Support NeoGAF

[Shadow of the BEAST]

linear games with small game areas like uncharted or gears of war look good this gen, they can stream new textures effortlessly.

But as soon as the game opens up everything goes down hill. Im playing skyrim right now and that game looks great at a distance but once you get up close or look at characters it looks horrible. many ps2 games look better.

More and more games are becoming open world. And for that we need much better hardware but more importantly more ram.

 

[Pimpbaa]

And it was a complaint from the outset.

They would have really complained if the 360 went with 256MBs of ram as originally intended. Your average PC game does not use much more than 2GBs (mainly due to still running 32-bit code), and that's with the bloat that comes with an OS like Windows. 2GB is just about right for a next gen console.

 

[skyfinch]

I'm surprised that no one is talking about 2 gigs of ram in this thread.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

They would have really complained if the 360 went with 256MBs of ram as originally intended. Your average PC game does not use much more than 2GBs (mainly due to still running 32-bit code), and that's with the bloat that comes with an OS like Windows. 2GB is just about right for a next gen console.

most pc games are console ports.

 

[Pimpbaa]

But as soon as the game opens up everything goes down hill. Im playing skyrim right now and that game looks great at a distance but once you get up close or look at characters it looks horrible. many ps2 games look better.

LOL

 

[Jonm1010]

Are people still in the mindset that Microsoft will push the tech as hard as it did with the 360.

I really don't see it personally, I think both MS and Sony will play it safer this time and try to make a profit as fast as they can.

My bet is both will go the Vita route. Smart tech that's sum of its parts will look better than most comparable technology and games(considering the advantage of a closed system) but isnt so groundbreaking and costly that it will lead to a loss for more than a year or so. $399 price point, $299 tard pack.

My hope is for something that looks as good or better than the Samiritan demo. My guess is that, like the original Epic unreal engine 3 demo, the results will probably be almost as good but not quite as good as the demo in realtime. Throw in some new direct x features from Microsoft as a given due to their history and that is my bet for what the end product will look like.

 

[BeEatNU]

I think they are more limited by their GPU speed than memory. You could have all the memory in the world for these consoles, and you'd still not have games that run at 60FPS or render at 1080p, or even at full 720p in many cases.

well PS3 more or so in this case.

 

[Shadow of the BEAST]

LOL

silent hill 3, resident evil 4 has much better characters than skyrim.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

I think a great many people are going to be seriously underwhelmed by the relative improvement that the next gen will bring regardless of what the spec sheets say.

I don't really care about "more shinies!" and such, I just want worlds that draw much further, a more consistent experience (frame rates, tearing, clipping, etc), more complex AI routines, more substantial physics and more persistence with regards to your actions on the world.

Basically, I want the 3D worlds we have his gen, just richer, more coherent and more detailed. Draw distances to the horizon, believable AI, physics so real you can almost feel their effects through the screen, this is what next gen should be.

 

[gofreak]

Exactly. What is the 360's mobo supposed to mean?



...what's your argument?

I think his point is that in a console, you can't just stick a bunch of ram sticks on there ad nauseum, that the layout of the motherboard means that adding memory modules costs quite a bit of area.

8 RAM modules might be the most we can expect based on PS3 and 360's MBs.

If we know the capacity of RAM module available for a system, and we reckon they use 8 modules, we could reasonably guess what'd be possible on the RAM front.

On that basis I think 2GB DDR3 total would be very conservative. They could do that with half the number of RAM modules they used in 360 initially.

However, 2GB of DDR3 + 1GB of GDDR5 (for example) makes total sense, and would be as ambitious (RAM module wise) as the 360/PS3 motherboard designs.

4GB of GDDR5 is probably implausible in 2012 unless 4Gigabit modules are in the works (?) But they probably want more than 2GB (what 8 GDDR5 modules could yield today), so that would neatly explain the apparently odd DDR3 choice on one side, and a move to a non-unified approach to let them add more (faster) memory off the GPU side. The mention of DDR3 in light of that maybe lends the rumour a bit more credibility, IMO - unless someone had done their homework a lot, it would be a weird thing to magic up, but it actually makes sense.

 

[Jonm1010]

They would have really complained if the 360 went with 256MBs of ram as originally intended. Your average PC game does not use much more than 2GBs (mainly due to still running 32-bit code), and that's with the bloat that comes with an OS like Windows. 2GB is just about right for a next gen console.

As pointed out before, most PC games also have a 6 year old console as its lead platform. To which they then throw on some minor feature upgrades and slap a PC logo on the box and sell it for your computer.

 

[Pimpbaa]

silent hill 3, resident evil 4 has much better characters than skyrim.

You are goddamn blind.

 

[Nizz]

In theory, are these specs enough to give us graphics at the quality of Battlefield 3 on PC's now? Or the equivalent of Crysis 2 on high(?) at 60fps? That would be fine by me.

 

[Johnny2Bags]

They would have really complained if the 360 went with 256MBs of ram as originally intended. Your average PC game does not use much more than 2GBs (mainly due to still running 32-bit code), and that's with the bloat that comes with an OS like Windows. 2GB is just about right for a next gen console.

Skyrim eats 1.7 gigs of Video Ram ALONE within two minutes of playing the game... Not to mention the System ram (if you tweak the .ini for added performance) hits almost four... I have 8 gigs so I went for the cushion...

That's not to say that every game is like that, but these consoles aren't out for a couple years... and games will continue to get more and more demanding... not to mention the consoles next life-cycle is going to be almost ten years as admitted by microsoft themselves when they launched the original 3 console takeover plan....

 

[Pimpbaa]

As pointed out before, most PC games also have a 6 year old console as its lead platform. To which they then throw on some minor feature upgrades and slap a PC logo on the box and sell it for your computer.

The games that don't, still don't use much more than 2GBs. And it's not because of consoles, it's because they are still using 32-bit code to remain compatible to luddites still using winxp and such (or being outright stupid and are using 32-bit windows 7).

 

[clav]

I think his point is that in a console, you can't just stick a bunch of ram sticks on there ad nauseum, that the layout of the motherboard means that adding memory modules costs quite a bit of area.

8 RAM modules might be the most we can expect based on PS3 and 360's MBs.

If we know the capacity of RAM module available for a system, and we reckon they use 8 modules, we could reasonably guess what'd be possible on the RAM front.

On that basis I think 2GB DDR3 total would be very conservative. They could do that with half the number of RAM modules they used in 360 initially.

However, 2GB of DDR3 + 1GB of GDDR5 (for example) makes total sense, and would be as ambitious (RAM module wise) as the 360/PS3 motherboard designs.

4GB of GDDR5 is probably implausible in 2012 unless 4Gigabit modules are in the works (?) But they probably want more than 2GB (what 8 GDDR5 modules could yield today), so that would neatly explain the apparently odd DDR3 choice on one side, and a move to a non-unified approach to let them add more (faster) memory off the GPU side.

I doubt MS will change from its unified RAM architecture approach.

Why break away from a system that works and reduces bottlenecks when you can have the CPU and GPU fused as the RAM can be obtained from the same pool?

The Xbox 360 Slim has fused the two together.

 

[CitizenCope]

Shouldn't we be talking about the fans they should be using and not the RAM.

 

[clav]

Shouldn't we be talking about the fans they should be using and not the RAM.

120mm fan or higher or bust.

Bigger fans can push more air and operate at a slower speed for quieter performance.

 

[Orayn]

Shouldn't we be talking about the fans they should be using and not the RAM.

Not so much fans as heatsinks and how they're fastened to the motherboard. A big part of the RROD issues were due to thermal expansion issues, where they'd warp, lift off, press down too hard and break things, etc.

 

[gofreak]

I doubt MS will change from its unified RAM architecture approach.

Why break away from a system that works and reduces bottlenecks when you can have the CPU and GPU fused as the RAM can be obtained from the same pool?

If higher density ram modules don't come along for 2012, here's their choice assuming a cap of 8 RAM modules and a launch in 2012:

2GB GDDR5 (unified)

4GB DDR3 (unified)

2GB DDR3 + 1GB GDDR5 (non-unified, 3GB total)

It's not implausible to me that their system designers might favour the last option. More total memory than the first option, faster memory for the GPU than the second (which they may prefer over a larger, slower pool).

 

[Übermatik]

8gig ram
1 tera hdd

anything else is disappointing

1 Terabyte is ridiculously unrealistic, unless either Sony or Microsoft go down a download only route, and even then...
8 Gigabytes is far-fetched too - expect 4 at the most.

 

[mysteriousmage09]

Auto fake, the next consoles won't be using off the shelf ddr3 ram.

 

[FateBreaker]

silent hill 3, resident evil 4 has much better characters than skyrim.

LOL

 

[Torrod]

Could have 16 cores and 5 gpus with 10 gigs of ram. But the only true question remains: is it any fun?

 

[flyinpiranha]

I agree with you completely.

I don't think people's imaginations are limited anymore by what a console can display visually, its more a case of talent, timescale, and money.

New technology is always more work, because no matter how awesome the hardware you still need to apply that power towards the goal. The more stuff you pack in, the more closely you need to look to make sure its working correctly under all circumstances due to machines' annoying habit of interpreting your instructions literally!

Realistically we're approaching a plateau because although the machines are getting better, people aren't. And people are the crucial element in the equation.

You don't think developers have gotten better? I think it's amazing the stuff that has come out this generation. Or am I misreading that last part?

I think technology pushes people to get better. I can only imagine what Rockstar, Epic, Naughty Dog, and many others will do with better hardware at their disposal. The hardware is almost always the limitation to the creative minds in these scenarios.

While I don't disagree that I'd love to see more developers venture from this "everything has to be realistic" mentality, I can't deny that things such as Skyrim and Red Dead Redemption and Uncharted 3 ... and many others honestly are technical marvels, and giving these developers even better tools will only net better results as it has been for the past couple decades.

 

[Kyaw]

2 GPUs... hmmm INTERESTING.

 

[Jonm1010]

Skyrim eats 1.7 gigs of Video Ram ALONE within two minutes of playing the game... Not to mention the System ram (if you tweak the .ini for added performance) hits almost four... I have 8 gigs so I went for the cushion...

That's not to say that every game is like that, but these consoles aren't out for a couple years... and games will continue to get more and more demanding... not to mention the consoles next life-cycle is going to be almost ten years as admitted by microsoft themselves when they launched the original 3 console takeover plan....

I agree, but as a sidenote I think its naiive on Microsoft's part to think the Loop will be the only console for the next ten years. It may still be manufactored while a new system is being phased in but I think reality and external factors will push Microsoft to introduce something else before those ten years are up.

Whether its the emergence of the Apple HDTV that will no doubt have a method to play HD games or Apple putting an HDMI out on the Ipad and selling a cheap controller to use for your TV. Or the emergence of fiber technology that will increase demand for things like OnLive. I dont think Microsoft, or Sony for that matter, will in the end be able to rest on their laurels and think their next console will go ten years before needing to innovate.

 

[Pimpbaa]

Skyrim eats 1.7 gigs of Video Ram ALONE within two minutes of playing the game... Not to mention the System ram (if you tweak the .ini for added performance) hits almost four... I have 8 gigs so I went for the cushion...

I'm playing the game with ultra settings, and i've never had any performance drops due to texture swapping on my 1GB video card. Also, Skyrim is not even large address aware by default, so it can't hit almost four (it would crash before that). Even if it did, it would show that consoles need far less ram than PCs to do the equivalent considering the game runs find on the 360 with it's 512MBs of ram.

 

[StevieP]

What ya mean like Skyrim with its sexy high res textures >.>

It's Bethesda. And it still looks better than it does on consoles. Thanks to modding support, it will eventually look a LOT better. My original point was, you don't buy consoles for graphics. You buy them for games.

If you guys care *this* much about visuals (LOL again at the people expecting Samaritan) you'd have PC rigs already.

Here is Carmack, of all people, from yesterday:
http://www.gamezone.com/news/don-t-expect-epic-leap-in-graphics-with-next-gen-consoles-predicts-dev

In an interview in the latest edition of the Official Xbox Magazine, which takes a look back at the Microsoft's evolution of the Xbox consoles, id Software's John Carmack said he doesn't expect an epic leap in graphics with next-gen consoles.

 

[RaijinFY]

Hmm.

Looking at Elpida's current RAM offerings, DDR3 is available in 4Gbit varieties, but GDDR5 is currently only available in a max module density of 2Gbit.

If MS has a maximum module budget of 8 (same as 360/PS3 initially, IIRC - probably the reasonable max), if they were to go with GDDR5, that would limit them with the above to a max of 2GB of memory. Assuming they're targeting 2012 and 4Gbit GDDR5 modules aren't on the cards in that timeframe.

But if they go with DDR3, they could use 4 modules off the CPU for 2GB and 4 off the GPU for another 2GB. Or 4 2Gbit GDDR5 chips off the GPU (for 1GB).

That could explain the choice of DDR3. Favour memory capacity over speed on the CPU side.

Plausible?

Isnt VITA roughly the same?

 

[clav]

If higher density ram modules don't come along for 2012, here's their choice assuming a cap of 8 RAM modules and a launch in 2012:

2GB GDDR5 (unified)

4GB DDR3 (unified)

2GB DDR3 + 1GB GDDR5 (non-unified, 3GB total)

It's not implausible to me that their system designers might favour the last option. More total memory than the first option, faster memory for the GPU than the second (which they may prefer over a larger, slower pool).

In the PC world, there's been research pouring in how to unify the CPU and GPU all in one dye, so that computers can operate efficiently and finally do away the northbridge and southbridge on computers. That way, computers will use less power and therefore produce less heat.

Both Intel and AMD have been offering better onboard video solutions over the years. Even Nvidia has joined in the fray in the mobile market.

Assuming that both the GPU and CPU are on the same chip, that could make room for more RAM.

You see how in the Xbox 360 mobo, the GPU and CPU take up the same space (up until Jasper). The X360 S finally fused the two onto one chip.

 

[Jinko]

Hmm all this talk of tech makes me wonder how many zombies Capcom can have on screen now. -.-

 

[Proelite]

I agree, but as a sidenote I think its naiive to think the Loop will be the only console for the next ten years. It may still be manufactored while a new system is being phased in but I think reality and external factors will push Microsoft to introduce something else before those ten years are up.

Whether its the emergence of the Apple HDTV that will no doubt have a method to play HD games. Or the emergence of fiber technology that will increase demand for things like OnLive. I dont think Microsoft, or Sony for that matter, will in the end be able to rest on their laurels and think their next console will go ten years before needing to innovate.

Exactly, I don't think they will be willing to risk having an expensive and outdated console on the market in 3-4 years time. That's why they should focus on breaking even or making money day 1. There is a chance we may see the fourth Xbox console 3 years after the Loop is released as a response to some new development in the industry.

 

[gatti-man]

silent hill 3, resident evil 4 has much better characters than skyrim.

But as soon as the game opens up everything goes down hill. Im playing skyrim right now and that game looks great at a distance but once you get up close or look at characters it looks horrible. many ps2 games look better.

most pc games are console ports.

Dude........duuuude

 

[Dennis]

2GB of unified GDDR5 or XDR2 RAM is the best solution.

4GB of DDR3 would be so dumb.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

In theory, are these specs enough to give us graphics at the quality of Battlefield 3 on PC's now? Or the equivalent of Crysis 2 on high(?) at 60fps? That would be fine by me.

Nice avatar dude. Melissa Clarke is truly one of the most beautiful girls in the world. If I had the computer from Weird Science, she would be the result.

 

[Johnny2Bags]

I'm playing the game with ultra settings, and i've never had any performance drops due to texture swapping on my 1GB video card. Also, Skyrim is not even large address aware by default, so it can't hit almost four (it would crash before that). Even if it did, it would show that consoles need far less ram than PCs to do the equivalent considering the game runs find on the 360 with it's 512MBs of ram.

Yeah I made mine LAA for a bit, may change it back... My point was that on my Dual GPU rig it USES 1.7 gigs of ram, as well as Large Address Aware levels of memory approaching four gigs... So, taking into account that Bethesda are known for their enormous world and not their optimized engines... This still shits all over the theory that games will not be above four gigs for ten years... My god, just wait until the High res texture pack (would you not want the new console to be able to run textures like this?? Cuz it won't without proper ram), which I will max out and love.... Even more memory...

You can easily make the game Large address aware if you want, check the threads if you wish... This is what i'm referring to...

 

[clutch.as.it.gets.]

2 GB of RAM for a videogame console or any entertainment devise in 2012 is a joke. And DDR 3? Really MS? Only 2 GB of slow DDR 3 RAM? Major disappointment if true. MS would cheap out big time!
The new xbox has to have 4 GB of Ram, especially with windows coming to the new box and all those entertainment things MS is planning.

I wont belive that and hope those 2 GB of DDR Ram are for the CPU only, and the GPU gets their own 2 GB memory pool.

 

[gofreak]

In the PC world, there's been research pouring in how to unify the CPU and GPU all in one dye, so that computers can operate efficiently and finally do away the northbridge and southbridge on computers. That way, computers will use less power and therefore produce less heat.

Both Intel and AMD have been offering better onboard video solutions over the years. Even Nvidia has joined in the fray in the mobile market.

Assuming that both the GPU and CPU are on the same chip, that could make room for more RAM.

Not sure that'll happen.

It'll happen in revisions as with 360, but I think the initial boxes will use discrete CPU and GPU chips for more performance. Unless they're not really gunning for performance, but I think they are. The trade-off of processing vs RAM probably would be worth it in 2012.

For those saying DDR3 is outrageous - look at what's available. If they don't use DDR3, they may be stuck with 2GB of RAM total. Max. (Unless new higher density gddr5 ram modules become available soon...)

 

[Dipswitch]

If higher density ram modules don't come along for 2012, here's their choice assuming a cap of 8 RAM modules and a launch in 2012:

2GB GDDR5 (unified)

4GB DDR3 (unified)

2GB DDR3 + 1GB GDDR5 (non-unified, 3GB total)

It's not implausible to me that their system designers might favour the last option. More total memory than the first option, faster memory for the GPU than the second (which they may prefer over a larger, slower pool).

I dunno. In some cases the 2GB of GDDR5 might be a better option for developers, as it might present them with more flexibility as to how to carve up the memory pool. For instance some devs might prefer to keep the main game code running in a 512MB memory space, thus reserving 1.5GB of memory for VRAM purposes.

I get the sense that VRAM is a more precious commodity to developers at the moment than system ram - that's just a hunch I have mind you. I'd be very interested to see some real examples of how developers are utilizing the 360's memory pool at the moment for comparisons sake.

 

[Johnny2Bags]

I agree, but as a sidenote I think its naiive on Microsoft's part to think the Loop will be the only console for the next ten years. It may still be manufactored while a new system is being phased in but I think reality and external factors will push Microsoft to introduce something else before those ten years are up.

Whether its the emergence of the Apple HDTV that will no doubt have a method to play HD games or Apple putting an HDMI out on the Ipad and selling a cheap controller to use for your TV. Or the emergence of fiber technology that will increase demand for things like OnLive. I dont think Microsoft, or Sony for that matter, will in the end be able to rest on their laurels and think their next console will go ten years before needing to innovate.

I don't think their hand will be forced.. I truly believe the next Xbox will dominate the console landscape... almost sickeningly similar to their three step takeover noted... it's all perfect so far... I DO HOWEVER, believe that the step will be an "itteration" and a revised console or upgraded HDD etc... instead of a brand new one... I guess we will see..

 

[clav]

Not sure that'll happen.

It'll happen in revisions as with 360, but I think the initial boxes will use discrete CPU and GPU chips for more performance. Unless they're not really gunning for performance, but I think they are.

We'll see.

Everything in this thread including the OP is speculation.

I think we'll see dual-core GPUs. That's something that hasn't appeared in the hardcore gaming market yet.

 

[Orayn]

I'd say we're far more likely to see some sort of on-die floating point solution like IBM's Cell, AMD's Bulldozer, or the current incarnation of Intel's Larrabee.

"Dual core" doesn't mean anything to GPUs. They don't have discrete cores the same way CPUs do. Hell, even Bulldozer did away with the traditional notion of cores.

 

[Pimpbaa]

Yeah I made mine LAA for a bit, may change it back... My point was that on my Dual GPU rig it USES 1.7 gigs of ram, as well as Large Address Aware levels of memory approaching four gigs... So, taking into account that Bethesda are known for their enormous world and not their optimized engines... This still shits all over the theory that games will not be above four gigs for ten years... My god, just wait until the High res texture pack (would you not want the new console to be able to run textures like this?? Cuz it won't without proper ram), which I will max out and love.... Even more memory...

You can easily make the game Large address aware if you want, check the threads if you wish... This is what i'm referring to...

My point is that consoles need far less ram. The game runs on 512MB. Also, I don't need to make it large address aware, because the game doesn't need it.

 

[Zombie James]

Can someone plot the average gaming rig's total System and Video RAM by year, with the last couple of consoles' total RAM by release year?

It'd then be interesting to see how those ratios have changed (or not).

Whipped this up real quick with info from Wikipedia.

RAW numbers (main memory/video memory):

Genesis: 64KB/64KB
SNES: 128KB/64KB
Saturn: 2MB/1.5MB
Playstation: 2MB/1MB
N64: 4MB (unified)
Dreamcast: 16MB/8MB
Playstation 2: 32MB/4MB
Gamecube: 24MB/3MB (not sure how accurate this is)
Xbox: 64MB (unified)
Xbox 360: 512MB (unified)
Playstation 3: 256MB/256MB
Wii: 64MB/24MB

Some notes:

• Only includes main system memory and video memory.
• Doesn't include the N64 expansion pack.
• The Gamecube apparently had 16MB for sound and DVD caching.

 

[Lord Error]

well PS3 more or so in this case.

Many recent better looking X360 exclusives are sub hd and 30FPS. Halo 3, Halo Reach, Alan Wake, Splinter Cell: Conviction, Halo: Anniversary . In fact, if you stick to visually impressive exclusives, PS3 fares better in terms of resolution.

Regardless, It is absolutely a problem or a limitation on both consoles that they just can't render any of today's graphically demanding games at 1080p, or at 60FPS, much less both, and are often even struggling to render 720p in locked 30FPS.

You are goddamn blind.

Heather from SH3 did look better than this, and this is one of the better looking Skyrim character closeups I could find.

http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2011/02/The-Elder-Scrolls-V-Skyrim-Busty-Wench.jpg

 

[clav]

I'd say we're far more likely to see some sort of on-die floating point solution like IBM's Cell, AMD's Bulldozer, or the current incarnation of Intel's Larrabee.

"Dual core" doesn't mean anything to GPUs. They don't have discrete cores the same way CPUs do. Hell, even Bulldozer did away with the traditional notion of cores.

Cores don't really mean anything to this day aside from PR. How are you going to explain to the average Joe that the new tech is better?

 

[gofreak]

I dunno. In some cases the 2GB of GDDR5 might be a better option for developers, as it might present them with more flexibility as to how to carve up the memory pool. For instance some devs might prefer to keep the main game code running in a 512MB memory space, thus reserving 1.5GB of memory for VRAM purposes.

I get the sense that VRAM is a more precious commodity to developers at the moment than system ram - that's just a hunch I have mind you.

It's possible devs etc. would tell them to use 2GB of GDDR5 instead of 3GB (split DDR3/GDDR5). That might be true, but I can also entertain the possibility they'd prefer the latter. It's not that outrageous.

Particularly also depending on the services MS wants to run on the thing, how much they want to take from devs. Let's say MS wants to reserve 256MB of RAM for the OS/Kinect processing/whatever.

Under the unified 2GB of GDDR5, that leaves devs with 1.75GB to play with.

Under the other approach, it leaves them with 1.75GB of DDR3 and 1GB of GDDR5.

If any scenarios where non-graphics RAM requirements in a game exceed 750MB (quite plausible), the non-unified set up with DDR3 wins.

Obviously things only get more favourable for that setup if the OS requirements are more than that.

 

[Orayn]

Cores don't really mean anything to this day aside from PR. How are you going to explain to the average Joe that it is better?

I propose we go back to measuring console power in arbitrary numbers of "bits" in addition to buzzwords like BLAST PROCESSING!

Failing that, we can come up with an exponential scale for how many Gamecubes you'd have to tape together to achieve the same performance.

 

[mysticwhip]

I love this time of the year.