PlayStation 4 Games Can Only Use 4.5GB Of System’s 8GB RAM

Both Xbox One and PlayStation 4 sport 8 Giga Bytes of RAM, but Microsoft has been criticized for reserving 3GB for system and background applications, leaving just 5GB for games. It seems that Sony also has similar limitations on PlayStation 4 games’ RAM usage.

According to Digital Foundry, Sony's current PS4 developer documentation states that 3.5GB of the console’s 8GB RAM are reserved for system and background applications, leaving 4.5GB only to games.

The report noted however that RAM allocation is relatively flexible and that – depending on availability – games might be able to claim an extra 1GB of RAM.

Sources close to Sony revealed that the company’s R&D team is looking for ways to optimize the console’s operating system, so it is possible that more RAM will be available to games at launch. There are no guarantees for that though.

Add new comment

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.



Doesn't matter what you own or how much you have paid out for it. If you don't like consoles then don't ******* buy one. If you don't like PC or MAC then don't ******* buy one. God sake people **** off. Let the site bring the news however good or bad and shut the **** up

No one is stopping the site

No one is stopping the site from bringing us news. People here just like to discuss their tastes like any normal person, the thing is we do it differently here. So using your own logic, if you don't like the comments here gtfo, or simply read the article and move on. Either way your comments are inane, fucktard.

Why are you faggots always

Why are you faggots always arguing over PC vs console? It's a non sequitur; I own both and use them for different purposes, PC is better for some games like RTS and MMO, and console is better for sitting down and playing games with friends in the one room. Not to mention - PC is used for browsing web, video editing, industrial applications, and much more; whilst console is used as a living room entertainment unit for watching blu ray movies etc. How can you compare the two as though everyone need to make a choice between one or the other???

So much for no background.

LOL consoles were always claimed to have the advantage that they don't have to run any background programs. LMFAO so much for that bullshit. They'll keep trying to make them more & more like PCs but cheaper & you get what you pay for, idiots.
You voted 'no'.

well i think that you console

well i think that you console guys are jelous of the mans pc specs. Everytime a console comes out you guys get shafted big time and youi are about too again... dumb ***** for buying consoles when pc would give you more gaming pleasure

pc all the way

I dont need a console when ive just finished this beauty. Corsair 900d Corsair ax1200i with custom red psu cables Plextor 256mb pro ssd Samsung 512mb extreme pro ssd Asus z87 maximus extreme m.board 32gb kingston hyper beast 2400mhz ram Asus rog phobeus sound card Pioneer xl blu.ray writer Lg 27" 2560x1440 ea83 led 2 evga gtx 780 superclocked hydro coppers in sli Corsair sp2500 speakers Corsair k95 keyboard R.a.t 9 mouse Aquero led temp/flow/fan control display 4 x 4tb western digital h/drives All fully watercooled on a custom loop. Primochill Advanced primoflex lrt tubing black onyx d5 655 pump ek pump top ek supremacy cpu block full nickle Red/black monsoon fittings all round 250mm phobya balancer res black nickle 18 x corsair sp120 quiet fans aquacool 360mm and 480mm ut 60mm rads. various sensors and led lighting. one dream build....its taken me 2 weeks to build and get right....

Firstly why are u stating

Firstly why are u stating this on a ps4 article. Secondly who cares what you have, anyone who actually gives a **** looks at the rigs section of this site. so why don't you **** off and post a picture of it Instead of wanking over it you sad *******. really these pc owners who witter about their hardware are just sad ******* with no life.


Who cares? *256/512mb ssd drives? you mean gb? god **** it, you're building something without knowing the basic, i'm pretty certain that your setup looks garbage, how you assembled your water loop. Must be nasty down there for two weeks build time #Moneywasted. PS, not a console *** boy but I have the same build, bragging about something isn't gonna help especially you don't know what you are bragging about. #****.


Only idiots post hashtags everywhere, your ignorance regarding SSD's confirms that. 256/512mb SSD's are fairly common, they're RAM based ssd's. The ones you're referring to (with gbs of storage) are flash based SSD's which are somewhat slower. Talk about not knowing the basics.

ssd ...

more Ram affect the life of a SSD. SSD as a limited life... and on a pc it is recommended to have more RAM for reduce de solicitation of the ssd...

Someone's got anger

Someone's got anger management issues. Anyway, it really depends on the type of ssd drive. Yes, there are a few types of ssd and the differences between them are huge. Flash based ssds are slower and measured in gbs, DRam based drives are very fast and still measured in mbs.


It was a mis type you *****. I work 65 hours a build time was slow. Sour grapes me thinks. It looks fantastic everything hidden/neat build.short runs of tubing.....go cry in your mamas arms .

I cheer to your build, but...

The Roak is right, TOGTFO, the burden of proof is on your side, post it in the rigs section, and then SHUT these ******* out... Wait a minute, you bought the Obsidian 900D?!?!?! ****! that **** is ******* expensive! More cheers to your good health and rig.

4.5GB is hardly enough for

4.5GB is hardly enough for some of today's games, IMO Another reason why these consoles are not worth it. I've spent slightly more than 600e to upgrade my old dual core to a gaming i5 8gb machine and in the end I got something more useful than a lousy console.

4.5GB just not enough?...

Yes... I agree because the last of us was already hogging all that memory in the PS3... All 512MB of it... Oh wait! That system has an OS too, so it must be using even less than that... This isn't a PC build, these games are built differently, think before you speak(figuratively of course).

ARMA 2 may have run better

ARMA 2 may have run better with 8GB BUT that dosnt mean the game uses 8GB... your forgetting your windows also uses some of your memory.... really wish you people would stop comming with smart *** remarks.

No they don't. I beat Skyrim

No they don't. I beat Skyrim on a PC with 2.5GB of ram, using a TONNE of graphical and gameplay mods. It ran fine. The official specs call for 2GB. Kerbal Space program also requires only 2GB, and runs perfectly on my laptop which has 2GB of ram. Where are you getting your numbers from? Even if we combine the VRAM and system ram of the computers I used together, that's still like, 3.5GB. 4.5-5.5GB of ram will be plenty for the games the console's capable of playing.

Not only this, but when a

Not only this, but when a game recommends a certain amount of RAM, it's taking into account the amount of RAM used by the background processes of the OS, which are already allocated their own little section of RAM to play around in, leaving a WHOLE ~5GB of RAM to use instead of a variable portion of available RAM as you would find occurs when using a PC.

the ps3 has separate video

the ps3 has separate video ram as well there is no way in hell Skyrim address 8GB of ram for a start the max addressable in a 32bit win 7 system is only 4GB dont see people complaining that skyrim wont run on there 32bit systems - and id be surprised if skyrim isnt a 32bit programme anyway i have never seen a game exceed 2-3GB Ram and the ones that get close to this are badly coded Just because a game recommends 4GB to play doesn't mean it uses all of it there are a **** ton of other processes using that ram

how is a console more

how is a console more expensive than a gaming pc really if you can build a gaming rig for £430 I would be very impressed. when a top level graphics card is that much on its own without the motherboard ram cpu and all the rest of the stuff you need. ok console graphics aren't as good as a pc but I would rather spend £430 on a console to play game than have to fork out close to a £1000 to make a gaming pc.

True gamer has all platforms!

It is no better considering I play my PS3 on a 55inch tv which back in the day cost 5k! Still rather play on my pc though, Way better. I will buy the next gen consoles as well as I always do but will no doubt end up back on pc after a while especially once next gen games are out which need updated hardware and the console will be stuck for another few years on the same parts. One good thing though is next consoles aren't really consoles anymore, They are turning into a pc and even use pc parts now instead of dedicated components made for it, All good for both console and pc gamer as game cross ports between them will be a lot better. Next gen consoles can't come soon enough, PC games have been held back somewhat for the last 6 years.

Actual costs

And more than that, at least when considering the Xbox, how much is a Live subscription per year? $50 may seem like a good value but that 450 over a life span of a console (lets say 8 years) adds up to 850. Which for that price you might as well buy a decent PC. Now granted a PC can cost more than that but then you're getting into spec beyond a console. The 360 has a triple core XEON with hyperthreading @ 3.2Ghz, 512MB of GDDR3 @ 700 Mhz, and a ATI Xenos graphics chip. For a PC of similar stats today you'd pay less than$100. The Xbox one to date priced at $499 and is confirmed to be running a AMD 8-core APU @ 2Ghz (this may be higher), 8GB of DDR3, an a ATI Radeon built in the APU. A PC of similar stats today is about $600-$800. That may sound more expensive today but after a few years of Live service and higher priced games it really churns out to cost more than a PC


Add new comment