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

Forums - Gaming - 4GB RAM in 7th Gen Consoles...

Dgc1808 said:
I have to be honest...

The main reason why I brought up this thread is because of anger towards my laptop and the price tag of being a pc gamer. My laptop has a week embedded 7000 [Gt, Gtx, i don't really know, it's an NVidia....] and 1GB of ram, and 1.9GHz dual core Processor.

I was playing Resident Evil 4 [love the game but couldn't find the PS version on this pathetic island...]. At a windowed 800x600 res, the games graphics were fine but the frame rate sucked balls, I looked at my settings to get the best out of it I could [am running vista..... I hate vista.....] and my frame rate sucked balls none the less but the graphics were fine. I looked at task manager every once in a while and noticed that the game was always taking up between 240MB to 350MB or Ram on my computer..... and then I remembered that I had the game on ps2 and the ps2 had a minute 32MB or ram.... that bummed me out when I think of how much I would have to pay to run this game well on my desktop at home [am at work right now....].

My desktop sucks worse than my laptop:

2.4Ghz Single Core
846MB or Ram [DDR1 btw...] [it's supposed to be 1GB.... that's what I said on the Box and when I looked inside the thing there were 2 512MB ram cards...]
Embedded 6150 [Nvidia... so throw in you GTX, GT, G/S, D/P, DMC LOL]
Power Supply: 250W
19" Monitor [which my ps3 is also connected to threw an HDMI to DVI cable, I play in 720p]

I still live with my family, am only 16, I didn't buy the computers... I wasn't even their when it was purchased. Neither the laptop, Am the only one that uses the laptop, and the desktop is supposed to be for the family... but am the one using it about 96% of the time...

The main problem with your laptop is that the GPU is useless. It sounds like you have a shared memory Geforce 7000M or 7150M. When I was researching laptops before I bought mine, I found out how underwhelming the embedded ATI and Nvidia graphics card solutions were.

 



Around the Network

^^ Hmmm.....



4 ≈ One

Dgc1808 said:
I have to be honest...

The main reason why I brought up this thread is because of anger towards my laptop and the price tag of being a pc gamer. My laptop has a week embedded 7000 [Gt, Gtx, i don't really know, it's an NVidia....] and 1GB of ram, and 1.9GHz dual core Processor.

I was playing Resident Evil 4 [love the game but couldn't find the PS version on this pathetic island...]. At a windowed 800x600 res, the games graphics were fine but the frame rate sucked balls, I looked at my settings to get the best out of it I could [am running vista..... I hate vista.....] and my frame rate sucked balls none the less but the graphics were fine. I looked at task manager every once in a while and noticed that the game was always taking up between 240MB to 350MB or Ram on my computer..... and then I remembered that I had the game on ps2 and the ps2 had a minute 32MB or ram.... that bummed me out when I think of how much I would have to pay to run this game well on my desktop at home [am at work right now....].

My desktop sucks worse than my laptop:

2.4Ghz Single Core
846MB or Ram [DDR1 btw...] [it's supposed to be 1GB.... that's what I said on the Box and when I looked inside the thing there were 2 512MB ram cards...]
Embedded 6150 [Nvidia... so throw in you GTX, GT, G/S, D/P, DMC LOL]
Power Supply: 250W
19" Monitor [which my ps3 is also connected to threw an HDMI to DVI cable, I play in 720p]

I still live with my family, am only 16, I didn't buy the computers... I wasn't even their when it was purchased. Neither the laptop, Am the only one that uses the laptop, and the desktop is supposed to be for the family... but am the one using it about 96% of the time...

wtf? 2 x 512 is 1024 or 1gb of ram...

2 x 512 in dual channel = better performance than 1 x 1gb in single channel. I'm assuming dual channel here, that or just because 2 x 512 could have been cheaper at build time. The embedded 6150 will be taking up the difference between 1024 and 846.

The embedded graphics cards aren't designed to give beastly games performance. I don't see why it should suprise anyone when they don't.



Yes

I would say 2GB is the minimum and 3-4 GB is possible if they aren't released until 2012. Also, I hope Sony at least puts a much better graphics card (when compared to the CPU) in the PS4.....

And I think you mean 8th gen, not 7th gen...



Not trying to be a fanboy. Of course, it's hard when you own the best console eve... dang it

The Nintendo 64 had 8MB of RAM with the Expansion Pack D:

Yeah, 4GB seems about right. Not that pricey either.



Around the Network

The Wii only has 88 MB of main memory

According to your calculations the next generation will have at least 704 MB (88x8), and because nintendo proved that you don't need to make a super console each generation, I think they will go to 2GB at most.



Could very well be 4 gigs combined. We are in the transition of SD to HD gaming. And new consoles are at least 2.5 years away for the Xbox and much longer for the PS3 if it can regain its dominance.



Like Squilliam, I'd wager that the next generation of consoles will have 2 GB's of RAM, 3 at the most but it seems unlikely.
Consoles generally don't have a lot of RAM, but they have fast RAM.



lets predict via buying a good lowend computer now

dvd-rom- $30

ram...1-2 gig for all of them (currently 1 gig is $22, 2gig is $35 -retail)

mobo w/1080p capable video 60

case w/power supply 50

intel dual core cpu 70
hard drive -80gig- 35

price $280 with 2 gig ram.......


same spec's with Blu-ray instead of dvd $380

figure in ~3 years blu-ray drives(currently $140) will be ~50-60 dollars

cost of other items will be ~1/3rd less

and there you go the next "xbox"



The next gen will probably have ray tracing capabilities. This will require a significant amount of ram and graphical capabilities.



Console Agnostic since 2001.