Quantcast
Is next gen console's extra RAM going to primarily used to upgrade graphics?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Is next gen console's extra RAM going to primarily used to upgrade graphics?

Michelasso said:

Also the PS4 GPU is more like the 7970M (M as mobile) than the 7850. For the simple reason that it is energy saving. Not that this simple fact would change much about the RAM management, true. But it is also true that we have no frigging clue of what's really inside that chip. We just know that the memory bandwidth is higher than both 7850's and 7970M's. There could be, and most likely there is, the typical "secret sauce" we find in consoles.


Actually, it doesn't have more bandwidth dedicated to graphics than the 7850, remember, it uses a unified memory architecture, everything from the CPU, Hard Drive, Optical Drive, I/O stuff all share a chunk of that bandwidth, if you tax the entire system to 100% with allot of bus transfers, the bandwidth available to graphics will tank, the PS3 doesn't have EDRAM to make up for that hit.
That is the main problem with unified memory over split memory architectures that are found in the PC and to a lesser extent the PS3.

Teraflops wise, it's almost the same as a desktop Radeon 7850, a mid-range card, not a high-end one.

Michelasso said:

Still, after the debacle of the PS3 splitted RAM architecture to have 8GB of unified video RAM is a huge step forward. Even Skyrim at the 6th or 7th patch fixing the memory leaks could run just fine in the PS3 (I played it personally. Not even a freeze and the frame drops disappeared) , issues like that will never happen again. And more video RAM can be useful to pre-render and store some parts of the environment, while the GPU is not very busy. Sure, it must be optimized. That's why Naughty Dog games will look greater than ever while the multiplatform one, especially the ones ported from PC, will most likely run at a lower fps.


Skyrim was Bethesda's own fault, Skyrims game engine is essentially an upgraded Gamebryo engine which is the same engine found in Oblivion, hell, even allot of the shader code in Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Skyrim is the same, it's a horrible engine, with some benefits like amazing modding capability.
Remember Oblivion performs fairly horribly on the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 too, with lots of item pop-in, freezes and framerate issues, so it's not like they didn't have any experience in trying to get this game engine running on consoles.
It's just Bethesda has bad testers, period.

Michelasso said:

This is only academic anyway. The truth is that there are plenty of (PC) games that do not need to fully use the top GPUs. I can see big issue only with games like Crysis 4, unless they improve their stupid engine. After that, having for example Lara Croft with or without dynamic hair won't change my life nor may gaming leisure at all.

 

Actually, that's not entirely accurate.
It's pretty well known any high-end card made in the last 4-5 years on the PC can max pretty much max any console port at a 720P resolution that most console games run at anyway, with relative ease.

PC's do need to use 2-4 of the fastest GPU's on the market in tandem, not at 720P or 1080P, but at 8-10x higher in resolution, that's what the extra performance has allowed the PC gaming master race to achieve.
And let me tell you, until you game with Eyefinity/Surround Vision with that kind of resolution... You haven't really "gamed". :)
Heck, 5760x1080 is a massive step up to, the immersion can be incredible in some game titles.



Around the Network
Machiavellian said:
platformmaster918 said:
Machiavellian said:
One thing I can see more ram helping is creating a ram disk. Since the expected behavior for Sony and MS next gen console is to always be on. Developers can keep the state of the games in memory and it only takes secs for you to get back to your place in your game. Depending on how much memory is reserved for this state, you could have a few games in this state and easily move between one or the other with little fuss.

I believe Sony and MS will do this with whatever other functions they support like true multi tasking. Switching between open apps like Nextflix, Hulu and other streamers

Maybe what separate Sony and MS is how much will be reserved for other functions and how much will be available for games.

So basically exactly what Sony said it would do in their press conference?  I believe their exact words were "the play session is stored in RAM" when they were talking about instantaneously turning it back on.

Exactly.  MS is rumored to reserve 3GB for the OS which is a lot.  The last rumor concerning the PS4 was 1GB which is pretty small with 8GB system.  I believe both systems will be somewhere in the middle

Which is really nice since I play in between classes on weekdays and it really is longer than you think between booting up the system, booting up the game, loading your game, and waiting for the world to load.  Also I don't want to leave my PS4 on in an apartment that will probably be pretty hot once spring rolls around (generally wouldn't want to leave it on long with a launch system because even the 10% YLOD had me worried let alone 50% RROD)




Get Your Portable ID!Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

Can developers afford to utilize all the extra ram? Is the progress of console hardware outpacing the feasible potential of developers and possibly resulting in leaving a lot of untapped horsepower? It seems there have been a boatload of stories of developers downsizing in recent years because of failures to reach target sales. Target sales that may just not be sustained by the market because of the outrageous cost to produce these games requires several millions of units need to be sold to turn profit.



People that say AI will advance a lot are full of shit. Civilization can't even improve on its AI which shouldn't be that hard for a turn based strategy game. I hope they improve physics because the Crysis 1 video that shows a turtle walking on two legs makes it look like shit.



Billjw said:
Can developers afford to utilize all the extra ram? Is the progress of console hardware outpacing the feasible potential of developers and possibly resulting in leaving a lot of untapped horsepower? It seems there have been a boatload of stories of developers downsizing in recent years because of failures to reach target sales. Target sales that may just not be sustained by the market because of the outrageous cost to produce these games requires several millions of units need to be sold to turn profit.


Ram is easy to waste and use. However, just remember Ram itself doesn't do any type of processing.
Think of it as a super ultra fast flash drive that holds information that the CPU, GPU and other I/O stuff grab when they need it.

The thing with this current Generation though is comparatively, the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 had relatively high-end graphics processors compared to what was available on the PC at the time.
This time around they're running with only a Radeon 7850, which is mid-range stuff. - Better than the Radeon 6670/7670 rumours that flew around at one stage that I was dreading, but I would have loved for them to have dropped something even faster into the box.

As for the CPU that's going into the PS4, it's a slow heap of crap. - Something I would use in a HTPC under my television or in a Tablet or a Netbook.
Then again the Xbox 360's CPU and the Playstation 3's CPU aren't exactly speed demons either and there are simple reasons for that, one is power budgets, second is cost which is also in direct relation to the fabrication process and transister counts.

Just remember that whenever Sony or Microsoft or Nintendo "claim" something in regards to what their consoles can do, take it with a pinch of salt, they're advertising to get you to buy the machines, they're not super computers or even equivalent to a high-end PC.
Heck most developers will probably abuse the Unreal Engine anyway again, rather than push image quality.



Around the Network
JazzB1987 said:

In the beginning it will be used for the "being lazy" again.

I mean with current consoles devs were forced to optimize the hell out of their code etc to make the games run etc... with Sony's 8gb of ram they can finally throw unoptimized "mess code" at the console.

I am pretty sure we will have games alot of inefficient games in the beginning and in a few years we will finally have games that make use of the 8gb of ram (well 7gb for games)

The games we will see in the first 2 years might work with 1-2gb of ram but because they are unoptimized they will use need alot more.

Devs might do this because a) its a new generation and programming is a bit harder than with consoles you had 7 years with. 2) it saves alot of money and because 1GB of ram is still 4x or even 8x the ram of ps360(depending on how you look at the PS3's ram) and its faster anyways we will still see a difference in graphics so there is no need right now to "use" all the Ram.

P.S. the "lazy" thing is also the reason why you read that devs love the huge amount of ram.

Exactly what award one wins for not being "lazy"?  Is there some sort of golden cookie they give out?  There is a reality of tight deadlines and need to get things out to the market inside tight windows.  In light of this, why wouldn't  there be said "laziness"?  And I find it interesting that "lazy" is thrown around a bunch by people who don't work in the industry and don't kow what is involved.



richardhutnik said:
JazzB1987 said:

In the beginning it will be used for the "being lazy" again.

I mean with current consoles devs were forced to optimize the hell out of their code etc to make the games run etc... with Sony's 8gb of ram they can finally throw unoptimized "mess code" at the console.

I am pretty sure we will have games alot of inefficient games in the beginning and in a few years we will finally have games that make use of the 8gb of ram (well 7gb for games)

The games we will see in the first 2 years might work with 1-2gb of ram but because they are unoptimized they will use need alot more.

Devs might do this because a) its a new generation and programming is a bit harder than with consoles you had 7 years with. 2) it saves alot of money and because 1GB of ram is still 4x or even 8x the ram of ps360(depending on how you look at the PS3's ram) and its faster anyways we will still see a difference in graphics so there is no need right now to "use" all the Ram.

P.S. the "lazy" thing is also the reason why you read that devs love the huge amount of ram.

Exactly what award one wins for not being "lazy"?  Is there some sort of golden cookie they give out?  There is a reality of tight deadlines and need to get things out to the market inside tight windows.  In light of this, why wouldn't  there be said "laziness"?  And I find it interesting that "lazy" is thrown around a bunch by people who don't work in the industry and don't kow what is involved.

How about replacing the word lazy with easy money grab or putting your B team to work on a console or not investing that much money or setting that much time to develop a game for a console (Madden Wii U developed in less than 6 months) or how about copy and paste a leading game in a genre or how about setting unrealistic goals for a title that would not sell that much then pulling any future support or how about the video game industry is just one giant pile of immature shit most of the times.



Billjw said:
Can developers afford to utilize all the extra ram? Is the progress of console hardware outpacing the feasible potential of developers and possibly resulting in leaving a lot of untapped horsepower? It seems there have been a boatload of stories of developers downsizing in recent years because of failures to reach target sales. Target sales that may just not be sustained by the market because of the outrageous cost to produce these games requires several millions of units need to be sold to turn profit.

Next-gen consoles will be much eaiser to develop for. This will make multiplatform development cheaper and even lead to more games being put on PC/Steam.



Pemalite said:
Billjw said:
Can developers afford to utilize all the extra ram? Is the progress of console hardware outpacing the feasible potential of developers and possibly resulting in leaving a lot of untapped horsepower? It seems there have been a boatload of stories of developers downsizing in recent years because of failures to reach target sales. Target sales that may just not be sustained by the market because of the outrageous cost to produce these games requires several millions of units need to be sold to turn profit.


Ram is easy to waste and use. However, just remember Ram itself doesn't do any type of processing.
Think of it as a super ultra fast flash drive that holds information that the CPU, GPU and other I/O stuff grab when they need it.

The thing with this current Generation though is comparatively, the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 had relatively high-end graphics processors compared to what was available on the PC at the time.
This time around they're running with only a Radeon 7850, which is mid-range stuff. - Better than the Radeon 6670/7670 rumours that flew around at one stage that I was dreading, but I would have loved for them to have dropped something even faster into the box.

As for the CPU that's going into the PS4, it's a slow heap of crap. - Something I would use in a HTPC under my television or in a Tablet or a Netbook.
Then again the Xbox 360's CPU and the Playstation 3's CPU aren't exactly speed demons either and there are simple reasons for that, one is power budgets, second is cost which is also in direct relation to the fabrication process and transister counts.

Just remember that whenever Sony or Microsoft or Nintendo "claim" something in regards to what their consoles can do, take it with a pinch of salt, they're advertising to get you to buy the machines, they're not super computers or even equivalent to a high-end PC.
Heck most developers will probably abuse the Unreal Engine anyway again, rather than push image quality.

Thanks for posting this. I stayed out of this thread because I didn't want to tell people *again* that they don't know what RAM actually is for but I totally agree with you :)

Again, in short, RAM is to reduce computing units io-wait. Simple as that. All can be inferred to such a simple statement.



sethnintendo said:
richardhutnik said:
JazzB1987 said:

In the beginning it will be used for the "being lazy" again.

I mean with current consoles devs were forced to optimize the hell out of their code etc to make the games run etc... with Sony's 8gb of ram they can finally throw unoptimized "mess code" at the console.

I am pretty sure we will have games alot of inefficient games in the beginning and in a few years we will finally have games that make use of the 8gb of ram (well 7gb for games)

The games we will see in the first 2 years might work with 1-2gb of ram but because they are unoptimized they will use need alot more.

Devs might do this because a) its a new generation and programming is a bit harder than with consoles you had 7 years with. 2) it saves alot of money and because 1GB of ram is still 4x or even 8x the ram of ps360(depending on how you look at the PS3's ram) and its faster anyways we will still see a difference in graphics so there is no need right now to "use" all the Ram.

P.S. the "lazy" thing is also the reason why you read that devs love the huge amount of ram.

Exactly what award one wins for not being "lazy"?  Is there some sort of golden cookie they give out?  There is a reality of tight deadlines and need to get things out to the market inside tight windows.  In light of this, why wouldn't  there be said "laziness"?  And I find it interesting that "lazy" is thrown around a bunch by people who don't work in the industry and don't kow what is involved.

How about replacing the word lazy with easy money grab or putting your B team to work on a console or not investing that much money or setting that much time to develop a game for a console (Madden Wii U developed in less than 6 months) or how about copy and paste a leading game in a genre or how about setting unrealistic goals for a title that would not sell that much then pulling any future support or how about the video game industry is just one giant pile of immature shit most of the times.

You mean everything that is not a AAA flagship title?  That is the norm, and what you describe I would agree with, but fit it under greed far more than laziness.  What is really not lazy is writing in assembler and max optimizing things, which is not able to be afforded these days, because it really doesn't make for much of a difference.

The reality is there aren't many Bioshock Infinites out there at all.  Rest is what suits think will sell, and then get it to market as quickly as possible, hoping it doesn't crash and burn.

Gross incompetency and sheer stupidity is what you lay at the feet of management.  Laziness is what you fault coders for.  But people don't pay for coders to not be lazy.