Quantcast
PS4 specs aren't final!

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS4 specs aren't final!

ethomaz said:

That's minor changes... the project is already defined... the CPU, GPU, 8GB GDDR is already confirmed and that's will not change.

I can see a minor change in the clock of CPU and GPU... that's easy to put the GPU at 850Mhz and give us 1.96 TFLOPS.

This is exactly what I was thinking.  They will probably wait for MS to annonce their console, and if rumors are correct that they will have the exact same CPU, I could see Sony upping the clock on it to have a slight advantage over the NeXbox.  I could also see them upping the GPU clock to get it closer to 2TFLOPS.  Which would be great for the game visuals, since apparently the games we saw at the meeting were only running on 4GB of RAM (and obviously using currently listed clock speeds.)  Plus, they didn't specify how many USB ports they had or how big the HDD was going to be, so obviously the specs aren't final.  They may also choose to use a 8X or 10x Blu-ray player instead, as these would still be very cheap to include. 



Around the Network

According to a Sony insider, the PS4 will initially ship with only 4GB of RAM to cut costs, but shortly after launch you will be able to download another 4GB of RAM via The Cloud, with even more upgrades possible in the future.



Don't question this rumor... just believe!



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

NightDragon83 said:
According to a Sony insider, the PS4 will initially ship with only 4GB of RAM to cut costs, but shortly after launch you will be able to download another 4GB of RAM via The Cloud, with even more upgrades possible in the future.



Don't question this rumor... just believe!





Proclus said:
NightDragon83 said:
According to a Sony insider, the PS4 will initially ship with only 4GB of RAM to cut costs, but shortly after launch you will be able to download another 4GB of RAM via The Cloud, with even more upgrades possible in the future.



Don't question this rumor... just believe!







On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

KBG29 said:

rubido said:
If I was a developer and had 4GB to work with and someone said I now had 8, I would obviously say I like the fact I have more.

If I was a developer and had 8GB to work with and someone said I now had 16, I would obviously say I like the fact I have more.

If I was a developer and had 16GB to work with and someone said I now had 32, I would obviously say I like the fact I have more.

If I was a developer and had 32GB to work with and someone said I now had 64, I would obviously say I like the fact I have more.

The less a developer has to worry about anything makes it better for him. If Sony actually increased those 8 to 16, you probably will not see any developer complaining. But it will be terrible for Sony as the cost will go up and the results developers will get from the extra RAM will hardly be noticeable.

I bought my PC with 8GB of RAM. For a PC, that is currently a sweet spot. If I increase it to 16GB, for the stuff I do on it, I will see no increase in performance or quality of my games. I will get absolutely nothing out of it as I use at most 4GB of RAM. If I paid for more ram, I would get absolutely nothing out of it. Should I buy it then? Of course not.

The real question is if it's better for Sony.

BTW, this is diminishing returns: http://i.imgur.com/ChsSwUE.png

rubido said:

I guess stuff like "It will run linux" and "it will be backwards compatible" comes to mind. But those were not in 2005. What happened in 2005? I'm also curious.

 

Pulling the 8GB to 4GB would not upset the developers so much as they have already been working only with 4GB. I myself thing the 8GB is not even necessary. Don't even think there the developers will be able to use much more than 4GB (they usually don't in PC games even when pushing it to the max).

Reducing it to 4GB would actually be a good move for sony. Only fanboys could actually think otherwise.

Bolded 1

That is because you would still be running the same program. If you run a static program it will hit a point were more power does not make it look or run noticably better. This is not the same as giving devs more RAM. Giving devs more RAM means they can add more to there program. 

More RAM for devs means:

-Added effects
-More animations
-Higher res texture
-More NPC
-More detailed enviornments
-Longer draw distances

There is plenty more that they can do with extra RAM in the development of a game.

Bolded 2

Games are not running on 1.5GB of VRAM because they can go any higher, it is due to PC games being restricted by the mass market spec. Right now games are built for PS3/360 and low end laptops. They are then scaled up from there for things like the GTX 680. With the PS4 and hopefully the XB3 having 8GB of RAM this will give devs a new mass market spec. 

GPUs with 3 and 4GB of RAM are fairly new to the market, and they will start to see that be used very soon. It will not be long before 6, 8, 10, and 12GB cards are on the market. By the end of this gen you will see games running on much more VRAM. 1080P PC games will probably be using 8 - 10GB of RAM, and we will see 4K resolutions pushing 16, and I feel this is a minimum.

Just fixing your post a little:

 

More RAM for devs means:

-Added effects - NO! You would need a faster GPU for that.

-More animations - NO! You would need a faster CPU for that.

-Higher res texture - YES. You can include higher res textures with more RAM.

-More NPC - NO! You would actually need a faster CPU for processing more AI. If they use repeated textures, then extra RAM will not help out at all.

-More detailed enviornments - YES. But only because of what you already mentioned before with the higher res textures.

-Longer draw distances - YES. It helps.



Around the Network
Stinky said:
Chark said:
hivycox said:
LemonSlice said:
They pretty much released a list of all the specs. They're final.


Then why would Tretton come out and say otherwise?? This doesn't make any sense...maybe they are aware that a console with 8 gig GDDR5 would cost too much...look at their stock! They are investors who are afraid of the ps4 to be the ps3 all over again!


These are the kind of people that need to research their investments.


The only thing this rolling spec says to me is that Sony's only engineering goal is to trump the Xbox' spec. This is bad product management and leaving considerations like form-factor, power consumption and heat-load as last-minute considerations. Sony can't afford to finance another overpriced console, nor can they afford a reliability issue. So it's no wonder that investors would be nervous.

This!

To tell you the truth, I'm quite impressed with the ps4 and this it is almost perfect for a next gen machine as long as the price is not too high. Looking at it from Sony's perspective, I would drop the RAM to 4GB though.



Chark said:
hivycox said:
LemonSlice said:
They pretty much released a list of all the specs. They're final.


Then why would Tretton come out and say otherwise?? This doesn't make any sense...maybe they are aware that a console with 8 gig GDDR5 would cost too much...look at their stock! They are investors who are afraid of the ps4 to be the ps3 all over again!


These are the kind of people that need to research their investments.

That's the problem, they are doing their research, and their conclusion is to abandon ship.



Fireforgey said:
Chark said:
hivycox said:
LemonSlice said:
They pretty much released a list of all the specs. They're final.


Then why would Tretton come out and say otherwise?? This doesn't make any sense...maybe they are aware that a console with 8 gig GDDR5 would cost too much...look at their stock! They are investors who are afraid of the ps4 to be the ps3 all over again!


These are the kind of people that need to research their investments.

That's the problem, they are doing their research, and their conclusion is to abandon ship.

My point is the PS4 is anything but the PS3. Jeesh.



Before the PS3 everyone was nice to me :(

Fireforgey said:
Chark said:


These are the kind of people that need to research their investments.

That's the problem, they are doing their research, and their conclusion is to abandon ship.

And I bet in a year or so, they are going to want to jump right back on.  They're just being silly, really.  Nintendo's stock went up by about the same amount that Sony's dropped.  If people think that they are going to be the next gen leader (handhelds excluded), they have another thing coming.  I mean it's toughest competition hasn't even come out, yet the Wii U is already selling like a dying console.



Chark said:
Fireforgey said:
Chark said:
hivycox said:
LemonSlice said:
They pretty much released a list of all the specs. They're final.


Then why would Tretton come out and say otherwise?? This doesn't make any sense...maybe they are aware that a console with 8 gig GDDR5 would cost too much...look at their stock! They are investors who are afraid of the ps4 to be the ps3 all over again!


These are the kind of people that need to research their investments.

That's the problem, they are doing their research, and their conclusion is to abandon ship.

My point is the PS4 is anything but the PS3. Jeesh.


I'm sorry, I tease I tease.