At the moment, in regard of memory amount available for gaming it seems more correct to say that we are talking about 4,5 GB PS4 Vs 5GB XboxOne.
So XboxOne, at the moment, seems to have a 512mb advantage in memory amount.
- Status
At the moment, in regard of memory amount available for gaming it seems more correct to say that we are talking about 4,5 GB PS4 Vs 5GB XboxOne.
So XboxOne, at the moment, seems to have a 512mb advantage in memory amount.
yea , MS admitted it from the start that it's 3 for OS purposes(1gb reserved If i recall right) and 5 for games.
If you're willing to believe all this mess.
From my point of view me ,it's "twillight zone's" news ...
What we know is that Remote Play, Play Go, Share functions are all in some way aided by dedicated hardware or are done by dedicated hardware so what role those 3GB have in all these functions?
What's the justification/explanation for using that much GDDR5?
Personally I am not convinced that reserving such amount of RAM is reasonable and can be justified in any way. In other circumstances maybe I would, but there is this one little stupid thing - Sony decided to include obligatory 15 minutes gameplay recording for social networking. And this doesn't seem reasonable or well thought at all. There must be some influential FB/social networks fanatics in Sony headquarters to include really obsolete feature for such cost in RAM usage/HDD bandwith, so this other, future planned features probably will be eqally "great".
Also, the idea that HC gamers no longer matters is gimped from the begining. Oh well HC gamers are not majority of the console users, but they are buying majority of games and accesories... During PS3 liftime I've bought almost 50 games, steering wheel, additional 2 gamepads, Eye toy and PS Move. At the same time PS3 casual owners that I know personally (my family and friends) bought maybe 7 to 10 games. And yet Sony is reserving 3,5 GB RAM for casual functionality and for things I do in my living room with my smart TV, Asus o!Play and laptop for years.
Also, the idea that HC gamers no longer matters is gimped from the begining. Oh well HC gamers are not majority of the console users, but they are buying majority of games and accesories... During PS3 liftime I've bought almost 50 games, steering wheel, additional 2 gamepads, Eye toy and PS Move. At the same time PS3 casual owners that I know personally (my family and friends) bought maybe 7 to 10 games. And yet Sony is reserving 3,5 GB RAM for casual functionality and for things I do in my living room with my smart TV, Asus o!Play and laptop for years.
Bagel seed
Veteran
Instead of asking what that much reserved ram could be used for (which we won't know until later), ask, why would they allow devs so much ram (and lock themselves in) just for launch games which are mostly cross gen or started on the reality of there only being 4gb a little while ago?
I don't see how hard it is to understand why both consoles are have the same game/OS split. In the past I have said that it is remarkable that both console are extremely similar in more ways than one. While the 7/1 split for game and OS was making the rounds I did not want to comment on it because both systems have similar software/services ability based on what has been announced and yet the other system was reserving more for OS/services features. It was also striking that the system with more allocation for other services was the one from a company known for their OS prowess (this is a company that managed several evolution of its system OS and services while confined to 32mb of ram), so that means something was amiss. Now we know that the 7/1 split was incorrect and I am honestly not surprised.
If you are asking why they need to reserve that much, you only need to look at how the lat generation panned out and how the technological landscape has evolved and is still evolving. Mobile phones, tablets are constantly evolving and taking on features and functionalities that were previously reserved for dedicated devices. Look at the Xbox 360 today compare it with the launch version, or even what it was circa 2008 (NXE). Without knowing what was underneath the table you will be hard pressed to say that they are the same device. According to bkillian, we probably would have seen more services/functionality incorporated in the 360 had they not restricted themselves to the 32mb of ram for the OS. So in this iteration, they are reserving as much as they can in other to future-proof these devices.
Now you might ask why the need to have a constant reserve of resources for these other operations and the answer to that is at least one thing; QoS. iOS is what it is today because of the consistency and QoS on the platform. Android is finally catching up but iOS is known for its smooth operation. This is going to become even more important going forward because, as these devices take on more functionality, they still need to have a consistent and speedy performance.
Finally the fact that both consoles are allocating the same amount of system resources is not necessarily a reaction of one to the other, I believe its coincidence or to be more specific, I think the both arrived at the same figures without for knowledge of what the other was doing. I believe it was simply a case of taking into account the situation and issues I stated above and arriving at what they feel they need to do.
I personally believe that what this available for games, on both consoles, are enough given how long this past generation has gone and considering the capabilities of both systems. The gpu and cpu are not bleeding edge and yet will have about 5gb of RAM to play with. This is much more than their supposed pc equivalents have, and comparatively, if you factor in that the 360 and ps3 launched with high end cpu/gpu at the time but had less total RAM that their pc equivalent. Had it been that these systems are launch with gpu/cpu comparative to the current high end on pc (say gtx680/7970) then there might be some cause for concern. As it is now though, 5gb is more that enough I think.
If you are asking why they need to reserve that much, you only need to look at how the lat generation panned out and how the technological landscape has evolved and is still evolving. Mobile phones, tablets are constantly evolving and taking on features and functionalities that were previously reserved for dedicated devices. Look at the Xbox 360 today compare it with the launch version, or even what it was circa 2008 (NXE). Without knowing what was underneath the table you will be hard pressed to say that they are the same device. According to bkillian, we probably would have seen more services/functionality incorporated in the 360 had they not restricted themselves to the 32mb of ram for the OS. So in this iteration, they are reserving as much as they can in other to future-proof these devices.
Now you might ask why the need to have a constant reserve of resources for these other operations and the answer to that is at least one thing; QoS. iOS is what it is today because of the consistency and QoS on the platform. Android is finally catching up but iOS is known for its smooth operation. This is going to become even more important going forward because, as these devices take on more functionality, they still need to have a consistent and speedy performance.
Finally the fact that both consoles are allocating the same amount of system resources is not necessarily a reaction of one to the other, I believe its coincidence or to be more specific, I think the both arrived at the same figures without for knowledge of what the other was doing. I believe it was simply a case of taking into account the situation and issues I stated above and arriving at what they feel they need to do.
I personally believe that what this available for games, on both consoles, are enough given how long this past generation has gone and considering the capabilities of both systems. The gpu and cpu are not bleeding edge and yet will have about 5gb of RAM to play with. This is much more than their supposed pc equivalents have, and comparatively, if you factor in that the 360 and ps3 launched with high end cpu/gpu at the time but had less total RAM that their pc equivalent. Had it been that these systems are launch with gpu/cpu comparative to the current high end on pc (say gtx680/7970) then there might be some cause for concern. As it is now though, 5gb is more that enough I think.
It would be silly for Sony not to match whatever XB1 has ( or visa-versa ) just because of multiplatform games. Why add problems to what is supposed and easy porting situation.
Now I surely don't see why devs should need 7Gb for launch titles but in 3-4 year they might want more than 5GB RAM...but this is another story.
I personally am not judging Sony's choice.
I just don't see what we gain form this trade-off, and I mean quite literally.
Last edited by a moderator:
I've mentioned previously that the OS reservation could include gaming functionality. However, things like progressive download shouldn't need oodles of RAM. Nor streaming. XB1's justification came from large datasets for Kinect. PS4 doesn't have that, so 1 GB should be ample for multiasking lots of services and features.
This conversation has basically run its course now though. There are those who say, "I can't believe it," and those that say, "it's obvious, these consoles have to do everything a PC and tablet does," and no-one can provide any more details than that, so I guess I'll just step out here and leave everyone to call each other stupid for not seeing the mind-numbingly obvious.
Maybe when Sony show the system in action it'll be apparent what is consuming all that capacity.Betanumerical
Veteran
I've mentioned previously that the OS reservation could include gaming functionality. However, things like progressive download shouldn't need oodles of RAM. Nor streaming. XB1's justification came from large datasets for Kinect. PS4 doesn't have that, so 1 GB should be ample for multiasking lots of services and features.
This conversation has basically run its course now though. There are those who say, "I can't believe it," and those that say, "it's obvious, these consoles have to do everything a PC and tablet does," and no-one can provide any more details than that, so I guess I'll just step out here and leave everyone to call each other stupid for not seeing the mind-numbingly obvious.
The extra reservations and avoiding writing to the HDD could actually be a pretty big win in terms of performance, at least in regards to reading from the HDD. If the game is the only thing thats practically reading from the HDD and nothing else is often writing then it should reduce contention for the resource hugely and also reduce seek times by reducing thrashing.
But I would prefer they toned down the memory atleast a bit, after all it does seem excessive.
Only Sony knows what they are going to do with their console 5 years into the future. If you want a pure gaming machine, a console hasn't been it since the PS2 was a DVD player. And it's blatantly obvious that a powerful machine like the PS4 or Xbox One should do media and app functions with ease, downside is that it takes RAM (unless we really want to go back to the hell that is waiting for apps to load).
Let's not be so naive and think that shoving a ton of gaming performance into a box will give it the most longevity when PC games have lapped around the 360/PS3 in an almost laughable fashion. Besides performance, the real reason why those consoles need to die is because they fking slower than my phone in initiating new actions! Why? RAM. RAM. RAM. RAM. RAM. RAM. Having to dump current assets to switch to a new app wastes my time.
Anyway, that's my soapbox.
Let's not be so naive and think that shoving a ton of gaming performance into a box will give it the most longevity when PC games have lapped around the 360/PS3 in an almost laughable fashion. Besides performance, the real reason why those consoles need to die is because they fking slower than my phone in initiating new actions! Why? RAM. RAM. RAM. RAM. RAM. RAM. Having to dump current assets to switch to a new app wastes my time.
Anyway, that's my soapbox.
I've mentioned previously that the OS reservation could include gaming functionality. However, things like progressive download shouldn't need oodles of RAM. Nor streaming. XB1's justification came from large datasets for Kinect. PS4 doesn't have that, so 1 GB should be ample for multiasking lots of services and features.
This conversation has basically run its course now though. There are those who say, "I can't believe it," and those that say, "it's obvious, these consoles have to do everything a PC and tablet does," and no-one can provide any more details than that, so I guess I'll just step out here and leave everyone to call each other stupid for not seeing the mind-numbingly obvious.
What 'should' and what 'is' are two different things and this is based on a lot of variables, certainly more than I can or do know about. Expertise is one of them at least. MS was able to iterate and do a lot more with 32mb of RAM than Sony could do with 120-50mb of RAM. This is MS forte. Apart from this, there are possibly other factors that we are not taking into consideration and both company have yet to give us a proper look at their OS/services. Between now and the launch of the consoles we will get to learn more about these functions, and they will expand and evolve over the course of the coming generation.
Now, let's wait for smartphones to include full d-pad, analog sticks and force feedbak functions, maybe even little steering wheel. Everyone knows that playing games is not smartphone primary purpose BUT: casual users play games. And maybe, just maybe there will be a game, in future that will make it worthwhile. Or maybe there won't. But let's include them, just in case.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status