Umbra Dev on PS4's 8 GB GDDR5 RAM: "Devs Can't Take Full Advantage of it Right Now"

"There's been a lot of talk over the past few days about the PlayStation 4's RAM, with rumours from The Digital Foundry stating that developers will only have access for up 5.5 GB of the 8 GB DDR5 RAM. Development studios like Young Horses Inc. have said it's nothing to worry about (without confirming the truth of the rumours) while Vblank calls the rumour false."

[NYC_Gamer]

There's so much confusion over this piece of info between the different developers

[gameseveryday]

Not really. They all know that the power is there but as usual with every hardware cycle, it will take time. But personally, I think it will be faster this time around.

[iamnsuperman]

I think it will be faster to make true next generation games as the step up isn't as big. Remember from the PS2/Xbox to PS3/360 we went into the HD relm. HD was a big step up. This time the step isn't quite that of the HD step. So in a year or two we should see some really impressive games coming onto the PS4 and the One

[NewMonday]

@justastranger10

ACTUALLY the opposite

because the power available is much more than needed for current conventional games design, in the future developers should be able to express themselves better after coming to terms with the powerful PS4 TECH.

* love how you and others try to make the "4.5" false rumor stick, you cant blame MariaHelFutara for repeatedly reminding you of the facts.

PS4 games use 6G of RAM so far with more to be used in the future,

[Ezz2013]

""""Puha stated that,
“I cannot comment on how much memory the consoles use for their Operating Systems etc and how much is available for us developers, though the numbers are out there so…”

“Really, the more memory we have, the better. It’s as simple as that. Right now, as most developers are porting their current systems and engines to next-generation platforms, the engine pipelines cannot even take advantage of the PS4’s 8 gigs of super-fast RAM as we simply cannot push data fast enough into memory right now. "“So really at this point, everybody’s just really taking advantage of the memory to make life easier on making the first next-gen games, and then a few years down the the line you will see really memory, CPU optimized games just as in this generation. Right now on PS3 and Xbox 360 Umbra 3 data for a level can be between a 1-3 megabytes and on current gen every byte of memory counts.

“On next-gen, devs tell us right now it doesn’t matter if we take 30 or 80 megabytes, there’s plenty of RAM to spare. I’m pretty sure in a few years, memory will again be at a premium!
""

so he say that it will take time to take Full Advantage of the RAM
i can understand that

[Kryptix]

@justastranger
Whatever makes you sleep at night, buddy. lol But even if the 'rumor' was true, GDDR5 still outperforms the Xbox One's DDR3. It's two times better at transferring large amounts of data which developers will be mostly using after a few years when coding becomes more complex on the next gen consoles. Why do you think there isn't a difference right now? The coming games currently use small amounts of data. Remember, we're just coming out of a generation with 512MB of RAM, that's a small amount.

[Xsilver]

for me i think Sony first parties will be the ones bringing out the power first before any third party dev like it is this gen.

[MysticStrummer]

justastranger was so desperate to troll that he didn't read the article. There's actually a pro-XBox statement in there from the dev, though it has nothing to do with the RAM.

[skept3k]

The power of the next gen consoles is equal if not less to the power of current PC hardware. The games this generation, in terms of raw power, won't be that noticeable for anyone with med-high end PC.

[darthv72]

is there a way to put this argument to rest?

Can we all agree that no matter the amount of available memory, the devs will still be able to make some really next gen games.

[ChiaPet]

I'm sorry but I don't understand why people are making such a big deal about system memory, I mean, even if the ps4 Could only use 4.5 gb, I doubt any game would ever even need that much. Crisis 3 on pc only uses 2.5 ...

And as for everyone chirping Xbox one with its ddr3 memory, you obviously don't know much about computers. High end gaming pcs use ddr3 without a problem so the whole gimmick about gddr5 system memory is really not that special. Plus everyone forgets to mention the esram... I wonder why.

Both are great consoles and we have seen through every generation that there is never really a significant advantage of one system over another. There are only differences that make each one distinct and tasteful.

[Ritsujun]

justatroll10's mad.

[HowarthsNJ]

The massive amount of RAM worried me because devs get lazy when they have that much memory to use.

The PS3's RAM was always scary low and the top devs made very efficient software for it (ND).

Being cautious with memory can lead to better games even if it is more work.

[starchild]

@ Chiapet

GDDR5 really isn't a gimmick. It does have significant bandwidth advantages over DDR3. However, it also has higher latency.

Sony has taken some measures to mitigate any latency, while Microsoft has added eSRAM to bring the bandwidth up.

I tend to agree with anandtech.com when they say that the effective bandwidth between PS4 and XB1 may end up being essentially on par.

"Depending on how the eSRAM is managed, it’s very possible that the Xbox One could have comparable effective memory bandwidth to the PlayStation 4."
http://www.anandtech.com/sh...

What's nearly certain, though, is that the PS4's memory setup should be more efficient and easier to achieve good performance with. This, of course, will also depend on Microsoft and Sony's tools.

Both consoles should have plenty of memory for amazing next gen visuals.

[WarThunder]

btw:

http://gematsu.com/2013/07/...

[JunioRS101]

Agreed. And what people also like to neglect to mention is that not only is hardware improving, Developer strategies become more efficient also, so we're going to see a huge improvement in game quality over the next few years.

I'm mucho excitedo

[AndrewLB]

This is a common misconception I see on this site and because people keep repeating it, it perpetuates. The only advantage the PS4 has in regards to RAM is the much higher bandwidth compared to DDR3. But all that bandwidth is only useful if the GPU has the processing power to utilize it. And in the case of the PS4, it doesn't. A good visual representation would be like hooking up a fire hose to the valve you normally have your garden hose attached. Yea... you have a massive hose capable of carrying tons of water but the valve it's hooked up to has limited output.
The GTX 680 graphics card has only slightly more memory bandwidth (192gb/s) than the PS4 yet it pushes 3689gflops (2.5x) and 3x the texture fill rate. Memory bandwidth for the 680 is not a limiting factor unless you run triple screen @ 1080p. That being the case, the PS4 only uses a fraction of the memory bandwidth it has... and yes... i understand that this memory is shared between the CPU and GPU, but that actually confirms my assertion that i've always made of how the PS4's advantage regarding memory is small at best.
A much more important factor affecting performance is going to be the operating system. If microsoft does what it does best (make OS's), then chances are the Xbone will perform on par or possibly better than the PS4.
And don't get me wrong... i'm still buying a PS4 later this year. I just like to look at things objectively and factor in as many aspects of these consoles, and NOT do so while wearing glasses with sony colored lenses. Many people on this site are so blinded by fanboyism that perhaps they should get some mental help.

Now watch... because I said something about Sony some people may not like, the usual suspects will come out of the woodwork all pi$$ed off as if I just backhanded their mother.

...sad.

[Bolts]

This site is full of Sony fanboys. Trying to educate them on the Xbox One RAM vs PS4 is pointless. I still like it PS4 memory advantage when it comes to the GPU tho, while the resolutions might be the same, perhaps the PS4 might be able to load a few scenes faster or have less texture pop. Regardless the differences should be small.

[DonFreezer]

#justastranger10
Don;t reply to freaking hypocrites.
They said te same about the Xbox One and got well said and thousands of agrees.

[falcon97]

Who cares,no one can take advantage of wiiu's edram section right away ?? same with xbox1's cloud power ???

At the end of the day it's the games and how good they look graphically,we can talk specs all day long,if we can't see games that look like movies the jump isnt huge,just wait for the big games,wiiu has in 2014 Zelda,Bayonetta2,Smash,X,Mario kart8,Project CARS,ect this year wiiu has Watchdogs,Splintercell,Batman, COD Ghosts,Mario 3d land,Wonderful 101,Donkeykong,Assasins creed 4 ect,it's the games that matter ?

There are still people that think 3 consoles with dx11 capable gpu's will all have different graphics is beyond me,you heard microsoft say if they used edram they could of hit the terra bites of bandwidth RAM,wiiu uses tons of it on everything cache on cpu cores,on the MCM shared with cpu and gpgpu,trust me it's why Deux ex DC on wiiu is more expensive it's sharper than the pc version....due to edram ?

[ABizzel1]

“At the end of the day, both systems are quite close to each other. I really think this generation will be about services and there I see a big challenge for Sony to step up and compete with Microsoft.”

Wrong people buy gaming consoles to play games, "Services" are a secondary reason for buying a console excluding XBL & PSN+, and if that's the case they're neck and neck (XBL more servers thus stable connections, PSN+ free games with your subscription and PSN connection has been good enough for years now). And on top of that Sony is a Entertainment media corporation and one of the biggest in the industry. They have Sony music, Sony Picture (Movies & TV), so they have the advantage there as well vs. M$ who's just now entering the space and more than likely will need 3rd party support for Entertainment (which is going to cost them more money, on top of paying for 3rd party exclusives, on top of paying for Blu Ray in XB1, you get what I'm saying). M$ has borderline infinite money, but how are they going to make a profit with all these fees, worst of all if some of these risk don't pan out for them (taking risk are what leads to success, but if not planned out well then it's basically a losing battle, and M$ doesn't have ANYTHING finalized yet).

So if that's the case gaming wise the PlayStation Brand is still ahead of the Xbox. PS3 proved Sony is more focused on all things gaming with a diverse and arguably better line-up of exclusives, seasonal PSN game sales with 25% - 75% off games (Spring, Summer, Fall, Holiday, and smaller scale sales in-between), and Sony will back their console from birth until death proven with the PS1, PS2, and now PS3. M$ on the other hand dropped Xbox original dead, Xbox 360 first party exclusives dwindled to the same 3 franchises (plus Gears) over the pass 3 years & timed exclusive DLC.

Going into the next generation M$ is working harder at getting exclusives, but that's the same thing they did with the Xbox 360 before dropping off.

I enjoy the Xbox brand (don't like M$ business practices), but if you want a diverse a long lasting gaming experience then it's only on PS. If you like "Pop Games" (COD + clones, EA Sports, and other annual releases), great 3rd party support, and the occasional exclusive then the Xbox should be good enough for you. There's nothing wrong with that, but the problem I see is $399 (PS4) vs. $499 (XB1). That's M$ greatest challenge to overcome because last gen it was $299 - $399 (360 + 1 year head-start) vs. $499 - $599 (PS3 priced higher the entire generation).

M$ has their work cut out for them, and not having to press input on the remote isn't going to help them.

[AndrewLB]

Dude... as a PS3 owner and future PS4 owner, your assertion that PSN is "neck and neck" with XBL is misguided at best... I'd personally characterize it as "insane".

I do agree completely on the other comment about how these systems are primarily for games. Even though my PS3 has a great blu-ray player, i bought it to play games and the fact that it did have a blu-ray that was awesome. Plus the whole system cost as much as the cheap blu-ray players available at the time... a secondary but very nice bonus.

[Godz Kastro]

Usually when something is not clarified chances are its true, cough cough, MS... They have some good momentum going. I think they are trying to avoid any negative press.

Companies can be so shady... 8GB Ram in big bold letters but in real life you can only use blah, blah, blah. Look at all the cool stuff you can do with control/camera. Heck control even has a light built into it. Buuuut, need camera which wass never stated at time of presentation. Doesn't sound like the camera was supposed to be optional.

However presentation just showed features and not once mentioned that you had to by accessories for it to work the way they showed it. Smoke and mirrors... If you have nothing to hide then come out and debunk rumors. Otherwise they are true.

Consumer goes to store, says I saw them do this. Store employee says oh but you need this for that to work... mixed message imo.

[SCW1982]

If you wanna talk about smoke and mirrors than don't forget to mention Microsofts whole presentation of the Xbox ones operating system and Kinect functionality.

[Godz Kastro]

@SCW1982... Oh so youve played it and it doesnt function that way. Sorry im confused, I thought general public hasnt touched it yet... I dont know if you ever tried origianl Kinect. With this one being far superior tech wise they should have no problems creating that experience.

People assumed it was fake because it worked so well. Dont get it twisted, im not agreeing with your comment because it was stated that was real time.

Take it from me bro, I used the kinect daily and knows how it works. Double/triple horsepower and there is no reason it wont be that smooth.

Check this out.real time

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[Stu77]

You don't appear to understand what a spec sheet is.

The PS4 has 8GB of fast GDDR5, that hasn't changed.

A console ALWAYS needs to use some RAM to run the OS and services.

PS4 devs have confirmed games are in development using 6GB's of RAM, but most games, particularly 3rd party will use little more than 4GB's.

The 2GB partitioned off for OS and services is not neccessarily all being used, some is being held back for future services, while more RAM will be freed up for games as the OS is streamlined. This was the case with the PS3 and a major reason the last gen of PS3 games have been so graphically impressive.

As for the PS4 camera, Sony made a wise choice to ditch this unwanted device, I'm quite sure if Microsoft could go back in time they wouldn't have bothered with Kinect, it's becomes an albatros around their consoles neck.

A cheap Wii like controller would have done the job for mediocre motion control games

[tuglu_pati]

@Stu77

"PS4 devs have confirmed games are in development using 6GB's of RAM, "

Could you please post a link confirming this statement.

[dontbhatin]

How about you watch this video from Wired and tell me that it works as flawlessly as the reveal has shown it.

check this out...real time
http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[Stu77]

@skept3k

The great majority of PC games are console ports, designed for 512MB RAM, and CPU/GPU technology from 7-8 years ago.

This allows high-end PC's to ramp up the resolution and have better framerates, but the nuts and bolts of the game design, the polygons used to create worlds, advanced graphical effects etc. aren't incorporated into the game engine.

High end PC's will only start to be stretched when next gen games, designed from the ground up, come to PC. The overheads a PC has, and the inability to code to the metal, means a PC's spec will have to be far superior to a next-gen console to run equivalent games.

It's not different to this gen where the 7-8 year old PS3 hardware can run games like GT6, The Last of US, GoW and Uncharted 3, a PC of this vintage wouldn't even be able to run the game, nevermind at an acceptable rate.

The likes of Killzone: Shadowfall give a hint of what is in store, but these are still first gen game, future titles will be far more ambitious, and likely take very hefty PC's to run.

[Godz Kastro]

agreed, I thought about this the other day. Looking back at oblivion and comparing it to skyrim. Its like two different consoles.

[Dazel]

The confusion stems form not knowing what to do with so much GDRR5 ram. Most games such as Crysis 3 mp don't use 2GB now on a 1080p display. It's all a bit over kill at present and therefore a tad redundant, give devs/Sony a few years and they will figure out how to best utilise it all.

[PablitoPaperito]

Games on PC both use RAM and VRAM.

Skyrim can easily take over 4+gb of RAM and 1,5 GB of VRAM, so you're looking at 5,5gb, at least on paper. If you got mods especially.

[Godz Kastro]

I think we can all agree no matter what system we get we are in for a treat. Man, 4 months is such a long time. Im getting older now and really dont like to rush time but sheesh, this anticipation is getting to me.

[DarkHeroZX]

Pablito

Skyrim alone only uses 2 gigs max of Vram. I had to install a mod that allowed for the game to recognize 4 gig so I could install that super high res mod pack. And the only reason more ram is being used is because things are usually always running in the background like your OS for starters. The actual game doesn't need that much.

[3-4-5]

They shouldn't need 8GB right now.

Max they have NOW is 512 Mb.

[showtimefolks]

we got the last of us on ps3 what 6-7 years into this gen? as the developers have more time with ps4/xbox one they will be able to find out of to use the system and its specs t best of their talents

both systems will have shortcomings

all the fanboys are having fun with my system has faster ram or more ram but bottom line is this:

we went from 512MB to let's say ps4 has 5 GB for games

we went from 1GB to 5 GB for xbox one too

so now developers don't have to be so limited when it comes to not having enough ram space, going from 512-1GB to now 5-6 GB ram is a huge step forward

also wasn't it rumored that both xbox one and ps4 were originally planned for 4GB ram total? if that was the case and with 2-3 for OS we would have been left with 1.5GB ram, but now we have actually 5 plus so stop complaining

[cybervike]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the PS3 have 512 mb (256x2)of ram? They put out some pretty nice looking games IMO with that. Some are getting worked up now bc PS4 "only" can use 4-5 GB? I'm sure they will be fine even if it was limited.

Carry on..

[JamieL]

@ zyphee
So it was "lazy developers" fault the PS3 architecture was way over complicated and it wasn't financially viable to spend all that extra time with the PS3 version. I know this is N4G and Sony does no wrong....ever, but to me it was a bad move by Sony to tell every developer our there they are going to have to learn a whole new way to code games just because we say so. Those stupid lazy ass developers.

[Melankolis]

Not only lazy developers, it's also a Sony's mistake to be fair. Ken Kutaragi is an engineer at heart, he overlooked that gaming is "still" an industry.

Three words : cost, competition, customers. Sony (Ken) seemed to forget that.

[JamieL]

@ Melankolis
I agree with that, blame could be placed on both parties depending on how you look at it, but I just hate when the people on here put all the blame on the developer like Sony can do no wrong. The PS3 was a great piece of tech no doubt, and it had some great looking and playing games, but Sony was nowhere near as dominate this gen as people make it out to be on this site.

[Salooh]

Sony were absolutely wrong with making the architecture that complicated but at least it paid of with the last of us / gt6 / beyond and other games. However , the situation is different now with the ps4. It's as fast and easy as the PS1 in it's days . So more powerful + easy development + self publishing = Stunning games and superior multi platforms :P ..

Remember that the ps4 is like a super charged pc . We will get amazing games in the end ps4 life cycle like the last of us to the ps3..

[younglj01]

So you telling me MGS 4,UC 2,GoW 3,Heavy Rain,Resistance,TLoU,Demons Soul's, and KZ 2 were made with only 512 mb of ram?

To think what could be made with only 1GB of GDDR5 ram is amazing...

[friedricr]

My body isn't ready....

[Godz Kastro]

Im sure ill be corrected if Im wrong but I believe PS3 allocated the ram for specific tasks as opposed to 360 where you could share. I think this is where games like skyrim suffered on the PS.

[PSN_ZeroOnyx]

You are very correct.

@ justastranger10

You are very wrong, Sony has the best talent in the industry working for them, just look at st the PS3 exclusives.

The PS3 and 360 both have 512MB if ram. The difference was that xbox was unified and PS3 was split in 2 and Sony had half and developers had half. hence the reason PS3 had ram issues and no cross game chat.

And yet the PS3 still had the best, most impressive games in the industry. Not to mention PS3 has officially outsold 360 this gen.

PS4 is going to outdo X1 just like every gen before has.

[My_Outer_Heaven]

So they can take advantage of GDDR5 on a PC but not on a console... Hmmm.

[Kayant]

So are there any games that use more than 3GB of VRAM on PC in 1080p??

I know when you up resolution more VRAM is needed.

@justastranger10
So what Xbox one games are using all the 5GB of ram for games?

Like the article said it won't be a problem for either console until about 3-4+ years.

[bumnut]

I game in 1440p and have never used anywhere near 3GB VRAM.

[My_Outer_Heaven]

True there aren't many games that take full advantage of the ram on PC graphics cards.. I mod games a lot so having extra RAM I believe does help.

[WeAreLegion]

Justastranger is a troll account. He created it to mess with everyone. Lol. Just warning everyone.

[BABY-JEDI]

I'm assuming he's the one who disagreed with you LoL

[T2]

...and you lol ^

[WeAreLegion]

^But not you...

Suspicious. O_o

[Xsilver]

Really smh your stupidity runs deep i see.

[xReDeMpTiOnx]

I agree on a big part, Microsoft did do a better job with features for xbl and psn was inferior compared to it. But this new gen Sony has really shown alot and really gave consumers what they asked for, but how well will it translate on appear to actually being good is the big point.

I hope Sony really proves how well the new psn will stack
Up to xbl

[Enate]

Besides cross game chat an that stupid leave a voice mail crap what did Xbox live do exactly that PSN didn't? I'm am asking seriously not as a joke because I honestly haven't seen anything else. If those are the only things then I think that hardly warrants a word as harsh as inferior.

[christrules0041]

COD games definitely didn't lag as much as PSN. That is for sure.

[koolaid251]

Cod has lag on every system as long as they don't use dedicated servers there will be lag.

[dcj0524]

The OS was faster (didnt have to load forever) and tge dissconnects would be at a lower rate. Other than that their the same.

[andibandit]

@Enate

Come back when you've tried the new psn store

[Enate]

I have tried the new PSN store an it is slow and annoying. I am saying what do they actually have that makes it better outside of what I said already. My gaming experience on PSN is perfectly fine and the once maybe thrice every three weeks I may go into the PSN store isn't killing that.

An as for the disagrees in my first post wtf is there to disagree with I was asking a question. Some people on here really need to learn how to use the agree/disagree system instead of just out right abusing it like ignorant button mashers.

@dcj0524 the os is not Xbox live an I will admit it loads a bit slow while in game sometimes. Again though not a feature of Xbox live and the few times I do it while in game not really crying over it. I must be one of the few people who actually plays games when I turn on my system.

[Iltapalanyymi]

Of course they cant. It takes time to master all of it just like ps3 did.

[Funky Town_TX]

More RAM talk? It's all about the dev and the games in the end.

[CaptainofCrush]

The hypervisor enables developers to utilize up to 7GB on X1.

http://www.giantbomb.com/fo...

[imt558]

How about 7 gigabytes? I think that's kind of outlandish but LET'S JUST SUPPOSE. If apps can't run within that last half gig of memory we can just suspend the whole thing and give the whole 7.5 gigabytes to the game.

[christrules0041]

So your saying that having TV already loaded in the background, apps running on the side, being able to instantly switch to games and then be able to record and share gameplay while your playing the game on 1GB of RAM on the X1 it would just be lying to yourself. Sorry but that is clearly too many features to run off of 1GB of RAM.

[dcj0524]

My vita can do all that except for the recording part and it has 512MB for the OS. So yes, 1GB is enough.

[HammadTheBeast]

No it doesn't. I'd write a long and complicated tech explanation, but it's just not worth it.

[DarkHeroZX]

Its like I said yesterday. Hyper vision is a bottleneck for the X1. First off more CPU and RAM has to be dedicated to Hyper vision on top of what kinect always requires. Then if devs want more RAM then features have to be shut off to do so. So now we are left with a console trying to follow in the steps of the PS4 and that's a game machine first and a multimedia box second. Ultimately they will fail to deliver on the promise of efficiently multitasking through features and games. And if cloudz is teh future then why is hypervision even needed in the first place? That 3X the power for each X1 is beginning to look like 3X the bulls**t. All Hyper vision confirms is that cloud processing was just PR talk and that MS is just trying to sell a piss poor $499 version of the PS4.