By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - PlayStation 4 Developers Have Access to 7 GB RAM (Rumor)

SvennoJ said:
dahuman said:
SvennoJ said:
ethomaz said:
RenCutypoison said:
It was said earlier that the BD driver would be faster than the HDD. Won't it be a problem ? I mean, on ps3 bluray games could put data on HDD, but the games on the HDD will be solwer on ps4 if that's the case. So won't psn games be slower ?

That was my mistake... the HDD is at least twice fast than BD driver.

And more. It's a 6x CAV drive which is better for seek times but read times are 2.4x slower when reading the inside of the disc.

6x CAV ps4 = 216 mbps / 27 MBs at the outer edge to 90 mbps / 11.25 MBs at the inner edge
2x CLV ps3 = 72 mbps / 9 MBs anywhere on the disk, seek times are much worse as the rotational speed has to change.

Don't worry too much about a loud drive, it doesn't spin that much faster then the ps3 drive at full speed (~4900 rpm vs ~3900 rpm). However it will always spin at that speed.

HDD install will be even more essential next gen to feed all that ram efficiently. The blu-ray drive will be better able to help this time with the lower seek times and the much faster outer track. 1st party games will benefit by using both hdd and optical drive. Use 1 layer for a fast initial install at 27MBs, use the other layer for fast data access while playing, and use the slower parts of the disc for fmv and background loading.
The question is whether 3rd party devs are going to bother since the next xbox is rumored to always do a full hdd install. Why optimize for disk plus hdd use if it's easier to have 1 version for both disc and digital distribution?

The 6x CAV kinda puts my hopes down for a 4K disc format to run on ps4. 90 mbps is not fast enough for disc quality 4K. Maybe in a couple years a ps4 slim will feature a 12x CAV drive for 4K disc playback. (max speed is about 10,000 rpm) (And it will need to be able to read 8 layer 200 GB discs ofcourse...)


You know, that actually brings up an interesting question, I wonder what kind of drive is in the Wii U, we know it's basically 5x Blu Ray but they never said if it was CLV or CAV. Anyways, you are right about noise not being an issue since the Wii U is never loud at 5X.

It's probably 5x CAV, a 5x CLV drive goes up to 10k rpm.
5x blu-ray is a weird statemant anyway as blu-ray needs a 1.5x CLV drive to sustain 54mbps. a 7.5x CLV drive doesn't even exist yet.

Playing lego city undercover certainly shows the need for HDD installs next gen, damn those loading times and that's only 1gb of ram with a drive that's at least very close in speed to what the ps4 will have.

It’s not the capacity of the discs we’re interested in, though. It’s the read speed – quoted at 22.5MB/s. This is fast enough to ensure we’re not hobbled with slow, mandatory installs that ruin Nintendo’s ethos of ‘immediate gaming.

22.5 MB/s yeah probably 5x CAV drive, so actually between 22.5 MB/s outer edge to 9.3 MB/s inner edge.

Yeah that sounds about right, definitely not going to beat HDDs for now by far, I can also see Disc drives becoming less relevant as we move more into the DD space. I might just go DD only on Wii U and stop buying physical copies altogether for future purchases since USB2 HDD is still faster anyways(Already did for Monster Hunter and Need for Speed.) Will also do the same for PS4 if I ever buy one.



Around the Network
walsufnir said:
theprof00 said:
SxyxS said:
6gb should be enough /2gb for the system

more important is a smart loading management and streaming.
loading 7gb would need more than 5 minutes:
once fully loaded the advantage should be:no more loading times while entering buildings like in lego city

Likely 7GB will completely eliminate load times. With so much RAM available, 3GB can be used for the current area, and the rest dedicated to storing nearby area information...ie, loading while playing

This would also mean that PS4 is very loud as the drive would constantly stream data to RAM and given that even 6x reading speed is quite slow I believe it makes more sense to "install" games to hdd.

We'll see what Sony will exactly do.


Why would that be loud?  The disc drive in my PS3 is always quiet, and I can never ever hear an HDD...



Captain_Tom said:
walsufnir said:
theprof00 said:
SxyxS said:
6gb should be enough /2gb for the system

more important is a smart loading management and streaming.
loading 7gb would need more than 5 minutes:
once fully loaded the advantage should be:no more loading times while entering buildings like in lego city

Likely 7GB will completely eliminate load times. With so much RAM available, 3GB can be used for the current area, and the rest dedicated to storing nearby area information...ie, loading while playing

This would also mean that PS4 is very loud as the drive would constantly stream data to RAM and given that even 6x reading speed is quite slow I believe it makes more sense to "install" games to hdd.

We'll see what Sony will exactly do.


Why would that be loud?  The disc drive in my PS3 is always quiet, and I can never ever hear an HDD...

Because feeding the ram would make a constant streaming of a lot of data necessary and this will of course be louder than now - the drive will spin faster and if it really streams data directly to ram all the time it will also produce more heat.

I still doubt this scenario, nextgen will use hdds more than an odd.



walsufnir said:
Captain_Tom said:
walsufnir said:
theprof00 said:
SxyxS said:
6gb should be enough /2gb for the system

more important is a smart loading management and streaming.
loading 7gb would need more than 5 minutes:
once fully loaded the advantage should be:no more loading times while entering buildings like in lego city

Likely 7GB will completely eliminate load times. With so much RAM available, 3GB can be used for the current area, and the rest dedicated to storing nearby area information...ie, loading while playing

This would also mean that PS4 is very loud as the drive would constantly stream data to RAM and given that even 6x reading speed is quite slow I believe it makes more sense to "install" games to hdd.

We'll see what Sony will exactly do.


Why would that be loud?  The disc drive in my PS3 is always quiet, and I can never ever hear an HDD...

Because feeding the ram would make a constant streaming of a lot of data necessary and this will of course be louder than now - the drive will spin faster and if it really streams data directly to ram all the time it will also produce more heat.

I still doubt this scenario, nextgen will use hdds more than an odd.

It depends on the drive. The 12x DVD drive in the 360 spins at constant ~ 7500 rpm.
The 5x Wii U drive spins at constant ~ 4100 rpm. (no install, 1 minute load times in lego city undercover)
The 360 drive spins less then twice as fast, Wii U is silent, 360 sounds like a vacuum cleaner.

Loudness is not a problem, read and access speed is. Hopefully next gen comes with faster HDDs. 5400 rpm again will suck.



SvennoJ said:
walsufnir said:
Captain_Tom said:
walsufnir said:
theprof00 said:
SxyxS said:
6gb should be enough /2gb for the system

more important is a smart loading management and streaming.
loading 7gb would need more than 5 minutes:
once fully loaded the advantage should be:no more loading times while entering buildings like in lego city

Likely 7GB will completely eliminate load times. With so much RAM available, 3GB can be used for the current area, and the rest dedicated to storing nearby area information...ie, loading while playing

This would also mean that PS4 is very loud as the drive would constantly stream data to RAM and given that even 6x reading speed is quite slow I believe it makes more sense to "install" games to hdd.

We'll see what Sony will exactly do.


Why would that be loud?  The disc drive in my PS3 is always quiet, and I can never ever hear an HDD...

Because feeding the ram would make a constant streaming of a lot of data necessary and this will of course be louder than now - the drive will spin faster and if it really streams data directly to ram all the time it will also produce more heat.

I still doubt this scenario, nextgen will use hdds more than an odd.

It depends on the drive. The 12x DVD drive in the 360 spins at constant ~ 7500 rpm.
The 5x Wii U drive spins at constant ~ 4100 rpm. (no install, 1 minute load times in lego city undercover)
The 360 drive spins less then twice as fast, Wii U is silent, 360 sounds like a vacuum cleaner.

Loudness is not a problem, read and access speed is. Hopefully next gen comes with faster HDDs. 5400 rpm again will suck.

Thing is my drive (360) only exists for installs and initial "disc in tray"-check so... But rotating speed is only one factor - vibrations can also be loud is the design of the whole console is bad. Btw, the 360s is not really loud, I think. But that's not the point.

Of course access speed is crucial and read speed also and this is exactly why I think both consoles will use the ODD just to deliver the game, not to play games off it.  ODDs easily break when used too often and too much, they are the slowest part of systems right now and overall outdated (to me, at least).

I don't see the bluray-drive in ps4 streaming directly to ram, this would be a very bad idea.



Around the Network
fillet said:

All well and good but have you actually tried this in theory.

Go and compare system performance with 1GB and 2GB in Windows 7, it's clear that 1GB isn't enough even for basic web browsing with the OS stripped to the bones of any service except ones that are critical to the OS running.

Only the other day I spent £20 on 2 x 1GB SODIMMs for my parents laptop and they only use it for web browsing and - nothing - else. They noticed a massive difference, when a system is caching to disk just browsing the web, the OS doesn't have enough RAM.

1GB - no chance that will run on Windows 7 without extreme aggrevation.

 

I agree, and a big part of the reason for me posting about the 8GB of RAM making graphics better. No chance when that 8GB RAM is being bolted onto an AMD 7850 hybrid.


Nah. 1Gb is enough, you do need a fast storage medium though and a light virus scanner. (Like nod32, written in machine code, uses bugger all ram.)
My grandmother has 1gb of ram in her Desktop, running Windows 7 and it's more than enough for simple photo editing and printing, word processing and emails and some light web browsing.
However, your parents also have a laptop, 99% of the time they have a slow 4200/5400rpm hard drive, rather than the 7200rpm drives that are common place on Desktops, it's also why most of the time systems feel slow.

Mechanical Hard Drives should be banned as primary storage devices in PC's, period.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Pemalite said:
fillet said:

All well and good but have you actually tried this in theory.

Go and compare system performance with 1GB and 2GB in Windows 7, it's clear that 1GB isn't enough even for basic web browsing with the OS stripped to the bones of any service except ones that are critical to the OS running.

Only the other day I spent £20 on 2 x 1GB SODIMMs for my parents laptop and they only use it for web browsing and - nothing - else. They noticed a massive difference, when a system is caching to disk just browsing the web, the OS doesn't have enough RAM.

1GB - no chance that will run on Windows 7 without extreme aggrevation.

 

I agree, and a big part of the reason for me posting about the 8GB of RAM making graphics better. No chance when that 8GB RAM is being bolted onto an AMD 7850 hybrid.


Nah. 1Gb is enough, you do need a fast storage medium though and a light virus scanner. (Like nod32, written in machine code, uses bugger all ram.)
My grandmother has 1gb of ram in her Desktop, running Windows 7 and it's more than enough for simple photo editing and printing, word processing and emails and some light web browsing.
However, your parents also have a laptop, 99% of the time they have a slow 4200/5400rpm hard drive, rather than the 7200rpm drives that are common place on Desktops, it's also why most of the time systems feel slow.

Mechanical Hard Drives should be banned as primary storage devices in PC's, period.

Good for backups man :P HDDs technically last longer and data can be recovered much easier lol. I wouldn't use SSDs for my server other than the main drive for faster boot in case of failure which is backed up to one of the HDDs too.



walsufnir said:
SvennoJ said:

It depends on the drive. The 12x DVD drive in the 360 spins at constant ~ 7500 rpm.
The 5x Wii U drive spins at constant ~ 4100 rpm. (no install, 1 minute load times in lego city undercover)
The 360 drive spins less then twice as fast, Wii U is silent, 360 sounds like a vacuum cleaner.

Loudness is not a problem, read and access speed is. Hopefully next gen comes with faster HDDs. 5400 rpm again will suck.

Thing is my drive (360) only exists for installs and initial "disc in tray"-check so... But rotating speed is only one factor - vibrations can also be loud is the design of the whole console is bad. Btw, the 360s is not really loud, I think. But that's not the point.

Of course access speed is crucial and read speed also and this is exactly why I think both consoles will use the ODD just to deliver the game, not to play games off it.  ODDs easily break when used too often and too much, they are the slowest part of systems right now and overall outdated (to me, at least).

I don't see the bluray-drive in ps4 streaming directly to ram, this would be a very bad idea.

Over the years I have had way more HDDs fail then cd/dvd drives. I watch tons of movies on ps3 and plenty of games use the drive (it's used every day) and I haven't had any problems with the drive.

The ps4 is getting a cav drive, meaning less wear and tear as it doesn't have to change speed all the time when reading different parts of the disc. The 27 MBs though put at the outer edge will be a good help next to a HDD install. Plus it's pretty pointless to put cut scenes on the hdd, waste of space. All bits help, for example for racing games read the track data in one big chunk from blu-ray, while at the same time read the car data and other random access bits of the hdd.

The 360 did have some bad drives at the start. I still have a 20gb phat relic, one of the first ones with HDMI. That dvd drive is bad. I would never want to watch a dvd on that thing. (My HD-DVD drive is silent though, plays dvds too)



SvennoJ said:



The 360 did have some bad drives at the start. I still have a 20gb phat relic, one of the first ones with HDMI. That dvd drive is bad. I would never want to watch a dvd on that thing. (My HD-DVD drive is silent though, plays dvds too)


Early on, Microsoft had a "special" where they sold refurbished 20Gb drives for $20, so going by that, they must have had high failure rates on the 20Gb hard drives, ended up buying one for my Xbox 360 Core machine which is incredibly old now, but works fine.

As for playing back video, PC is your friend, let the PC transcode it and send it to the Xbox 360, it's a good way to run Bluray through the Xbox too, plus you get around the noisy optical drive. :)




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

ethomaz said:
enditall727 said:
How much ram did the ps3 need for the OS?

In the beggining 120MB... after the new devkit update in 2010... 50MB.

70MB of additional RAM unlocked for PS3 developers

And yes... games like Uncharted 2 was made with less than 400MB RAM.


Wow.. I seriously advise you to spend less time on forums and more time brushing up on your English. I pray you're not a native speaker.