Quantcast
View Post
maxnyc said:
Player1x3 said:
Kasz216 said:
Player1x3 said:
Kasz216 said:
ethomaz said:

But what the developer is talking... about memory... I think it is the biggest ever... GPU performance I'm not sure.

Anybody remember a increase in 16x the size of memory from the previous gen???

Wasn't the the jump from Nes/Gensis to SNES like... 60X or something crazy like that.?


NES had 2KB of RAM, SNES had 128KB of RAM, so that's +126 KB jump.

PS3 had 512MB of RAM, PS4 has 8GB of RAM, so that's +7488 MB jump...its not even comparable lol

It seems like your having a reading comprehnion problem.

Also... multiplications on a smaller level actually generally lead to more of a performance boost per amount added so...

And seems like you have a spelling problem. See, cheapshots won't get us anywhere 

This amount of RAM has never been added to a successor console before and that's a FACT

NES to SNES seems like a big jump only because of how laughable NES hardware was, even for it's own time. It's not much of an achievement to make a big jump from that 

Yeah exactly the case. NES hardware was extremely laughable even back then. Nintendo has always delivered a sub-par gaming experience, whereas Sony has redefined gaming time and time again. Also- ram and tech specs are DIRECTLY connected to the quality of the games and gameplay. Better specs = better games. That's just a simple fact. Sony will wow us again, just like cell technology crushed the 360's shitty hardware.

Depends on how you define sub-par gaming experience. If you're talking about specs, both N64 and GameCube were more powerful than their Playstation competitors. If you're talking about other stuff, i wouldn't really call NES a sub-par gaming experience, it was by far the only console worth owning in it's era. And i disagree with you on Better specs = better games. PS2 had the worst specs last gen, but few can deny it had by far the best library of games