bucky1965 said:
BinaryDelt said:
tuscaniman99 said:
Why do people who have absolutely no knowledge about tech keep bringing up GDDR5 vs GDDR3 like its something huge. You are just repeating what you have heard and read. Crysis 3 on PC only requires 4gb of GDDR3 ram and of course a DX11 compatible GPU. Considering it looks better than anything on these next gen consoles at the moment I'm pretty sure Xbox One will be fine with 8 GB of GDDR3. Ryse was the best looking exclusive at E3 imo (graphics wise) for either console. Also XBox Live will be miles better than last gen. Every game running on dedicated servers already makes it worthwhile. Can you say that every game will run on dedicated servers on PSN? |
My degree was in computer science and I've worked in IT for 10 years. I could care less about a tech pissing contest, that's just to give myself some credibility. This thread doesn't need to be highjacked with a back and forth about tech specifics nobody else may care about, so I'll just throw a broad response. We can peacefully agree to disagree or share some common ground, either is fine with me, but let's not do a back and forth "I know more about tech than you" discussion. That's not productive.
The bandwidth of GDDR5 memory is much higher than DDR3 (176 GB/s versus 68.3 GB/s). Crysis 3 on the PC only requires 4gb of DDR3 RAM because they're not going to build to require specs so high to make it inaccessible to gamers who might not pour thousands into their PCs for gaming--it's still a business. When you have more, more objects can be instantiated in memory. When it's faster, those objects can load faster and be more complex without compromising the performance of the game.
There are too many factors to consider when comparing PC versus console gaming. On a dedicated console, you have a generally minimal OS--though Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo have different approaches here--and a static set of specs to develop for. When putting out that PS4, XBox One, or WiiU game, you know exactly what that person is going to have and can really max it out. First party developers always do this, but for third parties, it's usually which system they'd rather develop for gets the best version, the others get ports. As for which console developers would rather develop for? Developers have already showed support for Sony's approach such as the Super Stardust team:
"These include obvious as the graphics display with higher resolution textures or more sampling and filtering for visual effects - such as volumetric lighting and global illumination in real-time," he said. "Also processor cores and CUs use the same memory - calculation results can thus be easily shared between them. This will make it easier to distribute some demanding calculations from the processor to the CUs."
Source: http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/15259/article/super-stardust-dev-ps4-s-gddr5-is-an-advantage-over-xbox-one/
Or we could ask a developer of Crysis 3 (Tiago Sousa):
"8 GB unified mem as baseline for next tech iterations makes me very, very happy. Fun times coming ^_^"
Source: http://www.examiner.com/article/crysis-3-developer-responds-to-ps4-s-inclusion-of-8-gb-gddr5-ram
I'm not saying it decides the next console generation. I'm saying you can't deny it's faster, and if utilized properly, could make a big difference.
The other big factor will be how much memory each OS requires. Last rumor I heard was 1 GB for PS4's OS and 3 GB for that of XBox One.
|
Do you know that data streaming has not been a major issue for game coders for quite some time?
|
I'm not insinuating that a previous issue existed. I'm implying that more can be done with the extra bandwidth, and if the OS usage rumors are true, the extra available memory.
To be honest, I don't know. None of us do. All I know is one is faster than the other and that can't hurt. If someone finds a way to use that to their advantage, that advantage could be huge.
