I would say there is a lot of smoke around the 7GB number.
Given the high speed of gddr5 you can access 5.87 GB per frame @ 30 fps. Really dev could use all 8GB if sony would let them since the bus is so fast.
PlayStation 4 (codename Orbis) technical hardware investigation (news and rumours)
- Thread starter Love_In_Rio
- Start date
- Status
I would say there is a lot of smoke around the 7GB number.
Given the high speed of gddr5 you can access 5.87 GB per frame @ 30 fps. Really dev could use all 8GB if sony would let them since the bus is so fast.
If that's the case, Sony is being pretty short sighted. It pigeon holes what they want their console to be for the lifetime of the device.
Love_In_Rio
Veteran
IMO the logical thing for being future proof and give OS enough space for future new functionalities would be 2GB for OS and 6GB for games.
I'd say the opposite. Sony's entire focus has been games above all else, and Xbox One has been about an entire entertainment experience. The design of each console reflects this. There is nothing short sighted about either strategy.
The PS4 could easily offer the same app functionality as the Xbox One, and still give most of the RAM to devs. Only you'll have to wait just a few more seconds to load Netflix, or go to menu. That's part of the value MS is counting on, and the main difference in design between the consoles.
I don't think either company is being 'short sighted', they just have different priorities that will play out in the marketplace.
edit: am in tech thread... sry
Last edited by a moderator:
Based on what? This only matters while you are playing a game. Once out of the game you have access to the full resources of the system. The os/apps are not gated to 2/1GB of ram. Since the game does not stay running.
Seem just stupid to gate off even 1GB of ram. Why do they need that much ram to run the OS in the background? There is very few thing i want loaded while I'm gaming. The system was design around 512MB of ram. What feature is so great that it needs 4x that?
With everyone having smart phones and tablet. I never want to use my TV has a second screen. Having apps sideloaded is a waste of resources. Is saving 10 secs of load worth losing 15% of your ram? Not for me...
doesnt the reserved ram also needed for "suspending" game?
PS4 have the ability to suspend game wherever and whenever. If it does it like iOS and Windows Phone, then Sony does not need to reserve lots of RAM but will need fast hard disk (or they use Hybrid HDD?, extra flash memory?)
if they suspend like Android, then they will need lots of RAM reserved for this suspend feature.
>> ps4 suspend http://www.psu.com/a018423/
there's no loading, just resume play.
PS4 have the ability to suspend game wherever and whenever. If it does it like iOS and Windows Phone, then Sony does not need to reserve lots of RAM but will need fast hard disk (or they use Hybrid HDD?, extra flash memory?)
if they suspend like Android, then they will need lots of RAM reserved for this suspend feature.
>> ps4 suspend http://www.psu.com/a018423/
there's no loading, just resume play.
Gradthrawn
Veteran
No. You don't need extra memory to preserve content that's already in memory. The suspend mode mentioned at the reveal and in the article is specifically in regards to putting the console to sleep. The game state just stays in memory (the memory it was already using). Needs enough power to keep the memory state active, and the custom chip can handle the rest as it normally would until the console is brought out of standby (the APU should by and large be un-powered, since memory sits outside of the APU). They are not suspending an app to memory so that you can launch another app. Even then it would make more sense to suspend memory to a virtual memory/page file specific to the tile on the HDD, as the XBO is doing.
Yes, a gaming console.
I feel like if something is important enough that it would take up 2GB of ram maybe you shouldn't be still playing the game & you should be focused on whatever it is that's so important that it needs to use up to 2GB of ram.
Hmnm, Cerny says PS4 is small cause "power consumption is less".
http://www.gamereactor.eu/news/83714/Mark+Cerny:+"they+know+how+to+design+PS4+so+it+won't+overheat"/
Question is, less than what? XB1? Current PS3? Launch PS3?
7850 TDP is 130 watts...I'm not seeing a whole lot of wiggle room with 8GB GDDR5 too.
Will be pretty interesting to me if these consoles come in significantly <last gen at launch.
http://www.gamereactor.eu/news/83714/Mark+Cerny:+"they+know+how+to+design+PS4+so+it+won't+overheat"/
Question is, less than what? XB1? Current PS3? Launch PS3?
7850 TDP is 130 watts...I'm not seeing a whole lot of wiggle room with 8GB GDDR5 too.
Will be pretty interesting to me if these consoles come in significantly <last gen at launch.
I have never understood why people think gddr5 uses some massive amount of power.
Biggest difference between ps4 vs ps3 slim is you have a single chip system vs dual. Being able to use a single heatsink is most likely the biggest reason the case is smaller.
Well because it does, be it memory chips or the memory controller, go head and compare discrete GPU cards available with ddr3 and gddr5. Thought we don't speak about a crazy different, usually those cards are low end so the tdp is not highto begin with.
PS3 Slim I guess, as that's what PS4's being compared to. Which was under 100 watts. Makes ya think...
That sounds a lot like PR bs. It seems that Sony decided to unilaterally orient its communication on hardware and hammering (though in clever manner) every choices MSFT made.
I would indeed be surprised if the PS4 consumes less than a radeon 7850, the clock is barely lower, there are 8 CPU cores in there, a lot more memory chips, the HDD, the optical drive.
Though the chip should be bigger (it has too) than Pitcairn, I think that the "Watts per mm^2" you have to dissipate should be lower than in the HD7850 making cooling easier ( the same applies to durango possibly to a greater extend). The result is the cooling system should run more efficiently.
I think Cerny speaks about the power consumption of the original PS3, that makes more sense, the elusiveness of his statement is a clever PR twist.
There are others, like the ease of development, no lies here the ps4 is the most straight forward system to ever land in the console realm, though there is something underlying in his talk that is not exactly fair: they make it sounds like MSFT are bad, that the 360 was a hell to code for, etc.
Imo that is the reason about his talk about the "others PS4", I absolutely believe that they considered the option but as the guy is clever he leverages that to make competition looks bad. In the process he forgets to speak about the API and related tools and the overhead as far as "easiness of coding" of having low level access to the hardware.
Anyway I guess it is fair from a business POV, actually I think he does it really well, in a subtle enough manner, I think he is as clever as he looks
Last edited by a moderator:
Big honking Mark Cerny interview, or "B3D aks Cerny questions"
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-face-to-face-with-mark-cerny
Some interesting stuff I picked out as I go
Nothing earth shattering I guess.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-face-to-face-with-mark-cerny
Some interesting stuff I picked out as I go
Nothing earth shattering I guess.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
The most interesting non-answer for me:
Cerny is stating facts of course, who you want to work with, or your preference for technology, can be ruled out for other reasons like cost or timing, but he he says "the choice of AMD came out of that."
Not the decision mind, the choice. As though they only had one choice: AMD. It could just be lazy language though, I'm Cerny was doing a lot of talking that day.
Mark Cerny said:
Cerny is stating facts of course, who you want to work with, or your preference for technology, can be ruled out for other reasons like cost or timing, but he he says "the choice of AMD came out of that."
Not the decision mind, the choice. As though they only had one choice: AMD. It could just be lazy language though, I'm Cerny was doing a lot of talking that day.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
If Cerny did mean AMD was the only choice, that means nothing else was viable. Intel. Nvidia. PowerVR. ARM. MIPS. PowerPC, or any combinations thereof. At least not based on their budget, timeline and goals.
Like I said, he may just have used a poor choice of words.
- Status
