Intrinsic said:
I've been thinking about this.... say an 8Gb (2GB) module of GDDR6 Ram in 2020 costs around $9 (GDDR5 costs around $6.50 for 1GB right now). They would need $72 for 16GB of GDDR6 Ram. And the cost of 4GB of GDDR6 ram would be around $18. Now the question, would it be better (cheaper and less complicated) to just pay the $18 for the extra Ram so they end up with 20GB of GGDDR6 (which also has the benefit of allowing them also hit a higher peak memory bandwidth) or is opting for 16GB GDDR6 and 4GB of a separate type of Ram just for the OS the better option? I'm beginning to think the former is the way to go. |
It might even be cheaper to have more memory/chips so you can use a narrower bus, simpler memory controller and power delivery.
Can't just look at the individual chip prices and come to a conclusion sadly.
Errorist76 said:
Sony would never alienate their early buyers like that. |
Except they have before with the Playstation 4 Pro.
Microsoft and Sony are for-profit businesses, they don't actually give a crap about the individual consumer... And that is fine as long as business interests align with our own.. And absolute bullshit when they don't. (Playstation 3, Xbox One.)
| Trumpstyle said: Why original ps4 uses 256mb ddr3 I don't know but probably of similiar problem. |
It is exactly the same reason.
"OS and background tasks". - The Pro probably used the extra DDR3 DRAM for a higher resolution UI... Which the Xbox One X doesn't do. And maybe offloaded a few more processes.
There are Pro's and Con's to each approach.
| Trumpstyle said: I dont expect sony to go with the fastest gddr6 memory speed because of cost and power consumption. On original ps4 they didn't either go for the fastest gddr5. |
The Playstation 4 used equivalent mid-range GDDR5 clocks/bus size and thus bandwidth for the time.
Of course AMD, nVidia and DRAM specs improved over time allowing for GDDR5 to be pushed harder, that's called progress.
But if you think that 176 GB/s was trivial for the time the console released... You are greatly mistaken.
For comparative sake the Radeon 7970, AMD's fastest GPU at that time had a 288GB/s worth of bandwidth, but that was on a memory bus 50% wider and a GPU significantly more expensive than what could be in a console at the time.
| EricHiggin said: A single large pool makes a lot of sense, but with Pro they decided to add a separate GB of DDR3, which doesn't really seem like enough to begin with, and strays from the PS4 single pool of RAM, so I dunno which way they will go. XB1X took full advantage of the RAM pool, but it also came at a price. |
The base Playstation 4 also had a chunk of separate DDR3. So it had split memory pools.
I always feel people neglect mentioning that.
| Intrinsic said: I guess no matter how fast ssd prices fall its still cheaper to just dolder the nand flash chips on the board regardless. On the plus side they could tailor the speed of such a set up. And technically having the console ship with 1TB of nand flash but no HDD is still an all inclusive package. Some would even-argue that its cleaner. |
The issue with NAND is you can't just drop a single chip on the board and call it a day... You need multiple memory chips to speed up memory transactions by taking advantage of parallelism.
| KBG29 said: If they left an open M.2 NVMe slot inside similar to the PS2's HDD bay, that would be the ultimate to me. |
| EricHiggin said: PS4 having 8GB of RAM makes sense if you take into account that 8GB is the max you get with AMD consumer grade graphics cards today/mid gen. |
Maybe the PS4 could start using all that 8GB of Ram for graphics then. Oh wait...
| Aura7541 said: Apparently, Cerny got awarded a patent on backwards compatibility testing less than 2 weeks ago. Not sure if it's related to the PS5, but I thought it was worth sharing here. |
Very interesting. Could be PS4 or PS5 related though.
Is Sony looking into Backwards compatibility thanks to Microsoft's successes in this area? Wait and find out more at 5.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
