Why would you think that? 768MB/s isn't the maximum speed that PS5 SSD can fetch. And it's nowhere near the 2.5G/s of the XSX. If that's the target, then both can stream the data made for that demo at the same speed.
I know that isn't the max speed, but that's the RAM-pool they were using for the demo and they will try to get the RAM-pool lower.
Going by Cerny, they designed the SSD to reduce the need for RAM as much as possible, freeing up RAM for all other computational rasks (hence why they went with "just" 16Gb of RAM).
The above two fall in line.
From what I understand, that means that the amount of data needed to be stored, is just 768MB/s. Just for rendering everything seen in the tech-demo.
But on top of that, they can stream all kinds of other files for other things needed for games.
So I assume that's all the other game elements required for gameplay and going by Epic they rendered 500K objects for the outdoor scene and they're able to render at least 1M objects. So that would all require more data to be loaded/streamed as well.
The SSD will not make a difference because the issue that will first arise is of vram & raw GPU power. What the SSD would help with is with getting those assets into vram/ram(PC) first but you still need enough vram/ram & bandwidth in the first place, and of course enough processing power. Think of it as the RX 470s with 8 GB vram, plenty of vram but not enough GPU horse power for 4K, so the vram advantage doesn't really materialise outside of niche scenarios (heavy texture mods etc).
And besides, don't believe the "8K texture" hype. That's more an advantage for the devs to simplify development but you as the end user will a) not see them because they won't ship with them as the size requirements would be too large; b) as seen in the example above, you'll get worse actual texture resolution & detail with Nanite compared to traditional methods, but you get the advantage of more performance & more geometry (ala mesh shaders et al).
The SSD speed advantage if it ever materialises will only be seen in first party games. No one third party will bother putting in extra time & resources into getting some imperceptible advantage that will only be uncovered by tech channels when they slow down videos & zoom in 800%. Especially when we consider how devs costs are going ever up & the demands and expectations of the public are increasing, and now you don't only have 2 platforms to ship to but like 5+ (incl Stadia, mobile etc).
Yeah, that much I get. But doesn't that mean that while the UE5 tech demo is 1440p on PS5, it could for example be 4K on XSX?
If so, what I'm curious about is how it holds up against XSX. If XSX can load at half speed, obviously it would need to load lower quality textures at smaller file sizes to match PS5s 2x speed, correct?
I do understand that resolution improves IQ, but I wonder if medium textures at 4K look drastically better than high quality textures at 1440p. Sharper looking, I get, but better?
Having said that, I haven’t played games on PC since the 386 centuries ago, so I might be way off here.