Karak
Member
I thought the consensus was that 4GB of GDDR5 was impossible in a console as it'd require like 16 sticks and a ridiculously complicated mobo.
New memory configurations take care of things like this.
I thought the consensus was that 4GB of GDDR5 was impossible in a console as it'd require like 16 sticks and a ridiculously complicated mobo.
I thought the consensus was that 4GB of GDDR5 was impossible in a console as it'd require like 16 sticks and a ridiculously complicated mobo.
Question:
Is GDDR5 twice as fast (or more) to what MS is having in X8OX?
If not, then I would argue that it is better with more RAM.
Or, any devs here.. If you could only choose one thing, what would it be, more ram or fast ram?
Ok...my brief understanding of this comparison.
- GDDR5 bandwidth benefit is only useful with more intensive, pixel hogging games
Does that seem fair?
What I meant was that both of them using AMD CPUs and GPUs from the same series makes the architectural differences much, much smaller than the HD Twins. Hard to say how the memory will pan out.
So many of you making this stupid statement as if speed is actually everything.
No. This RAM pool is shared for the APU (CPU+GPU) and dedicated GPU. Moving any data around would be much quicker, along with fill rate and rendering related work. The 720 would have to have edram or the equivalent to make up for the DDR3 or it would be in bad shape.
Ok...my brief understanding of this comparison.
PS4 Pro's
- GDDR5 has more than double the bandwidth of DDR3
- Theoretically can be clocked higher
- Should be more energy efficient
720 Pro's
- Double the ram
- GDDR5 bandwidth benefit is only useful with more intensive, pixel hogging games
Does that seem fair?
nope.
Just looking at the spec rumors I would expect the ps4 to be more powerful, but all the rumors suggest they are about even. I expect the 720 to have a healthy amount of edram.
Think about RAM like this:
It serves a cache memory. Things load and unload (sound, textures, code) using ram. More ram is good, better for those who are inefficient and sloppy coders. Faster ram, leads to everything optimally unpacking/streaming from memory. It doesn't clog up, or cause loading problems.
Example: if you were syncing pictures from a camera, to PC - do you want the images to compress and then uncompress, which would be efficient (GDDR)? Or do you want to transfer over each full size file one at a time, taking up more space, than is needed(DDR)?
Or like a suitcase: throw clothes in, or fold them? You can fill up the suitcase, in either case, but one is more efficient for the space allowed. The other is a sloppy mess.
My example is not exact, but thing of ram working like that. More RAM is good, but faster - efficient - ram is better. Most developers want more ram, because it's quick and they don't need to be efficient. They can just throw whatever in and not care if it's not optimal.
Interesting analogy. So what you are saying is Bethesda would like more RAM while other dev's will be able to make use of the faster Ram more efficiently.
Look at Wii U, it gets downports whereas it has more RAM (but slower) than the HD twins.
If you can have 4GB GDDR5 (it's insane in 2013, you know), you are the winner. Even if Durango has 32GB DDR3...
And, you know, when one guy says: "oh they won't waste GDDR5 with OS" (OS! OS! OS!!!!), he doesn't mean that the GDDR5 will be dedicated VRAM and that another pool will be used for the CPU in the APU (lol ^^)... He just says that they may end up with a small quantity of DDR3 for OS multitasking.
I wonder if MS will panic and try to switch from DDR3 to GDDR5 now...
Jaguar is more less Phenom II + FX instruction set optimized for low power consumption.
Steamroller is gonna be a massive upgrade vs current Vishera FX/Trinity&Richland APU, based on Piledriver cores.
All of this means that major work will be done by the gpu or the gpu+integrated gpu if the designs keeps the gpu of the APU's(physics/AA&AF/Lightning can be offloaded to them).
Think about RAM like this:
It serves a cache memory. Things load and unload (sound, textures, code) using ram. More ram is good, better for those who are inefficient and sloppy coders. Faster ram, leads to everything optimally unpacking/streaming from memory. It doesn't clog up, or cause loading problems.
Example: if you were syncing pictures from a camera, to PC - do you want the images to compress and then uncompress, which would be efficient (GDDR)? Or do you want to transfer over each full size file one at a time, taking up more space, than is needed(DDR)?
Or like a suitcase: throw clothes in, or fold them? You can fill up the suitcase, in either case, but one is more efficient for the space allowed. The other is a sloppy mess.
My example is not exact, but thing of ram working like that. More RAM is good, but faster - efficient - ram is better. Most developers want more ram, because it's quick and they don't need to be efficient. They can just throw whatever in and not care if it's not optimal.
I don't develop, I understand though
Much more advanced Kinect 2.0+ Illumiroom+set top box+hopefully more exclusives+different controller?
Good games.
At start? Same thing as with every console.
Exclusive games.
So 720 has more ram, but it's slower, while PS4 has less ram, but faster? If so, which one has the advantage?
Average joe will definetly invest such amounts of money^^.
Angry Birds 4k version confirmed^^?
Seriously, can we expect a game / games which will attract enough customers to the new systems at this economy state?
So many of you making this stupid statement as if speed is actually everything.
Richland APU vs Trinity APU (these at the same 32nm, with the same VLIW4 based gpu, same Piledriver cores CPU)vs crappy intel GT3 integrated gpu's.
Average joe will definetly invest such amounts of money^^.
Angry Birds 4k version confirmed^^?
Seriously, can we expect a game / games which will attract enough customers to the new systems at this economy state?
Wouldn't put money on that one.People will be way more civil with one another when there is no clear "winner".
So 720 has more ram, but it's slower, while PS4 has less ram, but faster? If so, which one has the advantage?
If Team ICO leaves Sony and goes multiplatform, then I'll definately get 720.
Think about RAM like this:
It serves a cache memory. Things load and unload (sound, textures, code) using ram. More ram is good, better for those who are inefficient and sloppy coders. Faster ram, leads to everything optimally unpacking/streaming from memory. It doesn't clog up, or cause loading problems.
Example: if you were syncing pictures from a camera, to PC - do you want the images to compress and then uncompress, which would be efficient (GDDR)? Or do you want to transfer over each full size file one at a time, taking up more space, than is needed(DDR)?
Or like a suitcase: throw clothes in, or fold them? You can fill up the suitcase, in either case, but one is more efficient for the space allowed. The other is a sloppy mess.
My example is not exact, but thing of ram working like that. More RAM is good, but faster - efficient - ram is better. Most developers want more ram, because it's quick and they don't need to be efficient. They can just throw whatever in and not care if it's not optimal.
I don't develop, I understand though
The apple craze is unmatched tho. Same for mobile/tablet I cant see video gane consoles doing numbers like that....The same economy in which millions upon millions of people not only buy iPads, Kindles, iPhones etc but continue buy the updated versions each and every year? Yeah, I think they'll be fine.
I think Sony is in a better position for early internal software output for the next generation. On the software side of things we can probably expect first year PS4 titles from:
Guerrilla Games (Last major game was KZ3 in early 2011)
Sucker Punch (Last major game was Infamous 2 in mid 2011)
Naughty Dog (Last major game was Uncharted 3 in late 2011)
Evolution Studios (Last major game was MS:Apocalypse in mid 2011)
Then you also have Sony developers who are likely already working on PS4 titles but are not as far along as the above studios:
Polyphony Digital (Last major game was GT5 late 2010)
-This studio is notorious for having ridiculously long development cycles.
Sony Santa Monica (Last major game was GOWIII in early 2010)
-Stig and team #1 has been rumored to be working on a new IP since GOWIII released.
Media Molecule (Last major game was LBP2 in early 2011)
-They are also developing Teraway for PSVita
Of course, this is all based on when these studios last shipped PS3 games along with knowledge regarding how many teams each studio has as well as the timing of previous output from these studios.
I think Sony is in a better position for early internal software output for the next generation. On the software side of things we can probably expect first year PS4 titles from:
Guerrilla Games (Last major game was KZ3 in early 2011)
Sucker Punch (Last major game was Infamous 2 in mid 2011)
Naughty Dog (Last major game was Uncharted 3 in late 2011)
Evolution Studios (Last major game was MS:Apocalypse in mid 2011)
Then you also have Sony developers who are likely already working on PS4 titles but are not as far along as the above studios:
Polyphony Digital (Last major game was GT5 late 2010)
-This studio is notorious for having ridiculously long development cycles.
Sony Santa Monica (Last major game was GOWIII in early 2010)
-Stig and team #1 has been rumored to be working on a new IP since GOWIII released.
Media Molecule (Last major game was LBP2 in early 2011)
-They are also developing Teraway for PSVita
Of course, this is all based on when these studios last shipped PS3 games along with knowledge regarding how many teams each studio has as well as the timing of previous output from these studios.
If Team ICO leaves Sony and goes multiplatform, then I'll definately get 720.
Sony needs a fresh breath of air. No Killzone, no LBP, no Infamous (to my despair), and DEFINITELY no Motorstorm.
Way too early next generation listwars commence.