Kenpachii
Member
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Inside Unreal: In-depth look at PS5's Lumen in the land Of Nanite demo(only 6.14gb of geometry) and Deep dive into Nanite
- Thread starter Lethal01
- Start date
- Status
Vognerful
Member
ok I am not surprised why the other guys do not bother to respond to you.
How many games did PS5 manage to reduce loading times to 90%? Did it happen without any software optimization (readjusting the code to take advantage of PS5 hardware)?
why did you change the goal post from "reducing load time to single digit" to "90% reduction"?
Other than initial load where you can compromise how many seconds you want to wait for the game to load, what speed do you need to feed your GPU with data and how much is what is important. Based on teh current tests we have for UE5, we do know that we can live SSD like the samsung Evo 970.
please source on this as I need to read what they were saying exactly.
Md Ray
Member
You can't. Because then NVIDIA wouldn't have introduced RTX IO nor MS would have introduced DirectStorage.
There you go.
Md Ray
Member
Because they know I'm right.
Plenty of games do. Off the top of my head: Avengers, R&C, Spider-Man, the latest one being Final Fantasy 7, a gigantic -97% reduction:
They happened after coding specifically for it, that's what DirectStorage aims to do on PC. You need similar technologies to PS5, on PC to be able to handle games like R&C, you can't do that without them. That's what I'm saying here.This is what an order of magnitude difference looks like:
No goalposts were moved. Go back and re-read the origin of "-90% reduction". I've quoted that well before you started replying to me lol.
Yeah.
From Ampere video presentation:
"Over 20 CPU cores."
From Ampere whitepaper:
Look at the CPU requirement when decompressing from 7GB/s NVMe according to NVIDIA:
Level load time using 24 cores CPU + 7GB/s NVMe: 5 seconds
which is still significant compared to 1.5 sec with non-CPU decompression, a -70% reduction:
Here's a level load time on PS5 with HW decompression + 5GB/s NVMe for reference:
You can see how intensive of a workload this is with a conventional CPU. When decompressing alone takes up all of Threadripper's 24 cores - what do you think will be left for the game itself? And an 8 core 3700X is far, far from 3960X. Not even the 5000 series is enough.
Last edited:
Vognerful
Member
ok, so 3 games? ( I will add for you Demon souls since you forgot about it)
But the discussion is not on what is the loading time is! it is that after you completed loading the game, what data transfer speed do you actually need for rendering data during gameplay? This was the actual point of contention. Even if I want to follow you point (R&C as an example), then how could they replicate something similar in the UE5 demo we had seen when direct storage is not out yet on PC?
The point is with little optimization, a game like R&C can be brought to PC. I will take the bite and say it can be done without having direct storage or RTX IO implemented. They will make things easier for sure.
Thanks for the slide on Nvidia RTX IO. I will read further on it. But I won't take his statement on data decompression at face value.
Kenpachii
Member
So u cant shift data from one storage space to another without compression?
U for real mate?
Md Ray
Member
If the data is compressed, which it is in the storage drive, you have to decompress it when bringing it into the memory.
You want me to post DirectStorage video presentation now?
mitchman
Gold Member
You're asking for something that can't be proved. The burden of proof is on the person who postulates an argument, meaning the burden of proof is on you as you made the claim a PC could do this.
Md Ray
Member
There are definitely more. And varies from 80-90% reduction in load time. Those were just off the top of my head.
Look, I'm not discussing rendering here. I jumped in because the discussion was about R&C and its fast level switching and whether it was possible on PC or not.
Lol, willful ignorance. Ok.
If you can't load a game that takes near 30 seconds on an HDD, and bring it down to 2 seconds using an NVMe without DirectStorage and RTX IO then a game like R&C can't be brought to PC.
Last edited:
Hoddi
Member
RTX IO and DirectStorage aren't becoming a thing for no reason. These things cannot come out soon enough because we desperately need them to move forward on PC. I'm honestly amazed by some of the responses here.
Does this mean that the PS5 is a magic solution? No, because Kraken isn't the only compressor in existence. Oodle Mermaid is almost twice faster for a measly 13% increase in file sizes while Kraken is simply a good fit for the PS5.
None of this has anything to do with UE5 which clearly doesn't need very high throughput.
Does this mean that the PS5 is a magic solution? No, because Kraken isn't the only compressor in existence. Oodle Mermaid is almost twice faster for a measly 13% increase in file sizes while Kraken is simply a good fit for the PS5.
None of this has anything to do with UE5 which clearly doesn't need very high throughput.
Hoddi
Member
I already addressed this on the last page. Doom Eternal does exactly that and is compressed using Kraken.
Md Ray
Member
Post the load times again, it wasn't clear.
I just saw a video of HDD vs NVMe load time in Doom Eternal... It was like a -67% reduction (35 seconds to 11.5 seconds). Far from PS5's consistent -80-90% reduction in native apps.
Last edited:
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
Loading is the new SSD apparently. And that is the only thing that is important in games. Well there it is boys, let's pack it up. Higher resolution, better framerates, higher IQ/fidelity doesn't matter, universal peripherals either. Loading is more important than all of that.
UE5 demo is a prime example of why direct storage isn't NEEDED right now. I'm not against it as I'll definitely enjoy the boost. But there are no games that require it right now, and there are no games that can't run on PC in existence, no matter how much these armchair devs wish upon a star.
UE5 demo is a prime example of why direct storage isn't NEEDED right now. I'm not against it as I'll definitely enjoy the boost. But there are no games that require it right now, and there are no games that can't run on PC in existence, no matter how much these armchair devs wish upon a star.
Last edited:
Kenpachii
Member
Me: what if you remove compression entirely and just transfer data?
you: well if you compress data, u can decompress it?
Oh by the way, u want a link to directstorage which has nothing to do with my question.
U know why u can't answer that simple question? because it will burst your bubble of bullshit. Which has been discussed to death in the last 20 pages.
And then he spams laugh smileys like nobody else on top of it, rofl.
Its every single fucking generation with those people.
If sony would have dropped a floppy drive in that dam box, they would have screamed superiority of the rooftops because it uses less power then a SSD which absolute shits all over it.
it's at this point just cringe to even talk to these people.
Last edited:
Hoddi
Member
Maybe, but I'm still careful to make statements about that. I have no idea how much data R&C streams in and Doom Eternal isn't the only game out using Kraken. There have been countless games shipping with Kraken over the past 3-4 years (including every COD game since WWII) and most of them don't load nearly as quickly as Doom Eternal.
I only posted that as a proof-of-concept. And, again, this thread is supposed to be about UE5. It doesn't mean that the PS5 decompressor is a waste because it honestly seems very useful.
Last edited:
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
I'm not saying anything negative about the decompossor hardware or anything related. I don't want people thinking I'm downplaying it. I'm simply saying it's not impossible to run on PC. There's RAM for that.
Rea
Member
Do you know that both world are exist in the ram in this Demo? It's just a different layer like in the adobe photoshop. There is no loading and unloading from the disk.Oh another variant of the UE5 demo will need 128GB RAM on PC to run, Editor is less taxing than compiled build, Lumen and Nanite ran on PS5's Tempest Engine and Unreal engine engineers are lying.
Valley of the Ancient demo already does this without none of that nonesense.
LMFAO. without superfast SDD, DirectStorage and RTX IO.
Unloading and loading over 1 million assets, over 100 billion triangles in 4 seconds...wow!
Last edited:
Hawking Radiation
Member
What the ever living fuck is going on in here lol
Hoddi
Member
I don't think Windows' file cache stores decompressed data. It's fine for storing compressed data that comes off the disk (which helps against unnecessary disk reads) but it doesn't cache decompressed files as far as I know.
Hoddi
Member
Oh, it's nothing to worry about. All of these modern computers and consoles are engineered by highly competent people who are making fantastic products.
Some gamers just take offense to that because my mother is supposedly a prostitute. I'm not sure how these things are connected but I'm only a guy who doesn't understand these things.
Hawking Radiation
Member
Man that sucks. What she can't get a job at like Costco or something?
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
lol for me it actually is
I'm far more impatient than I am amazed by purdy graphics. I'm largely a PC gamer and I actually bought 1 game on PS5 I'd normally play on PC, because I thought the load times would be amazing (they weren't really tho, booooo on Ubisoft for Fenyx Rising or whatever)
Hoddi
Member
No, I think her reputation is worth more than that. Anyone can shop at Costco which is more than can be said about some of the poor sods in this thread..
Rea
Member
If you are removing data compression, it is pretty stupid. Why?
1. By compressing the datas you can have much higher disk space on your storage.
2. By compressing datas you can have higher I/O throughput, so you can move datas at higher speed than your maximum storage speed. For example, if your ssd has 7gb/s max raw speed, by compressing datas with the ratio of 2:1, you can have 14gb/s data throughput. Pretty cool right?
So why would any devs or anyone on earth wants data without compression?
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
As far as decompression goes... just because the hardware on the PS5 "can replace X number of Zen 2 cores", doesn't mean that normal compression is actually needing that kind of power. Heavily compressed data that's needed instantly as part of a NVME -> GPU pipeline capable of sending it 5.5GB of RAW data? Yes.. that would take crazy horsepower.. but data not as heavily compressed, not needed as quickly, and not as much of it at once? That'd be done w/ way less CPU utilization. Loads of games barely use modern CPUs these days as is.
So you could theoretically use system RAM as a cache, which you more slowly fill in the background, as you near "world switches." And then very quickly load that data into GPU memory for rendering.
That's the theoretically method being discussed here I imagine.
What the PS5's I/O does is allow crazily high RAM usage for what's in the current view..w/ a very small cache footprint. A system with more memory, doesn't NEED all of that.
But it's the direction PC is going of course, and quickly.
So you could theoretically use system RAM as a cache, which you more slowly fill in the background, as you near "world switches." And then very quickly load that data into GPU memory for rendering.
That's the theoretically method being discussed here I imagine.
What the PS5's I/O does is allow crazily high RAM usage for what's in the current view..w/ a very small cache footprint. A system with more memory, doesn't NEED all of that.
But it's the direction PC is going of course, and quickly.
Last edited:
JeloSWE
Member
Every single thing you said is completely wrong.
Everything. The R&C portal can be replicated in under 2 seconds using regular old UE4 Level Streaming (Not even the new World Partition in UE5) and a SATA SSD.
This can be done continuously, there's no limit.
No superfast SSD. No DirectStorage. No RX IO.
The 48GB crap is the same nonesense people were saying that you need 128 GB to run the UE5 demo and even then you won't be able to run the flying scene.
Portal Transition Effect using Level Streaming - The Gabmeister
It's good post with an actual example, but it's ultimately about speed, the PS5 loads more data quicker. Please don't get too hung up on the exact numbers I used for RAM, I was just trying to give an example.
The fastest NVME SSD as of this writing is around 7GBs and you can't read compressed data as it would tank your CPU. PS5 SSD can read 5.5GBs raw and around 9GB compressed data per second using Kraken standard compression ratios of around 1.5 but when you factor in the use of Oodle Texture compression you can in theory get up to a ratio of about 3, thus a peak through out of roughly 17GBs for textures. So watching your video example and then RC videos, it's clear that RC loads much more complex scenes much faster. This is why I was giving examples where all the data is already resident in RAM so one doesn't have to read from storage. So to iterate, the argument isn't if you can do something similar on PC, it's about how much and fast you can get the data off the SSD into RAM.
Last edited:
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
No they aren't.
To many bottlenecks and no software built to take advantage of it like the PS5.
Md Ray
Member
Not my fault that you don't understand.
Because as you can see, it literally says "COMPRESSED DATA NEEDED", as per NVIDIA's own slides. Games files are compressed data, you can't remove something that's NEEDED. That's not how it works.
Last edited:
lh032
I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
Someone didnt play the game at all.R&C portals take about 3 seconds to load a mostly empty desert location with low poly geometry and textures.
While the Valley of the ancient Demo unloads the desert completely and loads the Dark world from scratch in 4 seconds without superfast SSD, no direct storage, no RTX IO.
That's right. Valley of the ancient Demo unloads and loads over 1 million assets with over 100+ billion triangles in 4 seconds.
Um, big issue I'm seeing with that example there. I've never played doom eternal, so I don't know what initial loads are like, but how is the GPU memory already pretty much full before loading unless everything is already in GPU memory? Really would like to see inital game load times.
Balducci30
Member
Guys what is the point of this, even if, let’s say, current PCs couldn’t run the Ps5 demo as well as a ps5 could - by the time a UE5 game comes out they will be able to. Both consoles will be outdated in every respect by personal computers that you can build for at least 2x the price in no time. It’s a losing battle
Brofist
Member
The thing is it already can, and easily, don't let the 100 tangents this topic has taken let you think otherwise.
JeloSWE
Member
So I counted, in multiple locations, dense levels as well, not deserts as you claim, the number of frame from when the old level is completely out of sight when falling into the portal (room/sphere) until the first frame you can see the new level show up trough the exit. I Also counted the number of frames it takes to load in the other level when hitting the purple crystals (note that the moment you hit it everything freezes in place except the character, it's hard to see due to imaged distortions and the glow from the crystal). In both instances it took around 23 frames at 60fps, that's 0.38 sec. No where near your stated 3 sec.
That's right. Valley of the ancient Demo unloads and loads over 1 million assets with over 100+ billion triangles in 4 seconds.
Nanite is VERY impressive no doubt, but I'm not sure you don't mean 1 millions unique assets, but rather a couple of 100~1000 unique rock assets that the valleys are bashed together from. Also the 100+ billion polygons I assume is just the theoretical amount of polygons in the scene if you multiply the instances with their polycount. Say you have a 1000 instances of 1 model with 1 million polys then yes, you have in theory 1 billion triangles in the scene. How ever, Nanite aims for a triangles to screen density of at most 1 triangle per pixel. A 3840 * 2160 resolution would thus require at most 8.294.400 tris at any moment (disregarding overdraw etc). I'm sure Nanite is designed with efficient streaming, only loading what is needed as soon as possible, but if this takes 4 seconds on this PC then just imagine how fast it would load on PS5.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
That's just the title of a slide explaining a scenario... written in typical slide title short hand.
It means:
"Currently if you need lots of compressed data for your game, a CPU wouldn't be able to keep up"
So games aren't written on PC to expect the kind of compressed data that would cripple a CPU... obviously lol
A PC game could absolutely not compress data at all.. but I'm not sure why they wouldn't, they just don't push it too far.
Last edited:
Loxus
Member
You guys at like every PC on earth is going to have a 3090.
There are millions of PC's barely more powerful than a Xbox One X.
PC may not be the outdated platform but there will always be millions of millions of low spec PC's out there.
And your not going to get a PC at double the price that's going to out preform the consoles. A SSD that matches the PS5's SSD not gonna be cheap.
Last edited:
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
All you need is a RTX 3060 for better performance than ps5, and it's one of the cheapest GPU's in the lineup. If a lower end gGPU is stronger, and there are even better models available, what do you think will happen when the RTX 40XX series releases?
There are SSD's that surpass ps5 for 200.
What does it matter what this or that PC has in it? If that person doesn't care for top of the line specs, but I do on the other hand, how does that interfere with either of our gameplay? How does that affect YOU, personally? I never understood people who bring up that silly "argument".
Also, there are millions who can't find a next gen consoles. There are more PC's in existence, that have better specs than next gen consoles. Even a bad example like steam survey proves this.
Brofist
Member
You may have missed it but Nvidia just released a $1200+ line of GPUs that sold out in literally seconds. There’s plenty of market for high end PCs.
I’m not seeing the relevance anyway. Do people who still only own PS4s matter to PS5 owners? PS4 owners outnumber them by a substantial number.
Last edited:
JeloSWE
Member
I'm curious which ones would that be? Even at 7GBs they are still slower than PS5 9GBs.
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
I always find that angle so weird, similar to those people who keep up with how many consoles were sold this month, etc.
Whenever people being up other people PC, this meme always comes to mind.
I don't care what others are running.
Is that the ps5pro by any chance? The disc and digital ps5 is 5.5gbps.
There are several 7gbps on the market right now.
Loxus
Member
The gpu cost $400 alone.
And what SSD that can decompress data at up to 22GB/s that cost $200.
Wtf are you even talking about?
There are many PC's in existence but how many are gaming PC's that can actually out preform the PS5, decompression performance included.
You probably thinking a workstation is a gaming PC too right?
Loxus
Member
How many GPU's were released?
martino
Member
the thing is that at this point probably not a lot less and this a growing number...
this narrative pc will remain where it is now while projecting ps5 being 120M is a strange one....
Brofist
Member
Not enough cause it's impossible to find any 30xx series GPUs atm
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
Do you have dementia or Alzheimer's? You literally just mentioned in your precious post:
Who the fuck cares about the decompression? Show me a game currently out for PC, that is lacking performance because of decompression problems. Or any game that has been cancelled on PC, because direct storage isn't released yet. Just one example is all I need.
You guys are insufferable. Always moving the goal posts to try and get a check mark for your plastic box.
First it was this demo couldn't run on PC.
Then valley demo was released, and it went back to "well it isn't the ps5 demo".
Then the ps5 demo was ran on PC in editor, which is more taxing to run.
"But but but it's in the editor!!"
Brian and Daniel confirmed it's more taxing to run the editor on top.
"But but but, decompossor!!"
Last edited:
Loxus
Member
You are so dumb.I always find that angle so weird, similar to those people who keep up with how many consoles were sold this month, etc.
Whenever people being up other people PC, this meme always comes to mind.
I don't care what others are running.
Is that the ps5pro by any chance? The disc and digital ps5 is 5.5gbps.
There are several 7gbps on the market right now.
Those SSD's will never reach that number in real life tasks.
You still haven't watch this video have you.
JeloSWE
Member
Again, PS5 raw speed 5.5GBs but basically all data is stored compressed with Kraken so in reality it will pull data of the storage solution at 7~9GBs or more. Whilst the fastest NVME drive can only do 7GBs no matter what you do. That is today at least, until RTX-IO/DirectStorage becomes a reality. I thought you knew of an even faster NVME but ala no such thing,
staticshock
Member
That's not how it works. If you actually want to have an objective and independent verifiable comparison then you use a game where we have a previous baseline. You can't just use one arbitrary game because every game is different (game size, tech, etc). Heck 2k loads 1-2 seconds. But what matters is how much it improved versus the baseline. What was the load time before and then afterwards.I'm sure there are. Are there games that went from 20+ secs to 2 secs?
i.e. a reduction of -85-90% in load time (when going from HDD > NVMe).
Nope.
PS5 is already there.
This might be a hard pill to swallow for people likeDonJuanSchlong , but it's the reality.
Spiderman PS4 Pro vs PS5 (Loading saved game)
26.0 seconds | 2.14 seconds (12x improvement)
Avengers Next Gen Upgrade PS4 Pro vs PS5 (Loading saved game)
1m2.11seconds | 4.32 seconds (14x improvement)
Way more than 90% improvement.
So the game with the best load times improvement multiplier is NOT spiderman Its The Avengers.
Not only that but spiderman on PS4 Pro was 45 GB and 50 GB on PS5.
While Avengers was 74 GB on PS5.
Avengers clearly has alot that its loading in than Spiderman and loads it faster.
XSX loads it in 6.29 secs, so 2 seconds slower. That's without using none of that kraken none-sense.
I think
DonJuanSchlong
should stop responding to you until you explain how Unreal engine engineers are lying about unloading the light world and loading the dark world in 4 seconds.You can download project and open it up and see for yourself. You can even disable the white screen so you can see it loading the darkworld and then doing garbage collection at the end to unload the light world.
Last edited:
Loxus
Member
Will if 1,000,000 were made, what you'd expect?
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
You are so triggered. Do you even understand what the difference between compressed and uncompressed data?
Do you realize the ps5 SSD is 5.5gbps? Please tell me you can connect these dots together, to possibly understand where I'm going with this?
Can I ask you a serious question. And please don't get offended or think that I'm picking on you or the handful of other uninformed people in this thread. But, one direct storage is available for PC, what other angle are you going to move the goal posts to? Everything so far has been debunked, and I can't wait for this to be put under the rug as well.
You guys must be running out of stuff really quick if your only defense is decompression, yet you have no examples still... Hmmmm
- Status