Unless their GPU and CPU end up being twice, or three times as powerful as they had been reported to be, 16 GB of RAM will be of no use whatseover. Way overkill for the needs of the system!
VGLeaks rumor: Durango CPU Overview
- Thread starter DieH@rd
- Start date
Unless their GPU and CPU end up being twice, or three times as powerful as they had been reported to be, 16 GB of RAM will be of no use whatseover. Way overkill for the needs of the system!
specialguy
Banned
Some people are saying the double density DDR3 chips that would be needed to do this simply dont exist.
But the same thing was said just before Sony did it, so I simply dont believe them. MS can probably make a special order or something, but it's a stretch, but it was also a stretch for Sony to hit 8GB, pretty much nobody with tech knowledge thought that was very possible.
There's also the factor that imo, 16GB really might be getting into overkill territory. That's a LOT of RAM to be pairing with a not that powerful GPU. Hell I think a case could be made PS4's 8GB is kind of unbalanced for it's 7850 mid level GPU.
It should be noted though, that even 16GB DDR3 would be VASTLY cheaper than 8GB GDDR5. $4 per GB vs $15 per GB imo. So 16 GB DDR3 would still only be $64, vs $120 for 8GB GDDR5. 8GB DDR3=only $32 obviously.
Gemüsepizza
Member
16GB DDR3 @ 68GB/s? How would that be useful? Here is an interesting post about memory amount and bandwidth:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=62108
sebbbi said:
I was very clear, so I am not sure what's there to interpret. I did not say that it will increase processing power.
That does not matter if the bandwidth is already high. And "more powerful" does not always mean "prettier graphics".
As far as I know, a low latency is desirable for general computing tasks, not so much for graphics operations.
Where have I declared "a winner"? What criteria do define "a winner"? We have rumors, and those rumors say that the PS4 is more powerful than the Xbox 3. That's what I am refering to. But I don't know which console will "win" this generation.
No loading times (well except for when the game is first booting) seems like a pretty great thing to me that comes out of 16 GB RAM. And in a best case scenario filling those 8 GB RAM takes about 80 seconds. Four times that if you're loading from BD and not HDD. Every streaming technology enjoys a huge performance boost from 16 GB over 8 GB, so quit saying that 4 -> 8 is great but 8 -> 16 is nonsense. The more RAM, the better.
specialguy
Banned
Gemüsepizza;49160061 said:
There's the ESRAM factor as well. I like to keep reminding people that technically PS3 had "twice" the bandwidth of 360 this gen, too. The EDRAM in 360 made it not matter or 360 come out ahead.
Yeah 16GB of RAM would be crazy, though. But so is 8GB of DDR5. It's like I said, I find it funny how RAM, the one area we were supposedly going to get screwed on, has turned into the most overspecced area of next gen. Both consoles will have at least 8GB.
If MS had 16GB, they could reserve 4+GB for OS, they could just go wild LOL. At that point you'd probably start designing games to have minimal loading. 16GB is the majority of an entire Blu Ray! Or 2-4 whole typical X360 games, all fitting in RAM...
EDRAM is 256GB/s in what way shape or form did the PS3 have more bandwidth?.
This generation the ram is similar as if last generation the PS3 has a combined ram bandwidth of 280GB/s or so.
specialguy
Banned
It had 2 ~22 GB/s busses, versus 360's one.
If you're just comparing main bus to main bus, as people seem to be doing when saying durango only has 68 gb/s.
I guess the rumored 102 GB/s of Durango esram doesn't sound as impressive on paper, but some posts on B3D imply it's probably essentially the max the GPU can use there. So it's simply a number that is built where it's not a limit for that portion of the Durango GPU. And plus there's some weird compression technicalities i think too. x360 gpu couldn't do data compression of some aspect, so 256 was needed. durango's can, so much less is needed.
Thanks for the reply. IIRC, some tech people here thought 8GB GDDR5 was technically conceivable but unlikely due to the financial constraints, which Sony seem to have got around. Regardless, if an extra 4-8GB of RAM is financially conceivable for Microsoft (you would imagine, if they felt it necessary), then it would give them that box-ticking element, a shock value akin to that of the 8GDDR5 announcement (for some at least - I'm not saying it would be technically comparable) and help to alleviate some of the tech lead the PS4 seems to have opened up. Not by much, I imagine, but every little.
That might be enough for them to do it, although frankly I don't see that happening - it's probably too little of a change to make it worthwhile and they may be better off sticking to their plan and possibly launching with an overall cheaper system.
Sure the 102GB/s eSRAM should not be discounted, but it should also be counted like its a extra 102GB/s ontop of the 68GB/s DDR3.
its double or nothing, I do not believe they make anything other then 2gb, 4gb, 8gb, etc ram.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
256 GB/s was just internal EDRAM bandwidth (especially useful because ROPs were in EDRAM), but it communicated with the rest of the GPU at 32 GB/s.
That's what I thought.
nah, 16GB would be nuts. You'd almost be loading the entire game into RAM - bluray will still be stuck at 50GB don't forget.
isn't the 8GB DDR3 already pretty impressive in terms of bandwidth? They seem to have pushed the boat out on fast/wide buses to get up to 68GB/s
I just hope they bump it up to 12GB just to make up for the RAM reserved for the OS.
IHaveCandy
Banned
But what if they put in 32 GB? Wouldn't they see even better gains? Why not 64? If increasing RAM gives a constant linear gain of improvement? Why not put a lot of RAM since its cheap? The answer is that it's not a linear gain of performance. You see less benefit the higher you go. Going from 2 to 4 or 4 to 8 is valuable. Going from 8 to 16 is not in just about every case imaginable. Games are not going to need to call 16 GB worth of data with the CPU and GPU they are using.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
It's worth pointing out that companies often have alternative designs waiting in the wings in case a need for any last minute changes occurs. According to Nick Baker, general manager of Xbox console architecture, they did have backup plans for Xbox 360 (although they were mostly about taking the power out of the box, presumably to improve yields and so on) so it's fair to assume that it's something they considered for the next machine as well.
However, I don't think they should be falling over themselves to match PS4's hardware. Going by the leaked specs, they seem to be in a competitive position already and any advantage PS4 might have on the hardware front would be of minor importance to most people. Instead, they should be laser-focused on delivering on their overall vision.
IHaveCandy
Banned
General purpose programming has you moving a lot of small files. I'm going to make up some numbers to make my point clear. It isn't indicative of real world numbers.
If an OS needs to load a hundred small files, latency is more important. Lets say DDR3 can move these files in total in 5 seconds, and there is only 1 second of latency. GDDR5 can load these same files in 2 seconds, but there is 5 seconds of latency. DDR3 got the job done faster inthos case. This situationis similar to how OSes tend up load a lot of tiny files.
If you are loading 10 very big files, DDR3 is better. Lets say it takes DDR3 60 seconds to load all these files, with 1 second of latency. GDDR5 can load them all in 25 seconds with 5 seconds of latency. Obviously, GDDR5 was better suited here. This example is similar to loading large assets in. A game.
I know the relation between latency and bandwidth
But what size of data is to be exchanged between APU and RAM? Do you have any reliable data?They cannot do this without changing the width of the ram afaik, so its either 16GB or 8GB no in-between.
that would be nice, but I don't know how feasible it would be.
I just hope the 3GB rumour is either nonsense, or MS being conservative and they'll shrink it down later on. 2GB for MS after a while vs 1GB for Sony would be close enough
IHaveCandy
Banned
I don't know the actual numbers, but textures and models are always going to be a lot bigger than text files and GUI assets.I know the relation between latency and bandwidth
Latency is in nanoseconds if that's what you are asking.
I am not sure about the latency of GDDR5 versus DDR3 but I think there was a post on B3D saying it was not that big a difference and no where near as big as people think.
IHaveCandy
Banned
Yes, both are in nanoseconds. Even if its 5 ns vs 20 ns, a 15 ns difference isn't that huge. It is why GDDR5 is not used when high bandwidth is not needed.
my vague memory is coming up with around 2x for some reason, so 10ns vs 20ns.
Hmm, given all that and having in mind that MS is behind Direct3d and sure knows a lot about the graphic pipeline and a lot about how GPUs operate I highly doubt that they build a system *intentionally* that has such a drawback
Would the real next gen console please stand up.
On a more serious note I think if Microsoft do go with the proposed leaked specs (8 core CPU 1.23 TF GPU, 8GB Ram) The only people who will be disappointed are hardcore people who like the best visual console experience.
But the reality is these people are a minority and from a business standpoint its is the wrong thing to do.
Microsoft has seen how successful the wii was and they want a piece of that pie.
Imagine if the Wii was powerful enough and Nintendo had better relations with 3rd parties and the wii got games like GTA4, bioshock, mass effect etc.
Thats what Microsoft want to do.
motion gaming is big, people are interested in motion controlled applications besides gaming such as fitness training + dance apps
If MS launch next box for $399 with kinect and it can play the latest COD, FIFA without looking drastically different etc
AND PS4 launches for $399 without its new dual cam thing
families, women and any other unhardcore gamers (i'am not saying there are not hardcore women gamers, but the majority of women would rather use a console to do zumba dancing and watch netflix.)
and if the mom or dad brought the new next box with kinect because there 6yr daughter would like it and there 14 yr cod addict son would be happy because it has the latest COD on it.
These sought of people would rather get a nextbox because they either have to please multiple tastes of there families or are interested in motion gaming as well as hardcore gaming.
On a more serious note I think if Microsoft do go with the proposed leaked specs (8 core CPU 1.23 TF GPU, 8GB Ram) The only people who will be disappointed are hardcore people who like the best visual console experience.
But the reality is these people are a minority and from a business standpoint its is the wrong thing to do.
Microsoft has seen how successful the wii was and they want a piece of that pie.
Imagine if the Wii was powerful enough and Nintendo had better relations with 3rd parties and the wii got games like GTA4, bioshock, mass effect etc.
Thats what Microsoft want to do.
motion gaming is big, people are interested in motion controlled applications besides gaming such as fitness training + dance apps
If MS launch next box for $399 with kinect and it can play the latest COD, FIFA without looking drastically different etc
AND PS4 launches for $399 without its new dual cam thing
families, women and any other unhardcore gamers (i'am not saying there are not hardcore women gamers, but the majority of women would rather use a console to do zumba dancing and watch netflix.)
and if the mom or dad brought the new next box with kinect because there 6yr daughter would like it and there 14 yr cod addict son would be happy because it has the latest COD on it.
These sought of people would rather get a nextbox because they either have to please multiple tastes of there families or are interested in motion gaming as well as hardcore gaming.
I remember reading one RAM thread here on GAF and people were saying (as a reaction to the 8GB GDDR5 announcement) that latency was the only thing that mattered and not size/bandwidth. Hilarious.
And this whole post underscores MS' big gamble, now doesn't it?
Nintendo caught a blue ocean market with the Wii. They tried it again with the Wii U and so far it looks like they whiffed pretty badly. Now MS is trying to do the same thing with the X720 and Kinect.
If they miss on the incredibly fickle "blue ocean" they're targeting because of iOS and Android devices (what many attribute to the Wii's sudden and abrupt stall) then all they have is an under powered system with features no core gamer cares about.
Meanwhile Sony is taking the "safe" play by going for the proven, reliable core gamer market full force. If they really do have tangible hardware superiority and are at a competitive price standpoint they'll be well on their way to a very strong platform with no additional risks tied onto them.
Also, if MS does go with the currently rumored specs there will be a tangible difference between PS4 and X720 games. Since both use similar hardware and are x86 systems built on AMD/ATi GPU technology it will actually scale amazingly easy, making the power gap consistently apparent in pretty much all cross platform titles, not to mention how much better Sony's first party releases will clearly be.
dead monkey uk
Member
Agree with this, most of the Wii owners have not upgraded to the WiiU, so there are plenty of sales for MS in this area. As long as they can keep the cost affordable. Going from the Wii to next xbox will be a massive jump.
As you say Fitness training, dance and karaoke games with motion control will be a massive market. Add to that large COD, FIFA and Halo player communities and any new xbox will do great (UK and US at least) even if it is less powerful than the PS4.
Hmm, given all that and having in mind that MS is behind Direct3d and sure knows a lot about the graphic pipeline and a lot about how GPUs operate I highly doubt that they build a system *intentionally* that has such a drawback
So MS can't design shitty hardware now because they make a mediocre API that they've used Windows to bull into being an industry standard?
FYI - there is likely a very legitimate reason why MS made the choices they have made. There is also a reasonably high likelihood it has absolutely zero to do with games.
dead monkey uk
Member
Really? I am sure every console is designed with games being the number one consideration
shinra-bansho
Member
Therein lies the assumption that the consumer the Wii brought into the console market wants an upgrade at all; rather than having moved on already to alternative gaming avenues or being satisfied with end-of-life systems like the Kinect for XBOX 360.
I think that's about right. DDR3 is in the range of around 10ns.
Ultimately it doesn't really matter, low latency and high bandwidth may be the ideal, but low latency is easier to get around than a lack of bandwidth, it's why CPU's have cache. For memory latency to really become a factor, you'd need to be missing the cache an awful lot of the time.
CaptainFalafel
Banned
The Wii did great because no one had ever seen motion controls beeing used that way before, and that generated buzz that caught the eye of the "casual market". The problem with the Kinect 2.0 is that we have already seen what it can do and therefore it's not going to generate the same amount of buzz, unles ofcourse they have some fetures that we have never seen before.
REMEMBER CITADEL
Banned
Wii U's failure was obvious from miles away, it only underscores how oblivious Nintendo's management is to what made Wii a phenomenon of global proportions.
What a bunch of nonsense (or funnily enough, as we would say in Croatian, "drek"; look it up). First of all, it's not a blue ocean strategy, the market they're targeting is already well defined, and has been for quite some time - their previous console helped shape it. Even the way by which they might attempt to achieve that (subsidizing console sales through subscription deals) has been already tested on Xbox 360. Unless there are revolutionary aspects to the next Xbox which we're not aware of yet, they're not trying to create a whole new market (i.e. pursuing the blue ocean strategy), they're trying to satisfy the needs of an already existing one.
More importantly, they're targeting the core gamer at least as much as the broader entertainment consumer, if not more. Their target group hasn't changed, it's broadened, and they're making sure that core gamers, among other types of consumers, have plenty to be excited about. Just because another console might have more processing power, that doesn't automatically make it more appealing in the core gamers' eyes, that's just one of many important factors, and quite low on the priority list for anyone but people who make up only a small fraction of an already relatively small group.
On the gaming front they're going to compete with Sony head-on, but they're also investing a lot of resources in areas which Sony seemingly plans to properly tackle only a few years in (and have no doubt about that, Sony will go for the same broader audience eventually; that is, if PS4 proves to be a sustainable platform in the long run). They could fail, of course, and they could fail spectacularly, but that will likely have little to do with a difference in processing power that is within the same ballpark as differences in the previous few generations, including the one in which Sony's underpowered console (compared to GameCube and especially Xbox) had no problem appealing to the core gamers and smoking its competitors.
Clearly. I wish you had any proof for that statement when, looking at this generation, Sony's first party games were generally neither better critically nor commercially received than Microsoft's.
Oh, there is a lot of hate swinging in this comment... But one thing is for sure: Hardware-like, MS almost always delivered very good products (keyboards, mice, webcams...).
no doubt.
There is also reasonably high likelihood that you don't know a little bit what it has to do with and that you are just guessing (or even worse stating your wishful thinking which would be sad).
dead monkey uk
Member
Agree a lot of Wii consumers were one off console buyers, who have moved on to ipad games or quite happy to dust off the Wii every Christmas. But if MS have a strong family focused software lineup I think they can cashin on what made the Wii so successful.
And if they release a next gen Gears of War and Alan Wake they will have 1 more sale
Melchiah
Member
What makes you think the fickle casual crowd would be looking for an upgrade? They've probably moved to the next big thing, like smart phones and tablets. You don't usually catch them twice by using the same method.
Alright alright he mentioned it and now you asked. I'll take him off later today.
dead monkey uk
Member
Apple have made a business out of doing this exact thing.
Is that not what I just answered. The casual crowd have most likely moved on, but come Holiday time, some will be looking for the next shiny new thing.
OK you need to stop posting.
Ok you need to stop telling people what to do.
That's what I was going to say Apple gets people excited by just bumping the specs and adding 1-2 new main features.
For me a tablet or smartphone is a different proposition to what is your main entertainment hub unless people think a whole family just sits around a iPad screen. If anything these new consoles will be and Sony has shown and MS has all but said complimenting these tablets and smartphones.
Angelus Errare
Banned
Well it is utterly silly to think AMD is going "Hey Sony, this is what we'll be putting in the new MS console" *shows Sony the hardware*. Then they're turning around and going "hey MS, here is what Sony is putting in the hardware!"
The lawsuit that would result from that would probably kill AMD.
Ninja Moomin
Banned
Today.... but as development needs change over time.
There was a time when all dev's talked about was how much more power and memory the PS3 and 360 afforded them.... now they talk about limits.
More memory does = more options for developers.... and the bigger issue for Durango is surely how much of that memory is reserved... remember the current thought is that 3gb is system / OS memory.
I don't say they did it officially but as well as there are leaks on websites and by this go "official" there will be most probably channels of information. I would be surprised if there wasn't any.
There would be protocols to try and eliminate this, each side would be pissed if it happened.
So this never happened before, you are trying to say? Industrial spying is just a legend? Informations can't be bought?