Sony Silently Squeezed Out 70MB More PS3 RAM
Apparently Sony has secretly reduced the PlayStation 3's memory footprint.
Joystiq reports that Sony has silently tweaked the PlayStation 3's operating system over the last few months in order to squeeze out 70 MB more RAM. The discovery was originally uncovered by PlayStation University who noted a reduction in the system's OS memory footprint. Months ago the OS consumed around 120 MB-- now it only requires 50 MB.
"Since the launch of the PS3, we have been continuously making efforts to reinforce our support system to game developers, allowing them to express their creativity freely on the PS3," said SCEA's Patrick Seybold. "As part of this support for game development, the size of the PS3 OS memory footprint has been reduced through network update for the game developers."
Unfortunately, this extra bit of RAM won't make the PlayStation 3 run any faster on the OS level. If anything, future games will have a few added effects. "Generally it probably won't change design, but might allow extra effects resolution or dynamic lights or something," one developer told Joystiq. "Probably more beneficial from the systems and art side then from design/gameplay."
So much for a PlayStation 3 Turbo.
- ''Explicit'' Section Hidden in Apple's App Store
- PCWorld: AT&T 3G 67% Faster Than Competitors
- Google Executives Convicted for Bullying Video
- Capcom COO Mark Beaumont Dies Suddenly
- Doritos to Give You a Chance to be a Pro Gamer
- Game Retailers Not Liking EA's Project $10 Tactics
- Sony Patents Universal Game Controller
- Microsoft and Amazon Sign Kindle, Linux Deal
- Weird LED Disco Shoes Come with Attached Floor
- Developer: Current FPS Games Are "Boring"
- Guild Wars Novel Coming Q1/Q2 2010
- Report: FBI Raids 3 Toyota Plants in Detroit
- YouTube Removes Original RickRoll Video
- Yahoo Integrating Twitter into Global Network
- Nintendo DSi XL Priced, Dated for North America
- ''Super Mario Galaxy 2,'' ''Metroid: Other M'' Dated
- Google: RickRoll Video Removal Was a Mistake
- Advertisers Pulling Out of PlayStation Home
- VIDEO: Nintendo Demos the DSi XL
Good for them! Overclocked ps3 ^^
i always thought bigger is better!
Yes, a big idiot is better than a small one!
Yes, a big idiot is better than a small one!
A big idiot is much scarier than a little idiot... O_O
Sony cleans up! 1st Jlo... now 70mb on the PS3 If I could only get them to remove those rootkits from my DVD collection?
Sony cleans up! 1st Jlo... now 70mb on the PS3 If I could only get them to remove those rootkits from my DVD collection?
the folks at playstation university?? wtf
Nice job SONY! Though 70MB is not that much more... but it is better than before for sure.
..
While squizing your OS size, SONY... have you thought about increasing the system memory size? At least in terms of the building cost of PS3... adding extra 1GB memory should not effect the building cost too much...
and of course... if SONY can upgrade the GPU to DX10 or even DX11.... it will be even better!!!!
(I am dreaming.........)
and of course... if SONY can upgrade the GPU to DX10 or even DX11.... it will be even better!!!!(I am dreaming.........)
my guess is that will be on the next gen of consoles.
my guess is that will be on the next gen of consoles.
DX18 more likely. Don't hold your breath waiting for next gen.
This is why should double the amount of ram they think they need after games on the consoles and if they did so most would have a few extra years of life before they are dropped. 256mb is nothing by todays standards while 512mb for the system out side the gpu would make the difference.
In other news: PC users have gained over 2GB of ram by spending only $20!
This is why should double the amount of ram they think they need after games on the consoles and if they did so most would have a few extra years of life before they are dropped. 256mb is nothing by todays standards while 512mb for the system out side the gpu would make the difference.
Please no. The last thing consoles need is a longer life span. Because they spend 3-6 years on the market, PC users get stuck with 3-6 year old graphics from cheap ported games, while console players exclaim "SHINNYYY!!!!" over old gen tech.
What I would not give to never see another idiot use "THEN" when they mean "THAN".
Our education system must truly suck.
ps3 dont uses directx system. it uses its own property gpu sdk platform.
the only limit for ps3 is its cpu and gpu power. you can get much more realistic visuals than dx10 or even dx11 in ps3. but you get real crappy fps.
because of this developers are tied within the optimal visual/fps range when developing thier titles...
In other news: PC users have gained over 2GB of ram by spending only $20!
...you mean $60
This is why should double the amount of ram they think they need after games on the consoles and if they did so most would have a few extra years of life before they are dropped. 256mb is nothing by todays standards while 512mb for the system out side the gpu would make the difference.
I remember reading an article last year that detailed exactly why consoles dont need the tons of RAM that the PC needs. It had to do with the way they code games for consoles vs. PC's allowing them to use less overall RAM. Not having to worry about things like multitasking and other 3rd party software hogging resources. The RAM they have to use in the console is fixed and and so the coders need to be more efficient with how they use it. That was my understanding at least, not being a coder myself.
Will 70MB of memory really make much of a difference?
Has there ever been a gaming related article on TH that didn't spawn comments from pompous ass console or PC fanboys? STFU!
Nice job SONY! Though 70MB is not that much more... but it is better than before for sure. While squizing your OS size, SONY... have you thought about increasing the system memory size? At least in terms of the building cost of PS3... adding extra 1GB memory should not effect the building cost too much... ..
it does when you are building a console, and after years of people like us bashing it for being too expensive I doubt they are going to add more expense to it. consoles use more proprietary and higher quality ram, that makes it more expensive than the ddr3 we buy.
it does when you are building a console, and after years of people like us bashing it for being too expensive I doubt they are going to add more expense to it. consoles use more proprietary and higher quality ram, that makes it more expensive than the ddr3 we buy.
No not really...
The PS3 uses 256meg of GDDR3 (same tech as PC Cards) at a lethargic 700mhz.
the other 256meg is XDR... which is Rambus, a failed PC memory tech (too expensive). Performance is comparable to DDR3 at similar clock rates.
So while performance would have been excellent in it's day... it's an old Platform and is fairly mediocre by today's standards.
...you mean $60
remember when you could get 4gb of ram for 30 bucks after rebate? those were epic days.
Nice job SONY! Though 70MB is not that much more... but it is better than before for sure. While squizing your OS size, SONY... have you thought about increasing the system memory size? At least in terms of the building cost of PS3... adding extra 1GB memory should not effect the building cost too much... ..
you would think that adding that extra gig of memory wouldnt cost that much money but you forget the type of memory the ps3 utilizes. The system uses XDR DRAM which is quite expensive for memory. adding as much memory as you suggest would raise the price by a good amount.
But it doesnt really need that much more RAM because it does use XDR DRAM.
They should make a PS3.5 that uses compatible CPU & GPU API's but CPU at least 1.5x performance (would like 2x) and GPU at least 3x (prefer 4x, DX11). Same game runs on PS3 as well as PS3.5 but the newer can enable higher detail, full 1080p at 60-120Hz, higher AA filter, more effects.
Why would they waist their time tweaking what they got, it works just fine, the games are sweet and there
comming around with some good stuff. I think it will be a good 5 years before you see a new machine
from Sony, they just started makeing money so they will soak in the profits for awhile i am sure.
RAM in a console is tied together to the system in a much more efficient way than a PC. a console needs nowhere near as much RAM.
i like tygrus' idea i must say. if there were a more expensive version of the PS3, identical in every way to the standard except for being able to output games in 1080p...
well i'd buy it for sure. i dont think its time for a console new generation of consoles yet, the ps3 in particular seems to only now be finding its legs. and another 2 years of them would help the market. but a refresh would be nice, and 1080p gaming would be a big draw to a lot of people.
ps3 dont uses directx system. it uses its own property gpu sdk platform.the only limit for ps3 is its cpu and gpu power. you can get much more realistic visuals than dx10 or even dx11 in ps3. but you get real crappy fps.because of this developers are tied within the optimal visual/fps range when developing thier titles...
That's a self-defeating statement. Of course performance is what limits visual quality! If performance isn't an issue, you can crank out equally realistic visuals using DirectX 9+ and OpenGL as you can with their proprietary PS3 SDK. In any given case, performance of the targeted hardware is the limiting factor.
All this about consoles being more efficient about memory or using "specialized super expensive" memory is horse hockey.
Consoles use the same tech as PC's, usually a generation or two behind depending on costs. Consoles and console games require less memory because they do not need the shear amount of shared library's, system drivers, windowing system, or caching that modern PC's use. Console games are compiled for a specific set of system specs, because the dev's know exactly what HW they will run it on they can tweak and refine the code down to a extremely small / efficient foot print. This also means the code doesn't port well (MS was the first to really adopt a port "friendly" SDK, and even then its got issues).
The #1 driving factor behind a console is price, a gaming PC can afford to be 2 grand or more, a console must be low priced to appeal to mass users. Just think about it this way, a ~single~ modern high end GFX card costs over $400 USD, which is the price of the entire damn console.
Umm... given the system os likely resides on the split 256mb XDR tied to the cell... a 70mb reduction in the memory footprint constitutes a roughly 30% gain in addressable memory space.
I don't know who wouldn't be excited over a 1/3 gain in useable memory when considering how memory starved the current gen consoles are. At least the devs will be happy. Hopefully, this will translate to better cross platform title performance instead of the PS3 always being shafted with shitty ports.
My OS uses 1GB.
I still have plenty to spare, thank you.