curl-6 said:
fillet said:
curl-6 said:
fillet said:
curl-6 said:
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 1 & 3, Black Ops, and World at War ran on the Wii despite the Wii having 88MB of RAM to the PS3/360's 512MB. |
That's wrong, the PS3 had 256MB available total and about 200MB available for games.
Porting from 200MB to 88MB is nothing compared to going from 7GB to 1GB.
Games using 5GB (if they ever come out and deducting about 2GB for video use) will have to have integral features removed and watered down beyond belief and likely not even recognizable from the original.
You have to think that games using 200MB aren't going to be doing anything amazing on the memory level Vs massive open world type games that 5GB would be needed for, those games wouldn't even be possible in any context, watered down or not on a system with 1GB of RAM.
|
No, the PS3 had 512MB of RAM, it was just split into two 256MB pools, (video and system) with initially 120MB set aside for the OS, which was later shrunk to 50MB.
And don't underestimate thow much memory can be saved by trimming draw distance and texture resolution.
|
Those pools are separate though with the memory used for the OS coming from the system RAM pool.
So point stands that PS3 has circa 200MB to play with for system RAM against the Wii's 88MB.
That's the reason for Bethesday having so many problems with the PS3 because they ported from the Xbox/PC
|
200MB for system RAM, but another 256MB for video.
|
Of course, but that video RAM can't be used as system RAM. You can only compare available system RAM when talking about available RAM. Same with a PC. You can have a Geforce TITAN with 6GB of video RAM but if you only have 2GB of system RAM for latest PC games on high then you will have major caching to disk.
Basically, video RAM doesn't make up for system RAM and vice versa (technically it can work the other way but the bus connecting the 2 is too slow to make this a realistic proposition). Obviously on the Xbox 360 it's shared so no problem there and same with PS4.
Essay Pro