King Art Games' Julian Strzoda says the differences "won't be huge" though.
Sounds like a toned down session to me. Of course having more and better defined texture will be dramatic. That has been the major difference between video cards for years, along with shaders. Having better texture also affect how well HDR is implemented. But in 4 weeks we will be seeing if there is any difference worth discussing.
It's the available memory game developers can use that matters and the XB1X finally gives them ample memory.
Except it's a very old concept in computing that one can never have enough memory, or power for that matter. It's not even a concept for just gaming. When you have either, it gets used, and the dev wants more, to do more. It's not a knock on the system, just one of the oldest concepts in computing.
Power yes, memory no. It's relatively cheap to have more than enough memory, even Vram now as well. Cards like the RX 480 cost a mere $200, and have 8gb vram. More than enough for any game. If you're talking specifically consoles, then perhaps it's a more legitimate point, since consoles never really go high end on anything.
For the most part, a lot of non-gaming or non-server applications are OK nowadays without tons of memory. The idea of "not enough memory" stems back from when we were looking at 64K-1MB of memory. Games, or graphics intensive application like video editing or what not will use up whatever is available, and generally, you can never have enough. System itself will obviously limit how much can go into it, but it's still an old adage in computing. I will agree though, that having "enough" memory for most general purpose computing nowadays is pretty darn cheap, especially compared to about 10+ years ago. I wasn't really speaking about consoles specifically, but I'd say more would always be welcome. However, when designing a game that is taken into account, and early builds tend to never have enough memory until optimization happens.
There comes a time when Human Resources to build out the detail bof comes to lengthy and costly.
What is this ancient wisdom you speak of? Where could MS possibly gather years of experience with implementing RAM...?
@Unspoken It's not so much an ancient wisdom, rather a long standing programming meme. It dates back to the first computers, which were always strapped for RAM. While it's not so much an issue nowadays for most users or programmers for a good number of applications, when it comes to things like video editing, server applications, media production, graphic work, and of course gaming, it's still a common belief that you can never have enough.
I'm sorry, I was alluding to the "640kB ought to be enough for anybody" rumored quote by Billy G.
This is true. When it comes to RAM, no such thing as over kill
That's absurd. You think people with gaming rigs that have 64gb RAM ever come close that? Or even half way? Of course not. Hell, I doubt there's any game that even maxes 16gb currently. It wouldn't even make sense to do that for future proofing, because by the time any game needs that kind of memory, the rest of the PC hardware will be obsolete. Not to mention the Ram itself. Even high end video cards rarely max out their Vram.
If you have more than the system can access based on the limits of the actual system, then that'd be overkill.:) @blue The reason no games use more than that is because most systems don't use more than 8GB for system memory, with the video memory usually being much less.
You could make that argument about any spec though. My point is, a PC will max out its CPU and GPU LONG before it maxes out it's ram, or even Vram to a lesser extent. Modern PCs allow 64gb or even 128gb of memory, no one ever buys this much (except the diehards), because it's pointless. @moldy No, not really. Having upgraded from 4gb to 8gb Vram in the past, it really doesn't make that much of a noticeable difference with what you see in game. To be fair though, X1X is a mid-gen update, so I don't think anyone is expecting a huge difference.
XB1X - 9GB of available ram PS4 Pro - 4.5GB plus 1GB (slower ram), total 5.5GB of available ram PS4 - 4.5GB of available ram Xbox One - 5GB of available ram (slower ram) As we can see the XB1X is quite a jump
@blue Whether it maxes out it's CPU before the RAM is highly dependent on the application. If you mean that a system CPU will max out before modern systems can max out the available RAM. For those curious, I think the maximum amount of memory theoretically available for a 32 bit system is something like 16-17 exobytes. However, the design of modern CPU, and their controllers limit it to something like 8 Terabytes. With those numbers, I'd say you are definately right, that the CPU's processes would be consumed trying to handle anywhere near that much data, long before that memory could be filled up, however, a CPU doesn't always access everything in memory all the time, so depending on the application, it could be faster for quickly accessing different types of data. HOwever, we'd be talking about applications which are very specific to requiring that much space, such as video editing or maybe server applications, and I don't know of any computer which actually comes anywhere close to using the theoretical limits, and only specialized systems which may use the physical limit of a modern computer CPU/controller chips. @moldy Never said it wasn't a jump. Was just being snarky with my reply to the OP.
@bluefox755 "@moldy No, not really. Having upgraded from 4gb to 8gb Vram in the past, it really doesn't make that much of a noticeable difference with what you see in game. To be fair though, X1X is a mid-gen update, so I don't think anyone is expecting a huge difference." You are talking about ram on the GPU compared to system ram. Most people don't need more than 16GB of system memory unless you do a lot of video editing (especailly 4K) or use memory hog applications but 8GB is no longer recommended. Videocards now exceed over 10gb of memory.
There is overkill when RAM is involved. Its when devs have to make sure that the lowest common denominator is still supported. Base X1 and PS4 and Pro still only have 8gb of ram so X1X will not see any gameplay improvement because of ram besides 4k textures. Which is the main reason PS4 Pro doesnt get 4k textures, because development starts on base PS4 and when it is maxed out it leaves no room to apply 4k textures for the Pro version. Unless you do multiple things at once on your PC, 16gb is plenty for all use cases. 32gb is completely overkill, and near future proof.
Your conclusion is flawed. If you look at PC you can see games support multiple memory configurations without using a lowest common denominator. Fidelity increases with higher available resources. More memory will give higher quality textures, increased resolution and less pop in/further draw distances. PS4 gets less 4K textures because the hardware has more limitations and development isn't as friendly as it is with Xbox One, X and PC.
^ And still, most current gen PC games usually run on 8gb with recommend at maybe 16gb. You will barely find games that come close to 16gb and it is usually a worst case scenario spec. And how does PC not use lowest common denominator? Most PC games are targeting 8gb systems because that is the average on Steam hardware surveys. You will rarely see games with 16gb as the minimum because it is not the LCD. When you see "Minimum Specs" that basically means LCD.
@death what you were saying was making sense until you said the Xbox one x is more development friendly then the PlayStation. There both x86 architecture so that’s a load of bull what your spewing from your gums
The added memory is for the larger textures which will be used. Game play wouldn't likely be that influenced by the increase in memory because it takes up a relatively small portion of the available memory to store all those variables and what not. The reason the PS4 doesn't get 4K textures is more because the GPU doesn't support the rendering of them with as much efficiency, and there's no reason to use them unless the game is actually rendered at a higher resolution.
Well at least they have 9 inch long to play with... per say if we were using metrics.
That sucks hopefully next gen consoles will have around 16 to 32GB of ram
Well when your CPU and GPU share the same pool of memory then yeah you can never have enough. The GDDR5 is great for texture streaming with that high bandwidth, but the high latency associated with that memory harms IPC for the CPU. Hopefully next gen we can see dedicated resources for both the CPU and GPU. 4GB of ddr4 on the CPU and 8GB of GDDR5 on the GPU. But that would mean having to abandon the APU in favor of more traditional pc setup, and i don't see that happening as value for these APUs in consoles just make better sense in manufacturing cost, and consumer pricing. Regardless, it still amazes me how developers are able to make such beautiful looking games on these consoles.
whats iron harvet? and why don't we ever hear such a statement from AAA devs?
"King Art Games' Julian Strzoda says the differences "won't be huge" though." But hey, some people think it's worth the extra $100-$150. Maybe it's for bragging rights...or the UHD player. :/
It is worth it just for the UHD player alone. A decent cheap one is at least £200 pound in the UK. So we are essentially getting one for £100, not long now
From what I have seen it will be enough.
That's the trouble with developers today always wanting more, when u think what the coders achieved back in the day with 48k, 64k that was programming pure talent.
Holy hell gamingbolt and Microsoft, enough already.
As an owner of 64GB of DDR4 @ 2400MHz, I can tell you, there isn't any such thing as "too much RAM". And the idea that hardly anyone ever buys that much is also bogus. I know plenty of folks in my club. The more RAM, the better, and you can't ever have too much. The X1X will shine due to this very fact, as if it were an 8GB system, it would hardly have any notable advantage over the Pro. That extra 4GB is a game changer.
I thought we all agreed long ago not to give a s*** about the opinions of indie developers on the strengths and weaknesses of game consoles. It's all just gamingbolt BS trolling this site.
As a developer, I will confirm that this is a lie. Bandwidth and speed are more important than in memory items. If you're pooling everything in memory... well.. you have a programming problem there. Also, if you can load the entire game into RAM then that's enough (just saying).
i love hardware i'm the arsehole that wants 128gb ram in my pc even though i don't do anything that could utilize it, until i see the price then i settle for less. I like what microsoft have done here hopefully we can just get decent spec consoles on both sides from the start next gen that was the beauty of a console no upgrades needed hopefully the pro and x were just a response of how awkward (4k,HDR,xbox one being underpowered,UHD playback) this generation has been and not a sign of whats to come.
Dreamcast had more ram then ps2 which had stronger cpu and the emotion engine thing going on.Dreamcast versions of games looked smoother then the ps2 counterparts. Xbox is kind of an unofficial successor to Dreamcast.Going for a higher amount of ram will show its diffrence for the one x
I can’t wait for iron harvest to come out. But they can definitely make a better bigger game they just probably don’t have the budget to utilize the full potential of the console. It’s not like it’s a Triple A game
Call me if they can produce games like Horizon. It was never an issue with the PS4.
in the good old days 48K was more than enough to have a huge and fun game, now that wouldnt be enough to render in play characters eyeball. How times have changed :)
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.