Support NeoGAF

[alphaNoid]

It's the most amusing method of downplaying I've ever seen.

Too much RAM, now a negative, and "bad for gamers" to boot, who would have thought it?

The mental gymnastics required to come to that conclusion should lead to pulled muscles and torn ligaments

I think the idea is that if it ends up being 8GB GDDR5 (~1.8Tflps) vs 8GB DDR3+eSRAM (~1.4Tflps), most all multiplatform games are going to be designed for the lower common denominator.. leaving only 1st party Sony titles specifically designed for the PS4 to take advantage of the bandwidth. It still gives Sony that 1st party edge, however.. GDDR5 is not cheap, at all. DDR3 is extremely cheap.

People are assuming if this is the end scenario one of two things is going to have to happen.

1. Sony prices the console comparatively to Durango, takes a big loss. Note : Sony cannot afford to take losses in 2013.
2. PS4 is going to cost more for users, and users end up paying more for a console of which the vast majority games will not take advantage of the added memory bandwidth.

In the end, someone is paying more so that a few games can load more objects on the screen, and a bit faster.

 

[Durante]

I don't think that is comparable. No one knows how they manage to put 8GB of GDRR5 ram into it. Stacking ?

It's really not remotely as bad as people make it sound. Titan has 12 of its 24 GDDR5 chips on its back, running at higher frequency, without any cooling at all.

And the most likely answer for the "how" is clamshell with 8 chips per side.

 

[BloodMoney]

I didn't watch the whole thing because it was kinda painful to see people actually trying their best to be underwhelmed. But he didn't say any of that.

He definitely compared the $600 PC his friend built for him with 8GB of system memory to the 8GB of PS4's memory and made it out to be no big deal. I seriously doubt he understands how GDDR5 is FAR superior to the system memory he has in the PC he couldn't assemble on his own.

 

[Roo]

Isn't the RAM one of the most expensive components from a console?
I wonder why they technically went with the most expensive option.. and I'm not even talking about the ammount of RAM but the type.

I mean, yeah, it amazing they went this route but they'll probably bleed money again. Not PS3 level but sill, I'm a little concerned about it.
It's like Sony doesn't give a fuck about their current economical situation

They did this to please developers but I'm sure as fuck they will be the first ones to abandon ship if it sinks if you know what I mean

 

[AndrewDean84xX]

New Kinect thingy, new controller, and 8GB GDDR5. How can this thing not be priced at $500-$600?

 

[Kung Fu Grip]

It's the most amusing method of downplaying I've ever seen.

Too much RAM, now a negative, and "bad for gamers" to boot, who would have thought it?

The mental gymnastics required to come to that conclusion should lead to pulled muscles and torn ligaments

I'm enjoying it. It's too funny.

Even though MS is only using DDR3, nobody complained about their 8GB or RAM.

And now people are saying it's going to be downgraded by E3. :lol

 

[beast786]

I think the idea is that if it ends up being 8GB GDDR5 (~1.8Tflps) vs 8GB DDR3+eSRAM (~1.4Tflps), most all multiplatform games are going to be designed for the lower common denominator.. leaving only 1st party Sony titles specifically designed for the PS4 to take advantage of the bandwidth. It still gives Sony that 1st part edge, however.. GDD5 is not cheap, at all. DD3 is extremely, extremely cheap.

People are assuming if this is the end scenario one of two things is going to have to happen.

1. Sony prices the console comparatively to Durango, takes a MASSIVE loss. Note : Sony cannot afford to take losses in 2013.
2. PS4 is going to cost more for users, and users end up paying more for a console of which the vast majority games will not take advantage of the added memory bandwidth.

There was obvious different between ps3/360 in multiplatform games. People clearly picked 360 versions even when slight frame rate advantage we're sold better and eventually set a mindset that 360 is where better MP games are at, a stigma that haunted Sony through out this gen.

So just riding it out as meh at the differences is not what has happened

 

[Cheech]

What I'm not clear on is why they did this.

Wouldn't it actually be cheaper to include 8 gigs of DDR3, and then another 2 gigs of DDR5 dedicated to the GPU? That configuration would mirror pretty much all higher end PC gaming rigs.

I am sure it gives devs more flexibility as far as how much they can use for the GPU functions per game, but oy, what a cost. And I honestly don't see the huge advantage in being able to do that, if you go with my configuration above.

 

[nib95]

What I'm not clear on is why they did this.

Wouldn't it actually be cheaper to include 8 gigs of DDR3, and then another 2 gigs of DDR5 dedicated to the GPU? That configuration would mirror pretty much all higher end PC gaming rigs.

I am sure it gives devs more flexibility as far as how much they can use for the GPU functions per game, but oy, what a cost. And I honestly don't see the huge advantage in being able to do that, if you go with my configuration above.

That would be much worse on the gaming side. DDR3 is slower ram. Also it's not easy to fit DDR3 and GDDR5. A gpu on a PC is a separate large device altogether, in a console to have the two different types you'd need complex changes to the motherboard, buses etc.

 

[MadSkillzBahamut]

Is this dedicated video ram or just like, general ram. Does the system even have dedicated VRAM at all?

 

[Cheech]

That would be much worse on the gaming side. DDR3 is slower ram. Also it's not easy to fit DDR3 and GDDR5. A gpu on a PC is a separate large device altogether, in a console to have the two different types you'd need complex changes to the motherboard, buses etc.

But this configuration is what is in every gaming PC today, isn't it? You have the GDDR5 on the graphics card, and the DDR3 modules on the motherboard.

Is this dedicated video ram or just like, general ram. Does the system even have dedicated VRAM at all?

No, it's "unified", which is what you see on cheaper laptops. Except unlike the cheaper laptops, the PS4 has all high end RAM, and not the cheap shit. This is why cheap laptops suck at games, BTW; there is no fast way to swap textures and perform other GPU functions that depend on fast RAM.

 

[Moral Panic]

It's the most amusing method of downplaying I've ever seen.

Too much RAM, now a negative, and "bad for gamers" to boot, who would have thought it?

The mental gymnastics required to come to that conclusion should lead to pulled muscles and torn ligaments

Not really. If you look at the context he was clearly talking about it relative to other improvements that could be made. He's saying that the choice to go to 8GB raises the price without enough of an increase in the quality of games compared to spending that money on a better GPU or CPU. You can disagree with it, but simple reading allows you to see what he is talking about.

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

Someone help me, I don't know much about this stuff. How can extra RAM help?

• Less pop ins? No, LOD its there to lessen GPU load.
• Better graphics? No.
• Better framerate? No, but can help with minimum framerates avoiding some streaming from HDD/BD.
• Bigger worlds? Yes.
• Better textures? No. You need moar TMU's and muscle for that.
• Better AI? No. You need better AI subroutines, not more RAM.
• Better physics? No. You need more processors, not more RAM.
• Faster loading games? No. Less load times. More RAM cand hold more things, but can't make slower devices to transfer data faster or make CPU to unpack it faster either.
• Anything else I missed? Less profit marging for Sony, lol.

Bolded.

 

[Osiris]

Bolded.

No offense dude, but after "8GB is not good for gamers" I don't think anyone is going to take anything your say seriously ever again.

.

 

[Skyzard]

How does the cpu compare to say a decent i7 processor?

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

What I'm not clear on is why they did this.

Wouldn't it actually be cheaper to include 8 gigs of DDR3, and then another 2 gigs of DDR5 dedicated to the GPU? That configuration would mirror pretty much all higher end PC gaming rigs.

I am sure it gives devs more flexibility as far as how much they can use for the GPU functions per game, but oy, what a cost. And I honestly don't see the huge advantage in being able to do that, if you go with my configuration above.

Then you miss the point of unified memory pool. You would need an interface between memories, another Memory Controller, since DDR3 MC and GDDR5 MC are different, and COPY memory, wasting tons of bandwidth.

Different thing is the smarter and cheaper aproach that MS and Ninty did with big main pool + fast ESRAM/EDRAM.

No offense dude, but after "8GB is not good for gamers" I don't think anyone is going to take anything your say seriously ever again.

.

Like if I care people like you do.

 

[Durante]

How does the cpu compare to say a decent i7 processor?

It doesn't, but this is not the thread for that comparison.

Bolded.

Realistic, but with a somewhat negative spin. The one I really disagree with is textures. You don't need more TMUs to get more texture variety, you need more RAM.

Different thing is the smarter and cheaper aproach that MS and Ninty did with big main pool + fast ESRAM/EDRAM.

That approach still shares many of the same disadvantages of split memory pools.

 

[nib95]

But this configuration is what is in every gaming PC today, isn't it? You have the GDDR5 on the graphics card, and the DDR3 modules on the motherboard.



No, it's "unified", which is what you see on cheaper laptops. Except unlike the cheaper laptops, the PS4 has all high end RAM, and not the cheap shit. This is why cheap laptops suck at games, BTW; there is no fast way to swap textures and perform other GPU functions that depend on fast RAM.

That's because there's often a need for loads of system ram. For software, os, applications etc. It's too expensive to have 8gb of GDDR5, nor do normal system uses require close to that kind of bandwidth, that's why on PC it's split like that. Slower system ram (but lots of it) for system use and much faster video ran for graphics. For cost effectiveness. PS4 being a gaming machine is different.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

How does the cpu compare to say a decent i7 processor?

it compares poorly.

 

[Curufinwe]

No offense dude, but after "8GB is not good for gamers" I don't think anyone is going to take anything your say seriously ever again.

.

Yeah, I think I'll go with John Carmack and the other developers on this one.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=514730

 

[Gorillaz]

You guys are insane if you think 8gigs of GDDR5 isn't enough. That's plenty

 

[Durante]

You guys are insane if you think 8gigs of GDDR5 isn't enough. That's plenty

I don't think anyone claimed that it's not enough. Some seem to argue it's too much, at least in terms of RoI.

 

[Curufinwe]

You guys are insane if you think 8gigs of GDDR5 isn't enough. That's plenty

Has anyone said that? I thought it was just one person saying 8 GB of GDDR5 was too much.

 

[nib95]

Has anyone said that? I thought it was just one person saying 8 GB of GDDR5 was too much.

For the record I never said it was too much, just that I'd have preferred less money on the additional ram and more on a better gpu.

 

[Lord Error]

I find this notion that Sony is including 8GB of GDDR5 RAM strictly as some marketing ploy to be fairly unlikely.

That is completely and utterly ridiculous. Even if devs just can't use that much fast ram meaningfully, which would after all be doubting in ingenuity of some of the smartest people around, what was Sony's other option of building a machine that would satisfy dev's high end wishes of having 8GB of RAM and also matching the amount that MS is having? This was definitely the only feasable option because they'd have to redesign hardware completely if they went with split memory pool of 4Gb GDDR5 and 4Gb of DDR3.

I have to say personally, I don't know how that much ram with that much bandwidth can be utilized, but I only don't know because I've never seen a precedent. Realistically, there was never a reason for anyone to even think about using that much fast ram in game making, not even on PC. Now that the option is on the table, people who really know this kind of stuff, will most likely find a way to make use of it.

For the record I never said it was too much, just that I'd have preferred less money on the additional ram and more on a better gpu.

That could have possibly been a better option, but it would again require a total redesign of everything. I think that Sony probably lucked out on some deal on ram at the last moment because prices dropped, and it was something they could add in so late without redesigning anything.

 

[delta25]

when I enter this thread this is the first thing that comes to mind...

edit: I'm not all that up to date on this GDDR stuff, what does this all mean for the PS4?

 

[Kambing]

8GB of ram is absolutely bonkers and awesome, really excited about it.

However I can't help but feel that perhaps they should have just gone with 6GB and allocate their budget towards beefing up the GPU, in terms of CU or increase the overall TF output. Because as it stands, i feel like the GPU might bottle neck the RAM? But i know jackshit about this so i am probably wrong haha.

I suppose what i am trying to say is, given my knowledge of GPU cards in PC, i would have much rather sony went(theoretical comparison of GPU in PS4) with say a 6GB HD7950 gpu as opposed to a 8GB HD7850 gpu. Wish i knew more about this type of stuff

 

[smokeandmirrors]

Isn't the RAM one of the most expensive components from a console?

For the most part (not including gddr5) ram is usually pretty cheap, ddr3 is extremely cheap now.

Though it's not usually what is used, but memory is not nearly as expensive as most people make it out to be. CPU's are usually a big cost.

 

[Majmun]

I still don't understand what 8ddr gb5 means for games. I'm really a noob when it comes to specs.

Can I somewhere read what the advantages are? Like better textures or loading or better animations, framerate, resolution etc...

 

[PnCIa]

So, how long will it take to fill so much RAM with content from the bluray drive?

 

[CadetMahoney]

So, how long will it take to fill so much RAM with content from the bluray drive?

heh

when I enter this thread this is the first thing that comes to mind...

Jigga. J

 

[dr. apocalipsis]

Realistic, but with a somewhat negative spin. The one I really disagree with is textures. You don't need more TMUs to get more texture variety, you need more RAM.

Of course RAM helps with more texture variety, but not with better textures on screen. You will be able to have more assets on a given level, but you will still be limited on how many textures you can display per frame. Hope I made my point clearer.

That approach still shares many of the same disadvantages of split memory pools.

You forgive than EDRAM isn't just fast memory, and it offloads some bandwidth intensive tasks from GPU.

If you ask me, of course big fast RAM pool is the better option given an infinite budget. But that budget isn't true. Not at manufacturing level or even TDP level.

Phones, consoles and other devices are moving toward the 360 paradigma of memory setup, as the better cost/performance ratio. Sony here could be just being Sony. Or they may have something in mind for the long run, not regarding to graphics. Once they went for the GDDR5 setup, they had no other choice than go crazy to match MS, since you cant reengineer the thing at this point.

 

[ASIS]

He definitely compared the $600 PC his friend built for him with 8GB of system memory to the 8GB of PS4's memory and made it out to be no big deal. I seriously doubt he understands how GDDR5 is FAR superior to the system memory he has in the PC he couldn't assemble on his own.

I don't think it was meant as a comparison. Even he says something along the line of "not this kind of 8 GB Ram". So I didn't get that feeling from him.

Maybe I should watch it again, but I really don't want to

 

[cjtiger300]

8GB DDR5 is bad for gamers. might be the most hilarious thing I have ever read on this site, and that's saying something, lol!!

 

[Radec]

Isn't the RAM one of the most expensive components from a console?
I wonder why they technically went with the most expensive option.. and I'm not even talking about the ammount of RAM but the type.

I mean, yeah, it amazing they went this route but they'll probably bleed money again. Not PS3 level but sill, I'm a little concerned about it.
It's like Sony doesn't give a fuck about their current economical situation

They did this to please developers but I'm sure as fuck they will be the first ones to abandon ship if it sinks if you know what I mean

RAM isnt that expensive even during the early PS3/360 days. But it is the most overlooked part that bottlenecks a console.

Nintendo put 2gb on the WiiU but allocates 1gb for the OS. Thats pretty huge for just what WiiU's OS can do.
PS3 have a combined 512 and it shows on how slow the UI at times. Also how multiplats tend to differ.

Sony learned from that and went all out with first of its kind 8gb gddr5 as a system memory. Might hurt financially but I assume they made a decent deal to its manufacturer.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Bkilian worked on Durango, hinted at dealing with the special "audio-block", if Kinect 2.0 made a huge difference in the BOM, he probably would have mentioned it, but as it stands, he cited the ram as a fairly significant difference in cost between the two.

I think Durango was built to be cheaper, to get within a certain ball-park visually, and then use features and price to gain traction with the masses. I don't doubt Kinect ate some of the CPU/GPU/Ram resources, but I'm starting to think there was never any intention of getting anywhere close to what they did with the 360 from day 1.

But it's all speculation, I've never seen a BOM breakdown this early ever be any where close to accurate.

Yeah I know who Bkilian is I'm just saying at this point the Durango is rumoured to have stuff that could outweigh the additional cost of the GDDR5. You're right about the BOM breakdown because one thing likely never to be known is what sort of deals Sony/MS struck with AMD.

 

[Perkel]

Of course RAM helps with more texture variety, but not with better textures on screen. You will be able to have more assets on a given level, but you will still be limited on how many textures you can display per frame. Hope I mede my point clearer.



You forgive than EDRAM isn't just fast memory, and it offloads some bandwidth intensive tasks from GPU.

If you ask me, of course big fast RAM pool is the better option given an infinite budget. But that budget isn't true. Not at manufacturing level or even TDP level.

Phones, consoles and other devices are moving toward the 360 paradigma of memory setup, as the better cost/performance ratio. Sony here could be just being Sony. Or they may have something in mind for the long run, not regarding to graphics. Once they went for the GDDR5 setup, they had no other choice than go crazy to match MS, since you cant reengineer the thing at this point.

Aren't you forgetting something ? Like texture quality (size) ?

 

[redhot_]

I don't know much about pc hardware but if developers seem to be happy with this, and dont have to jump through hoops to create something good for this system, fuck ya im happy too. Take my money.

 

[woolley]

I hope with this we can get more games like MAG, but maybe on an even bigger scale. Zipper was always talking about how them having a hard time adding more things to the game because there just wasn't enough memory. Large scale battles are really what I'm looking forward to in the future.

 

[RibMan]

Developers: "8GB OF GDDR5?!? FUCKING AWESOME!"
Gamers: "8GB OF GDDR5?!? FUCKING AWESOME!"
GDDR5 Suppliers: "8GB of GDDR5?!? FUCKING AWESOME!"
Sony Accountants: "8GB of GDDR5?!? ARE YOU FUCKING INSANE?!?"

It appears the developers won this round.

 

[mikel]

Well, if you actually compare the increase of RAM of PS3 vs PS2 then you will clearly see that the upgrade from PS3 512MB to PS4 8GB of RAM is pretty much the same - 16x more RAM. And yet nobody would be crazy enough now to say that PS3 had too much RAM

 

[cjtiger300]

Then you miss the point of unified memory pool. You would need an interface between memories, another Memory Controller, since DDR3 MC and GDDR5 MC are different, and COPY memory, wasting tons of bandwidth.

Different thing is the smarter and cheaper aproach that MS and Ninty did with big main pool + fast ESRAM/EDRAM.



Like if I care people like you do.

After going through your post history, you have some serious hate for Sony for some reason. I guess you're still bitter about the whole Dreamcast thing. Oh well, at least I know where you stand now and I can take everything you say with a grain of salt.

 

[Gorillaz]

Has anyone said that? I thought it was just one person saying 8 GB of GDDR5 was too much.

I don't think anyone claimed that it's not enough. Some seem to argue it's too much, at least in terms of RoI.

I don't even remember which thread I read it in so that was more of me cross posting. But I have seen a few people say that

 

[Lord Error]

Different thing is the smarter and cheaper aproach that MS and Ninty did with big main pool + fast ESRAM/EDRAM

Yes... let's use WiiU as a poster child of a meaningful and successful memory setup. Come on man.

 

[acm2000]

please note that the spec sheets did say "specs subject to change" so dont cry too much if sony discovers they cant slap in 8GB or that its not financially viable

 

[LCGeek]

Yes... let's use WiiU as a poster child of a meaningful and successful memory setup. Come on man.

Amount you can bitch about, as we discover more about how actually works a much different picture than what most expected.

 

[Meccanical]

Well you kno0w, we could always wait and see instead of arguing online.

No one is going to pay you if you are right or wrong.

 

[seattle6418]

One of the most interesting things about the console design is how much they were influenciated by Apple in one concept, and the only one i would bother them to go after: instant access

They talked about boot times, having to wait for things, and one of the things people expect out of those tablets is that everything is fast, ready to go. This design on a console is great, i think the memory plays a role here, and might have been what made them go for 8gb.

With this much space they can also double their footprint for OS (to 1gb) which would make most of the talked about features easier.

 

[JohnnySasaki86]

So have any insiders showed up yet and explained how they were wrong about the memory and what wasn't/was possible? Was this really a last minute decision by Sony? Basically have we received any insight or answers?

I think the idea is that if it ends up being 8GB GDDR5 (~1.8Tflps) vs 8GB DDR3+eSRAM (~1.4Tflps), most all multiplatform games are going to be designed for the lower common denominator.. leaving only 1st party Sony titles specifically designed for the PS4 to take advantage of the bandwidth. It still gives Sony that 1st party edge, however.. GDDR5 is not cheap, at all. DDR3 is extremely cheap.

People are assuming if this is the end scenario one of two things is going to have to happen.

1. Sony prices the console comparatively to Durango, takes a big loss. Note : Sony cannot afford to take losses in 2013.
2. PS4 is going to cost more for users, and users end up paying more for a console of which the vast majority games will not take advantage of the added memory bandwidth.

In the end, someone is paying more so that a few games can load more objects on the screen, and a bit faster.

Huh? Its rumored to be 1.23tflop for Durango and 1.84tflop for PS4. Where did the extra 200 come from?

 

[Teletraan1]

So, how long will it take to fill so much RAM with content from the bluray drive?

I am doing some calculations here. Lets just say. Its bad for true gamers.