you are not logged in

Latest "Reliable" PS4/Xbox 720 Specs Point To 2 GB On Next PlayStation

Console wars!

It’s hard to know how much stock to put into these figures, given that they’re a) on a forum and b) anything but official, but these specs over on NeoGAF at least point to some level of reasoned guesswork.

The poster cites “insider information” from a couple of places, so whilst it’s clearly not concrete (or final) this info should at least prompt some discussion.

The next Xbox, so the post says, consists of a 6-8 core AMD CPU and between 3 and 4 GB of RAM. An AMD GPU rounds off the stats, which together kicks out 1-1.2 teraflops.

The PS4? An AMD CPU with 4 cores, an AMD GPU 1150 SPU, and just 2 GB of RAM, which is “unlikely” to be upgraded. This combo dishes out 1.8 teraflops, apparently.

The truth is that the official details of the next generation of consoles isn’t known by anyone outside the platform holders themselves, but it’s fun to speculate; we’ll see soon enough hopefully.

  1. Kennykazey
    Since: Mar 2010

    If those 2GB Are DDR5, the NextStation should probably be just fine. But the PS3 has a theoretical rating of 2.36 tflops…. In practise, I don’t know. But should we be worried? Probably not.

    Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 18:21.
  2. The Lone Steven
    Never heard of him.
    Since: May 2010

    2GB of ram sounds very likely as i think the average PC gamer has 2GB of ram and the next generation of gaming is said to be as powerful as a mid range PC. It seems the Nextbobbox will be the most powerful of the two but i think will run the risk of being too hard to code for at the begining of it’s life thus giving the PSDave the advantage due to it being easier to code for. Well, judging from the PS3’s early life. :)

    Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 18:32.
    • AG2297
      Community Manager
      Since: Feb 2009

      The average PC gamer has 2GB of RAM?! On the GPU alone then yeah maybe, but Id say 4GB/8GB average with anyone buying a PC gaming machine now looking at 16GB in addition to their GPU RAM. 2GB of RAM on PC is nothing.

      Obviously this RAM situation is very different to GPU Ram and console RAM which is GDDR5 and I’m not comparing it to consoles but I just couldn’t let that “PC gamers have 2GB Ram” comment slip!

      Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 20:11.
      • anyjungleinguy
        Since: Nov 2008

        Anyone buying 16GB for a gaming PC is brain dead.

        And even above 1.5GB VRAM is mostly pointless at any resolution at 1080p and under.

        Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 21:15.
      • AG2297
        Community Manager
        Since: Feb 2009

        You’ll find a lot of top gaming PCs will have 16GB as it’s really not that expensive. Why go 8GB when you can have 16GB for not that much more. As for the VRAM, almost all the high-end cards have between 2-3GB anyway, it’s not really a choice of saying you don’t need it, it just comes as standard. It’s also there to allow multiple monitors. If you’re buying a high end PC you’re going to be gaming it at least 1080p anyway.

        Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 21:23.
      • SilverCider
        Since: Jan 2011

        Without listing various statistics about this and that on the RAM usage for PC; all I’m going to say is that at least 6-8GB of system RAM is beneficial for a lot of the bigger games released over the last couple of years. Now VRAM is getting quite important – I regularly see BF3 at 1080p use over 1.5GB, most games can certainly use over 1GB as I found out the hard way with my previous SLi system.

        [And that is the best use of grammar/punctuation ever! ^.^ ]

        Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 22:30.
      • Burgess_101
        Since: May 2009

        I got 16gb of RAM for £40 absolute bargain!

        Comment posted on 19/06/2012 at 02:54.
  3. ico
    Since: Aug 2010

    As long as they’re both backwards compatible and have disc based games then Im fine with however many teraflopsies they can dish out on a spin cycle.

    Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 18:41.
    • damoxuk
      Since: May 2011

      PS4 won’t be backwards compat if it uses AMD/Intel/IBM processor as the ps3 uses a cell processor and making it backwards compat would require a ps3 cell processor inside (like ps3 had at start which amped costs up).

      However Sony may still use an upgraded cell processor (devs should have gotten used to cell by now right?) and considering they own the Cell processor plant it may actually be cheaper to make the processors themselves. But hey no one knows for sure.

      Just another year of rumours then :)

      Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 19:16.
      • cc_star
        Team TSA: Writer
        Since: Forever

        I thought Sony sold the Cell plant back in 2007 to Toshiba… who promptly folded production of HD-DVD, perhaps a backroom deal done? Which ensured Blu-ray would become the dominant of the two formats, but also Toshiba would have something to add to their balance sheets?

        Yes another year of rumours, pretty sure these won’t go into production for another 10 months, so I’d be almost certain there’s zero final specs known by even MS/Sony, nevermind the rumour-mongers on the net.

        Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 19:51.
      • Uhyve
        Since: Sep 2008

        Actually, Sony bought back the Cell plant last year, so if it wasn’t for all the x86 next gen rumors, I’d have assumed that Sony would pull a Nintendo for next gen and use a higher clocked version of the PS3 processor (maybe with a few extra cores).

        Couldn’t find a better link:

        Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 20:48.
    • Devil2k
      Since: Jan 2011

      Oh Sony, it won’t hurt you to put more RAM in your console. You blew it with PS2 and PS3, so just go all out and quadruple what you *think* the PS4 needs.

      Comment posted on 22/06/2012 at 20:40.
  4. Mathematicool
    Since: Mar 2011

    Wow! So almost as good as the PC I built nearly a year go.


    Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 19:15.
    • cc_star
      Team TSA: Writer
      Since: Forever

      You built a PC with a lightwieght console OS & specific APIs to enhance what’s there ensuring that gaming capability would be far in excess of similar specced PC?

      Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 19:54.
  5. jayjay119
    Since: Apr 2010

    I understood very little to none of that article. Are those specs good for a next gen console in relation to what we have now? I’ve heard many gamers saying that the RAM of current gen consoles is insufficient so I’m guessing that the proposed 360 successor would be very good. But the rest, I’m lost. Anyone wiser than I care to enlighten the muggle?

    Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 19:49.
    • MrCoffeeUK
      Since: May 2012

      Yeah I know right? Once Windows 8 is added onto the new Xbox and PS4, with Office 2012, decent Anti-Virus, latest service pack etc there is no room for any gaming on these consoles is there?
      Or could it be those specs are pretty good for devices not running a massive OS nor housed in a tower the size of J Lo’s arse?
      My money is on the latter, though i’m no expert, just going by what I read on “www.pcgamersSTFUwithconsolecomparisons.com” ;-)

      Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 19:56.
      • MrCoffeeUK
        Since: May 2012

        That was in reply to Mathematicool, not you jay, stupid refreshing

        Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 19:57.
    • AG2297
      Community Manager
      Since: Feb 2009

      In basic terms:

      Today’s consoles (PS3 and X360) are mostly limited by the fact they have a small amount of RAM as you rightly said.

      If we take the specs above as fact, which in an likelihood they aren’t, then you’re looking at around 4x the amount RAM in the PS4 than is in the PS3 and it will be faster, more modern RAM too (GDDR5 as opposed to XDR and GDDR3 in PS3 in none basic terms). In theory, this would be plenty, but 5 years down the line will we be in the same situation as we are now where developers want more RAM? If so, then the Xbox would have 50-100% more than the PS4 which could be pivotal later in the consoles life.

      However in processing terms, the PS4 would exceed the next Xbox in terms of capability meaning that we could be looking at quite a similar situation to now where the PS3 has more processing power and the 360 has a RAM advantage but on a larger scale.

      If it’s anything like the PS3 and X360 generation, then the amount of RAM available will be more important than the processing power. However these specs are about 4 times as powerful as the current gen. I’d be more interested in seeing the stats behind the GPUs (graphics cards) though as they may play a more important role this time around. I’ll wait until the official specs are released before I bother with that though.

      Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 20:32.
      • SilverCider
        Since: Jan 2011

        ” I’d be more interested in seeing the stats behind the GPUs (graphics cards) though as they may play a more important role this time around.”

        If they want to push the exact same quality as they are doing this gen (give or take a bit) but at 1080p res instead of 720p, then they will require 2.25x the amount of oomph (on a basic fill-rate basis – I know it’s not quite as simple as I make out). Likewise, if they wanted to adhere to the wishes of the 1080p60 crowd up from the 720p30 then it needs to double again. In rudimentary terms, those GPU’s best be spicy to punch at least 4.5x above what the current ones have to offer! I’ll not go on to mention beyond 1080p… I’d be happy with that.
        Then for the CPU…. :P

        Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 22:41.
  6. jamess109
    Since: Apr 2009

    Crap hardware AMD=Shit for CPU and not as good as nvidia. 2Gb is too limited if they want the consoles to last 10years. Average PCs today (not the expensive ones) can do soo much better! PC = Winner!

    Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 21:07.
    • Jag
      Since: Feb 2009

      Yes PC will always be ‘better’ but a lot of games are restricted by the requirements of the current consoles i.e. DX9 and textures optimised for 720P.
      This is because consoles are where the money is so imagine how good the PC games will be next gen games with much better consoles.
      BTW I’m obviously talking more about games that are cross platform rather than PC exclusives.

      Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 22:07.
  7. Jag
    Since: Feb 2009

    Looking at the PC space 1 teraflop of useable performance has been achievable for the last couple of years now. This would produce an excellent bump in processing power for next gen, however the amount of readily accessible memory will also be key for everything in games including the map size, number of concurrent active objects such as NPCs and of course texture sizes. My opinion would be that 2 GB should be an absolute minimum but ideally 4 GB should be the min with maybe a 2+2 setup. Although I think this gen, XBox proved that letting devs decide what to do with all the available RAM is a much better way to go.
    I think with these specs we could get some truly amazing experiences next gen given all the devs have learned on the restricted resources this gen.
    Also I hope 1080P/60Hz is standard next time round, it’s just so much nicer :-)

    Comment posted on 18/06/2012 at 21:59.
  8. Roynaldo
    Since: Nov 2008

    Sorry to point out the general fact of the matter being ‘blah blah blah’. Nothing concrete, no word from either manufacturer. All run of the mill rumour.

    Barely worth talking about until next year tbh. Flop on that!

    Comment posted on 19/06/2012 at 00:36.
  9. Awayze
    Since: Jul 2010

    I hope Sony don’t use AMD but stick to the Cell and Nvidia GPU.

    Comment posted on 19/06/2012 at 02:50.
  10. fs
    Since: May 2012

    I can’t see Sony being any less powerful than Xbox. PS3 is always more/as powerful as its competitors, this is one of the things that defines it as a brand, to take this away would sed alarm bells ringing. I think it would be wise to avoid speculation until the concrete has been laid.

    Comment posted on 19/06/2012 at 09:08.

Latest Comments