152 replies to this topic

[3Dude]

MorbidGod, on 11 Mar 2013 - 18:36, said:Where are you getting those memory numbers? I must have missed something.


All it means is developers can give us games. They like making excuses to not do it though. So we'll see.


The bandwidth is from the wii u's 2GB slow ram pool. Hes using that bandwidth alone while complete ignoring the rest of the memory heiarchy because hes either too ignorant to understand how hardware works, or because hes a frothing fanboy intent on spreading propaganda and misinformation. Or a combination of both.

[tboss]

MorbidGod, on 11 Mar 2013 - 18:36, said:Where are you getting those memory numbers? I must have missed something.


All it means is developers can give us games. They like making excuses to not do it though. So we'll see.


The bandwidth is from the wii u's 2GB slow ram pool. Hes using that bandwidth alone while complete ignoring the rest of the memory heiarchy because hes either too ignorant to understand how hardware works, or because hes a frothing fanboy intent on spreading propaganda and misinformation. Or a combination of both.

 

thats were the low 12.8 came from? i heard first rumors saying 12.8 claiming thats what ninty said, then i heard hiarchy going over 200, first impressions was that was how well ninty engineered it, then saying the 12.8 was pulled from teh lowest value in the entire system?          

 

is the 2GB pool mem0?

[routerbad]

thats were the low 12.8 came from? i heard first rumors saying 12.8 claiming thats what ninty said, then i heard hiarchy going over 200, first impressions was that was how well ninty engineered it, then saying the 12.8 was pulled from teh lowest value in the entire system?          

 

is the 2GB pool mem0?

Mem0 is the 2MB SRAM pool on the GPU.  Mem1 is the 32MB SRAM pool, Mem2 is the 2GB pool.

[MorbidGod]

MorbidGod, on 11 Mar 2013 - 18:36, said:Where are you getting those memory numbers? I must have missed something.


All it means is developers can give us games. They like making excuses to not do it though. So we'll see.


The bandwidth is from the wii u's 2GB slow ram pool. Hes using that bandwidth alone while complete ignoring the rest of the memory heiarchy because hes either too ignorant to understand how hardware works, or because hes a frothing fanboy intent on spreading propaganda and misinformation. Or a combination of both.

Thanks, I see now.

[kingdomcode]

MorbidGod, on 11 Mar 2013 - 18:36, said:Where are you getting those memory numbers? I must have missed something.


All it means is developers can give us games. They like making excuses to not do it though. So we'll see.


The bandwidth is from the wii u's 2GB slow ram pool. Hes using that bandwidth alone while complete ignoring the rest of the memory heiarchy because hes either too ignorant to understand how hardware works, or because hes a frothing fanboy intent on spreading propaganda and misinformation. Or a combination of both.

3Dude, on 12 Mar 2013 - 13:06, said:
MorbidGod, on 11 Mar 2013 - 18:36, said:Where are you getting those memory numbers? I must have missed something.


All it means is developers can give us games. They like making excuses to not do it though. So we'll see.


The bandwidth is from the wii u's 2GB slow ram pool. Hes using that bandwidth alone while complete ignoring the rest of the memory heiarchy because hes either too ignorant to understand how hardware works, or because hes a frothing fanboy intent on spreading propaganda and misinformation. Or a combination of both.

im no fanboy >

[3Dude]

birdo fan, on 12 Mar 2013 - 07:42, said:3Dude, on 12 Mar 2013 - 13:06, said:
MorbidGod, on 11 Mar 2013 - 18:36, said:Where are you getting those memory numbers? I must have missed something.


All it means is developers can give us games. They like making excuses to not do it though. So we'll see.


The bandwidth is from the wii u's 2GB slow ram pool. Hes using that bandwidth alone while complete ignoring the rest of the memory heiarchy because hes either too ignorant to understand how hardware works, or because hes a frothing fanboy intent on spreading propaganda and misinformation. Or a combination of both.

im no fanboy >


Yes you are, you are just so incredibly bad at it and inconsequential that we can ignore you.

How you thought we could possibly be talking about you over the subject of bandwidth eludes me.

[Alex Atkin UK]

I'm having deja vu.  Because I distinctly recall people bemoaning the switch from DDR2 to DDR3 due to the latency being higher so only becoming a benefit once the clock rate is high enough to help offset it.

 

If it worked for DDR3 though, why shouldn't it work for GDDR5?

 

Yes, PCs will go to DDR4 rather than GDDR5 because PCs will continue to be required to run general purpose tasks that will be hit worse by the higher latency.  But the PS4 OS will be designed from the ground up with the latency in mind, and I never underestimate how many problems can be solved by clever programming.

 

Granted, if the PS Vita OS is anything go by, Sony suck at that sort of thing.  But considering how close they supposedly worked with developers on the PS4, they may have had help.

[Socalmuscle]

The gddr5 memory in ps4 is a clue.

Sony wants to be the graphics king.

The actual multimedia hub aspect of the system will perform well, but not perhaps not as sharp as the new Xbox most of the time.

But in terms of games, I expect the PS4 to have the most texture variety and the more stable frame rates.

In terms of geometry, the ram won't really help that. So expect similar looking character and environment models with similar texture quality, but a greater variety of textures before loading on ps4.

[3Dude]

Alex Atkin UK, on 15 Mar 2013 - 11:45, said:I'm having deja vu.  Because I distinctly recall people bemoaning the switch from DDR2 to DDR3 due to the latency being higher so only becoming a benefit once the clock rate is high enough to help offset it.
If it worked for DDR3 though, why shouldn't it work for GDDR5?
Yes, PCs will go to DDR4 rather than GDDR5 because PCs will continue to be required to run general purpose tasks that will be hit worse by the higher latency.  But the PS4 OS will be designed from the ground up with the latency in mind, and I never underestimate how many problems can be solved by clever programming.
Granted, if the PS Vita OS is anything go by, Sony suck at that sort of thing.  But considering how close they supposedly worked with developers on the PS4, they may have had help.

It will absolutely work for Gddr5.

Fantastically for graphics which need high bandwidth but arent affected too bad by latency. Which is why the stuff is all over new graphics cards.

For pc's main memory though, you definately want ddr3 because latency is very important.

Ddr5 will fix latency issues better after ddr4 etc and so on just like you said.

The os isnt really worried about latency as its mostly background taskings the user never sees.

The main 'problem' is going to be the cpu for real time tasks.

The gddr5 isnt clocked high enough, and its bus doesnt appear to be wide enough (its looking like a 180 bit bus is a lock) to take advantadge of the ram being gddr5 as performance ram.

Then again, it doesnt really matter as the ps4's cpu and gpu are so low end theyd never be able to take advantadge of such high performance ram anyways... So the ram should be more than suffecient.

It will get the same approximate performance as ddr3 on a 256 bit bus. *fixed*

almost made a big typo. gddr3 is based off of gddr2 and is double pumped, gddr4 and gddr5 are based on ddr3, and all three are quad pumped.

Edited by 3Dude, 16 March 2013 - 05:57 AM.

[Desert Punk]

I've read this thread and again its utterly unbelievable some of the rubbish written here, especially by 3dude. Anyone interested in this subject move over to neogaf where rationally debates are taking place. The memory chips are branded and numbered and so can be locked down to a maximum performance figure. Hynix DDR3-1600 with a 16bit interface. Just about the cheapest chips on the marketplace that Nintendo could have used.

 

Use your own eyes to see what the wii u is capable of. The idea that the ps4 and wii u are close in performance is based on fanboy fantasy nothing more.

 

I mean come on, just about every wii u game is struggling to outperform 360 or PS3. The wii u hardware is based on known gpu and cpu architecture. Games like Sonic Transformed even run at a lower resolution on wii u. Many wii u games have missing graphic detail, frame rate issues etc. The idea that the wii u can take on or have similar versions of ps4 and xbox 720 games is not realistic at all and there is absolutely zero evidence that supports that view.

 

This is deju vu from the wii days when similar fanboys were predicting it would somehow close the gap with 360 and PS3 and in fact the opposite was true.

 

We've seen inside the wii u, we know its got very low power consumption, we know its built on a low cost fabrication process, we've read the developer comments, we have seen repeated game reviews both multiformat and exclusives that show the wii u is often weak technically. How much evidence do people need to stop writing such drivel?

[kingdomcode]

I've read this thread and again its utterly unbelievable some of the rubbish written here, especially by 3dude. Anyone interested in this subject move over to neogaf where rationally debates are taking place. The memory chips are branded and numbered and so can be locked down to a maximum performance figure. Hynix DDR3-1600 with a 16bit interface. Just about the cheapest chips on the marketplace that Nintendo could have used.
 
Use your own eyes to see what the wii u is capable of. The idea that the ps4 and wii u are close in performance is based on fanboy fantasy nothing more.
 
I mean come on, just about every wii u game is struggling to outperform 360 or PS3. The wii u hardware is based on known gpu and cpu architecture. Games like Sonic Transformed even run at a lower resolution on wii u. Many wii u games have missing graphic detail, frame rate issues etc. The idea that the wii u can take on or have similar versions of ps4 and xbox 720 games is not realistic at all and there is absolutely zero evidence that supports that view.
 
This is deju vu from the wii days when similar fanboys were predicting it would somehow close the gap with 360 and PS3 and in fact the opposite was true.
 
We've seen inside the wii u, we know its got very low power consumption, we know its built on a low cost fabrication process, we've read the developer comments, we have seen repeated game reviews both multiformat and exclusives that show the wii u is often weak technically. How much evidence do people need to stop writing such drivel?

unicorn tongue

bullcrap

[Gamejunkie]

I've read this thread and again its utterly unbelievable some of the rubbish written here, especially by 3dude. Anyone interested in this subject move over to neogaf where rationally debates are taking place. The memory chips are branded and numbered and so can be locked down to a maximum performance figure. Hynix DDR3-1600 with a 16bit interface. Just about the cheapest chips on the marketplace that Nintendo could have used.
 
Use your own eyes to see what the wii u is capable of. The idea that the ps4 and wii u are close in performance is based on fanboy fantasy nothing more.
 
I mean come on, just about every wii u game is struggling to outperform 360 or PS3. The wii u hardware is based on known gpu and cpu architecture. Games like Sonic Transformed even run at a lower resolution on wii u. Many wii u games have missing graphic detail, frame rate issues etc. The idea that the wii u can take on or have similar versions of ps4 and xbox 720 games is not realistic at all and there is absolutely zero evidence that supports that view.
 
This is deju vu from the wii days when similar fanboys were predicting it would somehow close the gap with 360 and PS3 and in fact the opposite was true.
 
We've seen inside the wii u, we know its got very low power consumption, we know its built on a low cost fabrication process, we've read the developer comments, we have seen repeated game reviews both multiformat and exclusives that show the wii u is often weak technically. How much evidence do people need to stop writing such drivel?

I have similar sentiments. From my experience the Wii U will be to the PS4 and Xbox successor what the Wii was to the PS3 and Xbox 360. It is overall under powered and people here and elsewhere give the Wii U far more credit them it deserves. Whilst its a step forward from the Wii its not far enough forward for a next gen console. The only real sensible thing Nintendo did was to include HDMI out and include an HDMI cable as standard. Having 8 or 32 GB of flash memory as opposed to a large standard hard drive was a mistake as was only having 2GB of RAM. including USB 2.0 ports when USB 3.0 is now the standard was another mistake. Not having standard voice chat API's and protocols was another mistake. Personally I'm glad I can afford to get the PS4 and next Xbox as just having a Wii U as my next gen console would probably be very limiting when it comes to a next gen gaming experience. I'm sure people will flame me for saying so but that is my opinion.

[tboss]

I've read this thread and again its utterly unbelievable some of the rubbish written here, especially by 3dude. Anyone interested in this subject move over to neogaf where rationally debates are taking place. The memory chips are branded and numbered and so can be locked down to a maximum performance figure. Hynix DDR3-1600 with a 16bit interface. Just about the cheapest chips on the marketplace that Nintendo could have used.

 

Use your own eyes to see what the wii u is capable of. The idea that the ps4 and wii u are close in performance is based on fanboy fantasy nothing more.

 

I mean come on, just about every wii u game is struggling to outperform 360 or PS3. The wii u hardware is based on known gpu and cpu architecture. Games like Sonic Transformed even run at a lower resolution on wii u. Many wii u games have missing graphic detail, frame rate issues etc. The idea that the wii u can take on or have similar versions of ps4 and xbox 720 games is not realistic at all and there is absolutely zero evidence that supports that view.

 

This is deju vu from the wii days when similar fanboys were predicting it would somehow close the gap with 360 and PS3 and in fact the opposite was true.

 

We've seen inside the wii u, we know its got very low power consumption, we know its built on a low cost fabrication process, we've read the developer comments, we have seen repeated game reviews both multiformat and exclusives that show the wii u is often weak technically. How much evidence do people need to stop writing such drivel?

 

some games it underpreformed, yes, i know. but the reasons were explained, heck the need for speed guys said if they went for a wiiU release launch there games would have looked worse than 360/PS3 versions too. but since they waited they got better tools and more know how, so they copy pasted the PC version properly and added features. but i will admit your a bigger fanboy than a decent chunk of the people here. neogaf has alot of fanboys, enough to convince them that the wiiU has a R700 gpu which has ruffly a 1% chance of bieng legit. 

 

but based on my assesment: GPU, ruffly 500-550 gflops modded E6760. basic featuers will be done poorly compared to other next gen but special features should keep up fairly easily(this is based on assumptions of unknown GPU features). raw power compared to PS4 should be around 3.75-3.5 times the wiiU, PS4 would be 5x wiiU if stock R700 based on fanboys, still lower than their own assumptions. 

 

CPU: here it is alot closer. core to core, based on what i seen, wiiU should rape juager handsdown. so jauger has more cores. wiiU's 3 cores arnt semetric so need more optimization. but overall 3 wiiU vs 5 jagure(likly 720 for games), wiiU should have 90% chance of keeping up if not overtaking, 6 cores(ps4 gaming) wiiU should have 75-80% chance of keeping up if not overtaking,  3vs8 cores wiiU should have 30% chance of keeping up. based on raw power. 

 

memory: PS4 uses GDDR5, the CPU will suffer from this somewhat, (givving wiiU CPU more of a edge their). but the PS4 8gigs+GDDR5 should help the GPU preform well with little need for optimization. the 8 gigs will mostly provide texters and similar, few neccesseties will take up that much memery. the latiancy will cause some issues. the wiiU has less ram which will likly result in worse textures, other effects like less polyguns wont hurt simply because wiiU wont be able to output the polygons anyway. wiiU does have the memory hiarchy, which allows the GPU to reach its max much easier than PS4s(making effective difference closer to 3.25-2.5x wiiU) the 32gb Edram will help greatly, working with the whole system over 200gb/mb, forget which. the main 2gb memory at 12.8gb/mb will hold the system back somewhat, everything needed cant be put on Edram. poor optimization will hunder teh wiiU GPU because its forced to run almost soly off the 12.8gb. good optimizion will use almost all 200gb. but the 12.8 for main memory is what i beleave to be the cause to poor framerate, as developers dont know how to use the Edram(or the bank was not big enough, or they didnt use it effectivly, or both), leaving the GPU to wait on the 12.8 from the main ram to send the info the GPU needs to put onto the next frame, wasting time and resources. 

 

overall wiiU gpu needs alot more optimization to use effectivly, PS4 would have a effective 3.25-2.5x GPU power of wiiU, likly weaker CPU, leaving physics and AI ruffly even between all next gen. wiiU will likly maintain the framerate weakness from Edram not being enough to offset slow ram and the wait because of it. looks on late games on PS4 should look around 2.5-1.5 times better than wiiU(diminishing returns). 

[kingdomcode]

some games it underpreformed, yes, i know. but the reasons were explained, heck the need for speed guys said if they went for a wiiU release launch there games would have looked worse than 360/PS3 versions too. but since they waited they got better tools and more know how, so they copy pasted the PC version properly and added features. but i will admit your a bigger fanboy than a decent chunk of the people here. neogaf has alot of fanboys, enough to convince them that the wiiU has a R700 gpu which has ruffly a 1% chance of bieng legit. 
 
but based on my assesment: GPU, ruffly 500-550 gflops modded E6760. basic featuers will be done poorly compared to other next gen but special features should keep up fairly easily(this is based on assumptions of unknown GPU features). raw power compared to PS4 should be around 3.75-3.5 times the wiiU, PS4 would be 5x wiiU if stock R700 based on fanboys, still lower than their own assumptions. 
 
CPU: here it is alot closer. core to core, based on what i seen, wiiU should rape juager handsdown. so jauger has more cores. wiiU's 3 cores arnt semetric so need more optimization. but overall 3 wiiU vs 5 jagure(likly 720 for games), wiiU should have 90% chance of keeping up if not overtaking, 6 cores(ps4 gaming) wiiU should have 75-80% chance of keeping up if not overtaking,  3vs8 cores wiiU should have 30% chance of keeping up. based on raw power. 
 
memory: PS4 uses GDDR5, the CPU will suffer from this somewhat, (givving wiiU CPU more of a edge their). but the PS4 8gigs+GDDR5 should help the GPU preform well with little need for optimization. the 8 gigs will mostly provide texters and similar, few neccesseties will take up that much memery. the latiancy will cause some issues. the wiiU has less ram which will likly result in worse textures, other effects like less polyguns wont hurt simply because wiiU wont be able to output the polygons anyway. wiiU does have the memory hiarchy, which allows the GPU to reach its max much easier than PS4s(making effective difference closer to 3.25-2.5x wiiU) the 32gb Edram will help greatly, working with the whole system over 200gb/mb, forget which. the main 2gb memory at 12.8gb/mb will hold the system back somewhat, everything needed cant be put on Edram. poor optimization will hunder teh wiiU GPU because its forced to run almost soly off the 12.8gb. good optimizion will use almost all 200gb. but the 12.8 for main memory is what i beleave to be the cause to poor framerate, as developers dont know how to use the Edram(or the bank was not big enough, or they didnt use it effectivly, or both), leaving the GPU to wait on the 12.8 from the main ram to send the info the GPU needs to put onto the next frame, wasting time and resources. 
 
overall wiiU gpu needs alot more optimization to use effectivly, PS4 would have a effective 3.25-2.5x GPU power of wiiU, likly weaker CPU, leaving physics and AI ruffly even between all next gen. wiiU will likly maintain the framerate weakness from Edram not being enough to offset slow ram and the wait because of it. looks on late games on PS4 should look around 2.5-1.5 times better than wiiU(diminishing returns).

all this dont mean sh!t third partys will still abandon the wiiu because their games dont sell on nintendo consoles

[3Dude]

unicorn tongue bullcrap

Ha ha, hes like a performing monkey. Shows up and does the same little dance, unaware of why its no longer appropriate, because he doesnt know any better, hes just a monkey.

"The bandwidth is from the wii u's 2GB slow ram
pool. Hes using that bandwidth alone while
complete ignoring the rest of the memory
heiarchy because hes either too ignorant to
understand how hardware works, or because
hes a frothing fanboy intent on spreading
propaganda and misinformation. Or a
combination of both."

lol. Either im psychic, or he REALLY IS this predictable and clueless.

[routerbad]

I'm having deja vu.  Because I distinctly recall people bemoaning the switch from DDR2 to DDR3 due to the latency being higher so only becoming a benefit once the clock rate is high enough to help offset it.

 

If it worked for DDR3 though, why shouldn't it work for GDDR5?

 

Yes, PCs will go to DDR4 rather than GDDR5 because PCs will continue to be required to run general purpose tasks that will be hit worse by the higher latency.  But the PS4 OS will be designed from the ground up with the latency in mind, and I never underestimate how many problems can be solved by clever programming.

 

Granted, if the PS Vita OS is anything go by, Sony suck at that sort of thing.  But considering how close they supposedly worked with developers on the PS4, they may have had help.

The switch from DDR2 to 3 was never bemoaned by anyone that I knew of, at least in the IT industry.  The latency came down as the engineering process was refined for DDR3, and latency is actually not that bad.  GDDR5 is DDR3 for all intents and purposes, albeit with the bespoke changesin speed and latency.  I hate the naming for GDDR, they make it sound like it's leaps and bounds ahead of the current DDR spec when it is based on the current DDR spec.

[GAMER1984]

Ha ha, hes like a performing monkey. Shows up and does the same little dance, unaware of why its no longer appropriate, because he doesnt know any better, hes just a monkey.

"The bandwidth is from the wii u's 2GB slow ram
pool. Hes using that bandwidth alone while
complete ignoring the rest of the memory
heiarchy because hes either too ignorant to
understand how hardware works, or because
hes a frothing fanboy intent on spreading
propaganda and misinformation. Or a
combination of both."

lol. Either im psychic, or he REALLY IS this predictable and clueless.

so seriously i want to ask you.... the RAM of the Wii U isnt going to be the bottleneck. I mean i see the EDRAM SRAM whatever but 1GB is far less than what both ps4 and 720 look like they might have up to 4GB available for games. Every devleoper has come out and said RAM is the one thing they want the most of. the difference seems to be a bit much

[routerbad]

I've read this thread and again its utterly unbelievable some of the rubbish written here, especially by 3dude. Anyone interested in this subject move over to neogaf where rationally debates are taking place. The memory chips are branded and numbered and so can be locked down to a maximum performance figure. Hynix DDR3-1600 with a 16bit interface. Just about the cheapest chips on the marketplace that Nintendo could have used.

 

Use your own eyes to see what the wii u is capable of. The idea that the ps4 and wii u are close in performance is based on fanboy fantasy nothing more.

 

I mean come on, just about every wii u game is struggling to outperform 360 or PS3. The wii u hardware is based on known gpu and cpu architecture. Games like Sonic Transformed even run at a lower resolution on wii u. Many wii u games have missing graphic detail, frame rate issues etc. The idea that the wii u can take on or have similar versions of ps4 and xbox 720 games is not realistic at all and there is absolutely zero evidence that supports that view.

 

This is deju vu from the wii days when similar fanboys were predicting it would somehow close the gap with 360 and PS3 and in fact the opposite was true.

 

We've seen inside the wii u, we know its got very low power consumption, we know its built on a low cost fabrication process, we've read the developer comments, we have seen repeated game reviews both multiformat and exclusives that show the wii u is often weak technically. How much evidence do people need to stop writing such drivel?

Yeah, because that was entirely rational.  At least GameJunkie can troll and make it sound halfway sensible.  We are talking about specific specs and features, not trying to prove anything one way or the other.  No one is trying to say the Wii U is anything compared to the PS4.  We all know the PS4 is more powerful spec wise, I haven't seen a single person say otherwise.  Close in performance from a visual standpoint maybe, thanks to diminishing returns.  Also, just having a familiar CPU doesn't really matter all that much when your system is designed around a GPU that NO ONE knows anything about.  The fact that teams were able to port games onto the Wii U that were designed to rely more heavily on the CPU does tell you something interesting indeed.  That the Wii U CPU is pretty capable.  It isn't a familiar platform either, unless you know of another PPC750 with a 1.25GHz clock with SMP.  I don't, because it's never been done before. 

so seriously i want to ask you.... the RAM of the Wii U isnt going to be the bottleneck. I mean i see the EDRAM SRAM whatever but 1GB is far less than what both ps4 and 720 look like they might have up to 4GB available for games. Every devleoper has come out and said RAM is the one thing they want the most of. the difference seems to be a bit much

The difference in total RAM don't have any effect on the visual fidelity of the gaming experience.  Bigger worlds maybe, more detailed textures perhaps, when the developers actually have enough money to make assets that fill that space up.  That takes an immense amount of effort.  The Wii U will not see any RAM limitations at the outset.

[3Dude]

so seriously i want to ask you.... the RAM of the Wii U isnt going to be the bottleneck. I mean i see the EDRAM SRAM whatever but 1GB is far less than what both ps4 and 720 look like they might have up to 4GB available for games. Every devleoper has come out and said RAM is the one thing they want the most of. the difference seems to be a bit much

Theyll need to compress textures and audio. S3 texture compression is a very old technology and has a 6:1 compression ratio (Not quite, but close enough).

That means if you have 5GB of assets like say textures you need compressed, you can compress it to 1GB and still have pretty acceptable assets.



And things have come a long way since s3....

Its just a LOT more convenient for devs when you dont have to worry about memory management. Of course theyll ask for as much as possible.

Yeah, the ps4/720 will have some games wii u actually wont be able to run. Just like the xbox had some the ps2 couldnt handle.

But its not going to be ANYTHING like wii to ps360. And its NOT because the wii u is powerful.

Its not. Its impressive as HELL for how effecient it is, but its not powerful. The thing is, no one really expected it to be, and its turning out its hitting a bit above its weight class. Still not powerful, just more than what some (like me) expected.

Its the ps4, its NOT powerful, and is in fact LESS powerful than what even some conservative people (like me) were expecting.

Nvidia is not joking when they say ps4 is comparable to a low end pc. It has a low range cpu and a low to mid range gpu. You could give it a HUNDRED GB of gddr7890billion jillion to infinity and it wont make that system more powerful.

You can say 'well what does that make the less powerful wii u' But that doesnt really matter. No one expected the wii u to be powerful. But they did expect the ps4 to be powerful. They expected the ps4 to blow high end gaming rigs out of the water. It doesnt even compete with midrange. And the xbox appears to be even less.

The ps4 isnt going to use 8GB on games. Its processors arent powerful enough to process that many assets to display.

Most cell phones have a lot more ram than 360 or ps3. How many of them can run gears of war or uncharted?

Also that ram is going to be used for all kinds of sruff beyond the game you are playing. Like downloading a movie, while keeping a different full game suspended, while recording video of a game you are playing while you are downloading it.

And finally, killzone 4 was using 1.4GB of ram.

And that was NOT a small production. That was NOT a cheap thrown together demo. Now, those devkits only allotted for 4GB of ram, but even so, it was still less than half of what they had. The production values needed to utilize 8GB of ram for an in game scene would be so expensive on just content creation alone you would need to sell 10 million copies just to break even.

people need to start reeling in some of these fantasies....

Edited by 3Dude, 16 March 2013 - 09:06 PM.

[GAMER1984]

Theyll need to compress textures and audio. S3 texture compression is a very old technology and has a 6:1 compression ratio (Not quite, but close enough).

That means if you have 5GB of assets like say textures you need compressed, you can compress it to 1GB and still have pretty acceptable assets.



And things have come a long way since s3....

Its just a LOT more convenient for devs when you dont have to worry about memory management. Of course theyll ask for as much as possible.

Yeah, the ps4/720 will have some games wii u actually wont be able to run. Just like the xbox had some the ps2 couldnt handle.

But its not going to be ANYTHING like wii to ps360. And its NOT because the wii u is powerful.

Its not. Its impressive as HELL for how effecient it is, but its not powerful. The thing is, no one really expected it to be, and its turning out its hitting a bit above its weight class. Still not powerful, just more than what some (like me) expected.

Its the ps4, its NOT powerful, and is in fact LESS powerful than what even some conservative people (like me) were expecting.

Nvidia is not joking when they say ps4 is comparable to a low end pc. It has a low range cpu and a low to mid range gpu. You could give it a HUNDRED GB of gddr7890billion jillion to infinity and it wont make that system more powerful.

You can say 'well what does that make the less powerful wii u' But that doesnt really matter. No one expected the wii u to be powerful. But they did expect the ps4 to be powerful. They expected the ps4 to blow high end gaming rigs out of the water. It doesnt even compete with midrange. And the xbox appears to be even less.

The ps4 isnt going to use 8GB on games. Its processors arent powerful enough to process that many assets to display.

Most cell phones have a lot more ram than 360 or ps3. How many of them can run gears of war or uncharted?

Also that ram is going to be used for all kinds of sruff beyond the game you are playing. Like downloading a movie, while keeping a different full game suspended, while recording video of a game you are playing while you are downloading it.

And finally, killzone 4 was using 1.4GB of ram.

And that was NOT a small production. That was NOT a cheap thrown together demo. Now, those devkits only allotted for 4GB of ram, but even so, it was still less than half of what they had. The production values needed to utilize 8GB of ram for an in game scene would be so expensive on just content creation alone you would need to sell 10 million copies just to break even.

people need to start reeling in some of these fantasies....

how likely is it(percentage wise) that nintendo optimize the OS and give devs a 1.5GB total for games? and also how much more could devs do with that extra RAM?

Edited by GAMER1984, 16 March 2013 - 09:29 PM.