So how much data did that screen change use?
Indeed, and you don't even have the information for the first, right? So how can you even make these claims?
If people are only interested in hearing what they want to hear, I cannot spend more time on this beyond the following answer. I use you as an excuse but the answer is addressed to all those interested in the subject.
Obviously I don't know how much data is being loaded into R&C. I don't work at Insomniac. But I have enough experience to get an idea that they are more than 2.4GB (which is the XSX SSD bandwidth limit).
You start from the false belief that XSX can load 100GB/s. That is not entirely "true" as you understand it. It is not like this. The bandwidth is 2.4GB/s and at most, effectively, compressed you get an equivalent of 4.8GB/s. Equivalent. No more.
PS5 is designed to offer up to 22GB/s effective. And it would be necessary to explain some peculiarities of PS5 for you to understand the "why", and since I cannot explain the "why" I accept the fact that you could not believe it. It is not your fault not having access to these peculiarities.
If you still want to give for certain the interested claims about the 100GB of XSX then you could also say that on PS5 they are 458GB. And surely you must also believe the 600 "megas" of Movistar (telephone company). I do not know if this happens in all countries, but I suppose that this example will only be understood by those residents in Spain. I think it doesn't take much explanation in this regard. It is not reality. In the case of data, equivalences are one thing and actual bandwidth is another. There's no more.
Now the question I ask. Do you think R&C is loading more than 2.4 or 4.8 GB of data? And the second question. At what speed do you think XSX can do it in practice from the time it leaves the SSD until it reaches the screen? And not to do it once in a specific place but to be able to do it at any time several times and in different areas with different assets.
As I said in my first speech about it, I'm not saying that XSX can't deliver that quality. I'm just saying that XSX cannot do R&C as it is intended. It would have to be done differently. And you as a user should care little about how they achieve it while it is achieved. But in no case it would not be done in the way that PS5 can.
And assuming that the one loaded is less than 4.8, assets prepared specifically for XSX, texture compression, geometry optimization, etc. would have to be readjusted (I will not explain why).
And assuming that the loaded is less than 2.4 then we could start talking about comparisons.
Do you think R&C loads less than 2.4GB/s?
In any case, if these explanations do not help you either, I cannot say more. I respect your opinions, but sometimes they are not realistic in one direction or the other. PS5 does not have 12TF. And XSX does not have the PS5 data management system. The XSX GPU has over 15% more theoretical gross power (albeit at a slower speed, and speed is essential and transcendent for some tasks). The PS5 data management system on the other hand is in practice around 5 times better than that of XSX in the worst case scenario. And about 9 times better than XSX in the best possible scenario for PS5. And on average, with XSX at the maximum capacity with compression and PS5 at the minimum without compression PS5 continues to manage twice as much data as XSX in its most idyllic not constant moments.
It would be interesting to start neglecting the argument that the PS5 SSD will bring no benefit.
XSX has a GPU with superior theoretical raw power. That's where it all ends. What was shown in the presentation of PS5 does not do justice to what these machines can do (both) but you have to start accepting the limitations of each one. It's nice to have a long
penis, but sometimes it's better to have it a little shorter but much fatter. It could offer you a more satisfying experience in the long run (or not, according to everyone's tastes, of course).
It would be very debatable whether or not it is necessary to use, for example, 8K textures instead of 4K textures, it would be legitimately debatable. But the reality is that the volume of data managed by PS5 cannot be managed by XSX, nor can a home PC. At the beginning of generation, surely what you see on screen will make you think that this difference does not have relevance, but at the end of generation you will realize the relevance that it has. As long as you can believe or not believe, you are in all your rights, I only expose what there is. Neither pay me one, nor pay me another, my only interest is VR with respect to hardware and games in general with respect to software, whatever the platform. And I think that I have been quite critical regarding the games presented by Sony, perhaps you have missed it.
I will also tell you that I have not created the hardware, I only use it, and internally there are many things that I do not fully understand, but I will analyze the results. Still I know that there are many people around here that if they had the data on their screen they could say better than me how it works and its limitations (like other coworkers). But unfortunately I cannot offer you this information.
Cheers
www.neogaf.com
www.freepatentsonline.com
pick me.