I wouldn't be so sure about that (if you only want to play at console quality). Of course, if you are the type of gamer to buy a Titan you won't be happy with it for more than a year.
FRIDAYTON MK II: 5.5 million bears and salmon create unholy allliance to sack SONY HQ
- Thread starter Canis lupus
- Start date
Also this whole thing with the Xbots is funny considering the history:
1. The PS4 was revealed with 8gbs of GDDR5, everyone assumed the "Durante" would come with equal amounts of ram, but of DDR3. People got hyped at the potential power difference. Same amount, but one has greater power.
2. The Xbox One was unveiled, with the expected amount of ram, but we discovered that 5gbs were only to be used for games.
3. Now rumors are spreading that the PS4 may have almost the same amount of ram used for games as well. Roughly the same amount, but one has greater power. And somehow the tables are turned.
1. The PS4 was revealed with 8gbs of GDDR5, everyone assumed the "Durante" would come with equal amounts of ram, but of DDR3. People got hyped at the potential power difference. Same amount, but one has greater power.
2. The Xbox One was unveiled, with the expected amount of ram, but we discovered that 5gbs were only to be used for games.
3. Now rumors are spreading that the PS4 may have almost the same amount of ram used for games as well. Roughly the same amount, but one has greater power. And somehow the tables are turned.
Yeah... so far I haven't heard anyone complain about the xb1 specs either
Jesus Christ, Sony really going to use 3.5GB of fucking GDDR5 for OS? I knew 8GB of GDDR5 was overkill for the tech that's going in there, but, really? 3.5GB GDDR5 for only OS functions? What a waste of money. The problem of a unified memory pool, I guess.
Should have gone with 4.5GB of GDDR5 with 3.5GB of DDR3 for OS. Would have been much cheaper, but introduces a little bit of complexity for developers (CPU can't access same pool as GPU, like on PC). They instead could have had a separate small CPU that handles the OS, and pulls from the 3.5GB DDR3 exclusively, leaving the unified pool of 4.5GB GDDR5 for the Jaguar cores and GPU.
Should have gone with 4.5GB of GDDR5 with 3.5GB of DDR3 for OS. Would have been much cheaper, but introduces a little bit of complexity for developers (CPU can't access same pool as GPU, like on PC). They instead could have had a separate small CPU that handles the OS, and pulls from the 3.5GB DDR3 exclusively, leaving the unified pool of 4.5GB GDDR5 for the Jaguar cores and GPU.
I'll break it down.
Account was made in 2011 and he really loved (and could possibly still love Halo).
He is not a MS fanboy. Just loves Halo.
Or he could be like me, someone who loved the first 3, and their multiplayer (bought a 360 before the ps3, just because of Halo 3), was disappointed with Reach's multiplayer (and even moreso with 4's), and Halo just doesn't hold the same weight it did back in 2011.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
I wonder how many newer members don't get the bear/salmon reference.
RedAssedApe
Banned
Has it really for the xbox cuz that thing still runs like ass sometimes :|
The only way I can the see the ram not being an issue is due to the XBone in that 3rd party developers are going to take the XBone into account. Otherwise the memory required for PS4 ports to PC is going to increase.
The people who have a Titan also have a top notch CPU.
LTTP. When you really consider what Sony wants to do with the OS, it doesn't seem like 3.5 is that much. Welcome to next-gen.
Neuromancer
Member
Disturbing, almost satanic imagery.Ok, here ya go:
Halo fan who doesn't seem to like Microsoft? That might be a first. Or perhaps not, I don't even know sometimes.
SirIgbyCeaser
Banned
Well sony fans arn't dead yet. The problem with no playstation tears is this isn't as stupid as DRM on home consoles.
And when pitting the consoles side by side, it's GDDR5 vs GDDR3 +ERam, and then It's GPU difference.
But the real sweet part is still. 100 dollars less at retail launch, and no signs of shortages.
And when pitting the consoles side by side, it's GDDR5 vs GDDR3 +ERam, and then It's GPU difference.
But the real sweet part is still. 100 dollars less at retail launch, and no signs of shortages.
SwiftDeath
Member
Someone asked earlier for how much OS footprint was shrunk
PS3 OS footprint was shrunk almost 60% from 120 mb to 50mb
http://www.dailytech.com/Sony+Shrinks+PS3+OS+Gives+Devs+70MB+of+Extra+Memory/article17775.htm
Can't find anything on the 360's OS footprint being shrunk but some places state it was 32mb which seems small (32mb was listed as the footprint not how much it was shrunk by)
I don't man!
I'll wait until I hear some concrete information--especially given how all of us were upset with DF over their vague and incorrect info.
Now we all take their word as gospel?
This isn't me being a PS fan or anything, it's me questioning DF--as we all did less than a few weeks ago.
Now we all take their word as gospel?
This isn't me being a PS fan or anything, it's me questioning DF--as we all did less than a few weeks ago.
I don't understand all the fear guys, this sounds like this is mainly aimed at developers looking to make games...8GB of DDR5 is good and all but what are NORMAL consumers gonna do with it, honestly? If you're a developer or plan to at least then I feel your pain but normal gamers like me, this just seems like something I shouldnt be too worried about. If the OS is hogging that much then maybe they're trying to make navigation and such as smooth and effortless as possible. Plus im sure as time marches on and people really start figuring out the machine then more RAM would be freed up like the PS3. Like someone said before The Last of Us was beautiful...all that on 512 of RAM.
If you're not a developer, relax. Let Sony come out and do the 'splainin'. The games they showed look damn good and im still looking forward to the console. Im not making games so this don't bother me
If you're not a developer, relax. Let Sony come out and do the 'splainin'. The games they showed look damn good and im still looking forward to the console. Im not making games so this don't bother me
I really need to not talk so much, but one last thing. The RAM on Xbox One requires developers to jump through an extra hoop to take advantage of it. It adds an additional layer of complexity and has disadvantages (I'm not a programmer, don't ask me).
When year two or three of console life cycle is in check; the differences between these units will be glaringly obvious. Do not look to launch day to help you uncover hidden potential in either machine.
Neuromancer
Member
Maybe he only liked Halo when it was supposed to be a Mac game. The ultimate gaming hipster, if you will.
Krusenstern
Banned
I don't get it.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
This is too much reasonable thinking for this thread. If anything I'm sure the PS4 OS will expand to at least 4GB in a few years.
TheContact
Member
I don't want a choppy OS in like the ps3 has. 4.5ddr5 for games is still plenty
C'mon guys, settle down, forget about RAM for a second:
Good plan, getting right on it.
CadetMahoney
Member
Sony just needs to clear the air with this news and re-assure it's fans.
Absolute fail by Sony.
HOWEVER, despite the bad implications, Sony DID decrease the OS footprint considerably throughout PS3's lifespan. I wouldn't be surprised to see Sony slim down this massive bloated OS by 512-1536MB. This is just ridiculous. They could've had a 2GB advantage over Xbox One.
HOWEVER, despite the bad implications, Sony DID decrease the OS footprint considerably throughout PS3's lifespan. I wouldn't be surprised to see Sony slim down this massive bloated OS by 512-1536MB. This is just ridiculous. They could've had a 2GB advantage over Xbox One.
Audible Phonetics
Member
My problem is what is the issue here with this?
The point where Devs could even use 7 Gigs of Ram is so far in the future, and probably something only 1st party Devs would take advantage of.
Secondly 4.5 Gigs of GDDR5>> MS 5 Gigs Of Ram.
Thirdly As previous consoles have shown, patches can limit the OS and make it stream lined, thus making the the footprint smaller. Which affords more resources to the devs, who at this point btw are happy with the abundant amount of High Speed ram they have at their disposal.
Halo fan back in 2011. I was a big Halo fan in 2011 as well, despite being disappointed with Reach's multiplayer.
Got all giggly when Halo 4 was announced.
No longer a diehard fan. Enjoy the campaigns. But yeah, enjoying Halo =/= liking Microsoft.
I loved Halo until Halo 4, and now I don't really care about it or MS. Only reason I still have this avatar is because it's what people recognize me by.
biggersmaller
Banned
Exactly. This is good news if the 15 minutes is cached in RAM. The amount of remaining memory dedicated to a game should be more than plenty.
dragonbane
Member
But why? Devs already knew it obviously. Why tell it to the public? Who really cares about the allocation of fucking RAM? No one besides enthusiastic gamers on this and other gaming boards. I don't like it either, but I have to ask myself why does it matter if all the devs are happy and knew about this before.
PS4 is still more powerful than the XBox. Yes it is more even now, that was to be expected anyway. Microsoft didn't say anything either, all we have are statements from sources.
Both companies didn't make a public statement, because this news doesn't have any worth for the common gamer. At worst they misunderstand it, like you can see today. Sony wanted to avoid this nonsense.
R3TRO
Member
Ok, here ya go:
Creepy
dgrdsv
Member
No it's not. The main difference has always been in GPU and RAM speeds. Both had 8 GBs of RAM since announce days and that always meant that RAM sizes are comparable. Basically - nothing's changed.
RibbedHero
Member
Durante? Hhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Pristine_Condition
Member
Actually, it's usually around 600MB for 15 min of 1080p in .mp4 for youtube.
Regardless, it's ridiculous if they are holding that in RAM.
hydragonwarrior
Member
So PS4 = Gouku, XBone = Vegeta?
Amazing typo I think.
This has always been the case. Nothing has changed.
Not a typo.
Quoted for emphasis.
Pretty sure Mark Cerny, the CEO of Sony (not just some consultant guy) said they're already using 7GB for video recording.
Playsation_
Banned
Currently getting the popcorn, and waiting for Sony's response.
But it takes time to respond to changes, if it takes Sony a year to figure out if they can free up more memory from the OS, the it'll take another 12-18 months for games to adapt. So you're already 2+ years down the road.
Similar threads
- Locked