GC: "PS4's massive amount of available RAM is something that the industry has been cheering ever since its announcement."
Its great that they are going to be able to do a lot more now with next generation consoles but its also frustrating at the same time that the PC has had these capabilities for so long and are rarely utilized. Oh well, hopefully they will now with next gen.
"the PC has had these capabilities for so long" Feel free to show us these PCs with DDR5 memory for the entire system like the PS4 has. The amount of RAM in the PS4 is no big deal. It is the standard roughly 16x increase that every Playstation has had: PS1 2/3 megs PS2 32 megs - 2 * 16 PS3 512 megs - 32 * 16 PS4 8 gigs - 512 * 16 The memory speed is the huge power/performance feature for the PS4 not the amount of RAM. Memory speed is one of the major reasons why the PS3's graphics looked so far, far beyond anything the Xbox 360 put out this gen despite the fact that both systems had 512 megs of RAM to work with in games like Uncharted 1,2,3, Killzone 2,3, Gran Turismo 5, etc.
Gddr 5 isn't as good for cpus a ddr 3. By the way, no such thing as ddr5 ram. Ddr 4 will be coming out on pc by 2014 by the way. Please don't talk about specs if you're a console gamer, it makes you look bad. Just enjoy the awesome games that come out and stop comparing..... Specs or otherwise.
"Feel free to show us these PCs with DDR5 memory for the entire system like the PS4 has." 1. GDDR 5 RAM may offer high bandwidth, but comes with high Latency. CPUs dont work well with high latency and they cant really use such high bandwidth. Which is why PC has DDR 3 RAM for the CPU. It provides low latency and it provides enough bandwidth. 2. PC does have GDDR 5 RAM, since the last 4 years or so. Its the GPU that requires high bandwidth, Latency doenst matter to GPUs. Hence PC has GDDR 5 RAM that provides way more bandwidth than the one offered for the PS4, plus its dedicated ie not shared with the CPU. One can argue there are benefits to that too. Hence PC gets best of both worlds, Low latency RAM for the CPU. Much higher bandwidth for the GPU. How the PS4s CPU reacts to the high Latency of GDDR 5 is still anyones guess. "The memory speed is the huge power/performance feature for the PS4 not the amount of RAM." The memory speed is about equal to mid range GPUs of today and its going to be shared with the CPU, its not dedicated. Hence one may argue even midrange GPUs today get more bandwidth than what the PS4s GPU will be getting. Edit: Just for your reference, high end desktop CPUs from Intel which cost about 300-1000usd dont seem to be able to take advantage of memory bandwidth beyond 20GB/s not in games anyways. One would have to question how far the PS4s low performance mobile CPU that is of no match to Intels desktop CPUs will take advantage of all that bandwidth, it just might end up suffering from the Latency.
> why the PS3's graphics looked so far, far beyond anything the Xbox 360 It really is amazing that something so obvious about console hardware performance, memory speed, is unable to be grasped by Microsoft. Console engine programming is almost entirely based off of stream style processing where latency is of no consequence. Console engineers know how to build their engines in such a manner that the next data chunk is constantly being fetched while the current data chunk is being processed. Disc->Harddrive->Main Memory->Cache Everything being loaded asynchronously to the next stage of processing. This is why PC game engineers like Carmack and others cry constantly about porting their old PC style engines to console hardware. They are use to just dumping everything into slow main memory once at level load time and work on the complete data set all at once. If their engine runs too slow then it is your problem and you need to go out and spend large amounts of money buying a faster PC to run their crap code.
PCs don't need GDDR5 ram for the entire system. It would actually be detrimental to system performance due to it's high latency. That's why you only use GDDR5 in the graphics card. Anything that the PS4 can do, a high end PC can do as well, which is why I really don't think we're gonna be seeing much difference between PS4 games and PC games next gen--even with it's magical 8gb-GDDR5. There's also the fact that, due to the PS4's architecture, PCs will most likely be the lead development platform going into next gen. Also, you exaggerate the difference between PS3 graphics and 360. PS3 games look better, but not "far, far" better as you say.
It's not ddr5, gdd5 is just a modification of ddr3 that gives better bandwidth but worse lantency
"It's not ddr5, gdd5 is just a modification of ddr3 that gives better bandwidth but worse lantency" LOL... The 'g' just stands for 'graphics'... Gotta love the 'PC gamers' trying to pretend to be graphics hardware experts. "PCs don't need GDDR5 ram for the entire system. It would actually be detrimental to system performance due to it's high latency." Yes, PC programmers do suck and, yes, their crappy code would not run well with the incredibly high performance PS4 ram. PC hardware is designed for the lowest common denominator - that is why PCs require such a huge amount of system memory, video memory, etc to compete with console engineers running higher quality engines on less expensive hardware.
Dude, there is no DDR5 memory. Are you insane? If you mean GDDR then that is a different story. I dislike when know nothing console gamers (not all of you, some do understand) think that the ps4 is somehow a tech marvel with specs that have no been reached. We do not want shared GDDR5 memory. Why would we? PC gamers (well, speaking for myself) have a graphics card with GDDR5 memory just for gaming. We do not have to share with anything. That is called a dedicated graphics card. We even have additional RAM on the side of os and things like that. rl_pearson, you have to do some research. Do not talk about specs if you don't know what they mean. Why would PC gamers want to have to share an entire system on a small amount of RAM? We have things in our systems dedicated for each specific thing. This no only gives (well, the ones with nice set ups) an earth shattering lead in graphics and overall performance but it leaves the system open for future upgrades as we see fit. I agree, it is a nice upgrade for console gamers and one that will benefit us all but do not talk about shared GDDR5 memory like it is actually a good thing.
Every time you guys start harping on about specs, I'll just nicely repeat it over and over again. OPTIMIZATION, OPTIMIZATION, OPTIMIZATION 1200 HP Corvette will not beat a 600 HP Formula 1 car on track. The F1 car is OPTIMIZED for circuit racing, The Corvette wasn't. So please stop comparing console specs to PC Specs, it's just not the same. A PC with 512 MB RAM will not run Uncharted as it is on the PS3.
@Cupid_Viper_3 "OPTIMIZATION, OPTIMIZATION, OPTIMIZATION" Thats all we hear console gamers say lol. If console optimization is so good then why is it current consoles get out performed by Low end PCs of today. PCs that might be costing 500usd. Even back when PS3 was released a PC equipped with a 8800GTX outperformed it. Same is the case today. A 6 year old PC equipped with a 8800GTX will outperform a console even today. So where is the console optimization? We have seen games like Skyrim, Battlefield 3, Farcry 3, Mafia 2 literally lag on consoles. Where was the optimization then? Atleast on PC when something is wrong and the devs arent doing anything (such was the case with Skyrim PS3), the community patches the game itself or PC gamers do have the option to upgrade to better hardware so they can play the game, where as console gamers are left with no OPTIONS. Just as today many of them are crying about not having BC for their machine, Its because console gamers lack OPTIONS, OPTIONS, OPTIONS.
@feline What did I say tha is wrong? Gddr5 is based on ddr3, look it up . It's nothing new and have been in graphic cards for years . Gddr5 has worse lantecny than ddr3,
@vicodin No gddr5 and ddr5 are not the same thing. Gddr5 uses ddr3 technology, ddr5 doesn't exist
@ reynod Clearly you don't understand what the word means. "op·ti·mi· ;za·tion [op-tuh-muh-zey-shuhn] Show IPA 1. the fact of optimizing; making the best of anything. 2. the condition of being optimized. 3. Mathematics . a mathematical technique for finding a maximum or minimum value of a function of several variables subject to a set of constraints, as linear programming or systems analysis." I don't know how else I can explain what that means to you than the example I gave you earlier with the cars. lol Options? lol, like I'm not typing this from a computer? How dense are you son?
@Cupid_Viper_3 So now Consoles are 600HP Formula 1 cars, While PCs are 1200HP Corvettes. Stop making yourself look bad. Despite all the optimization low end Pcs are in fact outperforming consoles. No reason to believe that will change even with the arrival of the next consoles.
I can't believe I'm still reading posts of people that think gddr5 is ddr5, how long are people going to stay uninformed? let me google it for you "Like its predecessor, GDDR4, GDDR5 is based on DDR3 SDRAM memory" http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... and @faline yes PC gamers that build their own PCs would know a lot more about memory,CPUs and GPUs than your average console gamer
Are you guys serious? DDR5 and GDDR5 are the same thing. The memory is called GDDR5 if it is used exclusively in graphics cards and DDR5 if it is used for an entire system like the PS4.
@bourg no not the same thing at all, show me the specs of ddr5, it doesn't exist. ddr4 won't be out til the end of the year. gddr5 is just ddr3 with a pre fetch buffer. oh of course your account is just created 8 minutes ago, why you already used up all your bubbles?
PS4's total shared Memory bandwidth will be 176GB/s Mid range GPUs of today are already pushing 192GB/s (Dedicated). By the time PS4 is out, Midrange GPUs will be pushing 250GB/s (Dedicated) PS4's memory really isnt anything special when compared to PCs. It has to be shared with the CPU, which will just compromise how much the GPU gets.
"Even back when PS3 was released a PC equipped with a 8800GTX outperformed it. Same is the case today. A 6 year old PC equipped with a 8800GTX will outperform a console even today." Amnesia ! show us 2006 to 2009 games withy better graphics than unchartedµ2, gow3, etc COnsole always have better games and graphics for 4,5 years, before pc can take back the graphic crown (with only few games, and only some pc)...and don't dream, specs and resolution are not enough to make beautifull graphisms. By the way, why all the unsecure pc fanboyz with costy graphic cards are always making the same mistake at launch ? (after that, they generaly disapear
@Kikizoo Check out BF3 running on 8800GTX. 720p Medium settings. 64 player MP. I bet it could probably handle 1080p with some tweaking. 6 years later its still playing games beyond what the consoles are managing. http://www.youtube.com/watc... Way back when it released Crysis 1 was still new, i remember playing crysis 1 on a 8800GTX played the game in 1080p medium settings. Check today Consoles barely manage any Crysis game in 720p Crysis > Uncharted or GOW period.
"Feel free to show us these PCs with DDR5 memory for the entire system like the PS4 has. " Feel free to show us these PS4s with DDR5 memory for the entire system like you say the the PS4 has. Also how much of this memory is used for OS and other things? Also dedicated memory > shared memory. And ddr4 ram and gddr6 next year. Huge bandwidth and high latency through the whole system is the trade off but that will be fixed next year. http://computerstories.net/... Also ps4 has l3 cache shared for all 8 core which will slow it down even more. PS4 is awsome but many don't want it to be an console they want it to be a 2025 high end pc. Please don't get in a power match with pc's you will lose if not at launch soon. We have been through this before. I hope killzone just get to 60fps. Either way I am getting a ps4 but let the power trip go please. Games will look amazing! But it's a mobile cpu with a shrunken gpu to fit on the chip. Still ps4 ftw!
ummm GDDR5 isnt it for video and not main memor ram. I think hardcore console fanboys are gonna be in for a shocker when the console actually gets released at the end of thise year. You have to remember consoles are static hardware configuration, and PC's are NOT. The specs have already been determined in the background, and I am sure they had it set about a year ago.
and RAM is going to be all that sony fanboys go on about for the next 5-6 years ffs
Umm it is GDDR5 not DDR5.. -_-... and yea PC have had that for about 2 years now.. with just about every graphics card available. It may not be set up the same as the PS4 but PC has indeed had that type of graphics memory for a while now. I am not bragging or even talking shit but I am just trying to inform you or others who seem to be confused. Do I really need to post links? You could simply look online at most of the graphics cards for PC and notice many of them all have been using GDDR5, these cards have been out for a about close to 2 years now if not more. http://www.newegg.com/Produ... Pretty old ATI with GDDR5 http://www.newegg.com/Produ... What do you know the Asus Mars III even has 8GB of GDDR5 in one single card... http://wccftech.com/asus-ma... PS4 will be great but people need to stop being idiots about it is all I am saying. That is not even including using Cross Fire or SLI. You could quadruple that graphics memory if you wanted to. I have seen decked out PC's running two CPU's and 4 graphics cards all at once not including the actual RAM in a computer can far exceed the PS4.. I am sorry but the PS4 just isn't going to be doing that or else it would be expensive as shit. What kind of worries me is the PS4 only has GDDR5. Also I want to know what the graphics memory is running at internally, I know it is 8GB but graphics memory in a way works like a OS in a sense. I wonder what the internal memory is in the graphics chip. Every GPU has an internal memory. For instance you could buy many 2GB graphics cards but not everyone one will perform the same because some will come with a lower internal memory. Internal memory in graphics I know is far more important than the graphics memory they show. Some may come with only 2GB at 128-bits or 2GB at 256-bit, 2GB at 512-bit and so on. There reason I say it like an OS, you all know an OS can run at 32 bits and 64 bits and clearly there is a jump graphically between the two. In the same sense a graphics card with a higher internal memory will outperform the same card with the same graphics memory with a lower internal memory if that isn't too confusing. It is kind of misleading how they label these graphic cards, it how they sell them most people just pay attention to the graphics memory.. I learned that ages ago when buying a graphics card it is important to pay attention to the internal memory size first then the graphics memory second.
Sorry for any spelling errors and the skipped words. I have bad habit of thinking I wrote something but I guess I tried typing too fast and like a blind idiot just skimmed by but you should definitely get my point. I guess I used all my edit time writing that second part. So bare with the errors at the end, there are a plenty.
profgerbik I think the word you're looking for when you say "internal memory" Is "memory bus width" absolutely correct a card with a 384bit bus width is usually outperformed by a wide margin with a card that has a larger 512bit bus width
"Memory speed is one of the major reasons why the PS3's graphics looked so far, far beyond anything the Xbox 360 put out this gen despite the fact that both systems had 512 megs" bro, you know the 360 used unified RAM , and the PS3 used spilt RAM right(256 for gpu256 for CPU). That was one of the few advatages Microsoft had over sony last gen. Unified RAM is supposedly more practicle in Consoles, as they can access data from the same RAM pool. This is also why I hope the rumors of the 720 using split RAM are false. Sony got it right with their Unified architecture for the PS4
This is in reply to T900...looks like a lot of fanboys that don't understand tech at all have down voted your comment. I'm sure that it's because it doesn't correlate with all the hype they've bought into.
Pc's have had gddr5 for a while. However, they usually only have a few gb's of it, unless you're spending as much on the gpu as the ps4 will cost. Then you have to factor in that even with the latest pci express connection, you still don't get cpu to gpu bandwidth like ps4 enjoys since both are on the same die in ps4, reducing cpu's ability to aid the gpu and vice versa in a pc. You do have more latency with gddr5, but video games aren't as latency dependent as they are bandwidth dependent, so for a game console it doesn't matter as much. Then you have operating system overhead, which will be much less in a dedicated console than in a pc that has many more background processes running, and api's that don't let you code "to the metal" as much on a pc. Then you have split memory pools, which increases bandwidth for pc but also gives ps4 the advantage of being able to dynamically allocate more vram if needed by it's gpu. Ps4's os is rumored to reserve 1.5gb's, leaving 6.5 for cpu and vram. Since pc games are designed to run on midrange systems for max compatibility, I see ps4 keeping up with pc's that cost hundreds more to build for a little while when you consider all of the above. Each has it's advantages, but ps4 is a very capable system fine tuned for gaming. Not an office machine retrofitted to be able to play videogames.
GDDR5 is so bad for CPUs that AMD is actually releasing a APU using it: Kaveri will fully support GDDR5 later this year. I suggest sending an email to AMD because those dumbos must not have gotten the memo. /s http://www.xbitlabs.com/new... Internet experts. For the ones actually interested, this is what the PS4 is all about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... Kaveri shares the architecture of the PS4 cpu (on a different core).
Ps4 RAM=Ps3 Cell Fanboys have to have something brag about. Out of those 8GB only a small portion would be used as Video ram, maybe 2GB, because Cpu and Gpu can only chew so much, the rest will be for OS and texture or asets cache. So a system with only 2GB of GDDR5 can produce same graphics as ps4. Just look how much video ram Crysis3 uses on ultra settings and everything should be clear, and a side note a i7 with gtx680 can chew more graphic data then ps4 ever will.
Exactly, the cell was really overated and a waste of time for developers. Thier was nothing diffrent about the games that we havent see before. And as far as having 8gb of ram... developers have to be innovative first for the 8gb of ram to really mean anything.
"Thier was nothing diffrent about the games that we havent see before" Take the fanboy goggles off... The PS3 destroyed the wimpy Xbox 360 this gen. The wimpy Xbox 360 got beaten so badly this gen its fanboys had to resort to desperately scanning crappy multiplatform titles frantically looking for something to brag about. No console in history has every gotten beat like the Xbox 360 did this gen in graphics. Seven years after the wimpy Xbox 360 came out the only game its fanboys have to brag about is a game running Epics awful crossplatform Unreal engine with its 'shiny normal maps everywhere!' tech. The Xbox 360's only game anyone every even tries to claim can come close PS3 level graphics, Gears of War, gets destroyed by the PS3's Uncharted: http://kineticninja.blogspo... People use to think Dreamcast fans were delusional when it got destroyed by the PS2 in graphics. Xbox 360 fans are making Dreamcast fans look sane...
Yeah but fanboys think that ram has computing power and that it will be used for better A.I. or thinhgs like that. It's funny to read all dose comments from clueless fanboys. Can ps3 run Skyrim? Or Witcher2? Or Fallout? No ps3 is weaker than xbox360, ps3 can only run Uncharted and GoW wich are linear tunel shooters or has fixed camera like in GoW. Nothing special abot those games.
@feline_ if ps3 is so much more powerful than 360, why don't the multi plat games look like the PC versions? why do they always look about identical to 360? we are not seeing games in 1080p with dx11 effects onh ps3 are we?
Those actual Gears of War in game graphics are absolutely hilariously bad. Unbelievable that that is the best the Xbox 360 was able to put out this gen. Microsoft really blew it when they rushed the Xbox 360 out the door with such ridiculously weak graphics hardware compared to the what Sony ended up putting in the PS3. Looking back at the GameCube, PS2, and Xbox. All three consoles had games that were the best looking of the generation. The GameCube had the Metroid Prime games, the PS2 had the God of War, Gran Turismo games, and the Xbox had its games with 'teh shiny' like Halo. The Xbox 360 has been an unprecedented graphical failure.
Do you Delboy even know what Unified Memory means. It means that they can allocate the 8GB Gddr5 memory any way they want. Memory bandwith / 30 FPS (console standard for many games) = 5,86 GB max detail per frame active throughput with CPU and GPU combined. This means they can and some developers probably will allocate around 5GB for graphics. Not many PC GPU cards can do the same. And common for them all is that they are rather expensive... What will be interesting is to see if the PS4 has enough grunt to take advantage of this much VRam. 5GB frames sound like an awful lot of data. Remember: In order to take advantage of the theoretical active throughput per frame, you need at least that much Vram on the graphicscard, as the GPU needs somewhere to store the data before sending out the finished frame.
@teo72 Thats not how things work. First you have to consider not all 8GB will be used toward games. More so all of it cant be used toward VRAM, its shared. You need to chop of 2GB for OS and future reserves. The game itself will probably end up taking 2-3GB of RAM. You will potentially only be left with 2-3GB for VRAM. Its debatable how much of that VRAM the PS4s GPU really will be able to use. If RAM was all it took to increase performance Nvidia and AMD would be packing tons of it on their PC GPUs, they dont do that for a reason. The GPU used in the PS4 is nothing ground breaking its a mid range GPU at best. Further evidence can be seen with the upcoming Killzone game, it only uses 1.5GB of video RAM. That should tell you something. PS4 wont be able to take advantage of all that RAM not from a VRAM perspective anyways. Hence stop using RAM size as a guide to performance. Rather it will be the CPU and GPU that will be the determining factors, both of which are low end to mid range on the PS4. Edit: "Not many PC GPU cards can do the same. And common for them all is that they are rather expensive... " Wrong again, most mid range GPUs of today already provide more than 176GB/s Memory bandwidth. Btw again PS4 will have to SHARING that bandwidth not all goes to the GPU. In the PCs case all of it goes to the GPUs. HD 7950 already provides 240GB/s bandwidth (dedicated), thats alot higher than PS4's Shared 176GB/s.
Some of these comments from the likes of felinewhatever are the most fanboyish stuff ive read in awhile. Now while a person is allowed to have ones own "opinions" on things he has such a negative spin on things it makes you wonder what the quality of life this guy has outside of gaming. The PS3 had great looking games this gen but so did the 360. Fanboys are just that fanboys, not hardcore gamers. I used to think this site was for the hardcore but there is just too many fanboys on both sides now.
im so glad im getting the PS4
. affected by my facts ha! = facts of pain?
Bully not sure what it is you're trying to say. I thought this article was about the PS4 being able to do some amazing things, but you guys feel the need to attack Nintendo. I think a lot of you fail to realize that without Nintendo, gaming wouldn't be what it is today, so give a little respect.
Yeah may I also point out like I have done several times that gaming wouldn't be the way it is today thanks to every single gaming company we have had.So I would appreciate if you would stop pretending Nintendo did it on their own with no help or inspiration from anyone else like most people do. Never forget it was Magnavox, Atari and Sega that pioneered gaming along side Nintendo.Gaming would be what it is today without everyone's help and innovation.Even failed consoles like Jaguar and 3DO contributed fully voiced animated cutscenes.
Man, your so right! Without Nintendo the PlayStation might not of ever happened. Heck they practically pioneered the shoulder buttons & the four button layout. Remember the GEN vs SNES era. Well I use to think the SEGA six button pad was better. lol It might have been great back then then, but it ain't true now.
Maybe COD will finally die out now. Thanks innovation.
And replaced by what Killzone and Halo...innovation -_-
It would be a first person hugging simulator if Obama has anything to do about it.
Obama said he was banning violent games when did this happen?......oh wait good thing Games fall under the 1st Amendment. I swear, ever since we have had a black president you conspiracy theorists have gone over the deep end harder than normal.
Wii u is not next gen but its not a bad system is just overpriced and well at least is in hd but am going to wait for a price cut.
"Wii u is not next gen " People like you do realize that "next gen" isn't about how much power the system has, but simply releasing after this gen, right?
Actually, "generation" can be used to denote either way. We wouldn't really call the Wii U "next-gen" if there were no significant performance improvement over the Wii, would we? I mean, the Wii, itself, got away with it because it was a completely different concept from the Gamecube. Technologically speaking, generations are often separated by performance capabilities, not just the period during which they're released, chronologically.
If all next gen is is more power than Wii U IS next gen as it has more power than the ps360 and way more than the Wii. If its a measure of time than it is also next gen. If its an expansion on gameplay than its also next gen. I didnt have built in remote play last gen or any other gen before it. I could never pause a game and open a web browser before. I could never play 5 player split screen in a game before with only 1 tv. If that isnt next gen than i seriously dont know what is. Nintendo has done more with the Wii U than people give it credit for. Plus its fully backwards compatibile with the Wii. Its expanded more on its previous version than the PS4 has over the PS3. So think about that
Okay so wii u is next gen and ps4 and the next Xbox are next next gen, sorry but Wii u is not that much powerful than the ps3. PS4 is way more powerful than ps3 and it will do more things than pa3 ever could or the wii u. I don't hate the wii u I just think is overpriced and it's not fully backwards compatible if it was it would play GameCube games not just wii games if the wii could play them then wii u should too right? Ps4 doesn't play them for a reason the same reason they took the GameCube out of the wii u? So think about that before you go bashing on the ps4 for not having backwards compatibility.
I had to re read my post to make sure of it but nowhere in there did I bash on the PS4 for not having backwards compatibility. And Wii U is fully backwards compatibile with the Wii. It plays Wii games and uses Wii accesories. Gamecube is two gens behind and the Wii was backwards compatibie with the gamecube. As I said, when you compare the consoles to their previous iterations, the Wii U is more advanced than the PS4 is. I stand by that. Remote play, Miiverse, downloadble retail games, 5 player splitscreen, video chat. All this is out the gate and out the box. Just because its not as powerful as the PS4 does not make it any less of a next gen console. It added plenty with console features, same way Sony is doing with the PS4 and power. Everybody has their own tastes, for me personally great visuals lose their appeal faster than anything else to me. Remote play is still a joy to me all these months later But thats me.
that's like saying ps4 is not next gen becuase a high end pc pulls down it's pants and shits all over it....
That's like saying PC and the Magnavox Oddysey are in the same generation because there was no PC2 Brotip: don't categorize PC in generations for obvious reasons Brotip to 90% of everyone above: reread the stuff you post sometimes, seriously
the point of my comment is to show him how dumb he looks saying the wiiU isn't next Gen, not sure how you didnt catch that.
Okay here is some video of Infamous Second Son http://www.youtube.com/watc... Sucker punch has confirmed that this is real gameplay This is the zelda wii u tech demo, I cannot say that this is real gameplay, but we at least know that this is running in real-time http://www.youtube.com/watc... Again I cannot say this is real gameplay Obviously the PS4 wins no question But with the wii u that's pretty good for 2 gigs of ram and a seven-year-old tech The gap may not be as wide as we think
I'm really happy Sony went with 8gigs of GDDR5 ram for the PS4. I think next gen will focus largely on AI, larger worlds and overall immersive experience for the end user. Not to take anything away from the graphics but the features mentioned above will breath more life into the games.
lmao,GDDR5=New Cell Pachter is really clueless when it comes to tech.
I think I'm going to cry guys, I love you Sony :') PS4 coming soon to our homes!
You love a company....based halfway around the world
I'd like some of what the guy above me is smoking! What some haven't taken into acount, is when the WII came out it was was smoking the competition of the assembly line! Cheap, innovative motion controls and most of all Casual friendly. Those are really things that are afterthought with the WII U! Example the WII transcended all age barriers, from the very young to the very old. The WII U doesn't have that ability to entice the the older population, hell most 55 year old and up don't have up to date phones, the majority would just as well settle for a Obama phone. I read a commenters post a while back where he progressional increase of ram has been between 8x to 10x, and for the most part that has happened with each console from generation to generation except in Nintendo's case. It's pretty obvious with the close of this generation, the increase of ram for next generation was not just a want, it has become a necessity.
The thing is, the Wii U is the very definition of "2 steps forward, 1 step back". While the Wii progressed onward, Nintendo seemed to have acknowledged turning their backs on the "hardcore" community and made some changes to accommodate them. These changes also result in it being easier / more likely to see third party support. However, the Wii U still supports the Wii mote and can still appeal to the groups you list.
Nintendo has its fair share of massive failures Virtual Boy = Fail N64 = Fail GameCube = Fail Wii U = (impeding failure) If Nintendo fails this gen, they either gamble all there money and try for on last next gen of home console war or they call it quits and become a software only company.