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

Forums - Sony Discussion - My estimated specs of the PlayStation 5

method114 said:
I don't see 4k coming to PS5.

lol, 4k possible on ps4 and people don't see it coming on ps5, this thread makes me sad.



Nintendo 2018

English is not my native language.
Around the Network
mind said:
method114 said:
I don't see 4k coming to PS5.

lol, 4k possible on ps4 and people don't see it coming on ps5, this thread makes me sad.


It is technically possible.
However the Playstation 4 simply doesn't have the Ram, Compute or memory bandwidth to handle demanding video game titles at such a resolution.

Plus, it would be limited to only 30fps thanks to the HDMI port, which as a PC gamer... Scoff at.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

freedquaker said:
Norris2k said:
freedquaker said:

The sentence here actually defeats itself and reflects and major misunderstanding of the OS requirements. Speaking of FreeBSD on PS4 in particular, the OS definitely does NOT need 3 GB RAM to operate. For all we know, it is perfectly fine with about half a gig. Sony originally wanted to go with only 4 GB, reserving 0.5 GB for the OS, and leaving 3.5 GB for the games, remember?

Given that the OS is still the same, then what happened? They were able to increase the RAM to 8 GB, and knowing that most developers & games do not need that amount of memory, they decided to RESERVE some amount of RAM to make the console

a) Future proof with upcoming features

b) They can always release some of the reserved RAM in the future with a software update, but once you release it, it's gone, you can't take it back, in order to add more multi-tasking features etc...

 

So if anything, the 3 GB reserved for the OS proves that games DO NOT NEED 8 GB. This is clear from the PC games today, there isn't a single game that uses more than 4-5 GB! The vast majority of games do not even use more than 2 GB (system), being limited to 32 bit, and only recently are we seeing a trend away from this, with the advent of the next-gen consoles.

In the past, however, this was never the case. The PC had always used more RAM than was available on the consoles. Most PC games in 2006 were already using way more than 256-512 MB RAM, which comes with 360 and PS3. So you clearly see a relative abundance of memory here, which means the next gen will not have this kind of jump. The large reserve for the OS does not mean the OSs are that hungry, on the contrary, it means Sony can afford to reserve that much RAM from the games as they simply don't need as much today.

Mark my words here, and remember how ridiculous your original claims will look by then. Things do not get just scaled up, there is always a technical REASON behind them. With your projections, there is NONE.

Technically speaking, you are mostly right, but you are contradicting yourself.

You finish with "Things do not get just scaled up, there is always a technical REASON behind them. With your projections, there is NONE.".

But you are saying yourself that currently the vast amount of memory on the PS4 has no use. You remove 3 Gb from game and it's not really big deal, most game using 2-4 Gb. You add it on the OS, but you don't really have any use for it. There is no "technical REASON" for currently scaling up the OS memory... just a vague future proof intuition that it could have some use in the future. Most OS are not heavy memory consumer at core. In fact, strictly speaking, even the graphical environment that makes most of the memory footprint is not mandatory for BSD, it's a dispensable feature. So just add an other dispensable feature like a browser in background and you have your OS reserve a lot more memory. Feature could really rise in memory use especially because in a few year the decade old limitation from the 32 bits (and limited console) period will be forgotten.


Valid objections, and time for me to be a bit clearer (and clarify)...

The main reasons why there are two OSes operating at the same time on XB1, for example, are

a) To be able to run regular apps and games at the same time with full multi-tasking, and without each system interfering with the other

b) To be able to write closer to the metal with games, with a stripped down games focused OS.

c) Having the fully fledged OS for apps, but without compromising the games performance.

So basically the XB1 is running two OSes (or somewhat very low level Virtual Machines) at the same time. This is an incredible enterprise! But the big downside is the memory requirements, and disc access.

 

PS4, on the other hand, initially wanted to go with much smaller and less ambitious goal in multi-tasking. The games would run in their own protected and low level environment, while the apps would be handled by the OS separately. On the other hand, the additional RAM brought a lot more possibilities to Sony. I, honestly, don't know much about their implementations at this stage, and I am sure, PS4 would be perfectly fine 5.5-6 GB of memory as of this moment, and the remaining memory seems totally unused (at the moment).However, Sony will undoubtedly utilize this in the future, some of the possibilities are...

a) Additional simultaneous apps, features...

b) VR,

c) PS Now

d) Emulation

e) PS Vita related

f) Release some of this memory back to developers

g) GPGPU related

etc...

I agree with that, lot of features could be added, and that's for technical reason they will use memory. But more generally speaking, and I think you understand that, there is mutual impact between memory evolution and applications evolution. Applications grow bigger, they add more feature that requires more memory, that's the technical reason for more memory... but also adding more memory create new opportunities to create applications and features not even though to date, and does not yet represent a  real technical reason.

There were a shift for example in development when we come to the point that memory quantity was big enough to make micro management not necessary  in most developments (ie outside embedded, OS, and games) and allowed to use  memory heavy consumer language like java. But applications grew so big and wide that we now have in memory database that use immense quantity of memory and some memory expiration management... For just one website I worked on, even ssd was not fast enough for data loading and we had in memory disk... application was Gb of memory with data cache... and we had in memory database for some data. The more you have memory, the less you care using a lot of it, and the more you need, that's the path that could lead to a lot more memory in PS5 , including OS/feature side. Or not, if we really reached a maximum... but I'm yet to see it after 20 years in computing.

I'd like to clarify a little more about OS and features. So far for computers, there is the OS and applications (including games), that shares the same memory. The user is expected to have enough memory or close some applications to free some memory to run the OS and the game he want. He can add memory if it's still no enough. And there is most of the time disk swap to be able to handle more memory than physical memory (trade off is that the computer become very slow). The OS memory is not a memory reserved at start, it's really at realtime what the OS is using, exactly the same way the applications use memory.

So far on console, we have a clear different paradigm. Games have a guaranteed and fixed amount of memory. OS will reserve from start the memory decided and run itself and features inside (using everything or not). So OS memory reservation can be a lot bigger than the OS memory footprint we can measure on computers.



PS5 specs you ask?


GPU? Basically 1 gen behind best PC midrange.


RAM? 24 gb ram if triple channel, 32GB if quad channel.


CPU? 12 core cpu or a equally faster meghtz 8 core, extra cores or mhz used for improved game world physics calculations maybe some quality tesselation and still able to hold a solid 60 fps.


1080p upscaled to 4k (non native/upscaled 1080p) beast machine. The masses won't believe their eyeballs. 4k UHDTVs will be as cheap as todays 1080p's more likely even cheaper.



KBG29 said:
One Quick Question

If 128GB of RAM was possible in 2020 on the PS5, and most games were around 100GB. Would you not want the entire game loaded into RAM to completely eliminate load times?


No. Game data contains a lot of highly compressed data so you would still have loading times.

 

Edit: Take a look at this: http://geidav.wordpress.com/2013/04/14/making-of-turtles-all-the-way-down/

 

64kb demo. And believe me, you need way more ram than 64kb to get it running



Around the Network
walsufnir said:
KBG29 said:
One Quick Question

If 128GB of RAM was possible in 2020 on the PS5, and most games were around 100GB. Would you not want the entire game loaded into RAM to completely eliminate load times?


No. Game data contains a lot of highly compressed data so you would still have loading times.

 

Edit: Take a look at this: http://geidav.wordpress.com/2013/04/14/making-of-turtles-all-the-way-down/

 

64kb demo. And believe me, you need way more ram than 64kb to get it running


Lets not forget either the data has to get from Optical Disc/Hard Drive to Ram, even when streaming from an SSD, filling up 128Gb takes forever.
Chances are mechanical storage will still have a price/capacity advantage, which usually top out at around 140Mb a second on sustained consecutive reads and when you're filling up 131,072Mb of data... Well. You do the math. (Hence why I have SSD's in Raid to take advantage of my 64Gb of Ram.)
Even worse when it comes to randomised reads too, sometimes it can drop to a fraction of it's maximum throughput.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
walsufnir said:
KBG29 said:
One Quick Question

If 128GB of RAM was possible in 2020 on the PS5, and most games were around 100GB. Would you not want the entire game loaded into RAM to completely eliminate load times?


No. Game data contains a lot of highly compressed data so you would still have loading times.

 

Edit: Take a look at this: http://geidav.wordpress.com/2013/04/14/making-of-turtles-all-the-way-down/

 

64kb demo. And believe me, you need way more ram than 64kb to get it running


Lets not forget either the data has to get from Optical Disc/Hard Drive to Ram, even when streaming from an SSD, filling up 128Gb takes forever.
Chances are mechanical storage will still have a price/capacity advantage, which usually top out at around 140Mb a second on sustained consecutive reads and when you're filling up 131,072Mb of data... Well. You do the math. (Hence why I have SSD's in Raid to take advantage of my 64Gb of Ram.)
Even worse when it comes to randomised reads too, sometimes it can drop to a fraction of it's maximum throughput.


I have big hopes that when PS5 will be launched, optical media will be dead and that flash-memory has put the final nail in the coffin for magnetical drives...



walsufnir said:
Pemalite said:
walsufnir said:
KBG29 said:
One Quick Question

If 128GB of RAM was possible in 2020 on the PS5, and most games were around 100GB. Would you not want the entire game loaded into RAM to completely eliminate load times?


No. Game data contains a lot of highly compressed data so you would still have loading times.

 

Edit: Take a look at this: http://geidav.wordpress.com/2013/04/14/making-of-turtles-all-the-way-down/

 

64kb demo. And believe me, you need way more ram than 64kb to get it running


Lets not forget either the data has to get from Optical Disc/Hard Drive to Ram, even when streaming from an SSD, filling up 128Gb takes forever.
Chances are mechanical storage will still have a price/capacity advantage, which usually top out at around 140Mb a second on sustained consecutive reads and when you're filling up 131,072Mb of data... Well. You do the math. (Hence why I have SSD's in Raid to take advantage of my 64Gb of Ram.)
Even worse when it comes to randomised reads too, sometimes it can drop to a fraction of it's maximum throughput.


I have big hopes that when PS5 will be launched, optical media will be dead and that flash-memory has put the final nail in the coffin for magnetical drives...


I hope by 2020 SSD like flash cards are cheap enough to be used as game cartridges. Back in the 90s cartridges out died due to their limited size but today they have more than enough.



I have big hopes that when PS5 will be launched, optical media will be dead and that flash-memory has put the final nail in the coffin for magnetical drives...

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6244123

I hope by 2020 SSD like flash cards are cheap enough to be used as game cartridges. Back in the 90s cartridges out died due to their limited size but today they have more than enough.

There is already optical disk format announced with up to 1TB capacity, SSD won't be used.



Nintendo 2018

English is not my native language.
mind said:

I have big hopes that when PS5 will be launched, optical media will be dead and that flash-memory has put the final nail in the coffin for magnetical drives...

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6244123

I hope by 2020 SSD like flash cards are cheap enough to be used as game cartridges. Back in the 90s cartridges out died due to their limited size but today they have more than enough.

There is already optical disk format announced with up to 1TB capacity, SSD won't be used.


In my opinion storage will be flash, getting the games will be via internet.