News & Rumours: Playstation 4/ Orbis *spin*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shifty Geezer said:
Depends what you're doing. Comparison to sampled reference data can use huge datasets (eg. voice recognition).
Click to expand...
Only for a large dictionary ... so mostly for natural language web searching. For simply voice control the dataset is going to be tiny.

I think in the end this is the only reasonable suggestion of why so much memory is needed. For the hugely limited corner case of people who want to do a voice based web search right after dropping out of a game you throw a couple of GB of precious memory under the bus for the common use?

They should be able to get everything done with 512 MB, 1 GB is luxury ... 3.5 GB is retarded.
 
MfA said:
Only for a large dictionary ... so mostly for natural language web searching. For simply voice control the dataset is going to be tiny.

I think in the end this is the only reasonable suggestion of why so much memory is needed. For the hugely limited corner case of people who want to do a voice based web search right after dropping out of a game you throw a couple of GB of precious memory under the bus for the common use?

They should be able to get everything done with 512 MB, 1 GB is luxury ... 3.5 GB is retarded.
Click to expand...

There really is nothing worse than armchair engineering. :rolleyes:
 
Do they really need the whole database in memory, or can they get away with a tree search directly from the HDD or a flash area?
 
dagamer said:
There really is nothing worse than armchair engineering. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Sure there is, bad engineering.

Lets hope Microsoft decides that they're going to let developers use more, then all the justifications will disappear and Sony will follow ... in the end allowing more poorly programmed 3rd party apps to stay memory resident isn't THAT important, not important enough to allow the competitor to get ahead in the one area they marketed themselves most heavily ... gaming.
 
MfA said:
Only for a large dictionary ... so mostly for natural language web searching. For simply voice control the dataset is going to be tiny.
Click to expand...
Depends what you mean by tiny. If you mean "in the tens to hundreds of megabytes", then sure. The 360 used a database in the "tens" range, I'm sure you'd want better performance for a next gen console, right?
MfA said:
I think in the end this is the only reasonable suggestion of why so much memory is needed. For the hugely limited corner case of people who want to do a voice based web search right after dropping out of a game you throw a couple of GB of precious memory under the bus for the common use?

They should be able to get everything done with 512 MB, 1 GB is luxury ... 3.5 GB is retarded.
Click to expand...
Um, no. What if they want consistent drive response for the game? Then the best bet is to keep everything you can on the OS side in memory. Engineering decisions drive other engineering decisions. You can't just call something "retarded", especially when you have no idea what the engineering tradeoffs are that caused that decision.
 
bkilian said:
Um, no. What if they want consistent drive response for the game?
Click to expand...
That's what QoS is for ... ignoring that though, what could possibly be running in the background which uses so much memory that it could cause swap trashing without GBs worth of memory? This is a far more restrictive argument than the professed need for instant responsiveness when switching from a game to an arbitrary app.
 
Excellent news..

Sony has today revealed a number of new tidbits surrounding PlayStation 4 - primarily that its party chat functions will be free to use, meaning you won't need a PlayStation Plus subscription.

Unlike Xbox 360 or Xbox One, PS4 owners won't need to pay to chat online, or to use online-based apps such as streaming service Netflix.

PS4 does need you to be a Plus subscriber to play online games, but Sony has today clarified that this charge does not apply to free-to-play games - another thing Xbox charges for.
Click to expand...

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...at-online-apps-wont-require-plus-subscription
 
I was thinking they would just buffer the last 15 minutes of gameplay video into RAM and only write to the HDD when the user wants to save the footage?

As otherwise they'd constantly be writing to the HDD when a game is being played - and HDD wear and tear resulting from doing that could be a cause for concern given the expected lifespans of these consoles.

So something like that could well take close to a GB of RAM.
 
eastmen said:
Don't care much for the wording in the article

You only pay one fee on the xbox . That's for xbox live gold. Some mmorpgs don't require live to play them.
Click to expand...

Some? do you mean to say that there are MMO games that does and some that doesn't? it seems to me that Eurogamer says that there are MMO on the XBOX that does require a Gold account.

The good news is that Microsoft might feel forced to drop the fee for Netflix and services like that, which to be honest always was pretty stupid.
 
Maybe the 4,5 Gb for games is the minimum... and the OS can take up the 3,5Gb only in certain instances, where other apps are running.
Maybe during a gaming only sesion the OS sits in 1or 2Gb, and the game is free to take 4,5Gb plus some other "flexible" RAM allocation, and this flexible amount is ready to by given up by the game when other apps are requested by the user - but 4,5 Gb for games is set in stone and cannot get smaller.
...not sure I'm very clear...
 
(((interference))) said:
I was thinking they would just buffer the last 15 minutes of gameplay video into RAM and only write to the HDD when the user wants to save the footage?

As otherwise they'd constantly be writing to the HDD when a game is being played - and HDD wear and tear resulting from doing that could be a cause for concern given the expected lifespans of these consoles.

So something like that could well take close to a GB of RAM.
Click to expand...

Well the HDD is replaceable on PS4.
XBO apparently records the gameplay footage on the HDD which makes me think that the we are exaggerating the dangers.
 
eastmen said:
You only pay one fee on the xbox . That's for xbox live gold. Some mmorpgs don't require live to play them.
Click to expand...

The xbox live fee is monthly so hardly 'one fee' unless you mean 'one re-occurring fee'? Also which mmorpgs don't require live (out of interest) this is news to me?
 
-tkf- said:
Some? do you mean to say that there are MMO games that does and some that doesn't? it seems to me that Eurogamer says that there are MMO on the XBOX that does require a Gold account.

The good news is that Microsoft might feel forced to drop the fee for Netflix and services like that, which to be honest always was pretty stupid.
Click to expand...

I played final fantasy mmorpg on the xbox 360 without having gold.
 
(((interference))) said:
No, games are limited to 5 GB; 4.5 GB managed directly by the game and 0.5 GB managed by the system on behalf of the game.
Click to expand...

I thought the final set up was 4.5GB (real) directly managed the game 512MB (real) managed by the OS and then 512MB (virt) also managed by the OS.

So in total the available memory for games is 5.5GB with just the OS managed section being split.
 
In a virtual memory system isn´t the hard disk virtual memory bigger than the physical memory space managed by the same virtual memory system?.

If so the logical would be 4.5 GB of direct memory + 512 MB physical memory of virtual system + 1024 MB of HD virtual system.

This would also fit with claims of some games using 6 GB of memory in PS4.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top