John Hable also talks about how pre-baked lighting still not a solved problem.
if im not mistaken 2.5gb reserved for os??
its getting less and less with each api as far as i know. ps has another cpu for a few things,i think within 2 years we will have an extra gig of ram.
Disagrees for what? Ok so its not am extra CPU, but it does have the memory chip for reserved application actions.
why do i have disagrees for what i wrote? wish folk would be forced to explain them. it is getting less and less useage as its optimized,same as xb1 and even windows 10etc in pc world. but ps4 has another apu/cpu that i think it could switch a few things to to lower the footprint. http://vr-zone.com/articles... http://ps4daily.com/2013/11...
Naughty dog made the uncharted series and the last of us on a console that had only 512mb of ram.... Let that sink in for a minute ;-)
@Army Yet there are some who doubt they can deliver something similarly awe inspiring this gen because Drake's face was "downgraded" in the live demo... In my book when someone proves himself, repeatedly, with out fail, he/she gets a vote of confidence for their next en-devour. Well maybe I should publish my damn book for free...
And before that great games were made with 64MB. I believe the original Halo worked within this parameter. 8GB seems carry on the order of magnitude for memory configuration's this console cycle.
I don't know why you have so many disagrees for stating a fact. The PS4 has indeed a second CPU, which is an ARM chip using low voltage. This secondary CPU is currently used for background tasks (downloading, clip recording) as well as in rest mode (suspend resume, updating etc). So even now the secondary chip take some tasks from the main PS4 APU. I am sure that in the future the secondary chip will handle more tasks and thus the main APU will have more power reserved for games. I think this is the reason why MS increased the frequency of X1 CPU (from 1.6 to 1.75), namely to compensate the lack of the secondary CPU that PS4 has.
Got to agree. On PC, most titles don't require 4 gigs, they actually require 2 gigs on MOST PC titles (last gen anyway) and clearly due to the Windows OS, they would be using even less. 8 gigs is enough solely based on all consoles have it, its in 100% of BOTH systems, thus....we'll see things done with it that would clearly NEVER saw with PC titles as PC titles didn't just require. On PC, the most elite settings are only for the most elite PC's, they are not requried to run the game, not all PC's will run those games on max settings, its unknown how many have the PC capable of running the highest, thus...its created based on what the minimum is, not what the MAXIMUM can do. Developers can create to the MAX with console as again, 100% own those components to make a game using those specs. Console owners...thank PC gamers for bringing the cost of hardware down. PC gamers...thank console gamers for requiring such high specs, to bring up the minimum. PC gamers alone can't do that, the average PC gamer doesn't have 8gigs of ram, I hate when folks claim that thats "standard"... Even 4 gigs is a unwritten standard, you very much could get a way last gen with 2 gigs of ram shockingly lol. The Steam statistics very much show otherwise, though not all PC gaming, it gives a good idea of what the majority have. 32 million consoles right now.....factually all have 8gigs of ram. That just can't really be said about PC gaming currently. When next gen console games get ported to PC and start requiring more ram, THEN you'll see that number raise. So yes, 8gigs is GREAT for PS4 and XONE! Again, required and what you have in your rig is not really the same thing. I can have a rig with 32gigs...doesn't mean any game will support or require it. This is better for gaming over all, we'll be fine.
As the years go on the OS will be improved to a smaller footprint to free up more ressources for games. Keep in mind that it could result in the OS becoming slower.
I don't won't it to become slower. How slow are we talking?
Don't know can't see into the future :D
I doubt it'd become slower. Slower usually happens when things are added because resources are taken up to run those things. I'd imagine most of the current reserves for system memory in the PS4 are for features that may be implemented in the future, whether known or unexpected. They probably don't want to get caught not having enough space to work with like in the PS3. It's OK to give devs more memory as the generation goes on, but they can't just take it away to add a feature because then some already released games may not work.
PS4 had 3.5 for OS XB1 had 3 for OS The OSs of both consoles will likely be streamlined thus decreasing memory consumption. Therefore freeing up more ram for games in the future.
I highly doubt the PS4 actually uses anywhere near 3.5. Remember that the units the devs had before launch only had 4gb in total. There is no way they were expecting to launch with only 500mb available to games. I expect they've over reserved memory just as they did with the PS4, and in a few years we'll see more released to games once the OS is more mature and they are more certain of future requirements.
Jason Gregory at Naughty Dog confirmed that 5GBs of memory is available for games (at least it was Feb 2014, that may have increased by now). So PS4 has about the same XB1. Another thing that you have to bare in mind is that GDDR5 is like 3X faster than DDR3 and it's capable of simultaneous read and write in all cycles, DDR3 can only do one or the other in each cycle. Given that Windows only uses about 2GBs of RAM neither of these consoles should really need anywhere near that much memory. Back in 2010 PS3 only used like 50MBs for it's OS, even with multiple applications in use, with the faster speed PS4 should be able to get by with well under 1GB for OS. XB1 may need a bit more because of it's slower speed, but still it's substantially faster than PS3's memory.
@MrSec84 GDDR5 is faster when it comes to the GPU, DDR3 is CPU Ram which is what runs the OS. When it comes to OS then DDR3 > GDDR5 which would mean you will need more GDDR5 Ram to run an OS then DDR3 Ram. Explains why MS went for DDR3 because the X1 uses 3 OSs.
http://www.redgamingtech.co... You forgot about PS4's 1GB of Flexible memory, behind the 4.5GB for the devs. so it's really 5.5GB but only for the devs that really dig into the PS4's customized architecture, like their 1st party devs most likely would. Watch the vid too for explanation.
MrSec84- Don't forget that PC graphics cards are use GDDR5 memory that's FAR FAR faster than PS4 has. For example, my GTX 780ti has it's 3gb RAM running at 7,364mhz giving it an effective bandwidth of 353.3gb/s. And it doesn't have to share this with the CPU since it has it's own 16gb of low latency DDR3 on tap. @Tsar4ever "You forgot about PS4's 1GB of Flexible memory, behind the 4.5GB for the devs. so it's really 5.5GB but only for the devs that really dig into the PS4's customized architecture, like their 1st party devs most likely would. Watch the vid too for explanation." No, it's not. Out of the 3.5gb allocated for OS functions, 1gb of it can be "borrowed" under certain circumstances if it's not needed by the OS. The game would have to be specifically programmed to utilize this feature, but I don't see it being used much considering how much RAM is required for CPU type functions whether they be background processes for the operating system or the game itself. Modern games can use over 2gb ram just for the CPU operations, then 3+gb on top of that for the GPU itself. Right there you're at 5gb+ and that doesn't include the ram needed just to keep the OS running. That 8gb is going to run out fast as games become more advanced especially if better anti-aliasing methods become more common. Quite a few PC games currently eat up 8gb ram if you were to combine how much video and system memory in use.
@Azzanation: That's a common misconception, actually at the clock speeds of XB1 and PS4 both DDR3 and GDDR5 have comparable Latency, so GDDR5 is perfectly fine. The very fact that GDDR5 can both read and write at the same time makes GDDR5 superior because the OS doesn't have to wait to make a choice on whether to read or write, because it can do both to GDDR5. @AndrewLB: The comparison was between XB1 and PS4, not PC. That makes your point moot!
GDDR5 is really fast at moving large amounts of data at the cost of increased latency, which isnt a problem for a GPU since it by it's nature works in parallel. DDR3 is alot slower than GDDR5 at moving large amounts of data, but atleast it has a lower latency in finding the data that needs to be read, which is good for the CPU. In an OS you typically have alot of small memory operations, in relation to the number of large ones, so I would say that in the OS, the memory architechtures are on a more equal footing.
RAM plays much less of a part in terms of performance than say the CPU and GPU, those 2 form the heart of any system. I think new consoles have more than enough RAM, that should never be a question to begin with. Question is how well developers can compute to make up for the lack of CPU grunt on these consoles. On the other hand using compute doesnt come free of cost.
@kudostoyou That's exactly what it is. @Gamer777 1GB of RAM for the PS4 is flexible, meaning that it can be used for the OS or used by developers for games. 5.5GB of RAM can be used for games. If you doubt it read the information in the link: http://www.vg247.com/2013/0... Or you can google: PS4 Flexible Memory, PS4 Flexible RAM
The flexible memory is used to manage things that the system would manage anyways. It's available to the games, but isn't likely to be used for any major game feature. OTOH, it may be flexible enough where the dev can decide what they want to use it for, but they wouldn't have full access to it like the rest of the memory because the PS4 OS will manage that section of memory. Basically it means that unlike the other ~5GB of RAM where the dev can manage the memory to their hearts desire, the 1GB is managed by the OS.
No not for the ram, ram is temporary storage so no. OS gets stored in the hard drive.
The great thing with the PS4 is its flexible memory structure which can add a whole extra GB if used cleverly.
currently Sony has 3.5 gigs for gaming only and MS has 5.5 gigs and an extra core for gaming.
Ah, so that's why multiplats run better on the XB1, right? That makes total sense, now I get it. One quick question though, can you link me to your sources?
They both have 5 GB of RAM available for games. X1 has 6.5-6.8 CPU cores available for games, but PS4 may have done the same post-launch. CPU performance between the two in Project Cars is nearly identical according to Digital Foundry.
Nd developed the last of us and uncharted series on 512mb ram on ps3. So I am not worried at all Also as time goes u am sure both ms and Sony will find ways to make improvements and may make more ram available to developers Doesn't the ps4 have faster ram? Would that come into play as we move forward info this gen?
Basically that is a guideline for the application developers not the operating system. the OS of the PS4 is based on OpendBSD which is basically Unix and because it does not have to run over 200 system processes like a normal Unix system the PS4's OS can easily be run in 1GB of memory. If an application developer requires over 5GB of memory you can pretty much guess they have some very sloppy programmers. Any decent developer would make a PC game that would normally have as a base minimum of 2GB of RAM since requiring more would effectively cut out a large slice of of the potential market for their product. In fact with at least 5.5GB available for the PS4 a game developer has a huge amount of memory to play with. @UKmilitia API's or libraries as they are known in Unix/Linux circles don't take up memory unless they are called by the main (ie. parent) or child processes. Normally application processes are independent of CPU although usually critical system processes are bound to CPU 0 and even that is not always the case.
heck yea, ps4 is a complete monster and imhappy going from 720p 30fps on my fps games to 1080p 60fps. thats really a big difference to me. not to mention better graphics and things like bigger worlds more enemies and such. just looking of how far we come from the ps1 days is amazing, i remember playing a game called "driver" and you could not walk out of your car and i thought it was a blast, then gta 3 came along on ps2 and wow! what a differance. so now that we are all the way in ps4 we are justin the begining of the life cycle, i expect big things and with games like bloodborne just look at it.
PS4 is a fantastic system. Not many would deny that. That said, the 360 and PS3, from a technical standpoint, were more impressive for their time than are PS4 and Xbox One. It wasn't just Microsoft that pulled things back a bit this time around.
It seems like both Companies wanted to keep the costs low for their consoles this time. I believe they should have sold them for 50 - 100 $ and made them future - proof.
@reaper24, i agree. I would have gladly shelled out a few more bucks for each console if it meant a little more power. That said, I have not been let down by the performance of either console yet, speaking in general. The question is just how much more these would need to cost to really make a worthwhile difference. I am sure when the companies did their research, they took into account the fact that $50 extra bucks on the cpu or something would really only go so far. Consoles and gaming in general aren't going away anytime soon, but there's no denying it is becoming very expensive and these companies don't wanna absorb huge losses any more on the hardware. To remain relevant, I think consoles need to implement more cutting edge tech and then subsidize the hardware through subscriptions with online services. Most of us here pay for PSN/XBL year after year or every month already. I just wouldn't want it to mean high monthly payments like with cell phones. As it is, the services now are very reasonable and we already have to pay out of our arses for broadband separately.
The Messiah knows what he speaketh on. Sorta. The Cell was a split from the architectures others were doing and ideas were stolen from it and used elsewhere. But it never truly lived up to the expectations. Remember it was supposed to be a single chip solution. Once manufactured it couldn't handle the graphics side of its responsibilities completely. Hence the RSX. The 360 also introduced new things. Unified shader architecture. The first 3 core general purpose CPU. The first true system on a chip. But these current machines have their pluses. The APUs in both are, I believe, the first released that have a GPU and CPU that write to the same address. I think they should be full HSA compliant. Not sure any other AMD APUS are. Carrizo this year will be. I'm sure there are other first. Consoles are still adding to the cutting edge. I think on the parts chosen it was a matter of diminishing returns on die shrinks.
1080p and 60fps got nothing to do with Ram size. The outdated GPu and CPU of the current system probably won't be enough to get graphical intense games to be at 1080p and locked 60fps this generation. Hopefully the console makers won't cheap out on spec next time and make their machine powerful enough to last at least 3-4 years without being left behind in technology at the time of release.
The console GPUs are ABLE to output 1080p as many videocards from the past, that were even worse than the current consoles, did. The problem is with CPU which is very weak in the Xbox One and PS4.
I agree, and i do think this console gen is not going to be like the last. Its going to be short.
Consoles will never scale up in size/heat/watts like modern PC GPUs have. They will remain in the ~$400 price bracket. Sony/MS are no longer willing to take big losses selling them.
What games are 1080p 60fps. on the PS4?
Last of Us ?
Almost every cross-gen game.
Wolfenstein the new order, Outlast, MGS V, Metro Redux, The Last Of Us, Project Cars, Call Of Duty Advanced Warfare, Battlefield 4 and hard line, DMC definitive edition, Mortal Kombat X, practically every indie game. There's actually quite a few, although admittedly a lot of them are remasters.
There's a difference between 1080p 60fps locked and variable frame rate of up to 60 fps. Most people to just quote 60 fps even it variables like a son of a gun. I think you are thinking of 60 fps locked?
@Benjammin25 Battlefield 4 and Hardline are 900p with an unlocked framerate and Project Cars dips down into the 30'S.
is ps4 a complete monster?? I havnt noticed.
you havent noticed because youre too busy trying to get more bubbles.
Havent noticed? Thats another way of saying I dont own 1 lol. People like you are sickening, dont you got anything better to do than bash a VIDEOGAME system you dont own... Theres much better things you can be doing buddy... My PS4 doesnt match my PC but its still a monster machine for $400.
Step 1, check bank acct. (sufficient funds see next step) Step 2, go to store Step 3, purchase PS4 Step 4, play TLoU remastered, Bloodborne, Second Son and Driveclub. Step 5, Recognize. Step 6, look toward your XOne with contempt and say with condescending tone "you're only up to that?"
Is well this gen is over 1 year old and this gen is only going to last 5 yrs so I guess ND is choosing their words wisely. The tech is old and uses an infrastructure that is commonly know. Being that the console market hold a good chunk of market shares , even though stacked memory is coming out and are going to out pace these console capabilities at an alarming rate, consoles still will progress at their standards. So their PR doing a great job promoting their product while not telling you the full story from the perspective of the industry as a hold. Its like saying we could get more from DVDs before bluray comes let alone they dont use the best dvd technology. Its good PR to focus on the positive while omitting what happening in the industry. Just like car salesman tell you the 5 yr old car he's selling is the latest and great when we all know the new the new gtr is about to release
Those CPUs wont.
They are more capable than what they get credit for and far from maxed out.
It is 6 x 1,6ghz jaguar cores for game (xone 1,75 ghz), AMD on pc is losing with intel cpus in every game test, so, at most those cpus are like i3 with 3 cores, one less than i5.
8 GB GDDR5 = 16 gb DDR3 memory http://static.gamespot.com/...
I know right? LOL. Through optimization 8gb is enough since consoles don't run a lot of background processes. 8gb on PC is bare minimum because of everything that runs in the background and it does affect things like resolution and FPS, just not as much as GPU. They all work in harmony together.
GDDR5 in PS4 runs at 172G/s real world, DDR3 in XB1 runs at 55GB/s. Size they're the same, but speed wise GDDR3 runs at over 3X the speed, there's also the benefit of GDDR5 being able to handle read and write simultaneously, making it a lot more flexible than DDR3. 8GBs of GDDR5 would actually equal way more than 16GBs of DDR3. 8GBs in both consoles should be sufficient for size purposes though, it's the speed and flexibility of use that's the deciding factor of which trumps which though.
Maybe this is what Eagleturk was thinking about. http://www.goldfries.com/co...
Oh dear, I can't even find the wo.....
GDDR5 is twice as fast not twice the VRAM. That link above http://www.goldfries.com/co... Is exactly the proof in the pudding with hard frames of why the xbox is struggling. Devs have to do more work on xbox to get it near ps4 levels. Meaning more work for devs and less willing to choose xbox.
XONE has ddr3, no one is using anymore ddr3 on pc in high performance gpus. What now?
Your right... GPU's users GDDR not ddr... DDR and GDDR are 2 different things. So to a degree, outside of people have the latest and greatest RAM known as ddr4, most are using ddr3 memory.
@ShowanW Yeah right, but it is the problem, xone has only ddr3, so Nope you are utterly wrong. Xone has ddr3, ps4 has gddr5, pc gaming gpus has gddr5. So sadly xone is not even using gddr, if you disagree just post some official m$ confirmation that it is gddr3, but don't bother you wont find it. PS4 has additional 256 ddr3 ram for background tasks. It was all about GPUs memory, so every pc gamer is using gddr5, xone not. Even wikipedia states ddr3 for xone, and gddr5 for ps4, deal with it.
Memory size is consistent regardless of architecture. GDDR5 has a higher bandwidth, which is why it's better for graphics. For general purpose computing it's not really reliable and prone to lag, which is why we have DDR3. Even if the PS4 or X1 had 16GB's of their respective memories, it wouldn't run faster, it would just be able to hold more, which might matter if applications needed to cache data to the hard drive, which they typically don't on consoles.
Your comment = dumb/wrong
I always want better graphics of course, and don't want to bother with a huge PC, but seeing the densely packed detail of Bloodborne and The Order I'm pretty happy with the PS4's power even the X1 will surprise eventually. Both these systems will become more efficient when Devs tweak their engines for each systems strength.