Optimistic Gamer
Member
I love these Dunning-Kruger threads.
That’s the scenario this generation. Next generation it’ll be the memory in both consoles. I guess you can still bottleneck next gen with effects and definition but more usually than not AAA devs are going to clash with the RAM since they can render 7-8 times the detail rendered in a PS4 with only twice the RAM.These people seem to forget that CPU and GPU are the ones that usually bottleneck when gaming (on PCs with nvme or SSD),
Ram limitations on PS5 in particular will be practically removed for all intents and purposes.
How people in this thread pretends to know about tech and yet fail to understand the OP amazes me.
That’s the scenario this generation. Next generation it’ll be the memory in both consoles. I guess you can still bottleneck next gen with effects and definition but more usually than not AAA devs are going to clash with the RAM sine they can render 7-8 times the detail rendered in a PS4 with only twice the RAM.
Obviously confined within 16gb MAX per scene.That's a little bold.
Obviously confined within 16gb MAX per scene.
No, but what this entire original post is stating is that an SSD effectively unburdens a GPU which is just patently false.
As I said you can. But both run a modern GPU that lets you scale from lower resolutions with merely identical results. Kind of like checkerboard but better (specially the SX solution since it uses IA will be better). So, why waste the power in raw pixels?You can easily bottleneck these new GPUs by turning the resolution up to a true 4k. SSD won't be able to help with that. It's completely GPU-bound.
Yes, because we’re not talking about shaders or even gpus in this thread. Despite many conflating memory and assets with rendering hardware.You completely ignore the complexity of shaders.
Subjective opinion != objective fact.
How people in this thread pretends to know about tech and yet fail to understand how games and console hardware evolution work.*How people in this thread pretends to know about tech and yet fail to understand the OP amazes me.
That’s the scenario this generation. Next generation it’ll be the memory in both consoles. I guess you can still bottleneck next gen with effects and definition but more usually than not AAA devs are going to clash with the RAM since they can render 7-8 times the detail rendered in a PS4 with only twice the RAM.
You can easily bottleneck these new GPUs by turning the resolution up to a true 4k. SSD won't be able to help with that. It's completely GPU-bound.
I’m sure you’d agree 10 different cars on screen looks better than 5 cars duplicated twice. Still 10 cars on screen in both scenarios, still the same load. You still following, or the math is escaping you?
PS5 = 10 different cars, XsX = 5 x 2 cars
The above is bought to you by Cerney SSD spicy sauce. Crying is optional.
As I said you can. But both run a modern GPU that lets you scale from lower resolutions with merely identical results. Kind of like checkerboard but better (specially the SX solution since it uses IA will be better). So, why waste the power in raw pixels?
If something is completely GPU bound you don't need textures at all.
Textures and all assets (apart from the actual scene graph) are a way to trade CPU for RAM.
You can always trade CPU for RAM in graphics.
And the will fulfill the RAM first since there is very little of it.How people in this thread pretends to know about tech and yet fail to understand how games development work.*
If the system gets 3 or 7 or 10 or 30 times more powerfull, games will also get 3 or 7 or 10 or 30 times more powerfull, fullfilling all the resources the system has available and maximize it, every single generation.
Everyone expecting this to close the gap completely between systems is delusional. Everyone downplaying the RAM problem in this generation has no idea what he’s talking about.Yes and no. The bottleneck is not in the SSD speed. The SX arquitecture is quite fantastic. The bottleneck in both consoles is the RAM. With better assets you need bigger RAM amounts. If this generation wanted to keep the graphical jump from 360 to PS4 and it would maintained the the mechanical drives it'd needed 128GB of RAM @ 1TB/s. See? Those PCIe SSDs seem expensive but they are actually way cheaper than the alternative. Since the RAM technology hasn't keep with the needs of processing power these SSDs are here to help with that.
Both systems have dedicated silicon to load asset faster from their drives and that's not because people wants 2 second loads time so bad is worth the investment. It's because without fast asset streaming 16GB of RAM at 448-560 GB/s are ridiculous compared with previous generational jumps. So, everyone and their mother are currently implementing in their engines ways to move assets on the fly according to this new especifications.
So, is it 4.8GB/s a bottleneck for the system? No. But 16GB of RAM are, and they are less a bottleneck in PS5 than in SX. Specially factoring the SX is 18% more powerful but has not more RAM neither more speed in the drive to move assets from and to that pool.
I don't understand this. Can you be a little more clear?
The GPU on the PS5 has more ram availability to the scene it’s rendering because it doesn’t need to reserve as much ram for things off screen. So yes more variety of assets in front of you is exactly one of the many possibilities. And the car analogy stands firm.That is absolutely not what the SSD makes possible, yo. This is the first post in this thread where I am going to get into anything Xbox Vs PS5 and I am only doing is because you went there. I've done my best to avoid it thus far.
If the GPU of the PS5 has 100MB of memory available to it and the Xbox Series X has 100MB of memory available they absolutely will never load more than that on the screen at one time. It is not possible. I am not a game developer but your analogy does not demonstrate anything tangible. There is no reason why one console would load 10 unique cars and the other 5 cars duplicated twice. The assets still have a file size. If each car is 10MB in size there will only ever be 10 cars on the screen and it doesn't matter if they are 10 of the same or 5 cars duplicated. Your analogy just makes no sense and mine is drastically oversimplified I am sure but it is still based in logic.
What the PS5 will be able to do is have those cars exist then drive through a short tunnel for 3 seconds, come out the other side and have an entirely different scene. The SSD of the of the system lets developers feed assets to RAM faster. It does not let developer show more than the GPU can handle.
The more detail you render the more you need to put in your back buffer though; the improvement isn't linear because of that. (not that you said it was, just adding to the comment)The GPU on the PS5 has more ram availability to the scene it’s rendering right now because it doesn’t need to reserve as much ram for the back buffer. So yes more variety of assets in front of you is exactly one of the many possibilities. And the car analogy stands firm.
Hers another hint, look back to the slow days of the internet and trying to stream a video, it needed to buffer a good chunk of time to ensure continuous playback. Now with fast internet the video starts instantly, no need for large buffering because it’s practically real-time. Identical principles at play.
What's a texture? What does it represent?
It represents a factual or artistic "pre-render" of a particular BRDF (BRDF being actually yet another approximation, but let's not go there).
If you could calculate BRDF in real time for every pixel would you need textures at all?
If you could calculate in real time the internal structure of any physical object would you need meshes?
If you could in real time calculate physical phenomena like "fire" would you need particles?
Each and every asset in rendering pipeline is a smart way to "pre-render" just enough information that it would look believable but yet dynamic.
I didnt said RAM was good..., yes it should be at least 20GB to make me feel comfortable on X, and yes SSD isnt the bottleneckAnd the will fulfill the RAM first since there is very little of it.
I’ll quote myself:
Everyone expecting this to close the gap completely between systems is delusional. Everyone downplaying the RAM problem in this generation has no idea what he’s talking about.
Isn't fill-rate mostly limiting things like resolution and sometimes frame-rate because of it?This is a post from back in MARCH
@Karak handled this on his ACG podcast from day one
The video in the post is timestamped right to the quotes about SSDs
"You CANNOT draw more than the fuckin CPU and GPU can put on the screen."
"You're full of shit...you cannot cheat a fillrate with a SSD."
There are diminishing returns. You can have a 5” 4K phone but very few will notice. Solutions like DLSS 2 are going to be common ground and the SX even has a silicon dedicated to machine learning (that is how DLSS works, but of course it will be an AMD implementation). Only games with a budget to create assets insufficient to charge the GPU (like a cross gen game) will opt to waste resources in 4K rendering. Watch the DF feature about DLSS 2 and see for yourself.That's like asking why did we move from 720p to 4k . We need to represent our vision in the best possible light. If I'm making many samples that contribute to a pixel and I'm not getting a good enough approximation, I have to sample more. That's the inherit limitation of rendering as a whole. 4k is not just used for AA of polygons in a scene. All the shaders are dependent on resolution of the buffers as well.
It’s not a matter of popping or load slow the same assets. Is to load more detail in the front and less in the back. Which implies different assets across the board. In the OP is very well explained (I though).I didnt said RAM was good..., yes it should be at least 20GB to make me feel comfortable on X, and yes SSD isnt the bottleneck
What I said before
"These people seem to forget that CPU and GPU are the ones that usually bottleneck when gaming (on PCs with nvme or SSD), not the storage device, yes ps5 AND XBOX SERIES X have great nvme speeds, still those speeds wont make cpu or gpu faster, they will still bottleneck the CPU and GPU just like before.
Do you know what you will get if you have a slow storage device?
Get Star Wars jedi fallen order and the xbox one | S or PS4 and you will see, game will stop mid gameplay for some seconds to load assets, and then resume, and load textures slower, a faster drive will JUST LOAD ASSETS AND TEXTURES IN TIME so the GPU can continue render and therefore the game continue. PS5 will load faster but wont really make a diference, just in loading screens WHICH WILL STILL EXIST."
CPU and GPU will probably still bottleneck next gen, RAM on Series X being 10 avaiable for games if I'm not wrong will also be a bottleneck possibly.
I edited my responseThere are diminishing returns. You can have a 5” 4K phone but very few will notice. Solutions like DLSS 2 are going to be common ground and the SX even has a silicon dedicated to machine learning (that is how DLSS works, but of course it will be an AMD implementation). Only games with a budget to create assets insufficient to charge the GPU (like a cross gen game) will opt to waste resources in 4K rendering. Watch the DF feature about DLSS 2 and see for yourself.
It’s not a matter of popping or load slow the same assets. Is to load more detail in the front and less in the back. Which implies different assets across the board. In the OP is very well explained (I though).
No, but what this entire original post is stating is that an SSD effectively unburdens a GPU which is just patently false. And SSD allows assets to be loaded faster. That is all. It does nothing more than that. The system is still constrained by the specs of its hardware. The GPU and the CPU. The SSD does not allow MORE to be rendered on the screen at one time. It allows assets to be loaded to the screen faster when they are needed. If a GPU has 1GB of available memory it cannot and will not ever load more than 1GB of assets. Meaning there will never be more than 1GB of assets on screen at any time. The OP of this post is implying otherwise. He is implying that the SSD allows for the system to load more and that is false.
What do you mean? Any buffer size scales,The more detail you render the more you need to put in your back buffer though; the improvement isn't linear because of that. (not that you said it was, just adding to the comment)
I'm just saying what I think you just did; it's a factor of your quality and speed not just speed. As you increase detail you increase your buffer size (while still being able to be smaller than a system with a slower SSD.)What do you mean? Any buffer size scales,
buffer size = quality / stream speed
If comparing PS5 to XsX with the same quality and respective streaming speeds
XsX buffer = quality / 1
PS5 buffer = quality / 2
PS5 buffering reserve is half of XsX. Hence PS5 has more ram available for rendering..
You get an extra point for not saying "all intensive purposes".If anybody plays Warzone now and wanders into areas that are replicas of Multiplayer maps..e.g Vacant. The downgrade in Warzone is obvious. It’s not GPU load causing that, obviously much more detail can be rendered as seen in the multiplayer map. it’s the lack of ram and inability to feed the detail. Ram is being used up by the buffer for the much larger warzone arena instead of what’s in front of you.
These sorts of discrepancies should be history with the new ssd memory setups.
Ram limitations on PS5 in particular will be practically removed for all intents and purposes.
You get an extra point for not saying "all intensive purposes".
He should of.
You get an extra point for not saying "all intensive purposes".
That's true because the CPU has to decompress the data from the SSD. That takes too much toll on the CPU. Basically, PC CPU cannot stream a lot of data during RUNTIME. (During loadtime it doesn't matter).
PS5 I/O has a decompressor that is equivalent of 9 ZEN2 CORES. That will allow it to stream 9GB/s-22GB/s or data during runtime.
With the geometry engine not rendering what is not visible on-screen as well as the back-facing details, CPU and GPU will be starved with data to render if not for the SSD. Unless of course, it's a fighting game like Tekken and Streetfighter.
You just have to see what the 1.8TF GCN GPU inside the PS4 was already capable of rendering. Order 1886 and FF7 Remake has CGI looking moments, at the cost of not being able to go anywhere because the data can't be streamed 'just in time'.
You just have to see what the 1.8TF GCN GPU inside the PS4 was already capable of rendering. Order 1886 and FF7 Remake has CGI looking moments, at the cost of not being able to go anywhere because the data can't be streamed 'just in time'.
Yes, but the problem is that the system can render a much higher detail but the RAM space combined with slow streaming cannot provide the data in time.
FF7 Remake shows that perfectly. Their engine can render multiple characters with CGI like details (the party characters). But there are instances that even if cloud is alone, the characters around him, as well the details in the environment are too poor yet the game can obviously render them in detail. It's because the RAM cannot house all the details. The slow streaming doesn't help.
Now FF7 Remake was made in a 1.8TF of GCN GPU. PS5 is 10.3TF of RDNA2 GPU, but only 16GB of RAM?
If this gen with 1.8TF GPU, we are seeing games that are held back by RAM capacity (5.5GB, more than half used as buffer) and held back by slow streaming, 16GB for 10.3TF of GPU wouldn't cut it.
Also, remember PS5 Geometry Engine. It will only render what is in the current view of the player. I suppose similar to frustum culling but next-gen.
It keeps what is all around you at the highest LoD and discards data as you get further out, like it does now.... but much closer, also, high details data for objects that you may not turn to could be removed from memory (which is what is shown in the presentation).Isn't the closest data at risk of being seen again very quickly, and thus can't be discarded without risk of pop-in?
Or am I missing something here?
Calm down, you are teetering towards the ledge there.
Especially not when it's on PS5.Everything isn't CPU or Compute bound
I observe a complete misunderstanding of the technical part. Oranges and potatoes.PC decompresses data on the GPU front mate, it does a fuck ton more on the GPU front which AMD can't do through patents. U need 16 ryzen 2 cores to stream data at a quality level on AMD side while u only need 3% of your Nvidia GPU to get the same result. Then we got v-ram compression techniques etc all with it all done on the GPU side without effort.
I observe a complete misunderstanding of the technical part. Oranges and potatoes.
The GPU on the PS5 has more ram availability to the scene it’s rendering because it doesn’t need to reserve as much ram for things off screen. So yes more variety of assets in front of you is exactly one of the many possibilities. And the car analogy stands firm.
Hers another hint, look back to the slow days of the internet and trying to stream a video, it needed to buffer a good chunk of time to ensure continuous playback. Now with fast internet the video starts instantly, no need for large buffering because it’s practically real-time. Identical principles at play.
I repeat, a faster ssd directly translates to more ram available for immediate rendering because less buffering is needed for off screen assets. More ram = more assets, whatever they may be.
Made another image for you:
What we see here is: what happens if player moves.
So the player position (vertical black dashed line) changed.
The new asset state is in violet.
The left upper blue part is unloaded from RAM. The right upper violet part is loaded into RAM from SSD.
The common part stays the same.
Now on the bottom you have a rectangle. that's the same RAM when there is no streaming.
I.e. level was loaded once and no new data is coming, until we unload the whole level and load a new one.
The height of that red rectangle shows the asset quality for that case.
As you can see it's drastically (4x) lower than the blue LoD.
But it still uses the same amount of RAM (areas of blue and red graphs are the same).
And you don't need to load anything when player moves.
Does it make things clearer?
What about the geometry engine Cerny was talking about ? Why was it so important in his GDC speech (and not VRS) ? I thought geometry engine was already in RDNA1.What's a texture? What does it represent?
It represents a factual or artistic "pre-render" of a particular BRDF (BRDF being actually yet another approximation, but let's not go there).
If you could calculate BRDF in real time for every pixel would you need textures at all?
If you could calculate in real time the internal structure of any physical object would you need meshes?
If you could in real time calculate physical phenomena like "fire" would you need particles?
Each and every asset in rendering pipeline is a smart way to "pre-render" just enough information that it would look believable but yet dynamic.
Correctly! The system is not more powerful, but since it is starving for memory the less RAM is used for cache and more for rendering the better.I understand the theory. But I bet some people are confused because they haven't seen any really good SSD demonstrations yet.
What I don't understand is the misinterpretation that having a super fast SSD will make the system more powerful.
What I understand is that instead of having to account for the next 30 seconds of Gameplay all you need is to load assets for the next 5 seconds of gameplay. When this is done you obviously free up some ram and can use the ram for other assets. This in theory can lead to higher quality assets in the next 5 seconds of Gameplay instead of lower quality assets for the next 30 seconds of Gameplay.
This theory applies to both the XSX and the PS5 btw due to both systems having fast SSDs.
However in the end the power of the system remains the same. Having a super fast SSD just allows you to use that same level of power in a different manner.
Obviously consoles are faster. You need a sata3 ssd at least for PC.A Consoles with 16GB memory pool + superfast SSD and custom decompression chips.
vs
A PC with 8GB+ vRAM, 32GB+ fastest DDR4 but deliberately paired with a slow HDD like 5400rpm.