News & Rumours: Playstation 4/ Orbis *spin*

[MrFox]

DF was wrong after all in their interpretation, they got the vm part wrong (there was no 4.5 to 5.5 thing, it's 5GB exclusive to the game plus .5 vm, nothing is shared or ambiguous). Maybe that's what he's talking about. Sony did post a correction afterward.

Now we'll have the 4.5GB crap being repeated for years just like the 14+4 thing that can't go away.
Anyone who still think there's only 4.5GB available for games, please cancel your PS4 so I don't meet you online.

 

[warb]

It's 4.5GB plus 0.5GB.

 

[MrFox]

It's 4.5GB plus 0.5GB.

From the correction it's a 1GB pool split in .5 physical and .5 vm, as long as they don't allocate more than .5 in that 1GB pool it's still a total of 5GB physical that's exclusive to the game.

But I can't pretend it's impossible I got it wrong. Okay it's ambiguous

 

[Cranky]

Apparently this guy is a dev... he also says the DF numbers are wrong and is writing a full editorial on it (too long for twitter).
https://twitter.com/BriProv/status/361200597300543488

DF isn't always right.. weren't they wrong about the 7 minute vs 15 minute recording thing?
Not saying they are wrong, but maybe they are. Or maybe they just have older info.

LOL, that dude has absolutely awful credibility.

 

[hesido]

I don't think Digital Foundry even interpreted Sony's response correctly. They integrated Sony's response with their own view of that extra 1GB, somehow making that 512MB paged etc. etc.

I tend to think, devs can use "direct memory" if they want to manage memory themselves, and "flexible memory" if they want the GameOS to manage the memory for them, possibly using swap memory as need be. Some PC games would be much easier to port with "flexible memory", and if you want classical to-the-metal console approach, you can use direct memory.

I don't think that flexible memory is to get that extra 512MB as paged bla bla.. Why would you want to cap that virtual memory with 512MB anyway?

 

[warb]

"Flexible Memory" is memory managed by the PS4 OS on the game's behalf, and allows games to use some very nice FreeBSD virtual memory functionality. However this memory is 100 per cent the game's memory, and is never used by the OS, and as it is the game's memory it should be easy for every developer to use it.

Doesn't suggest it's optional. The only thing they correct is the suggestion that the flexible memory can be reclaimed by the OS.

 

[MfA]

It depends how frictionless Sony want the UI to be. Microsoft, whether you like their direction or not, showed a very slick interface and that kind of rapid response is something that is only possible with a crazy amount of software optimisation or a large amount of RAM to keep everything persistent.

If you need gigabytes of memory to keep the UI memory resident then you're doing it wrong ... keeping some bloated cross platform browser memory resident, now that eats memory.

PlayStation Store, Blu-ray playback, Netflix, a web browser and whatever else they have yet to show, they'll need a fair bit of RAM.

The wonders of HTML5, no better tool to turn what should take 100s of kB into multiple gigabytes.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm a member there, but that doesn't stop me from seeing what a joke GAF has become.

The topic of how crap GAF is isn't B3D material, and waking up to pages of posts I have to moderate in the morning about such nonsense encourages me ensure you don't remain a member here.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Thread closed for a sabbatical - I'm not wasting time cleaning it up*. Without the opportunity to reply, hopefully people will drop their interest in holding a pointless discussion and then, when reopened, discussion can to revert to the only worthwhile topic - "what the blazes are Sony wanting 1/2/3 GBs OS RAM for?!?"

*Edit : Changed my mind and nuked the thread.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

If you need gigabytes of memory to keep the UI memory resident then you're doing it wrong ... keeping some bloated cross platform browser memory resident, now that eats memory.

It's not just the UI but the functionality behind whatever it is the UI is intended to do. It's frustrating having to wait for a UI to appear, it's more frustrating to interact with a UI and for nothing to happen.

Saying Sony are doing it wrong without knowing the extent of what the PS4's OS is actually doing, is a bold claim.

The wonders of HTML5, no better tool to turn what should take 100s of kB into multiple gigabytes.

Keeping the web browser resident is one thing, but the state of the web browser is something they could certainly kick to disk.

 

[Yemeth]

It's not just the UI but the functionality behind whatever it is the UI is intended to do. It's frustrating having to wait for a UI to appear, it's more frustrating to interact with a UI and for nothing to happen.

Saying Sony are doing it wrong without knowing the extent of what the PS4's OS is actually doing, is a bold claim.


Keeping the web browser resident is one thing, but the state of the web browser is something they could certainly kick to disk.

From my perspective, I know that I am maybe too of a gamer to be important (which is funny to write, but hey), I do not care what they do with their OS, reserving so much RAM (percentage wise) for non-gaming purposes is strange for a supposedly "gamers first" console.

Sometimes I get the feeling as if people always act as if everyone is waiting for the Xbox One or the PS4 to check Facebook, surf the web for wikis etc. How many console owners do not have a PC, laptop nor tablet? Now even if this is a big percentage, how many of those do not have a smart phone? All those people who use these social media things like Facebook, already have their solution and do not need a console to do it too.

I am very interested in console gamers live streams etc., as this will give even less tech savy people a easy way to upload clips to their you tube channels, make live streams (interesting if they will allow live commentaries, that the microphone recording will also be uploaded etc.) etc. But when you look at a OS and what distributions like Lubuntu and their applications use RAM wise it is clear that we are in a "lets prepare for the competitor" instead of "we have our own vision and are making it reality" mode.

Except these upload/streaming features I can only think of a Facebook like data hoarding thing on the PS4 which eats a lot of RAM (coupled with the real name thing, could be very interesting).

But, as a ending note, I know that I, who do not use Facebook etc., are a dying breed and that today this is getting like not having an e-mail so I probably look at this from a dinosaur perspective .

I have preordered the console a few weeks ago, but will certainly not cancel it like some NeoGAF members for that I would need a "sponsored by the NSA" on the chassis .

Sorry for the long text...

 

[Deleted member 11852]

From my perspective, I know that I am maybe too of a gamer to be important (which is funny to write, but hey), I do not care what they do with their OS, reserving so much RAM (percentage wise) for non-gaming purposes is strange for a supposedly "gamers first" console.

100% agreed. I am buying a PS4 for games, Blu-ray playback and Netflix - in that order or priority and none of which I envisage needing to switch between quickly.

Please don't misinterpret my comments as being happy with the rumoured amount of RAM being flagged to the OS, I want as much as the hardware and resources available to game developers as possible and that includes most of the CPU cores. But I am detached enough from my decision to purchase a games console to call out nonsensical analysis on incomplete information.

Sometimes I get the feeling as if people always act as if everyone is waiting for the Xbox One or the PS4 to check Facebook, surf the web for wikis etc. How many console owners do not have a PC, laptop nor tablet?

Again, 100% agreed. I couldn't image wanting to check twitter on my PS4. I have a phone and tablet that is far more immediate and which has a good UI for this. I'm reserving judgement on the rumour until we know (not guess or speculate) more and Sony have shown more of the OS.

 

[-tkf-]

Apparently this guy is a dev... he also says the DF numbers are wrong and is writing a full editorial on it (too long for twitter).
https://twitter.com/BriProv/status/361200597300543488

DF isn't always right.. weren't they wrong about the 7 minute vs 15 minute recording thing?
Not saying they are wrong, but maybe they are. Or maybe they just have older info.

http://retrocityrampage.com/blog/2013/07/522/

Lots of discussion of ram blabla and.. the TLDR

Anyway, I’m not saying how much memory is used, but I am painting a better picture of how you should be looking at this, and again raising awareness about sensationalist headlines.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It's not just the UI but the functionality behind whatever it is the UI is intended to do. It's frustrating having to wait for a UI to appear, it's more frustrating to interact with a UI and for nothing to happen...

Like? When playing a game, how much extra functionality is required on tap? A web browser to look stuff up. Okay, that's a gig, let's be generous. Wasteful, ad-infested, bloated webpages are common practice. What else? A weather app? TV listings? We already have solutions to those in abundance, and they don't need immediate access anyhow.

We don't know what the OS is doing which is where it could be justified. As I've suggested before, if it's something epic like Home present in the background at all times, it'd make sense. However, these rather empty 'wait and see' justifications aren't really good discussion. That so few people can come with legitimate, realistic explanations means either the fabulous new experience is so fabulous and new, no-one can even imagine it, or it doesn't really exist and it'll just be a Windows or Android style interface, lots of widgets and photos and video feeds all sat in RAM. The take home point for me is that 1 GB is what you need for data, not executables. Either you have large working datasets, or you have loads of assets. Neither is an intrinsic requirement of an OS, nor 'apps' as embodied in mobile devices. It's certainly possible for devs to consume insane amounts of storage on UI assets (video-feed animated interfaces), but that'd constitute epic bloat. Heck, I don't understand why we're still using bitmap UIs instead of vectors! I imagined PS3 to be munching through vector graphics UIs seeing as Cell is pretty ideal for it, let alone the GPU. Instead we just have bitmaps at Retina resolutions

 

[2real4tv]

In reference to in game/app switching I wonder how games that dont pause will work, ie dark souls

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Like? When playing a game, how much extra functionality is required on tap? A web browser to look stuff up. Okay, that's a gig, let's be generous. Wasteful, ad-infested, bloated webpages are common practice. What else? A weather app? TV listings? We already have solutions to those in abundance, and they don't need immediate access anyhow.

This is the problem, we don't know. But let's take the basic functionality from the PS3, as a starting point, then add what Sony have said or hinted about the PS4 - here's a start:

• A game.
• The PSN Store.
• Netflix / BBC iPlayer / CatchupTV / Video Unlimited / Music Unlimited and any other streaming apps.
• Blu-ray/DVD/CD playback.
• Sharing, including picture/video editing.
• Future Gaikai implementation for backwards compatibility.
• Cross game chat.
• Background server for remote access (Vita, smartphones, tablets).
• Background server to allow other players to control your game.
• Background server for streaming to Ustream / other players.
• Background installation, downloading and updating of games/OS.
• Multimedia front end for remote DNLA server as well as photos, music, videos on the console.
• Background maintenance/optimisation of the filesystem.
• A web browser.
• Social networking.

We don't know what the OS is doing which is where it could be justified.

No, but you take an educated guess by assuming that much of the basic functionality of the PS3 will carry over to the PS4 - except for things like Home. Sony's key goal, what they repeated over and over, is immediacy. What little they've shown of the UI is all immediate - no waiting for things to load or for the screen to populate.

We don't know what the OS is doing which is where it could be justified. That so few people can come with legitimate, realistic explanations means either the fabulous new experience is so fabulous and new, no-one can even imagine it, or it doesn't really exist and it'll just be a Windows or Android style interface, lots of widgets and photos and video feeds all sat in RAM.

Well start with the list above. Run applications on your desktop that perform similar functions then look at how much memory they're using. Then factor in they'll want room to enhance existing functionality as well as add entirely new functionality they can't envisage at this point in time. The UI itself looks low maintenance, with very few visual elements and the backgrounds being comprised of gradients which are calculable in realtime.

The take home point for me is that 1 GB is what you need for data, not executables.

How did you calculate 1Gb? Does that include things like the share application maintaining 10 second thumbnails for the last 15 minutes of video saved? Does it include possibly keeping the PSN store data resident so it's just there? Does it include all the thumbnail avatars of your 1,000 PSN friends? Does it include buffers for everything being streamed? Does it include retaining whatever is being buffered by the Blu-ray/DVD/CD/Netflix/VOD applications?

Is the PS4 doing this? No idea? Does it need to do this? No, not if they are willing to compromise on the immediacy thing. But remember the PS4 is going to be around for several years. What is acceptable in terms of immediacy today will not in two years when tablets and phones, TVs and STB boxes will be using better technology and much faster.

Either you have large working datasets, or you have loads of assets. Neither is an intrinsic requirement of an OS, nor 'apps' as embodied in mobile devices. It's certainly possible for devs to consume insane amounts of storage on UI assets (video-feed animated interfaces), but that'd constitute epic bloat. Heck, I don't understand why we're still using bitmap UIs instead of vectors! I imagined PS3 to be munching through vector graphics UIs seeing as Cell is pretty ideal for it, let alone the GPU. Instead we just have bitmaps at Retina resolutions

I think they have large datasets across a lot of different applications. But when you talk about what is "an intrinsic requirement of an OS", what are you referring too? Windows? OSX? Linux? If so, these have to be all things to all men, where the PS4 (and Xbox One) are closer to appliances than general computing devices with flexible OS's. They need to be doing their core functions better than general computing operating systems. In this day and age, not to mention in 2-3 time, it's what people do, or soon will, expect.

 

[Yemeth]

100% agreed. I am buying a PS4 for games, Blu-ray playback and Netflix - in that order or priority and none of which I envisage needing to switch between quickly.

Please don't misinterpret my comments as being happy with the rumoured amount of RAM being flagged to the OS, I want as much as the hardware and resources available to game developers as possible and that includes most of the CPU cores. But I am detached enough from my decision to purchase a games console to call out nonsensical analysis on incomplete information.

Hello,

thanks for your reply and the other postings which are very reasonable and show your points. You are right, it is no problem to spend a couple of GBs for an OS, reserved cache et al, but I am seriously asking if it is worth it. I see you are not for their spending but are more trying to find the reasons for it, so excuse me if the rest of the post is more for the "I am for these things" crowd . Even though I, of course, respect if someone wants to have a console with 73 apps that you can switch too from the game without loading times (not that I understand the notion app = more important than games).

A few years ago we saw a idiotic "one software that does it all" trend (remember when Winamp 3 tried to be a video player ) which only led to lower quality in a "does everything, but nothing well" way. I fear the very same philosophy that led to such bloated software is the same behind these decisions (+ the fear of not having a feature that MS has).

I fear that you can have "featureitis" and trying too much. Lets say Sony does make a gaming console first that has a few "must have" feature like Netflix, NHL gamecenter, a lean and small social app for friends, trophies etc. but no great or system seller super-feature a ala Kinect integration. Also most of these applications would need to load, so you have to wait for a few second.

I would claim that such a console could be more succesfull than the "we are trying to have as much features as our competitors so that no one can say "console x has feature y which the PS4 does not". Not to mention that the notion that you need to switch, without waiting, between a game and movie is more than strange as in the PC world you still need to wait that a program is started and as a new Smartphone user I can say that there is no instant switching there too...

As an end point, no one is buying a 400 USD console to surf on the web but to play games, at best these other features could be an buying reason for people on the fence, but certainly not the main reason.

I would rather bet on a company that has a clear vision and the tools to make them reality, than on one that is always, frightfully, watching over the features of the competition. Really hope that Sony is not doing the second one...

 

[TrungGap]

...

As an end point, no one is buying a 400 USD console to surf on the web but to play games, at best these other features could be an buying reason for people on the fence, but certainly not the main reason.

I would rather bet on a company that has a clear vision and the tools to make them reality, than on one that is always, frightfully, watching over the features of the competition. Really hope that Sony is not doing the second one...

Long live Nokia 8860! Yea! People buy a cellphone for a cell phone, all that pretty ui, multitasking apps are just for people on the fence...

 

[zupallinere]

This is the problem, we don't know. But let's take the basic functionality from the PS3, as a starting point, then add what Sony have said or hinted about the PS4 - here's a start:

• A game.
• The PSN Store.
• Netflix / BBC iPlayer / CatchupTV / Video Unlimited / Music Unlimited and any other streaming apps.
• Blu-ray/DVD/CD playback.
• Sharing, including picture/video editing.
• Future Gaikai implementation for backwards compatibility.
• Cross game chat.
• Background server for remote access (Vita, smartphones, tablets).
• Background server to allow other players to control your game.
• Background server for streaming to Ustream / other players.
• Background installation, downloading and updating of games/OS.
• Multimedia front end for remote DNLA server as well as photos, music, videos on the console.
• Background maintenance/optimisation of the filesystem.
• A web browser.
• Social networking.

No, but you take an educated guess by assuming that much of the basic functionality of the PS3 will carry over to the PS4 - except for things like Home. Sony's key goal, what they repeated over and over, is immediacy. What little they've shown of the UI is all immediate - no waiting for things to load or for the screen to populate.

Of course all of this hasn't been deployed out to millions of consumers yet. One thing that will be done with gaikai is that it will be deployed over time and maybe some other things will as well but assuming not everything goes to plan it might not be a bad thing to keep a few resources around until things stabilize with some measure of responsiveness.

Most of this is going over the PSN and while it is way better than it used to be it's unknown just what level of performance you are going to get after the introduction of a new platform with lots more functionality.

 

[-tkf-]

This is the problem, we don't know. But let's take the basic functionality from the PS3, as a starting point, then add what Sony have said or hinted about the PS4 - here's a start:

• A game.
• The PSN Store.
• Netflix / BBC iPlayer / CatchupTV / Video Unlimited / Music Unlimited and any other streaming apps.
• Blu-ray/DVD/CD playback.
• Sharing, including picture/video editing.
• Future Gaikai implementation for backwards compatibility.
• Cross game chat.
• Background server for remote access (Vita, smartphones, tablets).
• Background server to allow other players to control your game.
• Background server for streaming to Ustream / other players.
• Background installation, downloading and updating of games/OS.
• Multimedia front end for remote DNLA server as well as photos, music, videos on the console.
• Background maintenance/optimisation of the filesystem.
• A web browser.
• Social networking.

No, but you take an educated guess by assuming that much of the basic functionality of the PS3 will carry over to the PS4 - except for things like Home. Sony's key goal, what they repeated over and over, is immediacy. What little they've shown of the UI is all immediate - no waiting for things to load or for the screen to populate.


Well start with the list above. Run applications on your desktop that perform similar functions then look at how much memory they're using. Then factor in they'll want room to enhance existing functionality as well as add entirely new functionality they can't envisage at this point in time. The UI itself looks low maintenance, with very few visual elements and the backgrounds being comprised of gradients which are calculable in realtime.


How did you calculate 1Gb? Does that include things like the share application maintaining 10 second thumbnails for the last 15 minutes of video saved? Does it include possibly keeping the PSN store data resident so it's just there? Does it include all the thumbnail avatars of your 1,000 PSN friends? Does it include buffers for everything being streamed? Does it include retaining whatever is being buffered by the Blu-ray/DVD/CD/Netflix/VOD applications?

Is the PS4 doing this? No idea? Does it need to do this? No, not if they are willing to compromise on the immediacy thing. But remember the PS4 is going to be around for several years. What is acceptable in terms of immediacy today will not in two years when tablets and phones, TVs and STB boxes will be using better technology and much faster.


I think they have large datasets across a lot of different applications. But when you talk about what is "an intrinsic requirement of an OS", what are you referring too? Windows? OSX? Linux? If so, these have to be all things to all men, where the PS4 (and Xbox One) are closer to appliances than general computing devices with flexible OS's. They need to be doing their core functions better than general computing operating systems. In this day and age, not to mention in 2-3 time, it's what people do, or soon will, expect.

I expect the gaming related services/apps to the "instant" functions.

The rest can be pulled and run from the harddrive. Same goes for avatars and other graphics. The 360 saves memory by pulling almost everything from the internet (no mandatory harddrive), disconnect the 360 and it's template graphics all over.

I expect Sony to use memory on supporting games, afaik with the PS3 when a game wanted a gaming related function, like remote play, that memory was gone from it's own memory budget, for example remote play. With the PS4 i think we see hints that Sony reserved all the needed memory for every game related service/function so that the games really won't have to worry about that.