Are drivers possible with console systems?
Of course. There's still a driver for software to actually access the hardware.
Are drivers possible with console systems?
Sony went with the former which is why in the earlier leaked specs we kept hearing about them having 4 GB of GDDR5 memory while Xbox One went with the latter and they always had 8 GB of RAM to work with.
The reason why Microsoft doesn't throw in more RAM is because it would be pointless at this stage of development. What problems does the Xbox One have that would be solved by throwing in more RAM? I know people are hung up on the 5 GB vs the 7 GB(?) available to developers but that won't be a big deal until much later in the generation and by them I am sure Microsoft will have optimized the OS enough to let the developers have access to more RAM if needed. Throwing in more RAM right now at the cost of delaying the launch would be a stupid decision.
On the issue of why Microsoft doesn't just throw in GDDR5 RAM into the Xbox One is because they would have to delay the console at least 6-12 months (you need to change the motherboard and possibly other components). ESRAM on the APU basically becomes worthless (not entirely but that die space would be much more useful if it had more CUs or a better CPU) and the R&D wasted on going around the bandwidth limitations is pretty much a sunk cost.
small or not. i will buy my games on the system that will look/play better.
i will not settle down for inferior port. even if it was just a little. period.
Of course. There's still a driver for software to actually access the hardware.
Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.
Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.
Well, that's the conventional wisdom about how things were decided and I don't disagree with it being very reasonable to believe that's what happened. It's also just as likely that MS' hardware team actually knows what it's doing and had a vision for how they wanted to maximize what they had to work with. Unfortunately, we're still in that Twilight Zone of waiting on information to find what scenario occurred and how it happened just as we don't know how they stack up when all is said and done. I really hope Dean Takahashi was given the same access he was for the previous two MS systems.
If you're so certain, you can just do us all the favor of clearing the air with details since you apparently know.
They would have to change the memory controller and the design of the board. It is also quite pointless to put in 12gb because the gpu won't use all 12 gb. I think they have the perfect balance for their console but unfortunately, its still a weak console.
It will probably be much faster given the ease of development vs PS3 and 360 which have a lot of quirks, at least for similar visuals. Otherwise it will take longer for higher fidelity assets to be created and it will require more artists etc...
For independent developers, PS4 is like a match made in heaven because it allows self-publishing and they can port their code from Steam releases very, very easily.
Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.
Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.
I'm fine with this. RAM is the bottleneck in terms of adverse effects on gameplay, pop in, tearing, frame rates, etc. I don't really care if the actual graphics don't improve greatly, I just want more consistency to performance and more persistence in terms of assets not disappearing, empty streets and repeated car models and such.Doubt that, unless 4k games becomes big which I hope not. My PC only has 4GB RAM + 1GB GDDR5 and I run most games at 1080p / 60fps. And that's with bloaty Windows on top. This coming generation will be limited by CPU/GPU long before memory.
I suppose this fits here since I can't find a dedicated thread when talking about PS4's hardware, but what do you make of what I found from one poster on another site concerning PS4's RAM?
PS4 is going to be worse AT GPU Boolean comparison operations while other systems can be multithreaded to aid Logic. This may hurt the PS4's use of Tessellation since boolean operations will be slower than Wii U and Xbox 1. It also has a weak CPU. It may not be able to handle many hardware lights ranging anywhere from Wii U to Last Gen. It just uses shader lights which don't have Alpha Channel correction. When a light shines on a ambient reflective object it only reflects back certain colors hiding the rest. PS4's lack of Edram means that the Char persision storage of shader information in RAM will be equivalent to Xbox One.
Booleans increase the number of header files to store their memory address and PS4 has huge memory banks think the location of one fish in a large ocean. PS4 has to store this address on the system to be read by memory controllers. This burden is much less for Embedded RAM which Wii U and Xbox one have which is much smaller in size and can be cycled for large storage. That means boolean dependent GPU operations will be worse. With all the boolean comparisons in tessellation to determine whether the structure is ABA or ABB or BAA the PS4 won't be able to handle as long tessellated strings. At 8bits Char persision Header files will reduce the Ram speed to Xbox One levels. PS4 has yet to show many hardware lights in Graphically intensive games it only has shader lights probably due to limitations which look unnatural.
It's not a myth that DDR5 is worse than DDR3 at the same speed.
For multiplatform games that don't release on PC.
Haha, this is even getting ridiculed by guys from Sony Santa Monica
interesting this was twitted by SSM sony guys, so maybe it's true.
@olson_dan
Software engineer, game industry. I gotta believe!
Santa Monica
Dan Olson ‏@olson_dan 2h
Uh oh this sounds bad for PS4... ... http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=69766971&postcount=427
Details
Tobias Berghoff ‏@TobiasBerghoff 1h
@olson_dan Damn. I guess we fucked up there.
Dan Olson ‏@olson_dan 1h
@TobiasBerghoff Sony pls fix the booleans. Why can't I have hardware lights instead of shader lights wow...
This guy retwitted Dan Olsons comment
Steven Tovey
@nonchaotic
Rendering APIs and Performance Tools @ Sony Advanced Technology Group. ex-Bizarre. Part-time: Bioinformatics and FPGA. Tweets reflect my opinions only.
Cambridge, UK
are they being sarcastic? Or is there really a concern?
EDIT:never mind, I see someone already posted this in the mean time
It will probably be much faster given the ease of development vs PS3 and 360 which have a lot of quirks, at least for similar visuals.
Otherwise it will take longer for higher fidelity assets to be created and it will require more artists etc...
I wonder if textures are normally authored at quite high resolution and then reduced for consoles so this shouldn't be a problem. I guess the same might be for models. Most articles I've seen seem to show that model artists work on quite high poly count models (probably due to the tools that they use) and then drastically reduce them for the game.
"WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE BOOLEANS!"
interesting this was twitted by SSM sony guys, so maybe it's true.
@olson_dan
Software engineer, game industry. I gotta believe!
Santa Monica
Dan Olson ‏@olson_dan 2h
Uh oh this sounds bad for PS4... ... http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=69766971&postcount=427
Details
Tobias Berghoff ‏@TobiasBerghoff 1h
@olson_dan Damn. I guess we fucked up there.
Dan Olson ‏@olson_dan 1h
@TobiasBerghoff Sony pls fix the booleans. Why can't I have hardware lights instead of shader lights wow...
This guy retwitted Dan Olsons comment
Steven Tovey
@nonchaotic
Rendering APIs and Performance Tools @ Sony Advanced Technology Group. ex-Bizarre. Part-time: Bioinformatics and FPGA. Tweets reflect my opinions only.
Cambridge, UK
are they being sarcastic? Or is there really a concern?
EDIT:never mind, I see someone already posted this in the mean time
The overwhelming majority of multiplat releases will also be on PC. Most of what you saw at e3 was running on pcs.
There are only really 2 legitimate reasons to own consoles at this point (8th gen).
1) you like the first party output - this is the differentiator. This is the real reason and this is why most PC gamers also own a console or 3
2) you prefer a lower upfront cost to hardware (which will be subsidized by the manufacturer) rather than lower software cost (and obviously the online services on most consoles are subsidized by your monthly payments) which add up quite a bit over the course of 6 years.
That's really it. There are minor things like "not playing with sliders", not doing any maintenance ever, and building or finding someone to build but really everything else is exactly the same.
It's all a box that has a controller (or Kbm plus controller) that plugs into your Tv with an hdmi cable. As fabricated said - if you're Looking at the visuals as a differentiator between consoles, you're already starting out "in second place". They will all have crashes, patches, updates, bugs, performance issues, etc etc no matter which walled garden or open platform you choose. If visuals are what draws you in, it's a pretty easy one to make IMO.
assets are pretty much made at the highest quality then reduced for the actual game
I'm sure this will come down with time.
They believe 8 GB of RAM is sufficient enough to last the life cycle of the console. Remember, the console's main problem isn't the amount of RAM, it's the bandwidth of the RAM.
I don't think this was the case, it's obvious that DDR4 was a long time out when these consoles were being designed.
We are excited about them that's why we discuss the spec sheets to death!
That is the general consensus. If you take a look at past AMD APUs we can see that they were bandwidth starved and performance suffered so simply going with the standard method wasn't going to be enough (These machines are built to run games at the end of the day). The ESRAM and slower RAM with higher space was one option while faster RAM at the cost of space was the second option. Sony went with the latter while Microsoft took the former.
Well, like I mentioned before the main problem isn't the amount of RAM but the speed of the RAM. The reason why ESRAM is needed is to help with the bandwidth because when APUs are bandwidth starved the performance suffers. At the time these consoles were being developed there were 2 options:
1.) Go with GDDR5 unified memory for the system and risk having less RAM or
2.) Go with DDR3 unified memory and have ESRAM to supplement the lack of bandwidth but you will guaranteed 8 GB of RAM.
Sony went with the former which is why in the earlier leaked specs we kept hearing about them having 4 GB of GDDR5 memory while Xbox One went with the latter and they always had 8 GB of RAM to work with.
The reason why Microsoft doesn't throw in more RAM is because it would be pointless at this stage of development. What problems does the Xbox One have that would be solved by throwing in more RAM? I know people are hung up on the 5 GB vs the 7 GB(?) available to developers but that won't be a big deal until much later in the generation and by them I am sure Microsoft will have optimized the OS enough to let the developers have access to more RAM if needed. Throwing in more RAM right now at the cost of delaying the launch would be a stupid decision.
On the issue of why Microsoft doesn't just throw in GDDR5 RAM into the Xbox One is because they would have to delay the console at least 6-12 months (you need to change the motherboard and possibly other components). ESRAM on the APU basically becomes worthless (not entirely but that die space would be much more useful if it had more CUs or a better CPU) and the R&D wasted on going around the bandwidth limitations is pretty much a sunk cost.
are they being sarcastic? Or is there really a concern?
Agree with this. Taken as a whole,the Xbox does seem like a nicely balanced machine, just at a lower ultimate power level than PS4. I expect MS are frustrated but ultimately OK with that,assuming Xbox is delivering what they originally wanted.
Start with apps + media + games, they went with a big windows 8 OS and lots of ram. That led to DDR3 for ram. The first is a strategic choice,the second is the logical result based on technology at the time (GDDR5 densities weren't there)
Both of those define the rest of the system. With a similar silicon budget for the APU, they could have had 18 CUs like PS4. But I expect those wouldn't be able to take full advantage of the DDR3 memory. So instead by opting for ESRAM and 12CUs,they probably get better efficiency and performance than more CUs on a slower bus.
I think split memory could have been an option. 2-4GB DDR3 for the OS and 2-4GDDR5 for games. Slightly more complex setup but I think it could have worked.
Umm....ram doesn't work that way. Any application the ps4 has, either if its games, browsers or what not, should have no problem to work with 5gb of ddr3 ram. (not to mention the esram they got threaded to them)I also tend to think that 5GB will become an issue later in the generation - especially when your oponent has 2 GB of faster memory.
Umm....ram doesn't work that way. Any application the ps4 has, either if its games, browsers or what not, should have no problem to work with 5gb of ddr3 ram. (not to mention the esram they got threaded to them)
Both consoles will and should be able to output spectacularly, beautifully games. So to say the difference this time is staggering is some hyperbolic stuff.
Edit: to be clear, ps4 is more powerful. One just isn't THAT far behind with what they're offering.
There are a lot of console-exclusive games that aren't first party. These are mostly the franchises I enjoy, and without having these types of games, PC could never be the go to platform for me:1) you like the first party output - this is the differentiator. This is the real reason and this is why most PC gamers also own a console or 3
All I said was that ps4 was more powerful and Xbox one will still hold its own. How is that not based on anything? Its common sense.You're just arguing semantics. And speculating based on nothing really. Smh
I don't know if this was already posted but someone on the B3D forum said that the reserved ram for the PS4 OS is not 1GB.
http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1764621&postcount=2440
He didn't say if it's less or more than 1GB. He only said the 1GB spec is wrong. Considering that PS4 OS is based on FreeBSD, which requires a very small memory footprint, maybe the ram reserved is still 512MB.
1GB would be the max it would use, no reason for more than that. I think it probably could work with less than 1GB but they're reserving 1GB in case they decide to add features.
I've heard differently, at least for textures. Supposedly it was somewhat true for PC games back in the day, when at the beginning of a project nobody knew what the hardware would be like later when the game would be released. When you're working on a PS3/360 game though for example, you have a very good idea about required texture resolutions and will only work with that limited size in mind.
For multiplatform games that don't release on PC.
Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.
1GB would be the max it would use, no reason for more than that. I think it probably could work with less than 1GB but they're reserving 1GB in case they decide to add features.
Seriously, he's right.
http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1763939&postcount=4710
http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1763889&postcount=4704
http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1763153&postcount=4649
Seriously, it's getting sad and the mods at B3D won't ban these idiots so the forum is basically becoming unreadable right now. Rangers/specialguy/Tyrone is in full on melt down mode right now grasping at as many straws as possible and juniors/newly registered posters who post "inside information" get taken seriously over there despite none of these ever turning out to be right.
The mods themselves are MS fanboys there, so that's why.
Read his post history to assess whether or not to believe that poster based on previous rumors and sources. I'm going with "no."Yeah but he said they are not reserving 1GB. He said this rumor is wrong.
Read his post history to assess whether or not to believe that poster based on previous rumors and sources. I'm going with "no."
He's talking about the guy from B3D who I can assure you is not me. I'm just speculating based on rumors, like most people here.Are you asking to verify Robo's history?
Booleans increase the number of header files to store thier memory address and PS4 has huge memory banks think the location of one fish in a large ocean. PS4 has to store this address on the system to be read by memory controllers. This burden is much less for Embedded RAM which Wii U and Xbox one have which is much smaller in size and can be cycled for large storage. That means boolean dependent GPU operations will be worse. With all the boolean comparisons in tesselation to determine whether the structure is ABA or ABB or BAA the PS4 won't be able to handle as long tesellated strings. At 8bits Char persision Header files will reduce the Ram speed to Xbox One levels. PS4 has yet to show many hardware lights in Graphically intensive games it only has shader lights probably due to limitations which look unatural.
It's bogus. The original post made no sense.