Support NeoGAF

[Kobold]

Let's say it this way:

It won't give you more frames per second or more processing power, it migh even give you less frames per second if more memory means to the developer more detail on the screen. But potentially it could speed up loading and mean more detail, as well as make larger levels possible without loading (streaming) etc.

But that's all Potentially. The optimal way to utilise the memory is up to the developer and varies per title.

 

[Dr_Cogent]

Let's say it this way:

It won't give you more frames per second or more processing power, it migh even give you less frames per second if more memory means to the developer more detail on the screen. But potentially it could speed up loading and mean more detail, as well as make larger levels possible without loading (streaming) etc.

But Potentially. The optimal way to utilise the memory is up to the developer and varies per title.

Oh wow. Kobold isn't freaking out and he actually understands! I assumed everyone would know that it's up to the developer, but making that assumption on GAF is a mistake.

He nailed it IMO.

 

[Gattsu25]

Tit for tat is what I say Wakune. Your dancing around with insults was easily seen through.

Get back on topic. If someone can honestly say I am wrong, please prove it. I am not. I never once said the PS3 won't benefit from a memory upgrade. Not once, so stop arguing the point.

I was on topic, guy, but your inability to focus on any part of my posts other than what you deemed inflammatory and your response got my jangles in a bind.

You're right! You haven't argued that RAM will not increase performance...what you have done however was FUD in the order of increasing RAM to 2TB will not see a huge improvement when no one in their right mind would expect something such as that. You have repeatedly used unrealistic numbers to prove a point that simply doesn't apply to the situation, and conveniently ignored correction and common sense in your arguments. You have agreed that RAM increases will provide performance increases (though not 1::1) but have never done so without reverting back to your inane and ignorant examples and argument.

Your ignorance has thrown an already bullshit thread into OT territory and your inability to stay focused hasn't helped.

 

[Stinkles]

Why are you guys arguing about a hopelessly unfounded and largely contrived rumor?

You may as well argue about the 360 getting a fourth G5 core.

 

[Dr_Cogent]

I was on topic, guy, but your inability to focus on any part of my posts other than what you deemed inflammatory and your response got my jangles in a bind.

You're right! You haven't argued that RAM will not increase performance...what you have done however was FUD in the order of increasing RAM to 2TB will not see a huge improvement when no one in their right mind would expect something such as that. You have repeatedly used unrealistic numbers to prove a point that simply doesn't apply to the situation, and conveniently ignored correction and common sense in your arguments. You have agreed that RAM increases will provide performance increases (though not 1::1) but have never done so without reverting back to your inane and ignorant examples and argument.

Your ignorance has thrown an already bullshit thread into OT territory and your inability to stay focused hasn't helped.

Wakune,

I really don't give a shit what you think. When sonycowboy tells me there is never enough memory - sorry - I'm not buying into that line of bullshit ever. There are multiple reasons why that isn't true and why you can't just add as much memory to a system as you want. There have been a few other off the wall comments in here as well that just equate to "more is more" - when it simply isn't all the time.

So believe whatever you like.

 

[kaching]

I haven't met a single developer "giddy" at this news, but hey, if PSM said it in a month old article it must be true.

Do tell - any way you can elaborate on this would be just about the most constructive post in this thread.

 

[dark10x]

There are multiple reasons why that isn't true and why you can't just add as much memory to a system as you want.

Yes, we all know this. It does not apply to the PS3. They could not and would not possibly put enough ram into the machine to reach any sort of problem area.

 

[FiRez]

Why are you guys arguing about a hopelessly unfounded and largely contrived rumor?

You may as well argue about the 360 getting a fourth G5 core.

Is it?

 

[SantaC]

I don't think the PS3 will have a price tag under $399, not that it bothers me, cuz I am getting one. (and a Rev)

 

[Gattsu25]

Wakune,

I really don't give a shit what you think. When sonycowboy tells me there is never enough memory - sorry - I'm not buying into that line of bullshit ever. There are multiple reasons why that isn't true and why you can't just add as much memory to a system as you want. There have been a few other off the wall comments in here as well that just equate to "more is more" - when it simply isn't all the time.

So believe whatever you like.

The problem is...no one sane expects Sony to add more than 512 (hell, I don't think they'd ever add this much) even if this (obviously fake) rumour pans out to be true. No one sane is expecting a terrabyte+...only you. No one expects Sony to "just add as much memory to a system as [they] want", as you so eloquently put it.

What I believe is that you are using unrealistic numbers to justify your argument
I also believe Sony won't be adding any RAM into the PS3

 

[Stinkles]

There is plenty of time, reason and purpose for Sony to updgrade the system RAM, but AFIK - and PS3 devs can feel free to jump in here - everyone is still targeting 512 total and no HD for game cache.

 

[Dr_Cogent]

Yes, we all know this. It does not apply to the PS3. They could not and would not possibly put enough ram into the machine to reach any sort of problem area.

And I agree with that dark. My point was lost obviously.

My point was about the simply comment about more is more. More is not always more. And it is also related to sony's misconception that devs never have enough memory. Sorry, that simply isn't true because the more memory you give devs, the quicker they fill it up and are begging for more anyway.

More in the PS3 is most likely a very good thing though. That I have no problem with. So can we get beyond this?

The problem is...no one sane expects Sony to add more than 512 (hell, I don't think they'd ever add this much) even if this (obviously fake) rumour pans out to be true. No one sane is expecting a terrabyte+...only you. No one expects Sony to "just add as much memory to a system as [they] want", as you so eloquently put it.

What I believe is that you are using unrealistic numbers to justify your argument
I also believe Sony won't be adding any RAM into the PS3

Wakune,

Sorry kid. Not once did I say that I am expecting Sony to put 1+ terabyte into the PS3. Now you're just making shit up.

 

[Gattsu25]

Wakune,

Sorry kid. Not once did I say that I am expecting Sony to put 1+ terabyte into the PS3. Now you're just making shit up.

If that were true, if the PS3 came with 2 terabytes of memory - would it be a benefit? NO!

Had the PS3 been released with 2 terabytes of memory, you would not see a huge gain in performance beyond probably 1 GIG or so or maybe even less.

Yeah, sorry...meant to say "no one sane is expecting a terabyte+ in the PS3, yet you use such high RAM amounts in your arguments"

semantics police

 

[Elios83]

Hopefully we'll have the final specs for the system in September.
As for the Ram upgrade of course it would be a really good thing (actually 512MB of XDR main Ram would be awesome,developers could make much bigger worlds) but I would also consider to use that money to put an hard disk (even if small,let's say 10GB) as a standard.
Anyway this is just a PSM rumor...

 

[Dr_Cogent]

Yeah, sorry...meant to say "no one sane is expecting a terabyte+ in the PS3, yet you use such high RAM amounts in your arguments"

semantics police

Yeah yeah, police this - police that. Words mean things Wakune. Better use of them will result in your argument being conveyed more effectively.

 

[Gattsu25]

Yeah yeah, police this - police that. Words mean things Wakune. Better use of them will result in your argument being conveyed more effectively.

Isn't that what everyone's been trying to tell you this whole thread? :b

 

[Dr_Cogent]

Isn't that what everyone's been trying to tell you this whole thread? --ugh...

Wakune,

I'm not going to repeat myself for the millionth time. Let it go young man.

 

[HyperionX]

PS3 needs more memory bandwidth than more memory, but either one would be nice.

 

[McFly]

PS3 needs more memory bandwidth than more memory, but either one would be nice.

By adding more memory blocks you actually get more bandwidth if you don't reduce the clock of the bus.

Fredi

 

[Endymion]

Don't get my hopes up like that.

:lol :lol

Hope this news is true, though. This thing will host the most representative games of the industry for the next six years, so better have the best hardware possible for me. And I'm willing to pay for it.

 

[Paladin69]

blu-ray
more memory than before
1080p support

how much will this thing cost? :lol

 

[ypo]

Probably as much as the $500 PSP.

 

[Razoric]

Probably as much as the $500 PSP.

Zing!

 

[Zaptruder]

I'd just like to ask everyone concerned, how exactly it is that they're so knowledgable about the economics of the PS3 hardware, and if they'd care to explain clearly how they work out the manufacturing cost of the unit as well as the final retail price at launch.

In otherwords, STFU you hacks. If I hear one more bitching about cutting features, keep cost down, I'm gonna fly over there and kick you in the nuts so hard, that you'll vanish, as the damage is applied retroactively down the generations causing your forebears to be sterile.

 

[Dr_Cogent]

I'd just like to ask everyone concerned, how exactly it is that they're so knowledgable about the economics of the PS3 hardware, and if they'd care to explain clearly how they work out the manufacturing cost of the unit as well as the final retail price at launch.

You should know by now that all GAF'ers know everything and we are never wrong. Couple that with we all disagree with each other at one point or another, and you have yourself quite the paradox.

 

[TheDiave]

I'm willing to pay $500-600 for it

I can't say the same. If it costs over 350 -- and even that's pushing it -- I'll be waiting 'til the system's price drops; By at least HALF.

I can wait.

 

[meelk]

given they have already cut things like the router OUT, them adding in things like more system memory is incredibly doubtful. Another case of a magazine flapping its lips with no real facts.

 

[Elios83]

given they have already cut things like the router OUT, them adding in things like more system memory is incredibly doubtful. Another case of a magazine flapping its lips with no real facts.

PS3 has never been announced to have router functionality.
There was just a rumor stating that Sony was originally planning to have it but they never announced it so they haven't cut out anything.

 

[Gek54]

The point I am trying to make is that I have a point up to a point and then my point becomes pointless becuase there is a point where I experience deminishing returns on the use of the word 'point' and such my point no longer points but becuame the antonym of a point and thats the point.

....shut up you are all stupid.

Good point!

 

[Dr_Cogent]

Good point!

Thanks for coming through Gek54. I knew I could count on you.

 

[Razoric]

chang3

 

[sonycowboy]

Good point!

:lol :lol

Nice job.

Cogent, clearly this has gone on past the minor point you were trying to make and it became a "I'm so much smarter than all of you @ GAF, so you should all STFU" on your side. Trying to argue your own superiority and that no one else can comprehend your point doesn't particularly seem reasonable.

 

[Raven.]

OMG! Someone that actually fucking gets it!

Let's say you have 1 GB of RAM right? OK, so you have to fill that RAM right? Loads from the disc right? More memory to fill means you are going to wait longer in general for the optical disc to read all of that into memory.

Like I said, some of you guys just don't get it.

4xBD-rom(I believe it should be possible) would deliver twice the speed of 12xDVD, given added possibility of extra redundancy, ps3 would fare better than the competition in this regard.

I'd like to see 100GB/s mem b/w, and at least 768MB+ of ram.

 

[BirdySky]

So just to sum this thread up,

Normal People:Yes, this is a good thing. I support this. Giddy up.

Xbox owners:No no no you've got it all wrong. Once it goes beyond the xbox360's spec, it becomes reduendent?

More ram definitely == better. Just think back to the Deus Ex Invisible wars fisaco. The levels were so small it was like being a mouse trapped in a box of matches. (Or something that actually makes sense)... once you realise that yes we have 512mb of memory now, but also yes, the base size of memdia has increased just as much, you also realise that 512mb in today's terms is not a whole lot more than 64mb in yesterday's terms.

Four textures at today's(Next gen ) res eats up a lot more memory than four textures at 256x256.

Plis you can do all kinds of cool stuff like pre-calced lod stored in vram, using up more memory but also allowing you to have hundreds of more characters and props.. Though with a cpu this fast I'd probably just do it in real time..but the...well whatever.

 

[Dr_Cogent]

:lol :lol

Nice job.

Cogent, clearly this has gone on past the minor point you were trying to make and it became a "I'm so much smarter than all of you @ GAF, so you should all STFU" on your side. Trying to argue your own superiority and that no one else can comprehend your point doesn't particularly seem reasonable.

sony,

The thing is, it was a minor point completely blown out of proportion by crazed sony fans. I was being accused of saying that the PS3 wouldn't benefit from a memory upgrade, when in fact, that was a lie.

There are so many common misconceptions when it comes to computing, I get irritated and try to set the record straight. So many common users just think "more is more" or "higher MHz equals better computer" or other shit nonsense like that. I'm trying to explain away some of those things when I get the chance, but obviously it's pointless. All I will get is nitwits telling me I am full of shit when in fact they don't even have the slightest idea of what I am getting at.

Unfortunately, these forums have plenty of people who only see what they want to see.

 

[Gek54]

sony,

The thing is, it was a minor point completely blown out of proportion by myself. I was being accused of saying that the PS3 wouldn't benefit from a memory upgrade, when in fact, that was a lie.

Unfortunately, I only see what I want to see.

Fixed

 

[terrene]

I can't understand why Sony would pack more hardware into the PS3 and still ignore the elephant in the room: THE GODDAMN LACK OF A HARD DRIVE.

 

[Razoric]

Fix3d

:O

 

[Dr_Cogent]

Originally Posted by NotMSRP:

Larger RAM means maybe less need for a HD or better caching?

Originall Posted by Gek54:

Both

I know you hate being wrong Gek54, but larger RAM doesn't mean less need for a HD. Persistence is still needed for MMORPGs as well as the ability for users to save music/maps/any data they want on a large storage medium.

I know you feel personally offended, but get over it. More RAM solves none of these issues.

Why don't you try and actually debate the issue instead of using the same tired old juvenile tricks that are played out far too much here (see post 141)

 

[DarienA]

I can't understand why Sony would pack more hardware into the PS3 and still ignore the elephant in the room: THE GODDAMN LACK OF A HARD DRIVE.

Probably because they don't give it as much importance as others do.

 

[Guy LeDouche]

sony,

Spoiler

The thing is, it was a minor point completely blown out of proportion by crazed sony fans. I was being accused of saying that the

PS3

Spoiler

wouldn't benefit from a memory upgrade, when in fact, that was a lie.

There are so many common misconceptions when it comes to computing, I get irritated and try to set the record straight. So many common users just think "more

is

Spoiler

more" or "higher MHz equals better computer" or other shit nonsense like that. I'm trying to explain away some of those things when I

g

Spoiler

et the ch

a

Spoiler

nce, but obviousl

y

Spoiler

it's pointless. All I will get is nitwits telling me I am full of shit when in fact they don't even have the slightest idea of what I am getting at.

Unfortunately, these forums have plenty of people who only see what they want to see.

RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!

 

[dark10x]

I can't understand why Sony would pack more hardware into the PS3 and still ignore the elephant in the room: THE GODDAMN LACK OF A HARD DRIVE.

The HDD is not nearly as necessary if more ram is added...

 

[Dr_Cogent]

The HDD is not nearly as necessary if more ram is added...

WHAT!?!? :lol

 

[gofreak]

I'm not sure if we should work under the assumption that a memory upgrade has happened. Before you know it, 1up will be writing of their personal offense at the lack of 1GB of RAM in PS3 after Sony's "promise"

 

[DarienA]

The HDD is not nearly as necessary if more ram is added...

uh.. no no NO.

People here are clamoring for a hard drive because they believe it's necessary for persistent worlds with large amts of data being tracked a la Morrowind, or for the use of custom hard drives.

Adding more memory doesn't accomplish those things.

I'm actually more curious about the changing of the memory card standard AGAIN... finally to the Memory Sticks... I actually think they wanted to do this last generation, but got spooked because of concerns that consumers would balk at the costs of the cards back then....

 

[Gek54]

Originally Posted by NotMSRP:


Originall Posted by Gek54:


I know you hate being wrong Gek54, but larger RAM doesn't mean less need for a HD. Persistence is still needed for MMORPGs as well as the ability for users to save music/maps/any data they want on a large storage medium.

I know you feel personally offended, but get over it. More RAM solves none of these issues.

Im sorry, when did the term 'less need' mean 'no need' becuase I must have missed that memo.

More ram means less need for chaching on a HD.

 

[terrene]

The HDD is not nearly as necessary if more ram is added...

It's not just that, but think of the peripheral functionality that can't be done without a harddrive.

+ Using it as a Media Center
+ Using it as a TIVO
+ Downloading patches and upgrades and goodies

Why in fuck do they care about making it a bluetooth-enabled "network hub" when they can't compete with what the 360 (launching 6 months earlier in the US) can bring to the living room?

 

[DarienA]

It's not just that, but think of the peripheral functionality that can't be done without a harddrive.

+ Using it as a Media Center
+ Using it as a TIVO
+ Downloading patches and upgrades and goodies

Why in fuck do they care about making it a bluetooth-enabled "network hub" when they can't compete with what the 360 (launching 6 months earlier in the US) can bring to the living room?

I'm curious... why would you want two devices that have almost the exact same feature set?

 

[dark10x]

It's not just that, but think of the peripheral functionality that can't be done without a harddrive.

+ Using it as a Media Center
+ Using it as a TIVO
+ Downloading patches and upgrades and goodies

Why in fuck do they care about making it a bluetooth-enabled "network hub" when they can't compete with what the 360 (launching 6 months earlier in the US) can bring to the living room?

Why does it matter? That doesn't exactly have an impact on games, now does it? If I REALLLLY want those features, I'll use my 360, but I doubt it will see much use in that regard as I'd prefer to stick with my laptop as an entertainment "hub".

 

[Dr_Cogent]

Im sorry, when did the term 'less need' mean 'no need' becuase I must have missed that memo.

I'm sorry, but more RAM doesn't equate to 'less need'. Sorry.

You guys do know what a HDD is for right? Data persistence?

HDD is more synonymous with ROM, not RAM. It's persistent. It's non-volatile. It's a friggin HD, not RAM. RAM is RAM. HDD is HDD. Back to school for you.