Wickerbasket
Member
I have no idea what any of this stuff means.
Still curious as to why both companies are using so much RAM for the OS.
Still curious as to why both companies are using so much RAM for the OS.
Why would that be the case? The memory is not "for paging", it is allocated to the game. But the management of it's fragmentation is managed, and, in addition, it is extended virtually to include virtual memory backed by the HDD.
But it is real memory dedicated to the game. It is not "bad memory" by any means.
I have no idea what any of this stuff means.
Still curious as to why both companies are using so much RAM for the OS.
I have no idea what any of this stuff means.
Still curious as to why both companies are using so much RAM for the OS.
you are saying that the direct memory is that direct with zero intrusion from the underlying OS. That the flex ram is the only portion that the OS acts as a mediator?
It's interesting that they're willing to explain the nuances between the two but unwilling to offer a figure of the OS footprint; the subject of the entire debate.
I have no idea what any of this stuff means.
Still curious as to why both companies are using so much RAM for the OS.
Because the numbers are likely not finalized yet. Sony made a pretty big judgement error back in 2006 at this same juncture in the PS3's development, and were too aggressive with the amount of RAM they allocated for games.
The end result was that they weren't able to include things like parties, x-game chat, a fully functioning XMB in-game, etc. I would guess that a lot of the same people shitting egg rolls over yesterday's news complained about the lack of those features during the PS3's life cycle. They want it both ways, but that's not how the world works, kiddies.
Now Sony's playing it smart and making sure they leave enough resources set aside for UX and future features. You can always give devs access to more of the memory pool down the road as your OS and app footprints shrink. They're once again showing that they've learned from the mistakes they made with the PS3. The console warz kidz may be crucifying them for it right now but, in time, they'll come to learn what a smart move this was.
As someone who has played video games for quite a while I think I know what's best for a new console.
How much RAM does a dev need to do this?
Fridayton MK III: Cyberaliens join God's attack on Sony HQ....
As someone who has played video games for quite a while I think I know what's best for a new console.
Because the numbers are likely not finalized yet. Sony made a pretty big judgement error back in 2006 at this same juncture in the PS3's development, and were too aggressive with the amount of RAM they allocated for games.
The end result was that they weren't able to include things like parties, x-game chat, a fully functioning XMB in-game, etc. I would guess that a lot of the same people shitting egg rolls over yesterday's news complained about the lack of those features during the PS3's life cycle. They want it both ways, but that's not how the world works, kiddies.
Now Sony's playing it smart and making sure they leave enough resources set aside for UX and future features. You can always give devs access to more of the memory pool down the road as your OS and app footprints shrink. They're once again showing that they've learned from the mistakes they made with the PS3. The console warz kidz may be crucifying them for it right now but, in time, they'll come to learn what a smart move this was.
It's not just the OS. MS and Sony are both leaving plenty of overhead to make sure that the entire UX is smooth and app-driven. They want you to be able to suspend games and apps to RAM and quickly be able to switch between them. They want you to be able to record or stream what you're playing in real time in the background. All of these things require memory overhead.
As someone who has played video games for quite a while I think I know what's best for a new console.
Might want to read the article, flexible memory is 100% for games and has nothing to do with OS reservations.
Although you can frame the question like: why is it flexible not direct to begin with (if it is indeed 100% for games)? Why are they doing it that way? And what are the advantages/disadvantages of this?
Actually, I believe some third party devs said that Sony's tools are more "mature", for the time being anyway.
Based on this information, plus the new source coming forward to explain the properties of flexible memory, our take on this right now is that there is 4.5GB of conventional RAM available to developers, along with the OS-controlled flexible memory Sony describes, in addition to that.
We understand that this is a 1GB virtual address space, split into two areas - 512MB of on-chip RAM is used (the physical area) and another 512MB is "paged", perhaps like a Windows swap file. But to be clear, of the 8GB of GDDR5 on PS4, our contention is that 5GB of it is available to developers.
I think that was already confirmed months ago.Is this the first confirmation we have that the PS4 OS is based off of FreeBSD?
Is this the first confirmation we have that the PS4 OS is based off of FreeBSD?
I have no idea what any of this stuff means.
Still curious as to why both companies are using so much RAM for the OS.
thats the problem. i'm sure all the app switching and "play while you download" is cute, but the big fuss seems to come from a crowd that would rather have that memory reserved for games and not apps.
Microsoft is using so much because they are a bloated media box.
Sony is using it to future proof the machine. Which is good.
thats the problem. i'm sure all the app switching and "play while you download" is cute, but the big fuss seems to come from a crowd that would rather have that memory reserved for games and not apps.
Haha lol. I love it.Microsoft is using so much because they are a bloated media box.
Sony is using it to future proof the machine. Which is good.
Thanks for clarifying.Yes.
How much RAM does a dev need to do this?
That is the only amount I care about.
So if this 4.5 malarkey is true, does that mean Sony lied? I certainly think it would paint them as disingenuous.
Never realized how much that second picture looks like Zaeed with elf ears. Robin Sachs would have been the PERFECT voice actor for that characterHow much RAM does a dev need to do this?
http://i.minus.com/ibjxCz37mFXzrX.gif
http://i.minus.com/ibp2LYnmQJjEkC.gif
That is the only amount I care about.
How much RAM does a dev need to do this?
That is the only amount I care about.
Microsoft is using so much because they are a bloated media box.
Sony is using it to future proof the machine. Which is good.
Dat bias.Microsoft is using so much because they are a bloated media box.
Sony is using it to future proof the machine. Which is good.
How much RAM does a dev need to do this?
That is the only amount I care about.
Microsoft is using so much because they are a bloated media box.
Sony is using it to future proof the machine. Which is good.
Sony failing to comment on the exact numbers can only mean the following:
A: They are still working out the details and have yet to finalize the numbers.
B: They have some as of yet unannounced features that may be using extra RAM.
C: The OS is indeed a bloated mess and they are hiding the numbers.
D: The world is ending.
Seriously though, I think remote play of every game is very ambitious and may be accounting for a good chunk of this.
So it's still just a rumour, after all this wailing and gnashing of teeth, and we're still nowhere nearer a resolution to this shitstain. And, even if it's true, it just means that the amount of memory devs can use is the same on both XBOne and PS4. So it's meaningless, since the PS4 is still superior to XBOne tech-wise and for other reasons, one of which is the lack of Ryse as a platform exclusiveHAH BETCHA THOUGHT I WAS GONNA SAY KINECT HUH
...
I've said it before - console wars never fail to bring out the full retard in GAF.
Think of it as a partition. In a PC if you have 8GB of RAM it means the OS can assign up to 8GB of RAM for stuffbut it's usually using much less, say, 1.5GB. But it would be a big problem if you only had 1.5GB of RAM, so you have the extra 6.5GB for when you need it
In the console the developer has to have a set amount of RAM so that they know they're not stepping on the OS's toes and vice versa. So they set aside 3GB of RAM for the background OS processes that are happening all the time plus enough RAM so that they can do more stuff when they need to.
At least this is my understanding.
thats the problem. i'm sure all the app switching and "play while you download" is cute, but the big fuss seems to come from a crowd that would rather have that memory reserved for games and not apps.
Crisis adverted, MS fanboy air strike called off. All is well for Team Sony.Based on this information, plus the new source coming forward to explain the properties of flexible memory, our take on this right now is that there is 4.5GB of conventional RAM available to developers, along with the OS-controlled flexible memory Sony describes, in addition to that.
We understand that this is a 1GB virtual address space, split into two areas - 512MB of on-chip RAM is used (the physical area) and another 512MB is "paged", perhaps like a Windows swap file. But to be clear, of the 8GB of GDDR5 on PS4, our contention is that 5GB of it is available to developers.
The good news is that the amount is static and not dictated by OS functions as we stated in our original post, making it a lot easier for developers to work with.
I haven't paid much attention to this lunacy.
From what I can gather we basically went from
7GB GDDR5 for games, 1 GB for OS
to
5GB GDDR5 for games, 3 GB for OS
If my highly advanced mathematical calculations are correct.. 7 - 5 = 2
So essentially all this incessant bitching is over 2 fucking GBs of GDDR5....
Am I missing something?
Because the numbers are likely not finalized yet. Sony made a pretty big judgement error back in 2006 at this same juncture in the PS3's development, and were too aggressive with the amount of RAM they allocated for games.
The end result was that they weren't able to include things like parties, x-game chat, a fully functioning XMB in-game, etc. I would guess that a lot of the same people shitting egg rolls over yesterday's news complained about the lack of those features during the PS3's life cycle. They want it both ways, but that's not how the world works, kiddies.