PS4 should not be so powerful next gen?

[rocketpig]

greenmedic88 said:

rocketpig said:

greenmedic88 said:

While a soft update can't create more physical memory, it can allow more physical memory to be available to developers for game engines by reducing the overhead of the operating system itself.

Most are aware this is the reason why a game that requires 2 GB minimum of RAM on a PC can still run on console with only 512MB RAM. Over time, those firmware updates can (already have) reduce the amount of physical memory required for the OS, effectively freeing up more RAM to be available for the games themselves.

Not as nearly as beneficial (or easy) as adding a couple RAM modules to a PC, but with consoles, firmware updates can provide limited future scalability in addressing memory constraints.

It rarely works that way, though. If anything, firmwares almost always bloat over time, not shrink.

In any case, there won't be enough of a difference to make it even worth mentioning.

 

It actually has been working that way with the PS3 since launch. You should do a little research if you're skeptical; it's pretty common knowledge.

Whether it makes a difference is an issue left to developers, but when memory resources are limited as they are with consoles, every MB makes a difference. Every developer will agree more available memory is always beneficial. A few extra MB of memory would allow for an in game screen shot capability. 8MB allows a PSP to be used as a second monitor. Or they could just use the memory for typical game resources; engine or whatever. Developer's choice. It makes quite a difference.

It is PC development that typically allows for bloated memory resource usage, both with the OS and game software. While the scalable architecture allows for the user to shut off features to minimize OS memory usage, the hardware scalability of simply adding more memory is the natural choice for anyone not working with a limited budget. Consoles don't have that option, so streamlined firmware updates remain the only solution.

Interestingly enough, the 360, with its architecture that has more in common with desk top PCs is considerably more efficient when it comes to OS memory usage: only 32MB. It's why features like in-game soundtracks and in-game text/communication were standard available features from the beginning.

http://www.innerbits.com/blog/2007/05/09/ps3-memory-footprint/

http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2007/05/14/new-playstation-3-sdk-released-os-memory-footprint-lessened/

Recently we were given the opportunity to ask Naughty Dog, the creators of Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune, some interview questions. Here are the results.

Questions 3 and 4 answered by Pal Engstad, Lead Rendering Programmer. The others were answered by Evan Wells, the Co President of Naughty Dog

Q4: With streaming technologies and the included HDD in every PS3, how important is actual memory? I ask because the PS3’s OS takes up so much more of the available 512MB than the 360’s OS does.

A4: Main memory is a cache, but remember that a larger cache enables us to keep more data in memory at the same time, enabling more detail in textures. Therefore, every MB saved improves the quality of our game. We’ve solved most of our memory problems by relying on the SPEs to perform compression, both at load-time and at run-time, using techniques developed by ICE, SCEA Tools&Tech and the SCEE ATG group. So yes, memory footprint is very important to us.

Interesting information. Thanks for the links. I didn't realize that Sony had streamlined the OS.