PlayStation 4 General DiscussionPS4

[Samus]

Video RAM on the GPU is what they need plenty of, not so much system RAM.

 

[Luminis]

I've got a nagging feeling we'll see shared RAM again, anyways. But, yeah, moar VRAM definitely, with high res textures and all that.

 

[Ddrizle]

Digital Foundry's take on the next consoles from MS & Sony

 

[Earth]

That's why you need more, in my opinion. In eight years, everyone will be laughing their butt off at 4GB of RAM. Would be the same thing as with current consoles, if you're asking me. Also, RAM ís dirt cheap these days. Just slap 12GB onto it and call it a day.

But they'll also be laughing at pretty much everything else in the PS4. Technology doubles every 18 months, its impossible for a console to keep up. By the time the specs are finalized and the console is built and released the tech is already over a year old and technology has doubled since then.

The best Sony/Microsoft can do is add the best tech they can that will allow them to sell the consoles for $400 or less with perhaps a profit. 4 GBs DDR5 and a Radeon 7970/8000 series are a good match and cost effective for the PS4. If the PS3 had 512 mbs of Ram instead of 256 mbs all the memory issues probably never would have happened. From the eye test, 4GBs of DDR5 memory along with a 7970 should compliment eachother just fine.

Cheap ram is $20-$25 for 4 GBs. If the console is $400 that's about 5% of it's price. 5% of profit Sony could potentially be dumping into something thats maybe not needed as much. 12GBs of Ram may be like giving the PS4 3 GBs of video memory. The rest of the hardware probably wont be able to take advantage of it.

The only real disturbing news Im seeing is the fact Sony may not make a 2013 launch. I doubt this happens. I can see there being a shortage at launch, but just dont see them waiting until Q1 2014 to launch with a large supply, giving Microsoft all the momentum.

I am so pumped for the next gen.

Edit: 512mbs dedicated to OS should make the ability to listen to MP3s on your hard drive while gaming universal for every game

 

[TheDabbinDave]

The only real disturbing news Im seeing is the fact Sony may not make a 2013 launch. I doubt this happens. I can see there being a shortage at launch, but just dont see them waiting until Q1 2014 to launch with a large supply, giving Microsoft all the momentum.

I am so pumped for the next gen.

Edit: 512mbs dedicated to OS should make the ability to listen to MP3s on your hard drive while gaming universal for every game

I find it disturbing that both consoles are entertaining the notion of using an entry level laptop/tablet processor for the very core of their existence. They better not be planning on more than a 5 year design cycle. Technology is advancing way to fast to go the basic cheapest route. Look at Nintendo, they are already obsolete and their only next gen competition is themselves.

I'd much rather be able to play FLAC files than MP3 . Unless mp3's are ripped on LAME vbr 0, they suck. Even with that codec, directly compared to a CD it's very noticeable.

I'm thinking about getting a turntable to embrace my musical roots draped in vinyl

 

[Tesla]

It isn't noticeable unless you're listening for it, and even then the difference is negligible.

Entry level or not, developers will learn to optimize for the consoles quickly. Look at what we ended up with on the PS3 in the last couple of years. Even the most simple-minded devs will be able to match that on the upgraded hardware.

 

[Luminis]

But they'll also be laughing at pretty much everything else in the PS4. Technology doubles every 18 months, its impossible for a console to keep up. By the time the specs are finalized and the console is built and released the tech is already over a year old and technology has doubled since then.

It sure as hell wouldn't be helping their case to use components that would be considered mediocre half a year before the launch of the consoles. Wasn't the strong side of consoles (aside from the plug 'n play like experience) that they're offering big bang for your buck when newly released?

That's the case with the previous consoles, at least. And while Nintendo did go on to show that you don't need high-end hardware to sell consoles, it seems unlikely to me that a similar approach would work for MS and Sony, due to obvious reasons. Granted, these times might be over. Most of the specs that have been rumoured seem to indicate that the next-gen consoles will be on par with a contemporary gaming computer (maybe even slightly inferior) in terms of hardware, while they were clearly ahead on launch for the last few generations.

512 MB RAM was pretty much the average for desktops back when the 360 launched, if I'm not mistaken. Most desktops I'm seeing now are sporting more than four gigs, easily, and that's with a few months to go before the actual launch. A budget-computer for less than 600 bucks came with 4GB of RAM three months ago, for example... And let's not forget that the limitations on the RAM and VRAM have been issues for years now. Going with what's less than average seems to severly cripple the longevity of consoles.

Then again, it'd be one reason to just save the cash altogehter

The best Sony/Microsoft can do is add the best tech they can that will allow them to sell the consoles for $400 or less with perhaps a profit.

Scrap the stupid sensores in the controller and put more RAM/VRAM into the console. Problem solved.

By the way, whether that's the best thing for them to do is debatable, as it depends on the repective strategy they're following. Microsoft has been doing well with taking a loss at the beginning of a console generation. The 360 turned profitable after a relatively short amount of time (as opposed to the PS3). Following such a strategy again might yield even better results should Sony not do something similar. Offering clearly superior hardware for a similar price is a nice selling point and is entirely possible, I'd think.

4 GBs DDR5 and a Radeon 7970/8000 series are a good match and cost effective for the PS4. If the PS3 had 512 mbs of Ram instead of 256 mbs all the memory issues probably never would have happened. From the eye test, 4GBs of DDR5 memory along with a 7970 should compliment eachother just fine.

Cheap ram is $20-$25 for 4 GBs. If the console is $400 that's about 5% of it's price. 5% of profit Sony could potentially be dumping into something thats maybe not needed as much. 12GBs of Ram may be like giving the PS4 3 GBs of video memory. The rest of the hardware probably wont be able to take advantage of it.

From a consumer's standpoint, I don't really care whether Sony makes 5% more or less profit per console sold. I just don't want to run into the console's limitations as early again, limiting all kinds of applications as early as three years after its launch.

Also, losing 5% of profit per console can easily be set off by just selling more units, which a better equipped system could potentially achieve.

The only real disturbing news Im seeing is the fact Sony may not make a 2013 launch. I doubt this happens. I can see there being a shortage at launch, but just dont see them waiting until Q1 2014 to launch with a large supply, giving Microsoft all the momentum.

Sony is still stabilizing from all the trouble it's been through, so it's hardly suprising that things aren't going smoothly for them, I suppose.

 

[Musolini187]

wouldn't it be better to actually wait for official news instead of making things up and talking about rumours?

also anybody know just how many times more powerful the ps3 was in comparison to ps2, and ps2 in comparison to ps1?

 

[thelvynau]

wouldn't it be better to actually wait for official news instead of making things up and talking about rumours?

also anybody know just how many times more powerful the ps3 was in comparison to ps2, and ps2 in comparison to ps1?

Where is the fun in not discussing it?

If you do not wish to speculate the why are you here?

 

[Luminis]

wouldn't it be better to actually wait for official news instead of making things up and talking about rumours?

At this point, it seems more like a debate on marketing strategies and philosophies, so to speak. How important future proofing and raw processing power are, for example.

 

[sems4arsenal]

wouldn't it be better to actually wait for official news instead of making things up and talking about rumours?

also anybody know just how many times more powerful the ps3 was in comparison to ps2, and ps2 in comparison to ps1?

This is the internet ,logic does not apply here.

 

[Froudeybrand]

http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/ps4-and-xbox-720-release-date-coming-autumn-with-400-price-tag

any one seen this?

 

[Slash]

With my PS3 and me still buying plenty of games for it I cannot justify $400 for it. Not worth it to me.

 

[LaBounti]

It isn't noticeable unless you're listening for it, and even then the difference is negligible.

Entry level or not, developers will learn to optimize for the consoles quickly. Look at what we ended up with on the PS3 in the last couple of years. Even the most simple-minded devs will be able to match that on the upgraded hardware.

That's very true. PS3 has a lot of good looking games using its 256+256 ram. 4GB is going to be enough if all the ram does is improve the texture resolution.

Bumping up the video ram 10x+ is a major improvement.

As of right now I am only interested in Forza on Xbox and $400 would be tough to swallow for one game if its a launch. Ps4 will be a tough launch as well, just need to see what games will launch. Its a guarantee WiiU will see a price drop but I don't want it at $99....

 

[Sanji Himura]

Apparently a Dev who is close to the PS4/720 projects is spilling the beans about the specs of the systems.

According to this soon to be ex-Dev(he is under a NDA), ports will soon be easier to make between the two consoles and PC. The way that he explained it is that because the PS4/720 will share similar architecture to a PC, games like Skyrim would have little to no trouble running across all systems because they all share common characteristics in hardware. Essentially, the 720 is a Windows PC and the PS4 is a Linux PC, thus ports could be handled easily between PC, 720, PS4 and Steambox.

CPU

While the Dev didn't go into much detail about the CPUs of each console, he did say that the code words of the day was "Green on Power". This means that while the CPUs are multi-core, the console can shut off the cores that you are not using. So, if you are watching netflix, the CPU can shut off most of the cores leading to a near-silent console.

The Dev is very excited about that bit as AMD is a strong proponent of using CPU cores in different situations, and if both consoles are using AMD CPUs, then the possibilities are endless.

GPU

At this point, the Dev is a bit disappointed in the hardware department. The graphical power of the consoles would be similar to a HD 7850. For those who need a point of reference, a HD 7850 would allow Battlefield 3 to run at 1080p while never dipping below 60fps.

As such, this would be the new standard for games.

Overall Strategy

While the PS4/720 may share similar CPU/GPU, the way that they go about the rest of the console is entirely reflective upon their strategy for the next gen.

Take RAM for example. Reportedly, Microsoft is going with a slower RAM, but more of it, to power Kinect 2.0 whereas Sony is going for a faster RAM but less of it. This, combined with the fact that Sony is investing a lot in the PS4's GPU, would make the PS4 a graphics powerhouse.

The Dev also thinks that the final price point of the two consoles will be pretty tame, and close together to prevent the $599 USD debackle of last gen.

http://oxcgn.com/2013/01/20/ps4-and-xbox-720-unveiled-dev-spills-the-beans-on-reddit/

 

[Tornado]

Active CPU core shutdown sounds great just from a cooling perspective.

 

[Luminis]

I'll believe it (the overall rumour) when I see it.

By the way, both consoles are suposed to be running 7850 derivates, how does that make them (or rather, the PS3 specifically) a powerhouse, graphics wise? An upper midrange card that will be close to two years old by the time the console launches...

 

[Sanji Himura]

I'll believe it (the overall rumour) when I see it.

By the way, both consoles are suposed to be running 7850 derivates, how does that make them (or rather, the PS3 specifically) a powerhouse, graphics wise? An upper midrange card that will be close to two years old by the time the console launches...

They could overclock, maybe? I think that because consoles have been afraid to overclock their GPUs due to cooling, their performance have suffered through the years. Since the next-gen consoles are effectively PCs, cooling wouldn't be that much of an issue.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

They could overclock, maybe? I think that because consoles have been afraid to overclock their GPUs due to cooling, their performance have suffered through the years. Since the next-gen consoles are effectively PCs, cooling wouldn't be that much of an issue.

Overclock? A console? And Microsoft / Sony would approve? Right.

Never gonna happen.

 

[thelvynau]

Overclock? A console? And Microsoft / Sony would approve? Right.

Never gonna happen.

If they were the ones doing the overclocking I doubt there would be a issue.

 

[Samus]

Still wouldn't happen, they underclock hardware if anything, they never overclock.

 

[thelvynau]

I suppose they wouldnt.

But it would give Sony another item to use to promote it if they overclock it.

Laying claim its faster?

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

No; they can just do that with a faster chip.

They're not going to overclock anything; if they do it will be by such a miniscule amount that it won't effect performance. Why? Because they will have to increase cooling efficiency to accommodate the rise in voltage/speed, increasing power draw, on top of already increasing power draw due to overclocking. Do you think they're going to put a massive air cooler or water loop in the next gen consoles.... It's not going to happen.

 

[thelvynau]

They could with a faster chip but they can spend less and overclock it for power for cheaper.

 

[Earth]

I find it disturbing that both consoles are entertaining the notion of using an entry level laptop/tablet processor for the very core of their existence. They better not be planning on more than a 5 year design cycle. Technology is advancing way to fast to go the basic cheapest route. Look at Nintendo, they are already obsolete and their only next gen competition is themselves.

I'd much rather be able to play FLAC files than MP3 . Unless mp3's are ripped on LAME vbr 0, they suck. Even with that codec, directly compared to a CD it's very noticeable.

I'm thinking about getting a turntable to embrace my musical roots draped in vinyl

Wow, when did 4 cores @ 3.2GHZ/8 cores @ 1.6GHZ become entry level. Technology sure is flying. But the key is it always has. I remember around the time of the PS3's launch PCs were being fitted with 1GB of ram. Mass marketed consoles have no chance of keeping up.

In the end the processor will be tailored to the needs of the console, making it more efficient then it could ever be if stuck in a random laptop.

It sure as hell wouldn't be helping their case to use components that would be considered mediocre half a year before the launch of the consoles. Wasn't the strong side of consoles (aside from the plug 'n play like experience) that they're offering big bang for your buck when newly released?

That's the case with the previous consoles, at least. And while Nintendo did go on to show that you don't need high-end hardware to sell consoles, it seems unlikely to me that a similar approach would work for MS and Sony, due to obvious reasons. Granted, these times might be over. Most of the specs that have been rumoured seem to indicate that the next-gen consoles will be on par with a contemporary gaming computer (maybe even slightly inferior) in terms of hardware, while they were clearly ahead on launch for the last few generations.

512 MB RAM was pretty much the average for desktops back when the 360 launched, if I'm not mistaken. Most desktops I'm seeing now are sporting more than four gigs, easily, and that's with a few months to go before the actual launch. A budget-computer for less than 600 bucks came with 4GB of RAM three months ago, for example... And let's not forget that the limitations on the RAM and VRAM have been issues for years now. Going with what's less than average seems to severly cripple the longevity of consoles.

Then again, it'd be one reason to just save the cash altogehter

4 GBs of DDR5 ram isnt medicore IMO. If someone was building a gaming PC today that would be enough for current games. People only really add more to future proof themselves. So why shouldnt consoles add more to future proof themselves? At some point its going to be the graphics card or processor holding developers back instead of ram. Do we really know that adding more ram will allow developers to make better looking games in the long haul?

With a PC you can just pull out the old graphics card and throw a new one in there that will play games that need that extra ram.

OK we heard about developers crying about RAM all the time, but did that stop the PS3 from having really good looking games? No. Im quite sure Sony doesnt want to repeat the Ram shortage issue. Im confident in their R&D team that 4GBs of DDR5 will be enough to maximize the processor and graphics card.

According to this 8GBs of Ram offers little performance increase over 4GBs, let alone 4GBs of DDR5 ram. Google searches reveal Battefield 3 only uses 1.5 GBs of Ram on high settings. That number can jump to 3GBs on ultra settings, but imagine it will be some time before developers push the hardware far enough to utilize that much of the ram while maintaining a stable gameplay experience.

Scrap the stupid sensores in the controller and put more RAM/VRAM into the console. Problem solved.

By the way, whether that's the best thing for them to do is debatable, as it depends on the repective strategy they're following. Microsoft has been doing well with taking a loss at the beginning of a console generation. The 360 turned profitable after a relatively short amount of time (as opposed to the PS3). Following such a strategy again might yield even better results should Sony not do something similar. Offering clearly superior hardware for a similar price is a nice selling point and is entirely possible, I'd think.

If Sony goes with high end DDR5 ram you're probably looking at increasing the console cost by 10% or more for every 4GBs of ram added.

GPU

At this point, the Dev is a bit disappointed in the hardware department. The graphical power of the consoles would be similar to a HD 7850. For those who need a point of reference, a HD 7850 would allow Battlefield 3 to run at 1080p while never dipping below 60fps.

What? Hes disappointed in hardware that can run Battlefield 3 in 1080p @ 60fps? A Radeon 7850 is a pretty stout card. My brothers desktop has a GTX 460 and can play Battlefield 3 at 1080p with high/medium-high settings and enjoy what feels like 50-60fps and absolutely no slow down ever, even on the largest 64 player maps. And according to some quick google searches a Radeon 7850 outperforms the GTX 460 by a healthy margin.

That has me very excited about the prospects of this next gen. For various reasons, consoles have always, always produced graphics that look better then their specs.

I think those who are disappointed had some unrealistic expectations for next gen. I was one of those for a while, I had hope'd they chose something around a GTX 550, but obviously that type of performance wasn't realistic price wise.

 

[Ddrizle]

They could overclock, maybe?

Nope.

 

[thelvynau]

Nope.

Just nope?

Any reason?

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Just those which have already been explained.

Cooling, cost, and performance.

 

[thelvynau]

Just those which have already been explained.

Cooling, cost, and performance.

Well cooling I agree with cost well wouldnt be as much due to a cheaper card being overclocked and performance I guess if you have two cards running the same speed and one is over clocked then the non overclocked might work better.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Grammar, please; that is in the AUP and your posts are difficult to read.

Like I said, its not going to be cheaper when you take into consideration the increased power draw, decreased chip lifespan, and additional cooling requirements compared to a non-OCed card. Also, consider the R&D required to implement it, and the potential risks associated with it....

No.

There is no point in overclocking a GPU in a console because you will not be able to achieve clocks high enough to see any considerable performance increase... you are trying to cool a ridiculously compact hardware system with little air flow. They have enough problems with cooling as it is.

Also, ya... a 7850 can run bf3 at 1920x1080 at 60 fps... at like medium, maybe high, settings. Not stating what eye candy is being used is a little bit ridiculous.