Does PS3 lack Ram?

  • 66 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for beardtm
beardtm

312

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 beardtm
Member since 2004 • 312 Posts
Well its apparently easy to port from pc onto 360, so i still reckon it'll look better.
Avatar image for joe_g_patton
joe_g_patton

1548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#52 joe_g_patton
Member since 2003 • 1548 Posts
I declare this thread lemming/cow battle flamebait. PS3 is doing ok on RAM if you AXE me? Y'all axe me? huh? I thought you knew!
Avatar image for AgentA-Mi6
AgentA-Mi6

16739

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#53 AgentA-Mi6
Member since 2006 • 16739 Posts

Does the Wii lacks ram...?

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#55 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
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


The 360's "lack" of RAM prevents it from getting games like Crysis.

The 360's RAM is limiting in that respect, it is a great setup for programming mind you. And most devs aren't complaining because they haven't hit the wall yet. Give it time.
Avatar image for xX0LDSCH00LXx
xX0LDSCH00LXx

1423

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56 xX0LDSCH00LXx
Member since 2007 • 1423 Posts
[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="xX0LDSCH00LXx"]Yea one just has more than the other.xX0LDSCH00LXx


The numbers really don't matter. The PS3 has 512 MB total RAM as does the 360. The architecture of that RAM is setup differently in both consoles. In the PS3 (IIRC), the RSX has full access to both sets of RAM while the Cell has only access to the 256MB of main system RAM. In the 360, both CPU and GPU have full access to all 512. Both are different setups and both cause different problems for developers. It really doesn't matter which one has more as they both limit what developers can do.

You are full of crap and you know it!!! I have not heard ANY devs complaining about the ram in the 360 to date.

QuakeCon 2007: John Carmack: "the biggest thing we worry about right now is memory. Microsoft extracts 32 megs for their system stuff and Sony takes 96. That's a big deal because the PS3 is already partitioned memory where the 360 is 512 megs of unified and on the PS3 is 256 of video, 256 of memory minus 96 for their system...stuff. Stuff is not the first thing that came to my mind there. (laughs)

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."

Avatar image for inertk
inertk

3385

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#57 inertk
Member since 2007 • 3385 Posts
[QUOTE="xX0LDSCH00LXx"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="xX0LDSCH00LXx"]Yea one just has more than the other.xX0LDSCH00LXx


The numbers really don't matter. The PS3 has 512 MB total RAM as does the 360. The architecture of that RAM is setup differently in both consoles. In the PS3 (IIRC), the RSX has full access to both sets of RAM while the Cell has only access to the 256MB of main system RAM. In the 360, both CPU and GPU have full access to all 512. Both are different setups and both cause different problems for developers. It really doesn't matter which one has more as they both limit what developers can do.

You are full of crap and you know it!!! I have not heard ANY devs complaining about the ram in the 360 to date.

QuakeCon 2007: John Carmack: "the biggest thing we worry about right now is memory. Microsoft extracts 32 megs for their system stuff and Sony takes 96. That's a big deal because the PS3 is already partitioned memory where the 360 is 512 megs of unified and on the PS3 is 256 of video, 256 of memory minus 96 for their system...stuff. Stuff is not the first thing that came to my mind there. (laughs)

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.

Avatar image for xX0LDSCH00LXx
xX0LDSCH00LXx

1423

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#58 xX0LDSCH00LXx
Member since 2007 • 1423 Posts
"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" QuakeCon 2007: John Carmack
Avatar image for TooBadUnknown
TooBadUnknown

28

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#59 TooBadUnknown
Member since 2005 • 28 Posts

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.

Avatar image for xX0LDSCH00LXx
xX0LDSCH00LXx

1423

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#60 xX0LDSCH00LXx
Member since 2007 • 1423 Posts
[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*
Avatar image for xX0LDSCH00LXx
xX0LDSCH00LXx

1423

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61 xX0LDSCH00LXx
Member since 2007 • 1423 Posts
[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!
Avatar image for TooBadUnknown
TooBadUnknown

28

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#62 TooBadUnknown
Member since 2005 • 28 Posts

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.

Avatar image for beardtm
beardtm

312

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#63 beardtm
Member since 2004 • 312 Posts

Wrong.

PS3 has one core with 8 SPU's.

Avatar image for TooBadUnknown
TooBadUnknown

28

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64 TooBadUnknown
Member since 2005 • 28 Posts

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

Avatar image for killzowned24
killzowned24

7345

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 killzowned24
Member since 2007 • 7345 Posts
Just wait for UT3.
Avatar image for TyrantDragon55
TyrantDragon55

6851

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#66 TyrantDragon55
Member since 2004 • 6851 Posts
It should be noted that it is possible for developers to access some of the system memory to be used with the 256 MBs of video memory, although this can cause performance problems. I also don't believe that the OS takes up that much memory anymore.
Avatar image for zero_snake99
zero_snake99

3478

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#67 zero_snake99
Member since 2004 • 3478 Posts

OS doesn't take up 96 mb anymore correct me if I am wrong. this was changed in the firmware update.Scarletred

You're correct. I'm not sure how much it takes, but anyways..

But I think Devs can do as much with the ram on the 360 as they can with ps3. Yes one is unified and one isn't. So far the only dev to complain about the lack of memory is Carmack. Yes he is a VERY credible and well known dev, but look how GT 5 is looking? And it's supposed to have FULL model damaging (look it up if you dont beleive me). They havent complained once, same for Guerrilla and look at Heavenly Sword, MASSIVE battles, and they aren't complaining either. I just think its a matter of how dedicated you are and what knowledge you have on the hardware/software you are working on. Besides if I'm correct, Carmack has been programming to work with PC's (which have more ram than consoles) for SEVERAL years.

Avatar image for imprezawrx500
imprezawrx500

19187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#68 imprezawrx500
Member since 2004 • 19187 Posts
[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

Avatar image for legalize3
legalize3

1670

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 legalize3
Member since 2007 • 1670 Posts

in short

the more cell u use the less mem you need

so no ps3 doesn not lack ram the ps3 lacks educated people like carmack who has to hire people...

i mean looks at his engine its nothing more then a souped up motorstorm engine

Avatar image for RichieRich555
RichieRich555

410

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#70 RichieRich555
Member since 2007 • 410 Posts

PC,

as much ram as you want, average being around 1gig.

CPU/GPU. also customizable :D

gamerchris810
Windows XP doesnt read over 4 gigs I believe. And 64 gigs in Vista?
Avatar image for scottishsohot
scottishsohot

27

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71 scottishsohot
Member since 2007 • 27 Posts
ps3 sucks get over it
Avatar image for Corvin
Corvin

7266

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#72 Corvin
Member since 2002 • 7266 Posts
Both PS3 and 360 should have had more RAM. I know consoles generally need less RAM than a PC (no bloated OS full of services and programs to store) but I believe both systems could benefit tremendously from even just 128mb more RAM. Seems like one of the things they really skimp on when they build these consoles.