NGGP: NextGen Garbage Pile (aka: No one reads the topics or stays on topic) *spawn*

Status
Not open for further replies.
PS3 750 mhz RSX+300MB ram
360 500 mhz Xenos+500 MB RAM

Not sure where the 300MB number comes from for PS3. Sure it has a split memory architecture, but it still has 512MB's of ram to work with (since the Xbox still needs to use some of it's ram for GPU, it's just variable).

So PS3:
256 + 256 - 43 = 469MB (though I'm not sure how much VRAM is dedicated to the OS)
 
Not sure where the 300MB number comes from for PS3. Sure it has a split memory architecture, but it still has 512MB's of ram to work with (since the Xbox still needs to use some of it's ram for GPU, it's just variable).

So PS3:
256 + 256 - 43 = 469MB (though I'm not sure how much VRAM is dedicated to the OS)

He's scaling the 512MB from last gen to try to illustrate the scale of the rumored memory difference between 720 and PS4.
 
Well the Wii U GPU is apparently around 50% more powerful than Xenos, but its certainly not showing in the games. Where its hamstrung by the weak CPU and poor bandwidth.

PS4 would seem to have the bandwidth advantage too, so it's much better positioned to capitalise on its extra FLOPS than Wii U.
 
Noticed lherre made a post on D vs O

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=46551080&postcount=274

In my opinion both machines will be very close, with some details in favor for each one, but I think we will have a ps360 situation again with 2 machines very close.

And some details in the articles are simply wrong.

I think this was in reference to the vg247 article so I wonder which details. OS RAM leaps to mind first.

Edit: He said "articles", thread is vg247 and nowgamer, and the now gamer article is riddled with junk, so I guess it doesnt say much.
 
Well the Wii U GPU is apparently around 50% more powerful than Xenos, but its certainly not showing in the games. Where its hamstrung by the weak CPU and poor bandwidth.

PS4 would seem to have the bandwidth advantage too, so it's much better positioned to capitalise on its extra FLOPS than Wii U.

Things don't just scale linearly like that. It depends on where the bottleneck is and how bad said bottleneck is. WiiU has almost half the main memory bandwidth of X360 but more GPU throughput. Allegedly, X720 has around 1/3 the main bandwidth of PS4 with a 33% "weaker" GPU, but bandwidth is still almost 3 times that of the 360 and almost 6 times that of the WiiU - the bottleneck will not necessarily just scale linearly and only allow 3x X360 performance. 70GB/s is certainly enough for 16ROPs as seen with the 7770. If they are going 32ROPs then there's also the embedded memory.

Either way, for that level of GPU I can't see 60-70GB/s being anywhere near as restrictive as 12.8GB/s is on the WiiU GPU. Of course there's also the embedded memory and overall capacity to take into account.
 
All i want is to play a game with that frog from the Crysis 3 demo. You know, the frog that looks like a frog? That one.

That's all i want. If my next console doesn't have the frog, i will be very disappointed.
 
All i want is to play a game with that frog from the Crysis 3 demo. You know, the frog that looks like a frog? That one.

That's all i want. If my next console doesn't have the frog, i will be very disappointed.

Ha yes im with you on tha one..that frog was an exquisite specimen :)
 
Well, the next gen Xbox will probably have a lot of yellow rubber ducks instead, what with Phil Harrison now working there. ;)
 
Sony engineers needed to outdo MS on hardware. MS software no doubt better OS

I'd agree. You've got to play to your strengths. I can't see Sony outdoing MS on the software and services side. Best bet is just to make sure they win on the hardware and attract devs that way.
 
Sony engineers needed to outdo MS on hardware. MS software no doubt better OS
The engineering part is almost irrelevant. Any engineer could come up with the idea of putting nice GPU with 4GB GDDR5 in gaming console. The problem happens when higher ups want all sorts of other crap to go along (certain motion sensor camera, huge OS etc.) that leaves less room for packing something powerful yet simple.

I'd agree. You've got to play to your strengths. I can't see Sony outdoing MS on the software and services side. Best bet is just to make sure they win on the hardware and attract devs that way.
I don't think they can outdo MS on engineering part either (meaning console hardware design). Limits are pretty clear (watts, transistors, money and multimedia) for both, and both get the hardware from the same vendors.
 
I think there is a group that wants the opposite.
I agree. I think its pretty clear that Sony went with something simple yet powerful. Something that wont break bank and won't be able to turn your car on from your couch, but still good gaming system. MS went in other direction. We are going to see how that pans out.

I'm not calling MS out yet, I have more "faith" in their engineers than in Sony's and I'm sure they are going to make interesting and efficient choices with hardware.
 
:cool:
I agree. I think its pretty clear that Sony went with something simple yet powerful. Something that wont break bank and won't be able to turn your car on from your couch, but still good gaming system. MS went in other direction. We are going to see how that pans out.

I'm not calling MS out yet, I have more "faith" in their engineers than in Sony's and I'm sure they are going to make interesting and efficient choices with hardware.

MS cater to Crytek and Dice when it comes to designing the Durango.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top