Fantastic
I didn't say otherwise but 3.5GB seems ridiculous. What OS needs that much RAM?
no os but easily an os with apps running on top of it.
Fantastic
I didn't say otherwise but 3.5GB seems ridiculous. What OS needs that much RAM?
1. They're wrong. They should get better sources, or at least attempt a better analysis.
2. OS matters are a bit more complicated than how this is being portrayed.
3. I clearly have a lot to learn before becoming a master troll.
4. It's Friday. My mobile is getting too much of a workout for a Friday.
1GB? Maybe not. 3.5 GB? Oh, hellllll no.So you guys thought having a continuous 15 minute 720p recording playback, RAM save states, play as you download and full UI access in-game was only going to need 1GB?
If Sony had stuck to 4Gb GDDR. How much of that would have been reserved for the OS?
Sony has no reason to talk numbers. The developers know how much ram is available to them. That's the only group of people who need to know anything.
Sony isn't all that concerned with message board pissing contests and nor should they be. They keep their info close to their chest because of the competition, not because they think that the general audience cares about RAM. Because by and large they don't. It matters now because it's the summer before release and we're bored. But all of this tech nonsense gets thrown out the window when the systems actually release. At that point we will be comparing how games look and play. That's what really matters.
Are you joking? They played it on stage.
No, I'm serious, I thought the February Killzone demo was just a target render. (Also, it ran at 1600x900, whereas the final game is 1920x1080.)
Depends entirely on the bitrate.
If Sony had stuck to 4Gb GDDR. How much of that would have been reserved for the OS?
Sony is playing it very safe for launch units. Things like clock rates, OS size, and memory allotments are conservative for a reason. Sony does not want to be in a position where they will lose out on a killer feature or find themselves in a position where there is zero room to grow. I wouldn't be surprised if year 3 or 4 of the PS4's life cycle you see a patch to upclock the GPU.
Upclocking the PS4's GPU 200 mhz more would yield a 2.3 TF machine.
As of this moment, not a single developer has complained about "too little RAM". Most developers are very happy by not only the quantity, but the speed of RAM. As we enter the third year of the machine, the OS size will shrink and things will become less bloated.
Let things play their part and STOP overreacting. Some of you have zero idea how well designed and balanced the PS4 is.
lol.While the PS4 is more powerful, the Xbone IMO offers a better selection of games based on what we've seen so far, not to mention the superior OS features and revolutionary Kinect sensor. Better hardware does not necessarily make the better console.
1. They're wrong. They should get better sources, or at least attempt a better analysis.
2. OS matters are a bit more complicated than how this is being portrayed.
3. I clearly have a lot to learn before becoming a master troll.
4. It's Friday. My mobile is getting too much of a workout for a Friday.
Agreed. It no different than people confirming the Xbox One is using 3gb of RAM for OS, when that has not been confirmed by MS either.
Game Informer: "My question is in terms of RAM you said there is 8GB of RAM my impression was there is 5 of that being diverted to the games, 3 of that to running the always-on apps partition. Sony has 8GB of GDDR5 which is pretty fast RAM and I think it is all unified towards games. Do you think that puts you at a technical disadvantage because there is [in the Xbox One] only 5GB of functioning RAM for games?
Marc Whitten: "Yeah, Im not going to talk about Sonys system, Im not close enough to really understand how there system works. I will say that I think the way weve balanced our system is really key, in terms of two things. The first one is we believe that we are going to have amazing experiences that are clearly next-gen. I think you guys saw some experiences that set a bar that is clearly very high... This isnt about so I can watch TV at the same time as Im watching games those are interesting scenarios as well. At a gaming level the ability to create a modern gaming experiences, where LIVE and the apps and services you can run at the same time as the game, we think will really change that experience we think its key.
So Sony's "goal" if this rumor is true, is to eventually reduce the amount of RAM being used up by the OS/match new features by MS and Ninty. Yet in the Phil Spencer indie thread some people kept drawing to Phil's use of the word "goal", when Sony is using a similar approach, albeit in a much different context. Why does Sony get the benefit of the doubt, that the OS footprint might eventually be reduced, (if this rumor is true) but not MS in regards to indie full use of RAM? Anyways, I don't see this having much of an effect on PS4 games, which is overall still the more powerful system. Hope we get official word on this Sony, wasn't this article initially withheld so Sony could prepare a statement of some sort?
Im curious if you could explain how this differs from MS' position where they can similarly reduce the size as time goes on? Or even upclock via a patch as you claim?
1. They're wrong. They should get better sources, or at least attempt a better analysis.
2. OS matters are a bit more complicated than how this is being portrayed.
3. I clearly have a lot to learn before becoming a master troll.
4. It's Friday. My mobile is getting too much of a workout for a Friday.
How well designed and balanced was it when it had 4GB ram?
What kind of apps and features are Sony worried about not being able to support? Do they have some idea on why Xbox has such a large OS footprint, or are they literally just reserving it because they can?
1GB? Maybe not. 3.5 GB? Oh, hellllll no.
Is it set in stone?
The point isn't how much RAM is enough but that Sony was picked as the 'gamer's console' also because its specs advantage and mainly the 8GB of GDDR5, but now the specs aren't much different and the DRM is the same.
Next gen is looking very not next gen the more and more we learn about it.
1. They're wrong. They should get better sources, or at least attempt a better analysis.
2. OS matters are a bit more complicated than how this is being portrayed.
3. I clearly have a lot to learn before becoming a master troll.
4. It's Friday. My mobile is getting too much of a workout for a Friday.
1. They're wrong. They should get better sources, or at least attempt a better analysis.
2. OS matters are a bit more complicated than how this is being portrayed.
3. I clearly have a lot to learn before becoming a master troll.
4. It's Friday. My mobile is getting too much of a workout for a Friday.
1GB? Maybe not. 3.5 GB? Oh, hellllll no.
Fwiw, the only reason I canceled my preorder is because I'm taking you up on your word.1. They're wrong. They should get better sources, or at least attempt a better analysis.
2. OS matters are a bit more complicated than how this is being portrayed.
3. I clearly have a lot to learn before becoming a master troll.
4. It's Friday. My mobile is getting too much of a workout for a Friday.
Well, that one has been almost confirmed, no?
Well, that one has been almost confirmed, no?
From the article
"Sony and Microsoft's approaches to OS allocation could come in their future plans for the reserved RAM. A Microsoft insider tells us that the engineers behind the Xbox One specifically chose 3GB in order to allow the background platform to evolve over a ten-year life-cycle - it's very hard to add features if the pool of available RAM is reduced from its initial level. The reserved RAM allocation there is set in stone, and is unlikely to change."
Wonder why people ignore this bombshell?
Didn't we have quotes the other day saying they're struggling to use up all the RAM?
Right now this is the best Thread on GAF.
How does this differ than what Microsoft (or the consoles last gen) is doing? The post is a sugar coating of the same situation that everyone gave MS shit for; taking up a huge amount of space for non gaming functions, whether a portion is reserved for potential future proofing or not. Proelite already said that some of the space that's reserved for the Xbox is open space for future proofing; just like Sony is doing here. Both can (and most likely will) reduce the footprint in the future.
Baffling how this post is being congratulated when it's essentially PR spin.
Basically this.
It also makes no sense for Sony to absorb the cost impact of an extra 4Gb of ram, only to release a tiny amount of that for games.
Plus I have no idea what you'd need that amount for. Cross party chat doesn't need 3GB. How much dos vita use,and that has multiple apps open at a time with instant switching, and cross game chat etc.
Yeah, I'd much rather bet on game devs finding a way to use 6-7 GB of RAM faster than Sony's OS team legitimately think of ways to use 2-3 GB for OS. In terms of an ROI on the extra 4GB of RAM, the former will likely payoff a lot faster and continue to offer dividends in the long-term to. Whereas, if they're just going to sit on a couple of gig of RAM lying fallow for who knows how long, that's definitely money they're eating on each unit sold basically.Basically this.
It also makes no sense for Sony to absorb the cost impact of an extra 4Gb of ram, only to release a tiny amount of that for games.
Plus I have no idea what you'd need that amount for. Cross party chat doesn't need 3GB. How much dos vita use,and that has multiple apps open at a time with instant switching, and cross game chat etc.
As for Sony releasing ram over time - don't forget you'll get lag from that. If Sony frees up another 1-1.5B, it'll be a year or more until games take advantage of it.
Using the argument that PC games don't need that much is shortsighted too
1. They're wrong. They should get better sources, or at least attempt a better analysis.
2. OS matters are a bit more complicated than how this is being portrayed.
3. I clearly have a lot to learn before becoming a master troll.
4. It's Friday. My mobile is getting too much of a workout for a Friday.
Right now this is the worst Thread on GAF.
How does this differ than what Microsoft (or the consoles last gen) is doing? The post is a sugar coating of the same situation that everyone gave MS shit for; taking up a huge amount of space for non gaming functions, whether a portion is reserved for potential future proofing or not. Proelite already said that some of the space that's reserved for the Xbox is open space for future proofing; just like Sony is doing here. Both can (and most likely will) reduce the footprint in the future.
Baffling how this post is being congratulated when it's essentially PR spin.
Im curious if you could explain how this differs from MS' position where they can similarly reduce the size as time goes on? Or even upclock via a patch as you claim?
If Sony had stuck to 4Gb GDDR. How much of that would have been reserved for the OS?