Support NeoGAF

[astraycat]

Are drivers possible with console systems?

Of course. There's still a driver for software to actually access the hardware.

 

[I2amza]

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.

Agreed. Throwing more RAM in there is a solution that doesn't solve any problems.

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.

The memory controller would need to be changed to one that is compatible with GDDR5. Another thing to take into consideration is that a lot of things that the XOne needs are latency sensitive such as the Kinect processing and what not. Currently there are no GDDR5 memory controllers that are low latency because GPUs don't care about that. That would be another time sink to R&D a low latency GDDR5 memory controller.

And as you said the ESRAM would become a waste of die space, and it would practically mean most, if not all, the R&D they have done until now would be worthless.

At this stage this is not a feasible idea, and let's be honest. MS will not let Sony have 2013 holidays for themselves, especially since they have no big exclusives coming for the 360 this holiday

 

[fabricated backlash]

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.

Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.

 

[ChorusLindarr]

Of course. There's still a driver for software to actually access the hardware.

Not a driver. Console has very thin APIs (application programming interfaces). The purpose is to allow programmers to write software that focusses on what the software wants to do and not have to worry about micromanaging the hw, i.e. moving data in and out of the processor registers etc. APIs provide a layer of abstraction to make programming on a given piece of hw easier.

Drivers on the other hand are a greater layer of abstraction that lets software be intepreted to run on many different hw configurations., e.g. Nvidia drivers allows games to work many different GPUs across the range of products in a series.

Consoles would use drivers for some thing like peripherals I would imagine. But those would be far more simple than same GPU drivers.

As a side note however it has been confirmed that the XB1 runs all its software in an effective virtual machine. Basically meaning the hw the developers see when they're coding their games is an entirely virtualised environment. As far as I'm aware they have no direct access to the hw, however on the other hand the game VM layer has been optimised for maximum performance, with all if not most GPU features exposed in the VM. I imagine MS did this for security, given how easy x86 hw would be to hack (i assume).

 

[ConteZero76]

There's something that's called "enough RAM".
It's true that in the past RAM was a hard limit and people had to find a way to fit everything inside (either with PS3 / XBox360), but 8GB is enough for a lot of time and it won't be a bottleneck (GPU raw power will probably be).
Adding RAM would probably be a good thing spec-wise (in a fetish way) but the burden probably won't pay in the long run... either the 5 vs 7 GB debate is somewhat clueless.

My 2 cents.

 

[dmg04]

Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.

Boom.

 

[Krusenstern]

Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.

For multiplatform games that don't release on PC.

 

[Madness]

Can someone tell me if development is going to take longer and cost more just because of the power of next gen consoles?

What I mean is, many of us can't wait to get a lot of 1080p 60 FPS games etc. But we also want top of the line water, grass, textures, realistic hair, destructible environments etc. Isn't this going to require teams nearly 4x as large as the teams currently working now?

Or will it be the same basically? Or even easier? Also, just for my own purposes, can someone come up with a hypothetical scenario, where having 512 mb limited a game that with 8 gb GDDR5 we'll get this etc.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

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.

 

[mrklaw]

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.

MS seemed to need a lot of ram for the OS, so 4GB total wouldn't have been enough. Even Sony only switched to 8GB at the last minute. There is no way MS would have taken a gamble on 8Gb GDDR5 being feasible, and risk delaying launch by a year if it didn't pan out.

This isn't retconning stuff, it seems pretty clear - certainly clear enough reasoning to be confident about it rather than question it constantly. At least until we hear otherwise.

 

[mrklaw]

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.

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.

 

[Madness]

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.

Damn, that's what I was thinking. So most AAA titles will require more artists, more time and more money probably to get the level of visuals we require.

That's good that self publishing is better. The smaller dev teams will really benefit.

 

[Always-honest]

Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.

if the multiplat is also on pc, then yes.

 

[Gemüsepizza]

Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.

Because a PC that can run games considerably better than the PS4 will cost up to 1000€, and you would miss out on all the amenities which are exclusive to consoles. Additionally, there are quite a few AAA games which are released on consoles only.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

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'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.

 

[stryke]

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.

Haha, this is even getting ridiculed by guys from Sony Santa Monica

 

[StevieP]

For multiplatform games that don't release on PC.

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.

 

[ChorusLindarr]

Haha, this is even getting ridiculed by guys from Sony Santa Monica

looool

Well played SSM. It's nice when companies can have a sense of humour.

 

[Dictator93]

I love that boolean BS that guy is spitting.

Looks like grade A console warrior crap.... what the hell is wrong with people?

 

[Globox_82]

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

 

[ChorusLindarr]

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's bogus. The original post made no sense.

 

[cyberheater]

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.

Yes. I think dev time could be quicker on more powerful easier to use hardware and also considering the relative maturity of modern game engines.

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.

 

[Brad Grenz]

"WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE BOOLEANS!"

 

[hodgy100]

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.

assets are pretty much made at the highest quality then reduced for the actual game

 

[Perkel]

"WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE BOOLEANS!"

Lol i lost my shit

 

[Perkel]

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

They are sarcastic since subject is stupid

 

[Krusenstern]

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.

Of course, of course. I know that. It's a no-brainer for me to choose the PC version of a multiplatform title. I was simply responding to his question 'Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with?'.
It's because there are multiplatform titles which simply don't release on PC. Bayonetta, Vanquish, Red Dead Redemption, Shadows of the Damned, Dante's Inferno, Dragon's Dogma etc. to name a few current-gen titles.

 

[lightchris]

assets are pretty much made at the highest quality then reduced for the actual game

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.

 

[Captain Tuttle]

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.

Thank you for this post, cuts through much of the BS nicely.

 

[ElTorro]

are they being sarcastic? Or is there really a concern?

No. The original post is clearly a made up troll post. Technology-wise, it makes no sense at all. Just a collection of randomly mixed terminology.

 

[uncledonnie]

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.

Excellent post, explains a lot.

 

[ari]

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.

 

[Can Crusher]

Booleans were the special sauce all along.

 

[Dragon]

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.

You're just arguing semantics. And speculating based on nothing really. Smh

 

[inner-G]

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

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:

Red Dead Redemption
Tales Series
Yakuza Series
Metal Gear
Final Fantasy
Valkyria Chronicles
Naruto Ultimate Ninja series
Katamari
Dragon Quest
Dynasty Warriors/Warriors Orochi
Shin Megami Tensei and Persona series
Disgaea
Dark Cloud
Kingdom Hearts

These are all console series that are not first-party, and they are why many gamers will remain primarily console gamers. PC just can't compete in that regard. It has tons of shooters and WRPGs but not everybody likes Western games better.

 

[JonathanPower]

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.

 

[ari]

You're just arguing semantics. And speculating based on nothing really. Smh

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.

 

[RoboPlato]

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.

 

[JonathanPower]

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.

Yeah but he said they are not reserving 1GB. He said this rumor is wrong.

 

[Warm Machine]

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.

It is still common practice to create textures at a high res and then reduce. High res this time around is probably 4096x4096 which is massive. Most studios would crank out 2048 at the biggest for environment in this last gen as they would have likely ended up using the 512 version.

Game devs have tools that can visualize when the highest mip level is being displayed. When we were working with 512x512 textures, at 1280x720 res some assets would never even hit the highest mip of that. Usually models that take up small amounts of visual space like ground props.

Remember when that Skyrim high res texture pack came out and it didn't seem to do that much? It is because the texture sizes were more or less being bound by the resolution of the display.

In an FPS, in a hallway setting, at 2048x2048 texture is larger than the entire bounds of the 1920x1080 screen. Then take perspective into account, using one on the floors or walls or ceiling is something that you can get away with and retain a high level of visual quality and essentially top out texture quality.

On a object like a character or a box where you have a 360 degree wrap a 4096 or more may be required as you could hit the highest mip level.

Like I said before if 512 was the average in this current gen and we were dealing with a 256 meg pool, a jump to 2048 is a 16x increase in required memory, pushing texture space up to 4gb. A jump past that is a jump to 16gb.

 

[Madness]

Probably been explained before, but is there any negatives to 5gb ddr3 and 32mb eSRAM vs 7gb GDDR5?

 

[SneakyStephan]

For multiplatform games that don't release on PC.

What about the exclusive games that don't release on consoles?

 

[phosphor112]

Then why would you ever consider buying any console to begin with? With console games you always start in second place to begin with.

IIRC, he already answered that. Doesn't want to deal with things like drivers, and buying their own PC hardware and such. It's a huge undertaking for some who just want to "plug and play."

 

[i-Lo]

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.

The article on which this thread is based states it at 1GB. Some rumours peg it at 2GB. Whatever the amount, I do remember a developer stating that it's a ringed system where the devs can only see the amount available to them (as an absolute restriction).

 

[Biker19]

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.

Oh, wow, LOL. Thank goodness that I haven't registered at those forums there yet.

I don't think I've ever seen a gaming forum with members that are so delusional & idiotic.

 

[benny_a]

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."

 

[i-Lo]

Read his post history to assess whether or not to believe that poster based on previous rumors and sources. I'm going with "no."

Are you asking to verify Robo's history?

 

[RoboPlato]

Are you asking to verify Robo's history?

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.

 

[Truespeed]

Boolean guy has followed up as to what GPU Booleans are.

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.

 

[AgentP]

It's bogus. The original post made no sense.

Scary people read that none sense and thought it was real. It was a jumble of tech and programming terms thrown together randomly, lol.