days it would be stupid not to future proof. In 2015 we'll probably have like 1TB in our computers, so sony and ms should aim for that ballpark, or at least build the system with expansion capabilities.
I don't see why ppl are talking about over the counter prices when we're talking about a company-to-company deal. Sony WON'T be paying over the counter prices and they won't be buying regular ole cheap memory that you can buy from a store. Hell they won't be buying modules that they have to snap onto a motherboard. We're talking memory that will be integrated into the motherboard. Nobody knows what type of deal sony will make with a manufacturer. Its also being mass produced.Decarb said:
Vampire Hunter Vizier
Neo Member
In 2-3 years time 8gb will be somewhat standard in PC. I expect at least 4 gb for consoles. What more funny is how crytek is accused for trolling etc...
I wonder what would've GAF said if it was GG or naughty dog saying this.
I wonder what would've GAF said if it was GG or naughty dog saying this.
To people saying that 2 GB will be enough and that 4 GB is insane and 8 GB a lucid dream, look at this news article. Those specs are pretty much what we got in the 360 give or take 300 MHz. It was in february 2004, just slightly more than a year away from the actual reveal of the console. Those specs were insane at the time, three cores and a GPU based on a desktop GPU which was two generations away (R400 launched a few months later back then).
We can extrapolate that Microsoft already knew they'd use GDDR3. This type of memory only started to appear in 2004 too and it understandable that they were reluctant to bump to 512 MB as this amount of GDDR3 only started to appear with the R500 in 2005 and must have seemed overkill back then for the Microsoft execs. Hell, the whole Xbox 360 specs must have seemed overkill to them.
My point is that one or two year before the launch, the specs seemed overkill but that's what allowed the Xbox 360's CPU to still be way above what was offered at consumer level in 2005 and GPU to still be among the best ones compared to the offering at the time.
We can extrapolate that Microsoft already knew they'd use GDDR3. This type of memory only started to appear in 2004 too and it understandable that they were reluctant to bump to 512 MB as this amount of GDDR3 only started to appear with the R500 in 2005 and must have seemed overkill back then for the Microsoft execs. Hell, the whole Xbox 360 specs must have seemed overkill to them.
My point is that one or two year before the launch, the specs seemed overkill but that's what allowed the Xbox 360's CPU to still be way above what was offered at consumer level in 2005 and GPU to still be among the best ones compared to the offering at the time.
CouchMaster
Member
DieH@rd said:
The cost of each RAM type per MB goes up in similar proportions.
Thunderbear
Mawio Gawaxy iz da Wheeson hee pways games
Man 8GB would be sooo amazing but I think it's too expensive. I expect 2GB which would still be a big improvement. 4GB would also be awesome and possibly within cost range.
I really don't blame Crytek for wanting that though. Video RAM is a huge issue to achieving a massive leap in quality.
I really don't blame Crytek for wanting that though. Video RAM is a huge issue to achieving a massive leap in quality.
I recently upgraded to 12GB ram since it was just so cheap and paging annoyed me. But I don't really expect future consoles to feature more than 4GB even if they release late next year.
It will certainly be the gen where contemporary gaming PCs are farther ahead of all the launch consoles than ever before. Power and size budgets bearing out.
It will certainly be the gen where contemporary gaming PCs are farther ahead of all the launch consoles than ever before. Power and size budgets bearing out.
The amount of people talking about DDR3 RAM prices and how Crytek are crazy is just ridiculous...
A console generation ago nobody would question 8GB being possible, with 4GB a definite. Heck XBOX to 360 was a jump of 8 times more ram which leans 4GB should be a lock, PS2 to PS3 was an even larger jump iirc close to 16 times (the same jump that 512 to 8GB would represent).
However, the console landscape has changed and 8GB is not really a reasonable request anymore, developers are struggling to sell more copies of their games but the cost of producing those games is ever increasing and Nintendo has proven that selling consoles isn't about having the best tech specs.
I commend Crytek for wanting the same increase in fidelity for the next generation as we had for past generations, but I think a few GB of very fast ram is far more likely to keep console and development costs down while providing full HD and 3D gaming.
Of course 8GB would be fairly useless without some massive improvements in the media our games come on or a breakthrough in data streaming well beyond what we have now because t he vast majority of console gamers would not put up with forced installs for their new xbox 720 game.
A console generation ago nobody would question 8GB being possible, with 4GB a definite. Heck XBOX to 360 was a jump of 8 times more ram which leans 4GB should be a lock, PS2 to PS3 was an even larger jump iirc close to 16 times (the same jump that 512 to 8GB would represent).
However, the console landscape has changed and 8GB is not really a reasonable request anymore, developers are struggling to sell more copies of their games but the cost of producing those games is ever increasing and Nintendo has proven that selling consoles isn't about having the best tech specs.
I commend Crytek for wanting the same increase in fidelity for the next generation as we had for past generations, but I think a few GB of very fast ram is far more likely to keep console and development costs down while providing full HD and 3D gaming.
Of course 8GB would be fairly useless without some massive improvements in the media our games come on or a breakthrough in data streaming well beyond what we have now because t he vast majority of console gamers would not put up with forced installs for their new xbox 720 game.
The RAM is going to be GDDR5, XDR or XDR2.
And those are not cheap so its not a trivial matter to choose 4GB over 2GB.
And people have to understand that a console board isn't the same as a PC board.
You would have a problem fitting enough of the RAM chips into the console board for 8GB. And the cost of putting 8GB of fast RAM into millions of consoles is not really realistic. They cut cost at every corner.
And those are not cheap so its not a trivial matter to choose 4GB over 2GB.
And people have to understand that a console board isn't the same as a PC board.
You would have a problem fitting enough of the RAM chips into the console board for 8GB. And the cost of putting 8GB of fast RAM into millions of consoles is not really realistic. They cut cost at every corner.
I found one price breakdown for launch Xbox 360:
TOTAL PRICE: $525
IBM designed and co-manufactures the custom microprocessor that powers the Xbox 360. The microprocessor is a triple-core PowerPC that runs at a frequency of 3.20GHz. At a cost of $106, this single part accounts for 20.2% of the total BOM cost for the Xbox 360 Premium, according to preliminary findings from firm.
Other key semiconductors in the Xbox 360 include the graphics processing unit (GPU), the memory and a Southbridge I/O controller. The GPU, designed by ATI Technologies to provide high-definition (HD) graphics, costs an estimated $141, including embedded DRAM from NEC.
The main memory, 512Mbytes of GDDR DRAM from Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., accounts for another $65 of the BOM.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20051123214405.html
$106 cpu
$141 gpu+custom vram
$65 gddr ram
those 3 parts account for 59.5% cost of entire console
TOTAL PRICE: $525
IBM designed and co-manufactures the custom microprocessor that powers the Xbox 360. The microprocessor is a triple-core PowerPC that runs at a frequency of 3.20GHz. At a cost of $106, this single part accounts for 20.2% of the total BOM cost for the Xbox 360 Premium, according to preliminary findings from firm.
Other key semiconductors in the Xbox 360 include the graphics processing unit (GPU), the memory and a Southbridge I/O controller. The GPU, designed by ATI Technologies to provide high-definition (HD) graphics, costs an estimated $141, including embedded DRAM from NEC.
The main memory, 512Mbytes of GDDR DRAM from Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., accounts for another $65 of the BOM.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20051123214405.html
$106 cpu
$141 gpu+custom vram
$65 gddr ram
those 3 parts account for 59.5% cost of entire console
Blue Ninja
Member
i'd be happy with 4, honestly. 8 seems a tad unrealistic (fuck, so does 4), but the next generation hopefully is worthy of the name.
PS3 launch prices - 48$ for 256MB of XDR Ram
Currently, it is estimated that Sony spends around $240 for manufacturing.
http://www.next-gen.biz/news/ps3-manufacturing-costs-down-70-per-cent-report
Currently, it is estimated that Sony spends around $240 for manufacturing.
http://www.next-gen.biz/news/ps3-manufacturing-costs-down-70-per-cent-report
DieH@rd said:I found one price breakdown for launch Xbox 360:
TOTAL PRICE: $525
IBM designed and co-manufactures the custom microprocessor that powers the Xbox 360. The microprocessor is a triple-core PowerPC that runs at a frequency of 3.20GHz. At a cost of $106, this single part accounts for 20.2% of the total BOM cost for the Xbox 360 Premium, according to preliminary findings from firm.
Other key semiconductors in the Xbox 360 include the graphics processing unit (GPU), the memory and a Southbridge I/O controller. The GPU, designed by ATI Technologies to provide high-definition (HD) graphics, costs an estimated $141, including embedded DRAM from NEC.
The main memory, 512Mbytes of GDDR DRAM from Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., accounts for another $65 of the BOM.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20051123214405.html
$106 cpu
$141 gpu+custom vram
$65 gddr ram
those 3 parts account for 59.5% cost of entire console
20GB drives didn't cost $50 in 2005, come on
TOAO_Cyrus
Member
Sethos said:
Your forgetting to include VRAM.
BrainZEROX
Member
Buying a 399$ console does not mean I'll get 399$ of electronic components, I think we all know that. Is half the price a good estimation of what's the hardware contribution in a end user price?