Ozymandias Muses On PS3 Memory Use
You've got to hand it to Microsoft's gaming platform strategy guy Andre 'Ozymandias' Vrignaud - he's certainly been getting into the PlayStation 3 vs. Xbox 360 conflict on his weblog recently - and he's asking some interesting, if Microsoft-centric questions, such as how much memory is reserved for OS on PlayStation 3.
So, apparently, all of the Xbox 360 system information (dashboard/online) fits into 32mb, resident at all times. Pete Isensee at Microsoft comments of the alternative: "For comparison, PS3 developers have to deal with a system that has memory split into two 256MB banks, one of which is reserved for graphics only. A large portion of both the memory banks are reserved for the system. On top of that, games that want to support other features, like friends lists or in-game commerce, take an additional memory hit."
He continues: "[An Ars Technica postl indicates that a total of 96MB is reserved for the system on PS3. [An Innerbits post indicates that 9MB is required for friends lists (and 60MB for in-game commerce!). If those numbers are correct, a PS3 title using friends lists functionality has 512-96-9 = 407MB available, 73MB less than an Xbox 360 title using the same features."
However, more than one commenter is skeptical about how this is presented - Parveen Kaler comments: "That is very one-sided analysis. There is a space vs. speed trade-off here. The PS3 doesn't require as much memory for certain tasks. For example, progressive meshes are a viable technique on the [PlayStation 3's] SPUs, whereas it is not very viable on the 360's cores." Later on, apparently blocked from commenting more by NDAs, he comments: "My final point is that this argument is all overblown fanboy fodder. This particular issue is a speed bump not an iceberg. Both systems have pros and cons. Developers will exploit the pros of both systems and mitigate the cons of both systems."
Comments
It's ridiculous how much time and effort people are willing to put in to slander the console(s) they don't support. You'd think they'd spend more time playing games on the consoles they do like, and less time being intolerant.
Posted by: Non | March 23, 2007 8:04 AM
If only Windows had such a small OS footprint!
Posted by: Tim | March 23, 2007 3:34 PM
I'm pretty distanced from this throwdown, but a couple of Kaler's comments got right up my nose:
-----
However, more than one commenter is skeptical about how this is presented - Parveen Kaler comments: "That is very one-sided analysis. There is a space vs. speed trade-off here. The PS3 doesn't require as much memory for certain tasks. For example, progressive meshes are a viable technique on the [PlayStation 3's] SPUs, whereas it is not very viable on the 360's cores."
-----
Oh sure, that gives the PS3 system designers license to waste memory left and right I'm sure. Why not use it more sensibly, then let their games reap the FURTHER benefits over the X-box 360?
-----Later on, apparently blocked from commenting more by NDAs, he comments: "My final point is that this argument is all overblown fanboy fodder. This particular issue is a speed bump not an iceberg. Both systems have pros and cons. Developers will exploit the pros of both systems and mitigate the cons of both systems."
-----
Calling something overblown fanboy fodder is the new was of being a fanboy. What's that, he disagrees with me but can't because of is NDA? TOUGH. If you are legally prevented from making an argument, you cannot just call the argument won anyway. The federal government should figure THAT out.
Posted by: John H. | March 23, 2007 4:34 PM
Thanks for the quote Simon. I've replied to this brouhaha over at my blog.
My post
Posted by: Parveen | March 23, 2007 7:47 PM
Hmm, I guess I can't use the link tag in comments. Here's the link:
http://parveenkaler.com/?p=42
Posted by: Parveen | March 23, 2007 7:50 PM
I'm still totally clueless, how much memory does the average 360/PS3 game take up? And can you add internal/external memory upgrades (e.g. PS2/360 Memory cards)?
Posted by: Dan | November 27, 2007 7:50 PM