360 only has 512 MB of RAM.......

mr ryles

mr ryles

CAGiversary!
Feedback
50 (100%)
Thats kind of sad. I don't know much about computer specs and such, but I do know you need about a gig of RAM to play most the new computer games smoothly. This may be an old subject but I just now found out and am curious how the 360 will hold graphically with only 512 ram.

It also has 3 processors, but does that make up for only 512 ram?
 
[quote name='mr ryles']Thats kind of sad. I don't know much about computer specs and such, [/quote]

if you don't know, then don't be so concerned.

and dont be sad, it will all be ok.
 
Dont compare it to a home computer, at least not with the amount of RAM. Home computers have full Operating systems as well as other services running underneath the game. The 360 can most likely turn most, if not all of them off.

If you want a good example, go check out any of those Atari classic game collections they sell for the PC. Even if the system requirements are low by today's PC standards, like 128MB of RAM, its still hundreds of times more RAM than the Atari 2600 had.
 
[quote name='jalu6']Dont compare it to a home computer, at least not with the amount of RAM. Home computers have full Operating systems as well as other services running underneath the game. The 360 can most likely turn most, if not all of them off.
[/QUOTE]
correct, since there is not a full blown os as well as other services running, as well as the fact the 360 software is designed for 1 platform, it get truly optimized.

if you want a REAL good example, some older dos games were made windows compatible when win 95 1st came out. using the windows bianary required a higher speced machine to compensate for the extra resources used up by the os.

just think. to get windows xp itself to run nicely requires 256-512 MB ram alone...
 
512 of RAM is plenty for a console - in fact, it was only VERY late in the game that the 360 was bumped up from 256 to 512, just to overly please developers.

Already hinted at above, but the 360 needs a lot less than a PC. Running Windows alone takes a big chunk out of your available memory.
 
[quote name='mr ryles']Thats kind of sad. I don't know much about computer specs and such, but I do know you need about a gig of RAM to play most the new computer games smoothly. This may be an old subject but I just now found out and am curious how the 360 will hold graphically with only 512 ram.

It also has 3 processors, but does that make up for only 512 ram?[/QUOTE]

The original Xbox only had 64MB with a 733MHz Intel Mobile Celeron/Pentium III hybrid processor.

The X360 is a giant upgrade.
 
[quote name='mr ryles']so whats the point of having 3 processors?

If 512 ram is more than enough why the hell does it need 3 proccesors?[/quote]
To make extra-shiny games
 
[quote name='mr ryles']so whats the point of having 3 processors?

If 512 ram is more than enough why the hell does it need 3 proccesors?[/QUOTE]

It probably doesn't but I'm guessing MS put it in so they could compete with the almighty power of CELL.
 
[quote name='mr ryles']so whats the point of having 3 processors?

If 512 ram is more than enough why the hell does it need 3 proccesors?[/QUOTE]

to run 3 threads at once maybe? that's like asking "why have dual/multiple cores in a pc?" if utilized correctly, you can run more in the same amount of time....

since your not a spec person... you should really read up on the specs of the 360... there are plenty of places that have a breakdown of everything, and it will give you a complete answer
 
Yeah 512MB is fine for consoles. I do wonder how much smoother the Xbox Guide integration would be with 1GB of ram though.
 
[quote name='mr ryles']so whats the point of having 3 processors?

If 512 ram is more than enough why the hell does it need 3 proccesors?[/quote]

OP. I would suggest reading a "how computers work" book. Not trying to be an ass here, but it will clear up your (mis)understanding of these things.
 
As cliche as this may sound, it's not how much RAM you have but how you use it.

Seriously. Memory management is a fine are that eludes MOST programmers for various reasons, most notably because it is extremely difficult.
 
512 is enough to ensure that the enemies in ninja gaiden 2 will become fully conscious and take over the world....and switch weapons on the fly while doing so.
 
[quote name='ashram']to run 3 threads at once maybe? that's like asking "why have dual/multiple cores in a pc?" if utilized correctly, you can run more in the same amount of time....

since your not a spec person... you should really read up on the specs of the 360... there are plenty of places that have a breakdown of everything, and it will give you a complete answer[/quote]
Its actually 2 threads per core multiplied by three, 6 Total.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']OP. I would suggest reading a "how computers work" book. Not trying to be an ass here, but it will clear up your (mis)understanding of these things.[/QUOTE]

There is no misunderstanding here. If 512MB Ram is more than enough to run the 360, why in the hell does it need 3 processors? Shouldn't 1 be enough? Unless it has 3 crappy ones that can combine their power to become ultimate. These are the questions I want answered.

And to prevent further puns, yes. Like Voltron
 
[quote name='mr ryles']so whats the point of having 3 processors?

If 512 ram is more than enough why the hell does it need 3 proccesors?[/QUOTE]


You're right. You really don't understand this stuff.

You're mixing two entirely different issues.

It isn't that 512 MB of RAM is more than enough. You can never have too much, although it will eventually go unused above a certian point. It is a matter of how much can be included while keeping the machine under a certain cost. It was a given that any new machine would have a lot more RAM than the previous one. How much was an issue of price.

A console is vastly more memory efficent than a ful featured desktop OS. Although new machines like the 360 have far more going on in the background than the old cartridge platforms, it is still largely dedicated to the game developer's choices. Windows provides a myriad of services that software applications use. For instance, by having the printing infrastructure in Windows itself you only have to install one driver to use a printer from all applications. Under DOS, there was no OS overhead for the printing infrastructure but it also meant every application had to do all of its own printing operations, including offring a driver for every printer model supported.

There is a huge amount of stuff in Windows waiting to be called upon. If you look around you an find articles on how to gain speed and free up RAM by turning off unused Windows service that are running by default.

Having three processors was also a matter of having greatly more processing power than the original Xbox but in such a way as to keep costs down. A big high-end desktop processor can match the performance of the Xbox 360 CPU but carries a far higher cost and includes a lot of functionality that doesn't contribute to a game console's needs. IBM and Microsoft came to a mutual agreement that many game tasks lent themselves well to heavily multithreaded parallelization. It can be technically daunting for a programmer unused to such a system but a programmers life always has new things to master on the horizon. That 3-core PPC design comes in at a much lower cost than a high-end P4 or Athlon. It meant giving up easy backward compatibility but that was already going to be a problem when they knew Nvidia would not be their partner a second time.
 
Isn't one of the cores on the 360 mostly or exclusively for the guide GUI and all that stuff (XBL chat, XBL camera).

As for why does it need 3 cores, how about it allows more realistic physics and better AI without bogging down the GPU so you can have a game that looks great AND has realistic physics and all that shit.
 
Asking why you need 3 processors when you have 512 ram is like asking why does a truck need a V8 engine when it has 4 wheel drive. 2 completelly different components of a computer that do seperate things to accomplish a goal.
 
A computer has to do many different things. I video game console only focuses on the video game so its okay to have low pc specs in a console.
 
well it would be nice if next gen consoles were able to do a simple upgrade for ram.

start selling ram sticks for 360,ps3,wii . Would make the console a little cheaper and give gamers options to upgrade if they feel like it.


I know i would be willing to add another 512 ram to a console a year down the line.


512 is a lot compard to 64 in original xbox.

however it really isnt a lot compared to what the 360 is now and how much more the games will need to be able to play.
 
[quote name='Ivanhoe']well it would be nice if next gen consoles were able to do a simple upgrade for ram.

start selling ram sticks for 360,ps3,wii . Would make the console a little cheaper and give gamers options to upgrade if they feel like it.
[/QUOTE]

Then you do exactly what alienates alot of folks from playing PC games: Requiring them to do semi-costly updates.

I'd rather have a universal amount, even if its a percieved "low" amount.
 
[quote name='darkrage']Asking why you need 3 processors when you have 512 ram is like asking why does a truck need a V8 engine when it has 4 wheel drive. 2 completelly different components of a computer that do seperate things to accomplish a goal.[/QUOTE]


exactly. Just like, Why does xbox 360 have a wireless controllers when it has a dvd drive. Thats what his questions sound like.
 
[quote name='Stuka']Isn't one of the cores on the 360 mostly or exclusively for the guide GUI and all that stuff (XBL chat, XBL camera).

As for why does it need 3 cores, how about it allows more realistic physics and better AI without bogging down the GPU so you can have a game that looks great AND has realistic physics and all that shit.[/quote]
From what I understand, the system reserves 3% of its CPU power for the GUI, or 10% of a single core. No matter what game the 360 is running, that 97% is completly used by the game. This is by memory, so I'm not sure how accurate I am. (No pun intended)
 
i understand that its better... but i still wonder why the guide lags comming out, and moving through listening and deleting messaging seems bogged down to me... anyoneelse?
 
Here's a thought, games that are made for 360 already have their specs set. PC games can very on specs because there is not one pc that has set a standard, PCs change everyday for specs. 360 stays the same.
 
[quote name='Ivanhoe']well it would be nice if next gen consoles were able to do a simple upgrade for ram.

start selling ram sticks for 360,ps3,wii . Would make the console a little cheaper and give gamers options to upgrade if they feel like it.


I know i would be willing to add another 512 ram to a console a year down the line.


512 is a lot compard to 64 in original xbox.

however it really isnt a lot compared to what the 360 is now and how much more the games will need to be able to play.[/QUOTE]

Then you no longer have a stable platform. Developers want every single machine to be absolutely identical and predictble in resources and behavior.

You may have noticed than only a small fraction of N64 games supported the exansion RAM. This device was originally part of the 64DD add-on drive. Additional memory would be required since data could no longer be read from the cartridge mapped to main memory. Developers found it let them do a lot more with the hardware's capabilities and pressed Nintendo to make it available while the 64DD sat in limbo.

As part of the 64DD it wasn't an issue of whther to support it. If you were doing a 64DD game you automatically could assume an 8 MB N64. But you also limited your market for the game to the subset of N64s that had the add-on installed.

For the Memory Expansion Pak it was worse because it was more difficult to track sales, especially after third party units appeared. Developers took a big risk if they produced a game that required the additional memory. Nintendo itslef waited quite a while before they allowed such a game, Donkey Kong 64, and only then because they bundled the unit with the game. Majora's Mask came later as Nintendo was confident a major portion of the N64 installed base had the added memory.

By the time N64 game development ended, only about 5% of the library supported the RAM Expansion Pak. To make good use of it meant a fair bit of added labor on the game and the cartridge capacity would need to be bigger for the higher resolution to be properly suppported by the art assets. If you didn't have a likely major hit on your hands, doing a game exclusively for the added memory was out of the question due to the reduced market.

Microsoft really, really doesn't want to put developers and consumers through this. It's just suicidal. They already impose enough requirement for hard drive support being included but optional in al but one title to date.
 
Question, i know to the people who know what there talkin bout this could sound stupid. I really havent seen much on what games use how many of the cores, from little that i have seen almost nothing does, not even the great looking gears of war. So if there using one core only, does that means the games that start using more cores will have that much bigger worlds and better graphics? And are there games yet that use more then one core?
 
[quote name='pdiscool']Question, i know to the people who know what there talkin bout this could sound stupid. I really havent seen much on what games use how many of the cores, from little that i have seen almost nothing does, not even the great looking gears of war. So if there using one core only, does that means the games that start using more cores will have that much bigger worlds and better graphics? And are there games yet that use more then one core?[/QUOTE]

This is fascinating. How, may I ask, can you tell a game is using more or less cores? Are you under the illusion that a better looking game is automatically using more of the machine?

It just isn't so. A poorly written can be very ineffcient and struggle to achieve with five threads what a better proframmer would get done with three and have plenty of pwoer left over for more goodies.

Unless you have a debuggling station you cannot honestly eyeball a game and say how much or little of the machine it uses. Good games and crap games can both vary widely in how they function.
 
[quote name='epobirs']This is fascinating. How, may I ask, can you tell a game is using more or less cores? Are you under the illusion that a better looking game is automatically using more of the machine?[/QUOTE]

Man when he reveals that he's telepathic you're gonna feel like such an asshole =/
 
[quote name='D4rkN1ght']i understand that its better... but i still wonder why the guide lags comming out, and moving through listening and deleting messaging seems bogged down to me... anyoneelse?[/QUOTE]

Depends on the game for me. The first generation titles (Kameo and PGR3 for example) tend to cause the guide to chug, while newer titles do not.

Could be a programming thing.

As for the messages, I think that may be related to your connection speed. Or Microsoft's servers.
 
This thread is funny...

If you told me the 360 had an old turd and the ghost of a gerbil running inside it I'd still buy it if it was capable of running games like Gears of War and Mass Effect.

If you want to fawn over specs, stick to PC gaming. Consoles are for those of us who are too lazy and only want to upgrade once every 5 or 6 years when the devs figure out what's going to work well for a while.
 
[quote name='Zoglog']Man when he reveals that he's telepathic you're gonna feel like such an asshole =/[/QUOTE]

Nah, just a little guilty when what he sees drives him to suicide.

Besides, how is telepathy going to tell him what is happening inside the 360? It isn't as though there is a mind at work in there.
 
Hehe, you guys are pretty harsh on the OP. Actually OP's question isn't THAT far off, I mean at least he is somewhat on the right track of knowing "having more cores, need more ram to support it with so it would utilize the full potential of multi-threading" This is a true statement, except OP probably made a mistake by comparing PC to console gaming, which 512 mb of console ram is probably as efficient as 2G on the pc.. if you think this way.

I think if OP rephrase his question, he wouldn't be flamed as badly :D

"Would the 512 ram be the bottleneck for the performance of the 360, consider it's so uber powerful with 3 core?"

Update -

Nm i missed OP's million dollar quetsion "so whats the point of having 3 processors?

If 512 ram is more than enough why the hell does it need 3 proccesors?"

Anyways, OP.. just remember:

More core = GOOD!!!!
More ram = GOOD!!!!

It's like ... life.

More money = GOOD!
More hot women = GOOD!

If you are having less hot women in your life, it doens't mean you want less Money.
 
[quote name='Apossum']512 is enough to ensure that the enemies in ninja gaiden 2 will become fully conscious and take over the world....and switch weapons on the fly while doing so.[/QUOTE]


Apossum +50 points of awesomeness for that post, in daddy's book that is
 
[quote name='terribledeli']Then you do exactly what alienates alot of folks from playing PC games: Requiring them to do semi-costly updates.

I'd rather have a universal amount, even if its a percieved "low" amount.[/QUOTE]


Agree 10000000000000000% that is why I HATE PC GAMES...nothing is more annoying then getting a game home and realizing you cant play it smooth w/o getting an upgrade...ughhhhh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top