ps3 does NOT lack ram!!1

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

Carmack is a freaking programmer ffs.

Im sure he knows the technical aspects of either console, moreso than most people on any gaming forum.

legalize3

thats why he needs to hire people to program for cell

hes just an old school programmer a guy who cant keep up anymore with newer technology..

please ...dont tell me you were sober when you posted this

From a PC stand point gaming wise, you usually build in importance GPU then RAM/CPU. RAM and CPU are about equal in importance but I give an edge to RAM as you can get more benifit, budget wise, from your system by downgrading $200 dollars in a cpu and doubling your RAM.

It is a common mistake for many "at home" PC builders to bottleneck there system with a subpar GPU versus the rest of a system. Just think of it in this way, your CPU finishes its calculations and sends it to the GPU, but now has to wait on the GPU to process its tasks before the CPU can proceed, so it either buffers information or takes a 5 microsecond coffee break.

While the Cell is an interesting idea and the PS3 definetly impressive, Sony made two major mistakes with their implementation. One, they bottle necked the Cell with their GPU, which is compounded by the lack of accessable RAM to buffer information. So yeah, you got an amazing CPU with some impressive specs, but you can never show it save in running anything that isn't graphic intensive. How they figured that with a game system, I do not know.

Secondly, if you make something "revolutionary" as they call it, you BETTER have a crack team of trainers to help out developers to understand this technology. In reality we don't know the specifics of Sony's training programs to help people understand the new yet extremely different programming schemes. However, from the "whining and quibbling" we've seen of late, I think Sony needs to ste up to the bar more often.

All in all, its a good system but I fear that this system will not last 10 years, especially how fast technology is changing. Oh, and I don't think the 360/WII will either;) If you have them, enjoy them here and now, and stop worrying about specifics/problems that belong to a developers forum.

maabus99

r....am? :|

[QUOTE="xX0LDSCH00LXx"]MODS LOCK THIS TOPIC!Primevil702

Would probably be best - but, you guys should stop spreading FUD. The OS originally was at 96Meg usage which was dropped down to 84Meg max usage as of SDK 1.6, and that's if all OS features are active(except ingame web browsing, but who needs that) - the OS will continue to be streamlined with future SDKs, don't you fanbois worry your little heads off.

Bottom line is:

CELL is powerful, and theoretically can surpass the consoles.

It features Blu-Ray, which can hold up to 50GB data.

But no matter what happens, it still has little ram (256 MB) and really is quite low. Maybe it was high a few years ago, but now, it's quite low.

Still, despite everything, what matters the most is the developer's talent and not the Technology within the console.

The amount of ram isn't the problem it has more to do with how the ram is used by the OS. The PS3 doesn't depend on ram that much. I see this when running F@H on the PS3 because the temp of the console actually drops quite a bit and this is working the cell fairly hard while folding. jimm895

yeah, it lacks games. x_boyfriend

for now

[QUOTE="x_boyfriend"]yeah, it lacks games. hellrazor06

for now

And the next few months!

[QUOTE="Meu2k7"][QUOTE="legalize3"]

in short

the more cell u use the lessram you need + the Xdrram is 12x faster then your typical desktop ram

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

i mean hes just an old school programmer the thing he knows is how to program for early 80 pcs looks at his engine its nothing more then a souped up motorstorm engine... thats why he complained about multi processors he cant keep up

here carmack get yourself educated and move on dont stay in the early 80s...

http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cell/Cell1_v2.html

besides ps3 does not use 96 mb of ram anymore god where is his head

legalize3

XDR RAM = Very high latencys , which takes away its greatness..... sorry ... clockspeed isnt everything.

same can be said about xbox360 ram

high ram slow clockspeed which takes away its greatness.... sorry ... more ram isnt everything

PS3 has 256MB XDR RAM & 256MB GDDR3 RAM.

Xbox360 has 512MB GDDR3 RAM + 10MB EDRAM.

PS3 OS uses 84MB RAM (recent patch reduced the usage down from 96MB)

Xbox360 OS uses 32MB RAM.

PS3total: 428MB RAM

Xbox360 total: 490MB RAM

developers would much rather have Xbox360 RAM available to them than the PS3 RAM. yes the XDR RAM is faster than GDDR3 RAM- but a lot of it is being eaten up by the OS & the 10MB EDRAM the X360 has is VERY useful in the graphics department. also when it comes to the crunch- having a greater amount of slower RAM gives developers much more flexibility- having a 256MB (well less due the OS) of fast RAM is good but not good if you need MORE RAM again.

[QUOTE="Shusty_lives"]Still Carmack said the PS3 is the most powerful.Planeforger

"Theoretically" more powerful, actually. Then again, he also called it the "lowest common denominator"...

Ok, no he did not. An Xbox fan said it when attempting to twist his words. Just because you put quotes around something, doesnt mean he really said it.

in short

the more cell u use the lessram you need + the Xdrram is 12x faster then your typical desktop ram

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

i mean hes just an old school programmer the thing he knows is how to program for early 80 pcs looks at his engine its nothing more then a souped up motorstorm engine... thats why he complained about multi processors he cant keep up

here carmack get yourself educated and move on dont stay in the early 80s...

http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cell/Cell1_v2.html

besides ps3 does not use 96 mb of ram anymore god where is his head

legalize3

[QUOTE="SUD123456"]

Of course it lacks RAM, at least if you mean lacks in comparison to the 360. There is no doubt about it. Sheesh. This is so obvious that it doesn't need a new thread.

One has 512 unified memory and one does not. One has an extra 10MB embedded eDRAM and one does not. One uses less O/S memory, and one uses a lot more. Only fanboys refuse to acknowledge that the 360 GPU is better than the PS3 GPU. That is the objective truth.

Now, whether the overall PS3 system configuration can overcome the RAM/GPU shortcomings is another story. Perhaps so. But so far, the penalty seems to be an overall performance that is no better than the 360 and more effort is required to get there. Sony fans live in the future with 'the potential'. MS fans live in the now.

In any case, Sony gimped the Cell by opting for a relatively weak GPU. Seriously, which would you rather have?

1. PS3 as is

2. Xbox360 as is

3. PS3 Cell CPU combined with the 360 Xenos GPU.

legalize3

key featue is cell does not need alot ram once your game is optimized with cell in mind.. cell does things fast nothing have to be stored in the ram for a long time

carmack is a guy who built his game around the gpu the pc way of thinking ps3 is different you need to built with cpucell in mind this is why he needs to hire someone this is why he does not like multi core cpus this is why his engine lacks next gen..

see the linux distro on ps3 runs smooth with only the cell and 265 mb lets do the same on xbox360 only cpu anmd 265 mb it will blow up...

manager/sales type explains to the engineers:
"Let me explain what video compression is..."

Dilbert: "Would you stop if I pointed out that everyone in this room except you is an electrical engineer?"

manager/sales type: "Zeros are round and fat compared to ones..."

Dilbert: "I'm begging you..."

It doesn't lack ram, instead the ram is bottlenecked. Instead of 512 shared, there is 256 dedicated to each part. Not cool when the GPU needs 30 more megs of ram and the CPU doesn't need it.Wasdie

Bingo.

in short

the more cell u use the lessram you need + the Xdrram is 12x faster then your typical desktop ram

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

i mean hes just an old school programmer the thing he knows is how to program for early 80 pcs looks at his engine its nothing more then a souped up motorstorm engine... thats why he complained about multi processors he cant keep up

here carmack get yourself educated and move on dont stay in the early 80s...

http://www.blachford.info/computer/Cell/Cell1_v2.html

besides ps3 does not use 96 mb of ram anymore god where is his head

legalize3

256mb - 96mb = 160mb Ram

if you dont think 160mb is not lacking, then you dont have a clue son.

Do not compare XDR ram to DDR2 and 3 ram. You can't compare them directly. XDR ram has much less bandwidth tan DDR2 and DDR3 ram. XDR ram at 3 GHz should be comparable to DDR2 at 667MHz or posibly 800MHz.

[QUOTE="Primevil702"]

[QUOTE="xX0LDSCH00LXx"]MODS LOCK THIS TOPIC!xX0LDSCH00LXx

Would probably be best - but, you guys should stop spreading FUD. The OS originally was at 96Meg usage which was dropped down to 84Meg max usage as of SDK 1.6, and that's if all OS features are active(except ingame web browsing, but who needs that) - the OS will continue to be streamlined with future SDKs, don't you fanbois worry your little heads off.

I'm a superstar? But yeah, here's the link http://www.innerbits.com/blog/2007/05/09/ps3-memory-footprint/

Yeah what the hell does John Carmack know? :roll:-RPGamer-

Obviously not much about PS3 SDKs, seeing as the bit he statedwas outdated by a few months.