• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

What do you think could be the memory setup of your preferred console, or one of the new consoles?

  • GDDR6

    Votes: 566 41.0%
  • GDDR6 + DDR4

    Votes: 540 39.2%
  • HBM2

    Votes: 53 3.8%
  • HBM2 + DDR4

    Votes: 220 16.0%

  • Total voters
    1,379
Status
Not open for further replies.

modiz

Member
Oct 8, 2018
17,814
I don't think a reference to access timing directly suggests DRAM vs SRAM. There's various things that affect access time.

On SRAM vs DRAM, I guess taking the patents' explanations at face value and trying to keep it simple:

SRAM might be faster/'better' for access to low-write, high-read data
DRAM might be faster/'better' for access to high-write, low-read data (at least vs a cache-miss in a SRAM setup)

The patent makes the suggestion that you might want to optimise for the former scenario in a games machine more than the latter, that it would be more advantageous to optimise for read-access to game asset data.

DRAM would I guess, also potentially have more space for cached data, at least depending on the size of your address lookup tables in use. Although there might be nothing to stop an implementation using SRAM for address lookup and block operation data, and a smaller-than-typical amount of DRAM on the side just for caching. SRAM has some other side advantages too - namely the ability to use it at a lower power-cost for standby mode operations.

As always, I wouldn't conclude for sure what the setup in either machine actually is at this point.
this would fit with MS talking about their SSD as virtual ram while cerny is talking about the SSD as a means of eliminating loading and streaming assets as fast as possible.
basically MS are planning to use the SSD as an actual additional ram which they write to a lot, while the SSD based off sony's patents will mostly read data very fast.
wonder what will developers favor more.
i do fear that writing to the SSD that much might increase the likelyhood of a SSD fault.
 
Oct 25, 2017
17,897
Matt only said that to calm the storm

#TeamReiner
I still think it is pretty funny how things instantly settled down the moment he said that lol.

You had folk who have never posted in these threads show up once that 'PS5 is stronger' thing started making rounds. Matt says he feels Next Box will be stronger? They gone. ⚰
 

modiz

Member
Oct 8, 2018
17,814
Which brings us back to the need to copy game data between storage devices which means that a big SSD won't be a good solution.
why not? with a big SSD you can just have the OS swap out the games that were not used for the longest time, just save the startup date of all game applications within the SSD.

also means that you dont need to wait for a loading of HDD to SSD the next time you open the game, and we know sony are going for eliminating loading screens as part of the marketing thanks to jason schreier.
 

dgrdsv

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,821
why not? with a big SSD you can just have the OS swap out the games that were not used for the longest time, just save the startup date of all game applications within the SSD.

also means that you dont need to wait for a loading of HDD to SSD the next time you open the game, and we know sony are going for eliminating loading screens as part of the marketing thanks to jason schreier.
This is essentially what I was suggesting a couple of pages back. But people here seem to think that a 1TB+ ultrafast SSD would be cheaper than a smaller one and an upgradeable HDD.
 

modiz

Member
Oct 8, 2018
17,814
This is essentially what I was suggesting a couple of pages back. But people here seem to think that a 1TB+ ultrafast SSD would be cheaper than a smaller one and an upgradeable HDD.
i do think they will go with a singular SSD though, just have an external spot to insert external drive and then apply my suggestion in the case that the SSD is full.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,849
I still think it is pretty funny how things instantly settled down the moment he said that lol.

You had folk who have never posted in these threads show up once that 'PS5 is stronger' thing started making rounds. Matt says he feels Next Box will be stronger? They gone. ⚰

Perhaps "they gone" because the thread had turned into a "why can't we just talk about Sony" or "it was better just talking about Sony" whinefest.

Yeah the thread is less of a battleground, because the only people left standing are predominantly Sony guys. For better or worse. I do think that the next gen speculation threads should be separated by platform to lessen the war zone.

Please don't take my comment as a dig, I am just stating the obvious.

Let the dogpiling commence. Lol
 

gofreak

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,734
this would fit with MS talking about their SSD as virtual ram while cerny is talking about the SSD as a means of eliminating loading and streaming assets as fast as possible.
basically MS are planning to use the SSD as an actual additional ram which they write to a lot

I really don't think that's envisaged - using storage for working-set (high write) memory. Your performance would tank vs local system memory. When MS - or anyone - talks about virtual RAM, they're talking about paging in and out data, to/from working memory rather than using the storage directly. Given how much asset data, data in memory, is actually static, I don't know if makes sense to prioritise page-out (write) over page-in (read).

A 'standard' SSD will improve both these things anyway. But if we're talking about which you might want to optimise further, for a virtual RAM or more explicit streaming/managed scenario or whatever, I'm not sure I'd put writes over reads. If they diverge on DRAM vs SRAM or whatever, I think it'll just be because one was happy enough with a standard-ish approach and one wanted to trade off further in favour of reads.
 

BreakAtmo

Member
Nov 12, 2017
12,806
Australia
why not? with a big SSD you can just have the OS swap out the games that were not used for the longest time, just save the startup date of all game applications within the SSD.

also means that you dont need to wait for a loading of HDD to SSD the next time you open the game, and we know sony are going for eliminating loading screens as part of the marketing thanks to jason schreier.

Yep. The OS would just silently remove the least-recently-played game once the SSD was like 900GB full (either deleting it or moving it to your external HDD). Then you'd just have to transfer or download it later. Simple, and it would be a while before you had to really worry about that, especially if you chose to run older BC games from the HDD (if possible).
 

cjn83

Banned
Jul 25, 2018
284
The heretic unity tech demo and the unreal rebirth open world demo are both using cards with 8gb vram. One looks straight up cgi. The other looks photorealistic.

There are dozens of unreal engine demos out there both open world and indoir areas that look photorealistic.

The unity open world mega city demo is also running on 8gb cards.


This demo is running on a 2080ti which is a 11gb card. Native 4k. Highest settings.


Yeah. And with framerates dipping in to the teens whenever the sky isn't there to help him.
 

BreakAtmo

Member
Nov 12, 2017
12,806
Australia
This is essentially what I was suggesting a couple of pages back. But people here seem to think that a 1TB+ ultrafast SSD would be cheaper than a smaller one and an upgradeable HDD.

I do think it would be, actually. If we start from the position of having a 256GB SSD and choose which setup to go with, it makes sense to me that simply increasing the density of the SSD you already have would be cheaper than adding an entirely new, comparatively large and complicated component with failure-prone moving parts. Especially if SSDs continue to shrink in price while HDDs stand still as fewer people and companies buy them.
 

modiz

Member
Oct 8, 2018
17,814
I really don't think that's envisaged - using storage for working-set (high write) memory. Your performance would tank vs local system memory. When MS - or anyone - talks about virtual RAM, they're talking about paging in and out data, to/from working memory rather than using the storage directly. Given how much asset data, data in memory, is actually static, I don't know if makes sense to prioritise page-out (write) over page-in (read).

A 'standard' SSD will improve both these things anyway. But if we're talking about which you might want to optimise further, for a virtual RAM or more explicit streaming/managed scenario or whatever, I'm not sure I'd put writes over reads.
i agree on that, having high reads seem more important, and if we are really getting ~5GB/s read speed, the loadingless future sony wants might be a reality with only 4 seconds needed to fill the memory, all sounds really exciting.
 
Oct 25, 2017
17,897
You tinker!

I like your spirit Drifting but even you would agree a 2019 release would be more likely than that.

But hey, dreams are good....
I think PS3 will be a E3 megaton announcement but I definitely don't think they will have the entire PS library on PS5. I'm definitely just dreaming with that.

Perhaps "they gone" because the thread had turned into a "why can't we just talk about Sony" or "it was better just talking about Sony" whinefest.

Yeah the thread is less of a battleground, because the only people left standing are predominantly Sony guys. For better or worse. I do think that the next gen speculation threads should be separated by platform to lessen the war zone.

Please don't take my comment as a dig, I am just stating the obvious.

Let the dogpiling commence. Lol
Nah, but I can respect your interpretation. 🙏🏾
 

Deleted member 12635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
Germany
Perhaps "they gone" because the thread had turned into a "why can't we just talk about Sony" or "it was better just talking about Sony" whinefest.

Yeah the thread is less of a battleground, because the only people left standing are predominantly Sony guys. For better or worse. I do think that the next gen speculation threads should be separated by platform to lessen the war zone.

Please don't take my comment as a dig, I am just stating the obvious.

Let the dogpiling commence. Lol
The outcome would be the same as some wouldn't able to resist to console warring in the "other" thread. It is us members that make threads bad, not the topic of a thread!

I personally think it was a wise decision to put both console speculations together as they share so many design principles this time. It was not obvious from the beginning but it is obvious now.
 

chris 1515

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,074
Barcelona Spain
This is essentially what I was suggesting a couple of pages back. But people here seem to think that a 1TB+ ultrafast SSD would be cheaper than a smaller one and an upgradeable HDD.

I just say that the solution inside the patent is expensive to be used in addition with a HDD. It means a second CPU, an hardware decompressor, a 256 GB SSD. The second CPU and hardware decompressor are probably a big part of the extra cost. They even gives some example explaining the speed of the NAND Flash depends of the power of the CPU and hardware decompressor. The NAND itself is some quad channel NAND, not 8 channels like in PCIE4 PC SSD.

HDD + SSD advantage is the storage size. Disadvantage is loading the first launch of a game. I don't think the speed in loading can be as high as the custom SSD. Custom SSD can stream compressed data.

The disadvantage of custom SSD is storage size and means usage of an external HDD or SSD for storage.
 
Last edited:

BitsandBytes

Member
Dec 16, 2017
4,576
I think PS3 will be a E3 megaton announcement but I definitely don't think they will have the entire PS library on PS5. I'm definitely just dreaming with that

Out of all the options PS3 is the least likely for me. Microsoft have shown just how much time, effort and cost it takes to do BC and can't see Sony putting in that kind of effort. I can only see them continue with hand picked remakes/remasters until there is evidence otherwise.
 

modiz

Member
Oct 8, 2018
17,814
Out of all the options PS3 is the least likely for me. Microsoft have shown just how much time, effort and cost it takes to do BC and can't see Sony putting in that kind of effort. I can only see them continue with hand picked remakes/remasters until there is evidence otherwise.
sony wont do it like MS, they will just use an emulator and say that it may or may not work, the games they got verified as working and fully licensed will be sold on the store.
 

Thorrgal

Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,277
It's not safe to say which has the edge when we know nothing about their clock frequencies etc. lol

It's not important either. It's just pleasing for one set of fanboys vs another.

I think it is my friend, at least at this point.

It's important insofar as, knowing this, MS will try to revert it, and Matt thinks they'll succeed in doing so.

Independently of the outcome, all of this information can help us surmise things like price, which for me is the key puzzle part missing.

So no, it's not important which one ends up on top, but yes, this info is relevant to the discussion in a big way, because I was a firm believer of $399 and now I'm on the $499 due to it
 

Pheonix

Banned
Dec 14, 2018
5,990
St Kitts
Perhaps "they gone" because the thread had turned into a "why can't we just talk about Sony" or "it was better just talking about Sony" whinefest.

Yeah the thread is less of a battleground, because the only people left standing are predominantly Sony guys. For better or worse. I do think that the next gen speculation threads should be separated by platform to lessen the war zone.

Please don't take my comment as a dig, I am just stating the obvious.

Let the dogpiling commence. Lol
funny thing is... talk like this is exactly what makes things like console waring a thing... and in fairness the post you replied to. Points that contribute in no way whatsoever to the topic of next-gen consoles. Be it their tech, their strategies or their features... instead a post dedicated to the whole us vs them nonsense.

They are gone because they were more interested in one console is more powerful than the other than they were in the actual tech that went into it. When their preferred console was on tp thy felt the need to post. We can say this about posters on both sides of the fence. And I don't see why next-gen threads should be separated. If people can't talk constructively, well we have mods for that.
 

modiz

Member
Oct 8, 2018
17,814
That's one of the biggest questions I have for next gen. Currently I have like 8tb of space and around 600 games installed. Having to pay for SSD storage for all my games next gen will be a big ole biatch.
that wont happen, there will probably be around 1TB of SSD internally, and you could add the additional storage externally, but for every game that is not on the SSD you will need to wait for the system to copy the game to the SSD and replaced it with the last game you didnt play on the SSD.
 

chris 1515

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,074
Barcelona Spain
that wont happen, there will probably be around 1TB of SSD internally, and you could add the additional storage externally, but for every game that is not on the SSD you will need to wait for the system to copy the game to the SSD and replaced it with the last game you didnt play on the SSD.

Another possible consequence to use a tinier SSD against a bigger SSD is maybe with a big one you can use QLC not sure it will be the case and TLC NAND will maybe be used for SSD + HDD...

EDIT: No difference of write cycle between the two is not so big...
 

DrKeo

Banned
Mar 3, 2019
2,600
Israel
Are you alluding to possibility that each CU will be designed to handle RT and non-RT functions? If so it will be interesting to see what can be rendered with a budget of 16.67ms (60fps) and 33.33ms (30fps) if that function acts just like any of core render passes.
I meant something similar to NVIDIA's solution in the RTX series, a small part of the CU is designed to handle RT and most of the CU is the usual rasterization machine that we are used to seeing. Every CU has some part which is dedicated to RT, just like NVIDIA's SM:
image11-601x1024.jpg

Smaller custom soldered SSD (128-256 GBs) acting as a user transparent cache and a scratch pad memory plus a replaceable 2-4 TB HDD would be my current bet. Games would copy the data needed for streaming to SSD at first launch and reuse this copy on consequtive launches. This data would be gradually overwritten by next games you'll launch. Most people don't play more than a couple of games at the same time and it would be a waste to use SSD just for data storage.
I do think Microsoft is using this solution. Sony? Less likely.
An HDD is an incompressible cost of 35 dollars, after you need to add a 256 GB NAND Flash, a second CPU for NAND Flash management, a hardware decompressor, a custom controller. This is too much... I don't expect more than a 1TB SSD...

Data don't need to be unpacked at first launch of the game after the game install or you speak of the game install?
HDD might be 35$, but if you have a 256GB SSD instead of a 1TB one? It will probably compensate for that 35$ difference. A 2.5" 2TB HDD is ~70$ for the consumer today, I'm guessing that Sony and Microsoft can buy it for a lot less than that.
 

Deleted member 12635

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
Germany
I think it is my friend, at least at this point.

It's important insofar as, knowing this, MS will try to revert it, and Matt thinks they'll succeed in doing so.

Independently of the outcome, all of this information can help us surmise things like price, which for me is the key puzzle part missing.

So no, it's not important which one ends up on top, but yes, this info is relevant to the discussion in a big way, because I was a firm believer of $399 and now I'm on the $499 due to it
Nothing is factual other than the things we got from Sony and MS. All stuff from Andrew Reiner or Matt is still unconfirmed and due to it not a fact.

Talking about launch prices I agree that $499 has a higher possibility than $399.
 

Gamer17

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
9,399
Nothing is factual other than the things we got from Sony and MS. All stuff from Andrew Reiner or Matt is still unconfirmed and due to it not a fact.

Talking about launch prices I agree that $499 has a higher possibility than $399.
Becareful vx1 doesn't see 499 lol

just like he was insisting November 2019 for release date which turned out to be wrong , his 399 will be proven wrong as well soon enough ;)
 

chris 1515

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,074
Barcelona Spain
I meant something similar to NVIDIA's solution in the RTX series, a small part of the CU is designed to handle RT and most of the CU is the usual rasterization machine that we are used to seeing. Every CU has some part which is dedicated to RT, just like NVIDIA's SM:
image11-601x1024.jpg


I do think Microsoft is using this solution. Sony? Less likely.

HDD might be 35$, but if you have a 256GB SSD instead of a 1TB one? It will probably compensate for that 35$ difference. A 2.5" 2TB HDD is ~70$ for the consumer today, I'm guessing that Sony and Microsoft can buy it for a lot less than that.

The price of a HDD is 35 $ incompressible. The only difference is storage size growing during the time. One day it can be 3 or 4 TB for the same price.

All mechanical and eltecro mechanical part + optical drive and HDDD of PS4 were 100 dollars of PS4 cost at launch and because of mechanical part there is an incompressible price as much as the SOC... I am sure using a custom SSD 256 GB like in patent + a 2TB HDD against a 1TB SSD is probably a little bit more expensive at launch and the cost difference grows in time...

409628-ihs-xbox-one-teardown.jpg
 
Last edited:

Thorrgal

Member
Oct 26, 2017
12,277
Nothing is factual other than the things we got from Sony and MS. All stuff from Andrew Reiner or Matt is still unconfirmed and due to it not a fact.

Talking about launch prices I agree that $499 has a higher possibility than $399.

I think anything Matt or Zhugex say for example is as factual as it can be without being official, that's why I said "Is safe to say". I didn't say "It's a confirmed fact"

It's safe to say PS5 will have hardware RT?

I think it's safe to say, wouldn't you agree?

Edit: Btw what is this arguing with semantics when noone here (Kyofu, me and you) is a native english speaker? I said "Is safe to say" when I could've said "It's probably the case" or whatever other idiom. I think both of you missed the point but whatever..

Edit2: Regarding the price if we believe those 2 things are "probably" true then $499 is more likely. That's the link
 
Last edited:

AegonSnake

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,566
My guess is that PS5 silicon is near final design, and MS is far from being final, so they can still tweak it somehow or improve the cooling solution, make a bigger box, in order to significantly overclock the APU (like +10%), just enough to beat PS5.
I think the main reason why Phil didnt reveal the tflops number is because he knows he can always increase the clocks to gain massive gains in performance or at least in tflops numbers. i dont know if they can go from 1.55 ghz to 1.8 ghz without making major changes to the SOC, but we will see. i think they will be able to get 1.7 ghz and 12 tflops.

11.1 vs 12.9 tflops looks much worse than 12.0 vs 12.9 tflops.

at the end of the day it wont matter when it comes to actual performance difference but it will matter when it comes to marketing, it will matter when it comes to losing every digital foundry comparison and definitely winning the console warring online. i remember last gen how pretty much everyone knew that the ps4 was more powerful even though not many gamers even knew what the hell a tflop was.
 

Gamer17

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
9,399
This seems pretty childish to admit honestly. Then again I find the whole concept of ignore lists (over petty differences of opinion) mind boggling and a little pointless when others quote someone on the "list".
We have different opinion which leads to nonsense discussion .I m 100% sure he has also put me on ignore list anyways .he doesn't see what I post and I don't see what he posts and we don't need to argue for pages lol

As for price Sony has used every PR it could to turn our attention to higher price point .if we want to disregard that and keep saying 399 doesn't make much sense to me .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.