New PlayStation 3 SDK released - OS memory footprint lessened

by Colin Torretta { May 14th 2007 at 11:00PM }

Developer blog Innerbits has a great breakdown of the most recent PlayStation 3 Software Development Kit, version 1.60. They provide detailed information on some of the more technical aspects of the PS3's operating system from a developer's perspective. The site analyzed the memory cost of the different features of the SDK and detailed the major ones. Here are the most interesting bits:

OS footprint reduced from 64MB in December to 52MB in the most recent release, roughly a 20% drop in resource cost.
Friends list costs 25 MB (?!) + 8MB for startup
Remote play for PS3 games possible - costs only 8 MB
PS3 OS cost: 84MB | X360 OS cost: 32MB (ouch)

Sony is clearly trying hard to optimize the OS, improving it every release and adding more functionality while reducing memory footprint. Unfortunately, there is still a long way to go. Every megabyte that the PlayStation 3 OS uses is one less megabyte of space that developers can use for better textures, quicker load times, and faster framerates. Sony is going to have a difficult time convincing studios to incorporate the different PSN features if the developers have to devote such a large amount of memory to them.

According to Innerbits, the next SDK release should be late May or June. They anticipate gaining additional memory back, so hopefully in the future we'll see more and more game companies utilize these features as their resource cost drop.

Tags: Friend's list, Friend'sList, memory usage, MemoryUsage, operating system, OperatingSystem, OS, resource cost, ResourceCost, SDK

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

drchucks @ May 14th 2007 11:43PM

It looks like a step in the right direction, but come on 25MB + 8MB for startup! Looks like that is the biggest problem. How the hell do you manage 8MB on remote ps3 games, but have 25MB dedicated to a friends list? If someone knows why that is eating up the resources please shed some light.

jaysins @ May 15th 2007 12:57AM

Also one SPE is used to run the OS constantly and another possibly, though unconfirmed, reserved to be taken if the OS demands it. So your down to 6 or even 5 SPE's, though again, I'm unsure about the second SPE as Sony hasn't knocked down the claim and it has been around for a while. The OS has to be constantly running so that you can be attached to your network, internet, online game, chat w/e, and for DRM purposes as it can keep your system "safe" from certain free material and make sure all audio/video is DRM protected. I think that's about it :)

Tahiri @ May 15th 2007 1:09AM

"and another possibly, though unconfirmed, reserved to be taken if the OS demands it"

That was denied by the first site that reported it (ars technica) because they got the info from a message board.

Also, this is the same site that reported background downloading would only work in the XMB and not in game. They've been wrong before (ie: lied)

And, the 32 MB VRAM used, is for the framebuffer. And that was based on an estimate of using 2 1080p double buffered channels. No game uses 2 channels, so divide that by 2 for 1080p games.

And even moreso, but 360 needs equal space for it's framebuffer. It has 10 megs dedicated for the framebuffer, but since it isn't large enough for anything over 480p, tiling must be used. Which means a full buffer is stored in normal ram.

So the stats are misleading in the following ways:
1) Bad source
2) Apples to Oranges comparison of PS3(with framebuffer) to 360 (without framebuffer)
3) VRAM estimate was wrong

alienclay @ May 15th 2007 2:55AM

reguardless, after finding out that the ps3 wouldn't be using a unified ram structure like the 360 (and it shouldn't with the cell structure.) i still personally feel sony should have put in 512 for main ram and 256 for rsx.

but at what cost$ ?

eh, i don't think it will make that big of a difference in the long run. you work with what you got, and the devs focusing on ps3 will make the most of it.

Max Boyer @ May 15th 2007 5:38PM

@3. Tahiri

nice to see you've got your talking points all in order

RoboJ1M @ May 15th 2007 5:11AM

"but at what cost$?"

Lots, I remember the decision to add 256MiB of RAM to the 360 cost MS millions of dollars.

It's really interesting to see the differences between a traditional software companies efforts (MS) and a traditional hardware companies efforts (Sony) to solve the same hardware and software problems.

This time next year I reckon MS will have ironed out their hardware problems (heat/noise/unreliable) and Sony will have sorted their software problems.

Well, maybe not Sony. Maybe by end of 2008.

J1M.

Jim @ May 15th 2007 7:03AM

10 Years? There are issues now because of RAM, so add RAM.
An upgrade offer could be done for
current owners. It is soldered to the board?
DIY sites would have a blast with that too, Modders everywhere would brag about it on the boards.
They need to just do it.

majorwedgie @ May 15th 2007 7:24AM

Tahiri - your facts are incorrect..... the 360 has a 10MB frame buffer physically on the gpu seperate from the systems 512MB ram. The PS3 does not have dedicated frame buffer. The 32MB comes from the 256 x 2. The architecture of the 360 GPU and unified ram gives it a head-and-shoulders advantage on top of the OS using such a small portion of system resources...

Read...
http://dpad.gotfrag.com/portal/story/35372/?spage=7

WhackMushroom @ May 15th 2007 8:13AM

remote play is possible! that is all i needed to hear today! gonna go bug the wankers at pspfanboy. brb.

Real Gambler @ May 15th 2007 1:58PM

PS2 has 32Mb and games like God of WarII look pretty good still. 256Mb is lots. If Microsoft or Sony had thought that it would be thigh, they would have added a $5 connector and door like any laptop. Or worst case, for $25 they would have added an extra 256Mb and marketing would have jump on that to claim they have more memory than any competition! None did...

It will take at least 5 years before developpers have to start optimizing their code because of this memory limit. Right now, they likely could not care less. And in 7 to 10 years they will have to seriously watch it, like PS2 developpers are doing today.

JB @ May 19th 2007 8:44AM

Majorwedgie you are an idiot. I am sorry but if you did more research you would realize that the PS3 is built as a streaming system and its cash is adequate enough to process local data. The SPE's also are not forced into sending back the data to the PPU as they can drop data to the ram over the EIB.

The dedicated frame buffer amounts to nothing except a subjective opinion. And your link is full of twisted facts. Anyway it doesn't matter the 360 has horrible latency issues.

Stef Geiger @ May 15th 2007 11:10AM

@4: You're wrong. The PS3 CAN use system ram as video ram. Technically speaking, this is true of any system. The laptop I'm typing this on uses 64 megs of system ram for video. If developers want to, they can code a game to use the system ram to help out the video ram. Sony just doesn't PLUG that fact, unlike Microsoft. See, Microsoft thinks everyone is stupid and will see it as a "feature".

Stef Geiger @ May 15th 2007 11:13AM

tom @ May 15th 2007 11:38AM

Stef> Of course you can use RAM for VRAM, but it's comparatively VERY slow, so for something like an advanced next-gen game, it's just not going to be all that useful.

Tretor> The 360 doesn't NEED the "embedded frame buffer" either (it's not a dedicated frame buffer, btw, but simply super-high speed memory tied directly to the GPU, so it makes a great frame buffer, or depth buffer or effects buffer or just 10mb more vram). It's just a nice bonus.

In general> I'm wondering about reducing the system memory footprint on the Dev kits and how that translates to the user's console. The OS is booted from the system it's self, and not from the games. This means that developers need to still be working for the lowest common denominator: the guy who bought a PS3 and never applies a system update. That guy is still going to be running a PS3 with less available RAM than the developers.

Darko @ May 15th 2007 1:39PM

@Tretor

By having this 10 meg frame buffer it allows the 360 to enable things such as AA and AF without a dip in frame rate. Or at least thats the idea. So saying the ps3 doesn't need it is stupid...

DarkJC @ May 15th 2007 2:33PM

tom, in normal systems the RAM is slower compared to the VRAM, but actually in the PS3 both sets of RAM run at comparable speeds with a super fast bus between everything. Check out the information on the PS3's architecture at Wikipedia.

Tahiri @ May 15th 2007 5:58PM

"Tahiri - your facts are incorrect..... the 360 has a 10MB frame buffer physically on the gpu seperate from the systems 512MB ram."

Yes, I said that. I also said it's not large enough for anything larger than 480p so you must use some of the 512 MB of RAM for a full framebuffer, and use tiling

"The PS3 does not have dedicated frame buffer."

I know that. I said the 32 MB estimate was the framebuffer for 2 1080p channels

"The architecture of the 360 GPU and unified ram gives it a head-and-shoulders advantage on top of the OS using such a small portion of system resources..."

Actually developers disagree. It's a major disadvantage in that bandwidth is now divided in two between the component. Where on PS3 it is not