Support NeoGAF

[UntoldDreams]

So just better AA? Hardly a killer feature. Anything over 4gb is overkill for gaming on PC, I really doubt the PS4 will fundamently change how devs make games. In fact it seems like PCs and consoles are getting closer and closer.

What the hell? As a developer on PC stuff I would absolutely prefer a unified memory architecture with a high speed bus shared between both CPU and GPU.

It's an IDEAL system for development and where we SHOULD end up eventually. I couldn't fathom how anyone could or would argue otherwise.

 

[8GB GDDR5]

Of course not just better AA. Every new next gen graphical feature, either previously used or yet to be used, is going to be more bandwidth and memory intensive. And anything over 4GB is only overkill because PC's were largely just getting previous gen ports, which were hardly pushing the boat. You wait till we get in to the swing of this new generation and then start telling me about how much ram PC GPU's are hogging.

RAM just allows you to store more data, it doesn't process anything. More ram will let you store bigger textures and bigger worlds without going to the loading screen. Not much else.

 

[8GB GDDR5]

What the hell? As a developer on PC stuff I would absolutely prefer a unified memory architecture with a high speed bus shared between both CPU and GPU.

It's an IDEAL system for development and where we SHOULD end up eventually. I couldn't fathom how anyone could or would argue otherwise.

Unified RAM makes it easier to program for, but in no way does it make more powerful. Xbox 360 had unified ram while the PS3 didn't. Didn't stop most games from looking nearly identical.

 

[RayMaker]

All of the big three are trying to get as many people possible to buy their console. That's natural.

They all have different strategies though:

Sony: Have the best graphics and most core gamer centric experience. Downside is price and there are only so many "core gamers" out there.

Microsoft: Try to make the console more then just a gaming machine and attract people not necessarily interested in the gaming aspect but the media aspect of the console and also attract core gamers with exclusives and competitive graphics and gameplay. Downside is few people want to pay the price of the console for the media side and well you alienate gamers ie. what Gaf has been today.

Nintendo: Try to make more gamers ie. Wii Sports/Play/Fit bringing new people into the videogame marketplace such as seniors, soccer moms and little kids. Downside is these new "gamers" tend to not buy too many games and aren't loyal customers.

fixed

 

[McSpidey]

They mention custom silicon in the disk drive. This must be linked to the use-once media drm.

 

[i-Lo]

Please inform me then. How will 8GB GDDR5 help?

7850 performs the way it does thanks to its GDDR5 RAM. GPU processing is highly bandwidth intensive and that's why the retail card never came with DDR3 ram on board (same reason why XB1 will pack eDRAM as well). Bandwidth intensive tasks, aside from the general transfer of raw data to the GPU, are AA and more importantly alpha effects (eg smoke). Without GDDR5 the GPU would be crippled and would not be able to function with either the efficiency and effectiveness for which it was designed.

The RAM in PS4 is rated at 176GB/sec and the GPU lies between 7850 and 7870 (18 CUs) and both its retail siblings run on memory bandwidth rated at 153.6GB/sec. The CPU takes up less than 20GB/sec in PS4 and customizations means that both CPU and GPU can access the same pool of data in parallel (iirc). This means no bottlenecks (nothing like what PS3 faced).

Also, the GPU in XB1 is rumoured to be a 7790 or a down-tuned 7850 variant (12 CUs) that has 2 triangle set up (meaning 2 triangles per 1Hz on clock speed).

The whole of ram will be used for more than just using static assets. Stuff like streaming and negating load times come into play. So in ways, it'll change development forever.

 

[Durante]

What the hell? As a developer on PC stuff I would absolutely prefer a unified memory architecture with a high speed bus shared between both CPU and GPU.

It's an IDEAL system for development and where we SHOULD end up eventually. I couldn't fathom how anyone could or would argue otherwise.

From a software perspective, it is indeed hard to argue. From a hardware perspective, you can always make 2 memory buses with more aggregate bandwidth than a single bus, and you can tailor different memory pools to different needs in terms of performance characteristics (i.e. the main memory pool is lower latency and bandwidth and the GPU memory pool is higher latency and bandwidth on current PCs)

 

[UntoldDreams]

RAM just allows you to store more data, it doesn't process anything. More ram will let you store bigger textures and bigger worlds without going to the loading screen. Not much else.

There is a point of diminishing returns for any particular architecture (gaming or engineering). Saying 4GB is the "ceiling" needed is circular logic in that the ceiling was organically chosen simply because of what the general market could support. If the market was filled with 16 GB RAM machines then games would have been architected differently.

 

[Dragon]

Unified RAM makes it easier to program for, but in no way does it make more powerful. Xbox 360 had unified ram while the PS3 didn't. Didn't stop most games from looking nearly identical.

If you thought Ram didn't matter essentially you wouldn't have made that awful username.

 

[H_Prestige]

Unified RAM makes it easier to program for, but in no way does it make more powerful. Xbox 360 had unified ram while the PS3 didn't. Didn't stop most games from looking nearly identical.

Actually most early games looked noticeably better on 360. And that was because of the unified RAM.

 

[KidGalactus]

Yup, Drive Club is the one you want to compare it to. I disagree that Drive Club looks better at all, but whats worth taking away is that they are both distinctively next-gen. People here claiming that its just Xbox360 1.5 are kidding themselves. This is still a powerful machine.

Of course not. It's Xbox 361

 

[nib95]

RAM just allows you to store more data, it doesn't process anything. More ram will let you store bigger textures and bigger worlds without going to the loading screen. Not much else.

The higher the ram bandwidth, the more of it you can access at any given frame. Rounded off, with 68Gbps DDR3 ram, Xbox One can access 1GB per frame at 60fps, and 2GB per frame at 30fps. By contrast, the PS4 with it's 176Gbps GDDR5 will have access to 3GB per frame at 60fps, and 6GB per frame at 30fps. Essentially triple the amount of ram available per any given frame.

 

[thecouncil]

Can someone tell me how this thing has 5 billion transistors please.

 

[8GB GDDR5]

7850 performs the way it does thanks to its GDDR5 RAM. GPU processing is highly bandwidth intensive and that's why the retail card never came with DDR3 ram on board (same reason why XB1 will pack eDRAM as well). Bandwidth intensive tasks, aside from the general transfer of raw data to the GPU, are AA and more importantly alpha effects (eg smoke). Without GDDR5 the GPU would be crippled and would not be able to function with either the efficiency and effectiveness for which it was designed.

The RAM in PS4 is rated at 176GB/sec and the GPU lies between 7850 and 7870 (18 CUs) and both its retail siblings run on memory bandwidth rated at 153.6GB/sec. The CPU takes up less than 20GB/sec in PS4 and customizations means that both CPU and GPU can access the same pool of data in parallel (iirc). This means no bottlenecks (nothing like what PS3 faced).

Also, the GPU in XB1 is rumoured to be a 7790 or a down-tuned 7850 variant (12 CUs) that has 2 triangle set up (meaning 2 triangles per 1Hz on clock speed).

The whole of ram will be used for more than just using static assets. Stuff like streaming and negating load times come into play. So in ways, it'll change development forever.

I have a 2GB 7850 and it's a great card, but plopping 6 more GB or ram isn't going to do anything. If the Xbox One has no high speed ram then I'll be worried.

 

[UntoldDreams]

Unified RAM makes it easier to program for, but in no way does it make more powerful. Xbox 360 had unified ram while the PS3 didn't. Didn't stop most games from looking nearly identical.

The word "Powerful" is rough resolution to use in comparison of any complex systems. I am more "powerful" than a goldfish, yet I would quickly drown underwater and the goldfish would survive.

I think the point of the OT here is that MS focused their $$ and thermal budget on something they could deliver without breaking the bank. Some performance will suffer due to budget choices no two bones about it... The question is if the overall VALUE of the choices made can be convinced to the consumer.

 

[Hatten]

I bet whoever made that decision waved a Wii with a DS glued to it.

Those 2 consoles were way, waaaaaaay behind their competition in term of specs, and yet outsold them all.

Just how much money microsoft lost with the Xbox again? a lot, and another lot with the X360

Adding the kinect2 by default is the same decision Nintendo made 7 years ago when they bundle the wiimote with the Wii instead of offering it as an accesory for the Gamecube as originally intended.

 

[nib95]

Can someone tell me how this thing has 5 billion transistors please.

Esram has an extremely high transistor density, could be partially that.

 

[i-Lo]

I have a 2GB 7850 and it's a great card, but plopping 6 more GB or ram isn't going to do anything. If the Xbox One has no high speed ram then I'll be worried.

I hope you are aware that the whole amount is never gong to be used for graphical data alone... right?

And Xbox 1 has DDR3 + eDRAM (which according some will act like a L3 cache). This system was designed where balance was paramount and for the suggested GPU, the ram situation looks optimum. However, it would be more of a challenge to program for than PS4.

 

[nib95]

I have a 2GB 7850 and it's a great card, but plopping 6 more GB or ram isn't going to do anything. If the Xbox One has no high speed ram then I'll be worried.

That's because you're playing current gen games that aren't very taxing. Stick in Crysis 3 and turn on Ultra settings, combined by 8xMSAA and watch your ram use completely max out and your system cry.

 

[Spongebob]

I believe the 7770 actually runs at 1000mhz, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's just a 7770 underclocked. If it is the PS4 will be much more powerful. A 7770 struggles to max games at 1080p, while a 7850 will max almost every game at 1080 fairly easily. This is on PC of course, consoles usually have less overhead.

Xbox One has 2 more CUs than a 7770.

I have a 2GB 7850 and it's a great card, but plopping 6 more GB or ram isn't going to do anything. If the Xbox One has no high speed ram then I'll be worried.

You couldn't be more wrong.

Also that 8GB of RAM will also have to function as general system RAM (CPU, loading etc.) and not just graphics memory.

Can someone tell me how this thing has 5 billion transistors please.

It's been speculated that could include elements from the new Kinect.

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

I really can't get over how unimpressive the visuals were, this Forza 5 trailer looks about the same as the GT6 trailer. Where is the huge jump that people are going to shell out $500 for?

Forza 5
http://youtu.be/r46D1lRpO1k

GT6
http://youtu.be/5-LILLcpO88

Are you kidding?

Textures, level of detail in the track, all that 3D spectators, etc..?

Actually is dissapoiting to see how good could have GT6 looked on PS4.

 

[pakkit]

This is a real missed opportunity for Nintendo, I feel like what Microsoft is doing with the Xbox One was exactly what Nintendo were targeting : all around entertainment system with special features to differentiate themselves... only... done right.

I like it.

Exactly how I feel. Microsoft correctly took on the "Wii" mentality. Sony's machine seems like a great alternative to PC gaming. And Nintendo's console...just really needs more first party support so it can start growing.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

When they open the conference with "we want technology to go back behind the curtain", you should have seen this coming.

They didn't really say this did they?

 

[Brashnir]

Are you kidding?

Textures, level of detail in the track, all that 3D spectators, etc..?

Actually is dissapoiting to see how good could have GT6 looked on PS4.

Don't worry, we'll get GT7 on PS4

Spoiler

in 2019

 

[RayMaker]

I hope you are aware that the whole amount is never gong to be used for graphical data alone... right?

And Xbox 1 has DDR3 + eDRAM (which according some will act like a L3 cache). This system was designed where balance was paramount and for the suggested GPU, the ram situation looks optimum. However, it would be more of a challenge to program for than PS4.

The x1 wont be hard to program for though will it?

i see it like the x1 will be easy to prgram for and the PS4 will be easier to program for.

the 360 had 10mb edram and 512mb and devs said that it was easy to program for and apparently the x1 is better then 360 making it easier to program for then the 360.

 

[Donthizz#]

I miss Reiko.

 

[RayMaker]

I miss Reiko.

what happened to him?

 

[Tashi]

High end graphics were never what I associated my favorite games with. Totally fine with that.

 

[i-Lo]

The x1 wont be hard to program for though will it?

i see it like the x1 will be easy to prgram for and the PS4 will be easier to program for.

the 360 had 10mb edram and 512mb and devs said that it was easy to program for and apparently the x1 is better then 360 making it easier to program for then the 360.

Ergo, it'll be more difficult to program for than PS4. Teh powah of choice of words.

And I've read about stories here of devs not being happy with the 360 because of its tiny cache of eDRAM. That'll shouldn't be a problem any more however.

They didn't really say this did they?

Yes they did.

 

[Man]

They didn't really say this did they?

I witnessed this moment. *sobs*

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

I witnessed this moment. *sobs*

Well that is pretty damning.

 

[AzaK]

I think those of you who are convincing yourself the Forza clip looked better than the GT5 one are kind of just wanting to see things that aren't there.

The colours and lighting are more subtle in GT5 so it does lack the flair, but that has always been the case with GT5, they go for realism over flair.

It will be interesting to see how the in-game visuals compare at E3, my money is going on them being very, very similar.

I guess a better question would be, do you all see $500 worth of difference? I know I don't.

lol, yes, we all know Forza has better sounds (I own them both, they are great games).

I could hardly see any straight edges in Forza but in the initial montage of car headlights in GT you can see tonnes of "angular" circles. Still, GT5 looks pretty damned impressive.

 

[shandy706]

They couldn't handle that 8GB GDDR5.

Would be interesting to see which console will be the lead for development. PS4 exclusives are going to wipe the floor in terms of graphics next gen.

..and my GPU from last year will wipe the floor with anything on next-gen consoles.

In other words, who cares. The PS4 and X1 will be close enough it won't matter. My PC will still be my downsampling top tier gaming system and my PS4/X1 will be for exclusives that can't get past 1080p and still have limited AA.

The PS4 is no better that the X1, and the X1 is no better than the PS4 to me.

 

[i-Lo]

Well that is pretty damning.

Relive dat moment

You're welcome.

 

[prwxv3]

what happened to him?

perm banned

 

[artist]

I'm so frustrated by this power thing. The PS2 came out more than 18 months before the Xbox. The console gen was decided before the Xbox was released; it could have been weaker than the PS2 and it would not have mattered. The whole conversation is meaningless; it does not reveal anything about consumer choices or consumer tastes.

However, if you examine the PS2 in the context in which it was released, you would surely realize that power was a key component of how the system was marketed to consumers. You would know:

• That the hardware components were given humanizing marketing names like "Emotion Engine" and "Graphics Synthesizer"
• That the PS2 was reported on in the media as being a supercomputer ("Sadaam Hussein is importing them TO LAUNCH MISSILES!")
• That the famous "PS9" ad linked the PS2 to a chain of consoles so powerful it became part of your mind
• That Kutaragi spoke about the PS2 as having "Toy Story like graphics" and that players would "jack into the matrix"

Stop being so intellectually dishonest. The PS2 was a monster when it came out. That power mattered.

Yes, it's true that, "The most powerful console has never won the generation!!!!111" But such an observation is facile and meaningless. The SNES and Genesis went head to head on power. The early days of the PS1 vs. Saturn was nothing but a 3d pissing match. The N64 was all about power and it debuted with a paradigm-shifting 3D title. The Dreamcast was a powerful machine ("it's thinking") and the PS2 came out and blew it away.

Am I saying the most powerful machine wins? No. Am I saying power is very important? Absolutely. Even this generation more consumers chose HD gaming machines than non-HD gaming machines and there is the possibility that the PS3 will close out the gen in first place.

So stahp.

what happened to him?

He alluded to 64MB ESRAM, 12GB DDR3, 20CU, 2+ TFlops GPU (big upgrade) in Durango. Besides, he also kept hinting a lot of other stuff in cryptic ways all of which turned out BS.

 

[maximum360]

perm banned

What happened?

 

[Amir0x]

That is a brilliant post from Y2Kev. Wow.

 

[nib95]

I'm so frustrated by this power thing. The PS2 came out more than 18 months before the Xbox. The console gen was decided before the Xbox was released; it could have been weaker than the PS2 and it would not have mattered. The whole conversation is meaningless; it does not reveal anything about consumer choices or consumer tastes.

However, if you examine the PS2 in the context in which it was released, you would surely realize that power was a key component of how the system was marketed to consumers. You would know:

• That the hardware components were given humanizing marketing names like "Emotion Engine" and "Graphics Synthesizer"
• That the PS2 was reported on in the media as being a supercomputer ("Sadaam Hussein is importing them TO LAUNCH MISSILES!")
• That the famous "PS9" ad linked the PS2 to a chain of consoles so powerful it became part of your mind
• That Kutaragi spoke about the PS2 as having "Toy Story like graphics" and that players would "jack into the matrix"

Stop being so intellectually dishonest. The PS2 was a monster when it came out. That power mattered.

Yes, it's true that, "The most powerful console has never won the generation!!!!111" But such an observation is facile and meaningless. The SNES and Genesis went head to head on power. The early days of the PS1 vs. Saturn was nothing but a 3d pissing match. The N64 was all about power and it debuted with a paradigm-shifting 3D title. The Dreamcast was a powerful machine ("it's thinking") and the PS2 came out and blew it away.

Am I saying the most powerful machine wins? No. Am I saying power is very important? Absolutely. Even this generation more consumers chose HD gaming machines than non-HD gaming machines and there is the possibility that the PS3 will close out the gen in first place.

So stahp.

Great post.

 

[i-Lo]

What happened?

It happens when you try to pass off every odd rumour as insider info, i.e. disseminating misinformation without discrimination and being adamant about it.

 

[Man]

Great, great post Y2Kev.

 

[stolin]

The higher the ram bandwidth, the more of it you can access at any given frame. Rounded off, with 68Gbps DDR3 ram, Xbox One can access 1GB per frame at 60fps, and 2GB per frame at 30fps. By contrast, the PS4 with it's 176Gbps GDDR5 will have access to 3GB per frame at 60fps, and 6GB per frame at 30fps. Essentially triple the amount of ram available per any given frame.

This is the correct answer.

 

[JohnnySasaki86]

RAM just allows you to store more data, it doesn't process anything. More ram will let you store bigger textures and bigger worlds without going to the loading screen. Not much else.

Correct, but faster higher bandwidth memory will transfer everything in and out of memory much faster. This can lead to higher framerates. Framerate can be bandwidth or GPU bound. Developers have a lot of problems with being bottlenecked by the memory. Also games that do a lot of streaming will see a big performance increase. This is why GDDR5 is better.

 

[Godslay]

Define care? I think they'll use the added bandwidth and computational advantage of the PS4 to at least bump a few things up. AA, AF, SSAO, shadow quality, post processing, depth of field etc. Or perhaps even 720p vs 1080p, slightly better frame rates etc. There's no reason why they can't.

Will they invest the time and money to bump a few things up? You could have all the RAM in the world, but it only matters if it is utilized.

What will be the lead platform? Will they say, let's build this on the Xbox and then Up-port to the PS4 because we have more leeway to make it run? Or the other way around? I don't know, and it will be interesting to find out. That's why I'm curious if 3rd parties will even care, assuming they can get the roughly the same product out on both boxes on time, within budget. Who knows?

 

[AgentP]

Gloating is never a good look, guys.

One of my post was made before I knew he was banned, the other I was feeling bad for him. That being said, he made his bed, now he is lying in it. No one made him post months of wishful thinking posts and wannbe insider stuff.

 

[Projectjustice]

The problem with the Xbox One isnt the hardware. The specs are on the same playing field as PS4. The problem is MS focus away from gaming and making a TV-box. So all this argument about specs is just silly at this point. They are both weaker than current PCs.

 

[OG_Original Gamer]

A tech demo would have been better than what they showed. Maybe something from 343 or Rare.

 

[SneakyStephan]

What the hell? As a developer on PC stuff I would absolutely prefer a unified memory architecture with a high speed bus shared between both CPU and GPU.

It's an IDEAL system for development and where we SHOULD end up eventually. I couldn't fathom how anyone could or would argue otherwise.

I don't want unified memory on pc.

Last thing I need is being tied to one shared manufacturer for gpu and cpu. The duopolies we currently have are bad enough as is.

It's also nice that pcs are highly modular, and it has to stay that way.
If one part breaks I don't have to spend extra hundreds of euros to replace the other bits, + upgrading parts seperately.

It's fine for a closed box like a console but has no place in pc gaming.
But hey devs these days... self serving and fuck the consumer. I hope whatever manufacturer tries to force unified memory on pc sees record losses that year.

 

[eighty(one)]

But the weaker (not necessarily weakest) system won the last two gens. ie. Wii and the PS2 before that (yeah, yeah Dreamcast, thus weaker instead of weakest).

Again, did nobody catch what I replied?

Third console curse - Historically, the third console is always the console which sees the market share lead dwindle away.

You could argue the tech angle and I will reply with MS is entering their third system and every third home system has tanked from the top.

 

[x-Lundz-x]

Please inform me then. How will 8GB GDDR5 help?

I saw Killzone 4 a few months ago and said damn, that's next gen.

Today I saw a cable box that needs 3 GB of ram alone just to operate. And I guess an HD version of CoD...finally.