If I were to design a console

[Rakehellion]

No, the system would have 2GB dedicated VRAM so they would not be using 3GB worth of textures. You don't think 2GB of VRAM is enough for 1080p? On a console? I think it's more than enough and textures could look stunning.

No, it isn't enough.

 

[Rakehellion]

There is certainly a purpose of using dedicated memory - you can use GDDR5 for graphics and DDR3 for system. Because that's the type of memory that works best in their respective roles.

XB1 uses all DDR3 - good for system use but mediocre for graphics (low bandwidth)
PS4 uses all GDDR5 - good for graphics but mediocre for system use (high latency)

It would also save on cost, you don't need 8GB of GDDR5 in a console that only has power to run 1080p at most when pushing "next gen" graphics. 2GB is more than sufficient here. And since DDR3 is both cheaper and better suited for system RAM, it's a win-win situation.

Unified memory is best. Having separate memory banks reduces performance and is a nightmare to program for.

The GPU is able to perform general purpose computer functions, so it eliminates the bottleneck of having to copy data across a slow bus.

The PS4 and Xbox One can record gameplay videos in realtime. This would be pretty much impossible with separate memory banks.

 

[exdeath]

I wouldn't say nightmare, but in the case of video memory you need extra effort to keep track of what's in VRAM, what isn't, make efforts to minimize fragmentation, use bandwidth swapping things between them, and duplication of resources between main RAM and VRAM.

And in OPs case, with less and slower RAM to start with than is available on PS4.

 

[toughtrasher]

No one is comparing this self-designed console to the architecture of the Xbox One 🙁 lol

 

[cmdrdredd]

No one is comparing this self-designed console to the architecture of the Xbox One 🙁 lol

Cause the xb1 is handled more like small dedicated vram with the fast SRAM and average speed ddr3.

 

[SlitheryDee]

If I were to design a console it would be less powerful than the most expensive one of the time, but close enough that games from that system could be ported more or less intact with the resolution and detail settings dialed down some. That way I could come in cheaper, yet offer the same games. If I had any additional functionality I wanted to include, such as motion control hardware and/or media center software, it would have to make the final price of the console no more than that of the competition to include it. Even then, I would be hesitant to put out a weaker console at the same price as the competition because I know they would trumpet that fact to high heaven.

Microsoft got everything right but the price, which means that they completely missed the point. Nintendo got nothing right but the price, which means essentially the same thing. PS4 will win this round handily, and for good reason.

 

[cmdrdredd]

If I were to design a console it would be less powerful than the most expensive one of the time, but close enough that games from that system could be ported more or less intact with the resolution and detail settings dialed down some. That way I could come in cheaper, yet offer the same games. If I had any additional functionality I wanted to include, such as motion control hardware and/or media center software, it would have to make the final price of the console no more than that of the competition to include it. Even then, I would be hesitant to put out a weaker console at the same price as the competition because I know they would trumpet that fact to high heaven.

Microsoft got everything right but the price, which means that they completely missed the point. Nintendo got nothing right but the price, which means essentially the same thing. PS4 will win this round handily, and for good reason.

Except unified memory is cheaper from what I understand.

 

[Majcric]

If I were to design a console it would be less powerful than the most expensive one of the time, but close enough that games from that system could be ported more or less intact with the resolution and detail settings dialed down some. That way I could come in cheaper, yet offer the same games. If I had any additional functionality I wanted to include, such as motion control hardware and/or media center software, it would have to make the final price of the console no more than that of the competition to include it. Even then, I would be hesitant to put out a weaker console at the same price as the competition because I know they would trumpet that fact to high heaven.

Microsoft got everything right but the price, which means that they completely missed the point. Nintendo got nothing right but the price, which means essentially the same thing. PS4 will win this round handily, and for good reason.

How did Microsoft get everything right, but the price... I personally don't think they got much of anything right. They better hope they have some good exclusives lined up. Myself I would hate to pay $250 for a One.

 

[mmntech]

How did Microsoft get everything right, but the price... I personally don't think they got much of anything right. They better hope they have some good exclusives lined up. Myself I would hate to pay $250 for a One.

Yeah, the Xbox One probably had one of the worst unveilings that I can remember. Microsoft pretty much rolled out a console that was everything that their fans said they didn't want. Expensive, underpowered, and bogged down by some pretty draconian DRM.

They've gone a long way to correcting most of those problems though, aside from performance. However, I don't think it matters too much in the long run. Most people aren't going to notice unless they have both systems side by side. It's destined to be second place unless Sony really screws something up. Though it won't be a failure.

I think Microsoft can one up Sony with the Xbone's robust media and app features. This is the one thing the PS4 really struggles with. Removing the XBL Gold requirement for access to streaming services is a massive step in the right direction.

 

[futurefields]

Unified memory is best. Having separate memory banks reduces performance and is a nightmare to program for.

What? No it is not... quit exaggerating/lying to support your own bias.

 

[futurefields]

No, it isn't enough.

Yes, 2gb of VRAM is more than enough for a console pushing 1080p. Even with every texture being full HD and msaa anti-aliasing.

 

[Rakehellion]

Yes, 2gb of VRAM is more than enough for a console pushing 1080p. Even with every texture being full HD and msaa anti-aliasing.

"Full HD" is not a technical term. Marketing buzz doesn't work here, kiddo.
Display resolution is one of the least important factors in determining VRAM usage and modern GPUs perform general purpose calculations as well.

What? No it is not... quit exaggerating/lying to support your own bias.

You mean my bias as a graphics programmer who's actually written game engines?

"No it is not" isn't an argument. Back that up with some evidence so we can have an actual conversation.

 

[futurefields]

"No it is not" isn't an argument. Back that up with some evidence so we can have an actual conversation.

Every gaming PC has a split memory pool. PS3 had a split memory pool. Xbox 360 had a split memory pool with EDRAM. XB1 has a split memory pool with ESRAM. There is nothing inherently complex about programming a game for a system that has seperate system RAM and video RAM. What makes you think there is?

 

[futurefields]

"Full HD" is not a technical term. Marketing buzz doesn't work here, kiddo.

Stop being dense, and don't call me kiddo or any other personal attack. Everybody knows "Full HD" means 1080p.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

1080p (aka Full HD/ FHD and BT.709)

 

[Rakehellion]

Every gaming PC has a split memory pool. PS3 had a split memory pool. Xbox 360 had a split memory pool with EDRAM. XB1 has a split memory pool with ESRAM. There is nothing inherently complex about programming a game for a system that has seperate system RAM and video RAM. What makes you think there is?

So because outdated technology did it, we should continue that way for the foreseeable future? Good argument! :thumbsup: Let's go full retro and get rid of dedicated GPUs and give consoles 128KB of RAM.

The PS3 and PS2 had a bus several times faster than the equivalient PC to work around the inherent disadvantage. The Xbox 360 had a shared memory pool.

"There is nothing inherently complex about programming a game"
How would you know? Have you ever tried it? Have you ever programmed anything at all?

Stop being dense, and don't call me kiddo or any other personal attack. Everybody knows "Full HD" means 1080p.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080p

1080p (aka Full HD/ FHD and BT.709)

Textures are not 1080p as you stated. They're typically square powers of two. And there's no reason to intentionally cripple the consoles when they're expected to last 9 more years.

 

[futurefields]

"There is nothing inherently complex about programming a game"
How would you know? Have you ever tried it? Have you ever programmed anything at all?

You aren't even worth debating if you are going to misquote me like that. :whiste:

 

[futurefields]

So because outdated technology did it, we should continue that way for the foreseeable future? Good argument! :thumbsup: Let's go full retro and get rid of dedicated GPUs and give consoles 128KB of RAM.

:whiste:

 

[futurefields]

And in OPs case, with less and slower RAM to start with than is available on PS4.

What are you talking about? XB1 and PS4 are limited to what 5gb for games? My console design gives 6gb for games, and the ideal RAM types for their respective jobs (GDDR5 for graphics and DDR3 for system).

 

[Ancalagon44]

futurefields you really dont like it when people disagree with you, but have you ever thought that maybe they are right?

Think about this - the XBox One and PS4 were designed from the ground up to be gaming consoles, and both of them have unified memory pools. Last generation, the Xbox 360 was the only console to have a unified memory pool, and it was renowned to be easier to program for. This generation, only the Wii U does not have a unified memory pool.

Remember, the guys that designed these consoles are smart. Very smart. They probably have PHds and many years of experience in the field, and the engineers at both Sony and MS went with unified memory. Why do you think that is? If you are right and unified memory is more expensive and slower, then they are idiots, correct? So unless you believe are idiots, you have to concede that there must be something that they know about unified memory that you don't know.

Personally I think the PS4 is the perfect console, hardware wise, this generation. For its cost, I dont think you can really do better.

EDIT: The XBox 1 and 360 both have extra cache memory, but they do have unified memory pools. And a unified memory pool is simpler for programmers because you can configure it to your liking. Want 4GB reserved for graphics memory? Done. Want 3.335676GB reserved for system memory? Done. You can slice the memory up any way you like, and share memory between CPU and GPU easily. How much programming experience do you have?

 

[futurefields]

futurefields you really dont like it when people disagree with you, but have you ever thought that maybe they are right?

Did you even read the posts? They are getting their facts wrong.

 

[futurefields]

If you are right and unified memory is more expensive and slower, then they are idiots, correct?

Where did I say unified memory is more expensive and slower?

Misquoting me and not sticking to the specific statements that I make. Not even worth having this debate if you aren't going to be honest.

 

[futurefields]

Think about this - the XBox One and PS4 were designed from the ground up to be gaming consoles, and both of them have unified memory pools.

The Xbone was designed to be a media center and straight from the horses mouth had gaming as a second priority. Give me a break here...

 

[futurefields]

Personally I think the PS4 is the perfect console, hardware wise, this generation.

If you think an 8 core tablet CPU with 1.6ghz per core is perfect for gaming you and I are going to fundamentally disagree on just about everything this topic.

They should have gone with less cores and higher per thread performance. These cpu's are a joke and the memory architecture's are a compromise any way you slice it. They are well designed from a cost saving and marketing perspective (wowweee 8 cores, kids!) and that's about it.

 

[Ancalagon44]

Where did I say unified memory is more expensive and slower?

Misquoting me and not sticking to the specific statements that I make. Not even worth having this debate if you aren't going to be honest.

There is certainly a purpose of using dedicated memory - you can use GDDR5 for graphics and DDR3 for system. Because that's the type of memory that works best in their respective roles.

XB1 uses all DDR3 - good for system use but mediocre for graphics (low bandwidth)
PS4 uses all GDDR5 - good for graphics but mediocre for system use (high latency)

It would also save on cost, you don't need 8GB of GDDR5 in a console that only has power to run 1080p at most when pushing "next gen" graphics. 2GB is more than sufficient here. And since DDR3 is both cheaper and better suited for system RAM, it's a win-win situation.

LOL!

So tell me, what do the above bolded statements mean?

The Xbone was designed to be a media center and straight from the horses mouth had gaming as a second priority. Give me a break here...

What kind of media center needs such a powerful GPU and 8 CPU cores?

If you think an 8 core tablet CPU with 1.6ghz per core is perfect for gaming you and I are going to fundamentally disagree on just about everything this topic.

They should have gone with less cores and higher per thread performance. These cpu's are a joke and the memory architecture's are a compromise any way you slice it. They are well designed from a cost saving and marketing perspective (wowweee 8 cores, kids!) and that's about it.

At the time when they designed the console, AMD's cat cores were better than their big cores - they were more energy efficient. Had they gone with big cores again, maybe you would have seen the RROD fiasco again?

Also bear in mind that in IPC terms, the Jaguar cores are much, much faster than the old 360 cores. Even with the clockspeed drop, I'm pretty sure that these new consoles are faster in single threaded performance.

And just so we are clear - you know more than all the engineering and business talent at Sony and MS combined? Just so I'm understanding you. What sort of background do you have? How many years of hardware engineering experience do you have? Or electrical engineering? Programming?

 

[Rakehellion]

You aren't even worth debating if you are going to misquote me like that. :whiste:

It wasn't a misquote, I copied and pasted your text. And you're not even attempting to debate with your one-line responses that contain no content.

They should have gone with less cores and higher per thread performance.

Yes, and Intel should should have made the Core i7 a single-core, 20GHz chip except that it's impossible.

So we've shown that you know nothing about:
-Hardware design
-Software design

And just so we are clear - you know more than all the engineering and business talent at Sony and MS combined? Just so I'm understanding you. What sort of background do you have? How many years of hardware engineering experience do you have? Or electrical engineering? Programming?

He's got 6 years of troll training at Mom's Basement U.