Well there are different levels of balance so.......
Results 26 to 50 of 136
wasn't this debunked last week? hahahaha oh man sith. You funny.
10-07-2013 #29Xbox One Dev: GDDR5 Is Uncomfortable To Work With
Next Gen top picks:
PS4: Infamous SS, DriveClub
One: Project spark, Forza 5
Multi: Watchdogs, The crew, FFXV, KHIII
Director Hiroyuki Sakamoto stated in an interview on Famitsu.com
"The PS4 has been provided with enough memory, and the processing speed of the CPU is fast. There’s no weak point, isn’t it?"
Sakamoto-san continues by mentioning that until now he used to have to waste time making ends meet with the memory, but PS4 removes that problem, therefore there’s no room for compromises because if you make compromises the difference in quality between your titles and the others would become evident."
I've said this before I will say it again. Both MS and Sony made the best of a bad situation.
GDDR5 is great for graphics but will affect the CPU when latency issues arise, this can be exacerbated by certain GPU functions running on the same bus.
DDR3 is ok for this issue but can't power a decent GPU.
It's all about trade offs. Both Sony and MS did the best to work around the increasing memory issues we are having in this industry.
About the only big advantage I can see would fall on MS side in that their memory is much cheaper to produce and should theoretically be cost reduced much further than the GDDR5 Is Ps4 can.
That said I will never bet against Sony when it comes to reducing systems costs, just look at what they achieved with PS3.
I'd say its actually the opposite with GDDR5 prices, GDDR5 could come down as it is used in more graphics cards and new systems ( If AMD goes ahead with GDDR5 Testing in APU pc systems) and the manufacture of the PS4 it self would affect the prices.
(this not so much at you Jabs but the thread now)
Are the trade offs to CPU performance unique to GDDR5 or GDDR in general? If its to GDDR5 only, how come? but if its GDDR in general, then why was it not considered a limiting factor for the 360 which used GDDR3 for its system memory? Is it more of a GDDR5 compared to DDR3 issue where DDR is just tried and tested and GDDR for system ram will require rethinking on how you utilise the memory for CPU usage?
One basic example we were given suggested that without optimisation for either console, a platform-agnostic development build can run at around 30FPS in 1920×1080 on PS4, but it’ll run at “20-something” FPS in 1600×900 on Xbox One. “Xbox One is weaker and it’s a pain to use its ESRAM,” concluded one developer."I think all those developers who are saying, "We don’t want to do a PS3 game," or "It’s really difficult to do it," should shut up and make their games. If you have time to complain about it, then you should be spending your time working on getting the most from the hardware."
“The poor [graphics] drivers have made it difficult to push either of them, and the developers aren’t familiar with the hardware yet,“ said one source. Another stated that we’ll begin to see far greater use of each platform’s unique features once we’re past the first wave of releases, when developers have more time and experience with each console’s quirks.
to reiterate my last post. it doesn't matter that developers will eventually get used to the architecture because they did so with the PS3 as well. the issue is that in relation to the 360, PS3 will always be more difficult, thus X1 more than PS4.
the problem is still there.
Itachi likes this post
if there was something easier than the 360 last gen then we'd see 360 suffer as well. developers are more attracted to platforms that are the easiest to develop for. we can sit here and argue that i.e. then why don't they focus more on PC and we all know the answers to that and it has nothing to do with ease of development but the market itself.
the problem is still there."
Its not secret the PS4 is basically a PC in disguise unless you start digging.
And when you start digging, that machine is far far more complex to deal with, it has huge chance of pulling a crash on you because of the way the memory coherency is used. It has 5 types of data flags for memory, which is a huge amount to keep track of (the XBO has two).
Cerny isnt wrong when he said they wanted to make a machine that was easy to get into but more complex long term...
Ultimately, we are trying to strike a balance between features which you can use day one, and features which will allow the system to evolve over the years, as gaming itself evolves,
I think people need to stop fooling themselves that the PS4 is somehow a walk in the park, it wont be, not when your getting AAA titles in development (watch the jump form release titles on both systems to 2nd release titles).
If people really want to use all that compute and UMA features, it costs a lot, and is going to be far tighter in timings on trying to not stall the GPU.
Last edited by mynd; 10-07-2013 at 22:09.
I wonder who should I believe.
And btw its hUMA not UMA.
Clearly having to deal with;
-painful esram architecture
-giving up GPU resources to kinect
-dealing with a weaker GPU
-dealing with ddr3.
Magically makes the Xbox easier/better to develop on. Eventhough we see compromised games already with 900p ryse and 720p killer instinct?
Please carry on.
Peregrin8X likes this post
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
- Icy hot of the north
- PSN ID
- Rep Power
I'm trying to figure out your post, mynd. Going from what you say this is the case for all AAA titles. The easier to develop for isn't all indies and quite frankly I find that a bit hard to believe. We will hear more about this from devs that actually make AAA games won't we? I believe we will. Making a AAA game on any platform will have complexities. I don't understand what you are trying to debate. If he is making it sound like a cake walk, I don't believe that is the case. It was advertised it's easier to develop games for, everyone knows that Sony has some focus on indies (which is a good thing... I don't see how it's not).
Also, I'm kind of getting tired of your constant basis that is against indies, it makes no sense at all. Everytime something postive comes to the PS4 and the attention of some people here, you come out with this tiresome excuse...."well, it's indie so whatever". Also, how do you know it's not easier? I know your background but I doubt you even have a devkit to even say anything against it's ease of development. honestly, I don't get you.
each time you have to reach a theoretical power by jumping through hoops as opposed to straight up method, you're going to have a lot of untapped potential. that's what happened to the PS3.
and while X1 is nowhere as difficult as the PS3, the point i was making is that what matters is that the market has for the moment.
PS3 is not the most difficult console to develop for in the history but it was for its time. right now it seems like you have no way of getting close to the power PS4 has on paper, without using the ESRAM to its fullest.
why wouldn't that be more difficult? whatever else you're saying, even if those things matter to a certain extent, what matters in the end more is that you have all this fast RAM to access and it is giving you the benefit without much effort. that is why Epic guy was so excited about it. who has praised X1's setup so far over PS4's?
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)