Sorry for this kinda gamerbrained question.

The Xbox 360, Playstation 4, Xbox One, honestly most consoles after the Playstation and Saturn have shared memory pools. It allows flexibility in how much memory and VRAM developers want to assign, right? Why does the PS3 not have a shared 512MB pool of GDDR3? It caused all kinds of problems, most notably with Bethesda games.

Is it the Cell Broadband Engine needing the specialty XDR memory? Is it an artifact of the Nvidia RSX graphics chip being added late in development? Looking back I a)most wonder if the split memory was more of a problem than the Cell tbh.

to piss you off specifically

permalink
report
reply
10 points

They pissed off more people with their busted-ass port of Skyrim :^)

permalink
report
parent
reply

Ha!

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Likely it was a tradeoff between various competing and contradictory constraints, most of which will probably never be revealed.

permalink
report
reply
10 points

:/

Sony also did this on the Vita, which has a way more lopsided 512mb system ram/128mb vram config, so it’s happened more than once. Just strikes me as so weird, and usually consoles with split ram have more system than video ram…

permalink
report
parent
reply

I was writing something much longer but I started actually reading about the PS3’s memory map and uhh

The memory pools aren’t really split* orrr… I guess it depends what you mean by “split”. The RSX can actually access the Cell’s XDR memory, it’s just somewhat slower because the RSX isn’t directly connected to the XDR memory bus so it has to ask the Cell BE to make accesses. For comparison, it seems the Xbox 360’s main memory is connected to the GPU which results in longer latencies for the CPU to access memory but apparently Microsoft partially mitigated this by the addition of more cache memory for the CPU.

*https://www.psdevwiki.com/ps3/RSX (scroll to: “RSX Memorymap”)

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Thus, there’s no shared memory between PPU or others SPUs. Instead, the SPU contains local memory used as working space.

To program this unit, developers use the PPU to invoke routines provided by the PlayStation 3’s Operating System, these upload the executable specifically written for the SPU to the SPU of choice and signal it to start execution.

sony nooooooooo bro this sounds soooooooooo annoying!!!

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

You can tell me abt the memory map if u desire ✨ but uh

Because of the VERY slow Cell Read speed from the 256MB GDDR3 memory, it is more efficient for the Cell to work in XDR and then have the RSX pull data from XDR and write to GDDR3 for output to the HDMI display.

There are also bandwidth differences up to 10gb/s between the different busses. Add the high latency of GDDR3 compared to the XDR RAM, and the fact that the Cell doesn’t seem to have access to the GDDR3… The RSX having to request access from Cell puts me in mind of Pentium Ds and other really early dual core CPUs, lol.

But this basically all means that using the two pools as a single continuous memory chunk would be impossible, right? The Xbox 360 sounds much more normal to me, I would bet without knowing that the PS4 and XBO also have large caches to offset GDDR latency. The OG Xbox has a large CPU cache as well =) which seems much funnier than this weird split ram shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I found this source all about the PS3 hardware

Essentially, while there were bottlenecks, the GPU could use the main system memory. I’m going to say that games struggled on the PS3 mostly due to difficulty programming for it

permalink
report
reply
4 points
*

This blog fucks, what an excellent source, ty.

It has also really convinced me that the PS3 is even more of a mess than I thought yeehaw SPE executable…

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Yes, but in a limited fashion and the Cell could not access GDDR3, yes? Plus the RSX has to request access to XDR via the Cell. I’m pretty sure using it all as one continuous ram chunk would have been tough at least.

“Difficulty programming for it” meaning ‘weird hardware design’ or ‘bad SDK/devkits’? Having just looked at the Element Interconnect Bus, and the state of multithreading in 2006… Oh boy

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yes to everything. The Cell processor was ambitious to say the least, but confusing hardware design and poor support from sony for developers lead to poor performance in many of the games that were developed for it. Or devs simply didn’t make games for the Playstation at all, a trend that would continue to this day. This actually reminded me of a parody song from a now defunct gaming website I used to listen to.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

a trend that would continue to this day.

The PS4 outsold the Xbox One 2:1 and the PS5 continues this trend, they’re also pretty normal architecturally?

But yeah no kidding, it just seems to me like this bizarre PPE/SPE orchestra is so much worse than simply three cores with simultaneous multithreading. (and a unified, flexible memory pool) It’s like they tried to reinvent the multitasking wheel…

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Xbox does not have console roots. Its a pc at heart.

permalink
report
reply
11 points
*

…yes comrade, all consoles do. All consoles are. MIPS (PS1, PS2) is from computers. PowerPC (Gamecube, Wii, Wii U) is from computers. 6502 (NES, SNES) is from computers. 68000 (Mega Drive) is from computers. Quick, what console is NOT a PC at heart?

The Xbox and One both use x86, and they have some software roots in Windows, but not only does that not really relate to the question I asked, all Xbox systems have shared memory anyway.

reddit-ass "well ackshually " comment

In a word: so?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

I can outpedant both of you by saying that ”PC” is practically always used to mean ”IBM PC compatible”, meaning x86/x64 architecture, therefore most consoles aren’t based on PCs

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

The last four minus the Switch are that is pretty dang pedantic tho, “PC” usually means any home computer nowadays. Plus, PowerPC…

Serious, do you unironically think I was being pedantic? Given that “xbox has pc roots” is a sort of ambiguous nothing-statement that doesn’t relate in any way to my question, (which is about the PS3) I thought pointing out that all consoles are just specialised, simplified computers was apt.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

no need to get mad at someone for just posting a comment

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

It’s a pointless entirely offtopic “heh gotcha” style comment that contributes nothing, in addition to lecturing me on things I already know. I wasn’t even being mean or rude really.

Also click their username, they are a lib.

permalink
report
parent
reply

no need to get mad at someone for just posting a comment

Bad posts are one of the worst things ever.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Good post, it really is just different types of computers (although game consoles continue to get less and less interesting architecturally :( )

Also I started writing a response to your original post (interesting question tbh) that is quickly scaling out of control

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Please I wish to knoooowwww! Scale it out of control!

And yeah, seriously. They’ve just been PCs since 2013.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Pedants gets no more answers

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

Says rhe redditor who came into this post to be pointlessly pedantic - " "

You could always actually answer A) the OP question, B) how what you said is relevant.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Wouldn’t that imply the opposite though? AFAIK PCs had already been using independent VRAM by the 7th gen

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That was / is slot-in, but yes. consoles was built more on the basis of coin-ups than what was the pc at the time. They had split personalities and was often compromised by several cpu/systems, while IBM’s pc was a single cpu thing. There was the co-processor but that was tightly knit to the processor and not independent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

This modular design what was made them able to do what they did - and imo what ps4 was the last iteration of for sony, with nintendo having the gamecube. The PS4 could do amazing things, but only like 12 programmers in the world was able to use it fully.

edit: Gc, not wii. Actually the gc was their first unified memory system. Sorry nintendo architects, my mistake

permalink
report
parent
reply

technology

!technology@hexbear.net

Create post

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

  • 1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
  • 2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
  • 3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
  • 4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
  • 5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
  • 6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
  • 7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.

Community stats

  • 1.7K

    Monthly active users

  • 5K

    Posts

  • 61K

    Comments