This topic is locked from further discussion.
You are full of crap and you know it!!! I have not heard ANY devs complaining about the ram in the 360 to date.xX0LDSCH00LXx
[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="xX0LDSCH00LXx"]Yea one just has more than the other.xX0LDSCH00LXx
The PS3 is not the favorite platform but it's going to run the game just as good. To some degree there's going to be some lowest common denominator effect because we're going to be testing these every day on all of the platforms, and it's going to be "Dammit it's out of memory on the PS3 again, go crunch some things down" That's probably going to be the sore spot for all of this but because we're continuous builds on all of these we're going to be fighting these battles as we go rather than build these things out and go, "Oh my God we're so far away from running on there." Which is the situation where Enemy Territory is suffering with at a degree right now, and a lot of other people have that."
[QUOTE="xX0LDSCH00LXx"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="xX0LDSCH00LXx"]Yea one just has more than the other.xX0LDSCH00LXx
The PS3 is not the favorite platform but it's going to run the game just as good. To some degree there's going to be some lowest common denominator effect because we're going to be testing these every day on all of the platforms, and it's going to be "Dammit it's out of memory on the PS3 again, go crunch some things down" That's probably going to be the sore spot for all of this but because we're continuous builds on all of these we're going to be fighting these battles as we go rather than build these things out and go, "Oh my God we're so far away from running on there." Which is the situation where Enemy Territory is suffering with at a degree right now, and a lot of other people have that."
At the same time he said..
1: Q: If Rage will ship on 2 DVDs, how will that work for multi-console?
A: The source data is more than that even. We go through tons of data compression, so the game is segmented in that regard. I wouldn't expect an HD DVD release for Rage though. What's interesting though is that it all fits fine with a 256m video card. On PS3, video requirements doesn't even completely use the 256 video memory; we wish we could use more in other places. Bottom line, it can be compressed from source.
What the HELL is with people talking about things they do not understand at all. Ram holds data. The PS3 has less, so it holds less. Its really that simple.
Cali3350
From all the posts I have read so far, Cali3350 is the only one who sounds like he understands what RAM is.
Just to let you guys know, RAM is what we refer to as main memory. Games require gigabytes of data nowadays and are stored in the hard drive. However, the processors (graphic/GPU and central/CPU) can only communicate with the main memory (RAM). Main memory is loads times faster than the hard drive (in the hundreds or thousands);the hard drive is very slow.
What makes a game take so long to load or process is because the hard drive has to frequently transfer data to main memory (RAM) and vice versa; the hard drive and RAM switch data back and forth since RAM can only hold so much data. Since the GPU and CPU can only interface with the RAM, the XBox 360 is more efficient when games require frequent switches between different sets of data from the hard drive. This is because the XBox 360 has more RAM so it has to transfer data from the hard drive to RAM less often than the Playstation 3. On the other hand, the Playstation 3 is more efficient the less often data needs to be transferred between the hard drive and RAM.
In conclusion, most of those who understand hardware agrees that the Playstation 3 has more potential than the XBox 360, but software-wise, the XBox 360 is easier to program and optimize for. It will take at least another year or few more years before most developers understand how to better optimize software games for the Playstation 3 due to its complicated 8 processors; Yes, the Playstation 3 has 8 processing units, but 1 is dormant, and 1 is dedicated to the OS and security, so that leaves 6 for processing the actual game.
*Note: I referred to video memory (for the GPU) and main memory (for the CPU) both as main memory and RAM for simplicity.
[QUOTE="Cali3350"]What the HELL is with people talking about things they do not understand at all. Ram holds data. The PS3 has less, so it holds less. Its really that simple.
TooBadUnknown
From all the posts I have read so far, Cali3350 is the only one who sounds like he understands what RAM is.
Just to let you guys know, RAM is what we refer to as main memory. Games require gigabytes of data nowadays and are stored in the hard drive. However, the processors (graphic/GPU and central/CPU) can only communicate with the main memory (RAM). Main memory is loads times faster than the hard drive (in the hundreds or thousands);the hard drive is very slow.
What makes a game take so long to load or process is because the hard drive has to frequently transfer data to main memory (RAM) and vice versa; the hard drive and RAM switch data back and forth since RAM can only hold so much data. Since the GPU and CPU can only interface with the RAM, the XBox 360 is more efficient when games require frequent switches between different sets of data from the hard drive. This is because the XBox 360 has more RAM so it has to transfer data from the hard drive to RAM less often than the Playstation 3. On the other hand, the Playstation 3 is more efficient the less often data needs to be transferred between the hard drive and RAM.
In conclusion, most of those who understand hardware agrees that the Playstation 3 has more potential than the XBox 360, but software-wise, the XBox 360 is easier to program and optimize for. It will take at least another year or few more years before most developers understand how tobetteroptimize software games for the Playstation 3 due to its complicated 8 core processors; Yes, the Playstation 3 has 8 cores, but 1 is dormant, and 1 isdedicated for the OS and security, sothat leaves6 for processing the actual game.
*Note: Ireferred to video memory (for the GPU) and main memory (for the CPU) both as main memory and RAM for simplicity.
see.. yet another wanna-be systemwars *SUPERSTAR* that claims his knowledge of the 360 and PS3 architecture is superior to that of John Carmack! Its people like you that cause the problem here, there are people that visit these forums that don't know anything tech wise and read the garbage you and everyone else write, then they go elsewhere armed with lies and twisted truths and spread it. 10 people turn into 20 then 30 and so on! bottom line is, anyone that comes into systemwars *IS* a *FANBOY* and really shouldn't be taken serious unless they have a creditable source. I think John Carmack is more than creditable enough to prove a point. *THE 360's MEMORY IS SUPERIOR END OF STORY*[QUOTE="TooBadUnknown"][QUOTE="Cali3350"]What the HELL is with people talking about things they do not understand at all. Ram holds data. The PS3 has less, so it holds less. Its really that simple.
xX0LDSCH00LXx
From all the posts I have read so far, Cali3350 is the only one who sounds like he understands what RAM is.
Just to let you guys know, RAM is what we refer to as main memory. Games require gigabytes of data nowadays and are stored in the hard drive. However, the processors (graphic/GPU and central/CPU) can only communicate with the main memory (RAM). Main memory is loads times faster than the hard drive (in the hundreds or thousands);the hard drive is very slow.
What makes a game take so long to load or process is because the hard drive has to frequently transfer data to main memory (RAM) and vice versa; the hard drive and RAM switch data back and forth since RAM can only hold so much data. Since the GPU and CPU can only interface with the RAM, the XBox 360 is more efficient when games require frequent switches between different sets of data from the hard drive. This is because the XBox 360 has more RAM so it has to transfer data from the hard drive to RAM less often than the Playstation 3. On the other hand, the Playstation 3 is more efficient the less often data needs to be transferred between the hard drive and RAM.
In conclusion, most of those who understand hardware agrees that the Playstation 3 has more potential than the XBox 360, but software-wise, the XBox 360 is easier to program and optimize for. It will take at least another year or few more years before most developers understand how tobetteroptimize software games for the Playstation 3 due to its complicated 8 core processors; Yes, the Playstation 3 has 8 cores, but 1 is dormant, and 1 isdedicated for the OS and security, sothat leaves6 for processing the actual game.
*Note: Ireferred to video memory (for the GPU) and main memory (for the CPU) both as main memory and RAM for simplicity.
see.. yet another wanna-be systemwars *SUPERSTAR* that claims his knowledge of the 360 and PS3 architecture is superior to that of John Carmack! Its people like you that cause the problem here, there are people that visit these forums that don't know anything tech wise and read the garbage you and everyone else write, then they go elsewhere armed with lies and twisted truths and spread it. 10 people turn into 20 then 30 and so on! bottom line is, anyone that comes into systemwars *IS* a *FANBOY* and really shouldn't be taken serious unless they have a creditable source. I think John Carmack is more than creditablesource to prove a point. *THE 360's MEMORY IS SUPERIOR END OF STORY* Go to school learn to program, find a job with one of these big developers then start schooling people when you got some creditable histoy behind you!bottom line is, anyone that comes into systemwars *IS* a *FANBOY* and really shouldn't be taken serious unless they have a creditable source. I think John Carmack is more than creditablesource to prove a point. *THE 360's MEMORY IS SUPERIOR END OF STORY*xX0LDSCH00LXx
Look who's talking :roll:
By the way, too bad you can't understand what I wrote because I also think that having more memory rather than having a faster speed is better at such a low memory capacity.
Wrong.
PS3 has one core with 8 SPU's.
beardtm
I definitely remembered wrong on what I read then. And you're right 1 PPE (core)and8 SPE from what I just read now at wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_Hardware
and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_%28microprocessor%29#Synergistic_Processing_Elements_.28SPE.29
Anyways, if you want a supporting source on my other PS3 and XBox 360 claims, its here, http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453&p=4
OS doesn't take up 96 mb anymore correct me if I am wrong. this was changed in the firmware update.Scarletred
[QUOTE="marklarmer"]i'm glad you kept it short.
But no not compared to the 360, compared to a PC however....
Poop_Slash
But Consoles have been know to do more with Less Ram then PC's.....
Devs can Optimize the hell out of the Ram on Console.
explain doom3 being cut down big time or farcry being rebuild since the xbox could handle the huge environment due to lack of ram. you can only do so much with limited ram and pc game have min recomended requirment this doesn't mean it wont run with less ram 256mb ram could run doom3 just not well since it would start paging to the hdd
Windows XP doesnt read over 4 gigs I believe. And 64 gigs in Vista?PC,
as much ram as you want, average being around 1gig.
CPU/GPU. also customizable :D
gamerchris810
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment