• 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.

Forspoken Load Times Are Barely A Second Long On PS5, Has Multiple Graphics Modes

Gamerguy84

Member
So when did Cerny and team finalize this I/O and all the working components? Was it 2018?

It wasn't just stuffing a fast drive in but hardware decompression and the path directly into video memory ready for use. Definitely a pioneer on this one that is still out in front all this time later.

Tim Sweeney:

Systems integration and whole-system performance. Bringing in data from high-bandwidth storage into video memory in its native format with hardware decompression is very efficient. The software and hardware stack go to great lengths to minimize latency and maximize the bandwidth that's actually accessible by games.
Those PC numbers are theoretical and are from drive into kernel memory. From there, it's a slow and circuitous journey through software decompression to GPU driver swizzling into video memory where you can eventually use it. The PS5 path for this is several times more efficient. And then there's latency.
On PC, there's a lot of layering and overhead. Then you have the issue of getting compressed textures into video memory requires reading into RAM, software decompressing, then calling into a GPU driver to transfer and swizzle them, with numerous kernel transitions throughout.
Intel's work on non-volatile NVDIMMs is very exciting and may get PC data transfer on a better track over the coming years.
On the user end it's just cartridge like speed if implemented correct.
 

ElCasual

Member
I will c*m in 0.6 nanoseconds
 

RCU005

Member
Cerny talked about how worlds could be designed completely different because with the SSD they could make a world load instantly and could have parts of the world load as you turn. However, I don't think we will ever see this kind of implementation this gen at all. Games will just be designed as they have for so long and the SSD will only be used to reduce load times. Why? Because Sony will not design a game that could only be played on PS5 (that was PS3 era Sony, but not know). Third party would never do that! PC ports need to be able to be run on different specs, even lower than PS4 sometimes, so it short, this gen is just a waste of specs (or at least the SSD for now).
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
I know that if you have an SSD fast enough on PC you can equal or even surpass the PS5s I/O. But the PS5 has a lot of customizations (Ex I/O Complex) that allows it to be very efficient with its SSD and any SSD that you add to the system. That’s one of the benefits of fixed hardware.

I know that PCs will always be ahead but due to the open nature of the hardware there’s just some things you can’t do with them. Not that it’s needed of course if you brute force it enough.
The thing is that we are talking about a product that is not taking a bath at $399 (including manufacturing and shipping costs) and that came out in 2020 (so we should compare it to $399-499 2020 PC’s), but PCMR cannot resist the e-peen comparison eh?

It is a big deal if a $399 box can outdo much much more expensive PC’s (we are also comparing a third party’s work on a game engine I/O vs MS itself doing the I/O side… DirectStorage being out on XSX|S for the last two years so it did not just come out)… it is also a big deal for consoles to go back to cart like loading times and making it easy even for indies to do so (which is where the praise for Cerny’s team should go: they invested significant R&D and SoC die area on the I/O path optimisation with a large I/O processor cluster and a custom SSD controller and extra memory).
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
That's not how pc works at all though, they've never been able to saturate that kind of speed on a PC nvme drive before. Loading times haven't been hugely different between an sata drive and an nvme in a PC. So if they can get close to the custome built PS5 solution in their first attempt I'll be highly impressed. Even if its like 1 second vs 1.8 or something that's damn cool.
I am impressed too, DirectStorage is a great evolution for the PC space. It is a bit misleading treating it as a “first attempt” when we are comparing what a third party did on their own on PS5 vs what MS did for them on PC essentially (and MS has considerable experience on DirectStorage) though. If Square did their own DirectStorage implementation the same way they did the PS5 version (which does not mean not asking questions to DevRel teams, etc… at all of course) it would have been more impressive as what a third party could achieve even in terms of approachability and ease of integration.
Same thing with UE5 Matrix Demo on PS5 vs XSX|XSS where the former was done by Epic and the latter required the Coalition who went as far as making engine changes to get the performance out of it they wanted and parity across versions.

As projects you need to give credit where it is due where you have to get involved deeply with a third party vs where you do not have to. That is part of well done planning and requirements gathering, architecture, and execution.
 
Last edited:
The thing is that we are talking about what a product that is not taking a bath at $399 (including manufacturing and shipping costs) and that came out in 2022, but PCMR cannot resist the e-peen comparison eh?

It is a big deal if a $399 box can outdo much much more expensive PC’s (we are also comparing a third party’s work on a game engine I/O vs MS itself doing the I/O side… DirectStorage being out on XSX|S for the last two years so it did not just come out)… it is also a big deal for consoles to go back to cart like loading times and making it easy even for indies to do so (which is where the praise for Cerny’s team should go: they invested significant R&D and SoC die area on the I/O path optimisation with a large I/O processor cluster and a custom SSD controller and extra memory).

Yes if we are being fair with our comparisons these consoles are extremely capable when compared to similarly priced PC and are a great value as well.

As for the I/O it’s certainly a massive upgrade when compared to HDDs. It’s great to go back to extremely fast loading times and game design should change across all platforms once the minimum requirements exclude HDDs. Fantastic news for PC and Console gamers alike and these advancements in I/O tech can only be seen as a good thing.
 

vkbest

Member
With what insomniac was doing with IQ in spider man and ratchet i was completely surprised how bad HZD looked like in performance mode. And I had to play it like that...
Imsomniac worked on several modes, Guerrilla did the performance mode near to release. In 1.0, performance mode is 1080p and lower settings
 

ShakenG

Member
Again, based on the quote I was responding to, it's comparing 1sec vs 1.Xsec loading times for having higher resolution, better visuals, better performance/framerate. I'll take the fraction of a second longer loading times, for better everything else. It's a no brainer. And it's kinda weird that only a "select" few that have an issue with something the majority of people would agree with me on. I smell hypocrisy.
In this case, i certainly agree.
Maybe i misunderstood but you made it sound like fast loading times weren't important for many. I certainly agree with you otherwise.
 

kruis

Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Native 4K?

X for doubt.

Theres a bunch of effects going on, I highly doubt this game will ever actually hit 4K....lest you are staring at a wall.
Should be a good benchmark title though.

Having these sub 2 second load times is what ive been waiting for.
 
Same thing with UE5 Matrix Demo on PS5 vs XSX|XSS where the former was done by Epic and the latter required the Coalition who went as far as making engine changes to get the performance out of it they wanted and parity across versions.

As projects you need to give credit where it is due where you have to get involved deeply with a third party vs where you do not have to. That is part of well done planning and requirements gathering, architecture, and execution.
The epic team was working on ps5 for a year before touching Xbox. There first project was ps5 only. Very poor comparison

We also have no clue to the reasoning of the help. Did they decide last minute to put it on Xbox? Was it because Xbox is shit or was it just because they didn't have time? Maybe it was planned all along to get the coalition to help with changes for Xbox to just add to the engine for easy optimizations.
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
The epic team was working on ps5 for a year before touching Xbox. There first project was ps5 only. Very poor comparison
Not really, you are treating that as a fortuitous accident or a conspiracy where Sony moneyhatted their way out of it. They had something useable earlier and third party devs were able to take advantage of it. If people had gone “wow, look at Epic’s first attempt on UE5” by looking at the Matrix demo it would have been essentially the same: it was not Epic’s first attempt as they had major help by the platform holder first party team that took over the port and made engine changes.
 
Not really, you are treating that as a fortuitous accident or a conspiracy where Sony moneyhatted their way out of it. They had something useable earlier and third party devs were able to take advantage of it. If people had gone “wow, look at Epic’s first attempt on UE5” by looking at the Matrix demo it would have been essentially the same: it was not Epic’s first attempt as they had major help by the platform holder first party team that took over the port and made engine changes.
I make a valid point and your rebuttal is to ignore the point entirely?
Edit
We know the demo had to release by a certain date. Why are you assuming Coalition had to come because Xbox sucks? Maybe they just didn't have time? Maybe the ps5 sucks so they had to have all hands on deck for that. That's just as logical as your conclusion.
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
I make a valid point and your rebuttal is to ignore the point entirely?
Edit
We know the demo had to release by a certain date. Why are you assuming Coalition had to come because Xbox sucks? Maybe they just didn't have time? Maybe the ps5 sucks so they had to have all hands on deck for that. That's just as logical as your conclusion.

Did I say the machine sucked? You made a comment which I acknowledge, but do not have to agree with it just because do I :)? So, I answered about why and how the two scenarios were similar. Period. Not trying to ignore your points at all…Maybe explain the point a bit further I thought I addressed it in that post (and trying to go a bit further into it in this one, maybe you are not reading my posts before commenting to them?).

My conclusion was:

1.) It is great that DirectStorage performs well on PC but framing it as “whoa very first time a third party used it and look at the result” oversells it as it ignores this was not a third party trying to get use out of it but MS themselves. 1.1) Similar to the situation UE5 demo on PS5 and XSX|S: great to see it performing well, but if you tried to frame it as “whoa look at the first time Epic touched XSX|S, imagine when they get more time with it as much as they had with PS5” would ignore that it was not a third party with lack of experience working on it (it is not about a console sucking or not, more about framing the scenario to promise a lot more untapped potential or suggestively wink at it at least).

2.) How and why the third party had more time on PS5 vs time to learn the other platform(s) is nothing bad on the other, but it could be a positive on the architecture, planning, and execution of the PS5 project… not sure why that needs to look fortuitous or be a blunder on the other side (similar chat that the one we were having with PS4 and Xbox One, it is one side that has to suck for the other to appear to have done anything right).
 
Did I say the machine sucked? You made a comment which I acknowledge, but do not have to agree with it just because do I :)? So, I answered about why and how the two scenarios were similar. Period. Not trying to ignore your points at all…Maybe explain the point a bit further I thought I addressed it in that post (and trying to go a bit further into it in this one, maybe you are not reading my posts before commenting to them?).

My conclusion was:

1.) It is great that DirectStorage performs well on PC but framing it as “whoa very first time a third party used it and look at the result” oversells it as it ignores this was not a third party trying to get use out of it but MS themselves. 1.1) Similar to the situation UE5 demo on PS5 and XSX|S: great to see it performing well, but if you tried to frame it as “whoa look at the first time Epic touched XSX|S, imagine when they get more time with it as much as they had with PS5” would ignore that it was not a third party with lack of experience working on it (it is not about a console sucking or not, more about framing the scenario to promise a lot more untapped potential or suggestively wink at it at least).

2.) How and why the third party had more time on PS5 vs time to learn the other platform(s) is nothing bad on the other, but it could be a positive on the architecture, planning, and execution of the PS5 project… not sure why that needs to look fortuitous or be a blunder on the other side (similar chat that the one we were having with PS4 and Xbox One, it is one side that has to suck for the other to appear to have done anything right).
You need to read what I originally quoted of yours.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
You need to read what I originally quoted of yours.
I would want to say ditto, you are answering quick one liners very rapidly after you read my posts. I do not think you are reading what I am saying given the conclusions you took. “Your ah then you think Xbox sucks eh?” bit makes me of that.

You quoted
As projects you need to give credit where it is due where you have to get involved deeply with a third party vs where you do not have to. That is part of well done planning and requirements gathering, architecture, and execution.
assumed what I meant by “not having to get involved”, I clarified again what I meant, you keep it ignoring it and taking a system war stance so 🤷‍♂️.
 
Last edited:
I would want to say ditto, you are answering quick one sentences very rapidly after you read my posts. I do not think you are reading what I am saying given the conclusions you took. “Your ah then you think Xbox sucks eh?” bit makes me of that.
"Same thing with UE5 Matrix Demo on PS5 vs XSX|XSS where the former was done by Epic and the latter required the Coalition who went as far as making engine changes to get the performance out of it they wanted and parity across versions.

As projects you need to give credit where it is due where you have to get involved deeply with a third party vs where you do not have to. That is part of well done planning and requirements gathering, architecture, and execution."

You are giving the reasons for your thoughts right there. Right here you are assuming one bad vs one good, while totally ignoring the team had a year extra experience working on one vs the other. Again we have no clue as to the underlying reason coalition was asked to come. Just that they were and what they did.
 

assurdum

Banned
Again, based on the quote I was responding to, it's comparing 1sec vs 1.Xsec loading times for having higher resolution, better visuals, better performance/framerate. I'll take the fraction of a second longer loading times, for better everything else. It's a no brainer. And it's kinda weird that only a "select" few that have an issue with something the majority of people would agree with me on. I smell hypocrisy.
No one select few has ever said pc loading it's a big issue. But it's hilarious how you try desperately to downplay faster loading times feature in a cheaper machine with the argument "just graphicz rulez my frien". A very childish attitude. It's not like ps5 sucks in this front. And don't talk about the hypocrise of the people who praise it, please. I bet whatever you want if was a different brand, your tone would change.
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
"Same thing with UE5 Matrix Demo on PS5 vs XSX|XSS where the former was done by Epic and the latter required the Coalition who went as far as making engine changes to get the performance out of it they wanted and parity across versions.

As projects you need to give credit where it is due where you have to get involved deeply with a third party vs where you do not have to. That is part of well done planning and requirements gathering, architecture, and execution."

You are giving the reasons for your thoughts right there. Right here you are assuming one bad vs one good, while totally ignoring the team had a year extra experience working on one vs the other. Again we have no clue as to the underlying reason coalition was asked to come. Just that they were and what they did.
I will reply a bit more in a short while if needed. Sometimes some aspects of some things can be better without other ones sucking. Then again you can explain the chain of events very differently and think Sony just stumbled in having both Epic and Square-Enix well prepared and with a dev kit earlier 🤷‍♂️.
 
I will reply a bit more in a short while if needed. Sometimes some aspects of some things can be better without other ones sucking. Then again you can explain the chain of events very differently and think Sony just stumbled in having both Epic and Square-Enix well prepared and with a dev kit earlier 🤷‍♂️.
Seriously you are getting hung up on the semantics of good/bad. You are attributing positive characteristics to one thing only and your wording very clearly compares the 2. Hence one is positive and the other is not. In your words
 
No one select few has ever said pc loading it's a big issue. But it's hilarious how you try desperately to downplay faster loading times feature in a cheaper machine with the argument "just graphicz rulez my frien". A very childish attitude. It's not like ps5 sucks in this front. And don't talk about the hypocrise of the people who praise it, please. I bet whatever you want if was a different brand, your tone would change.

How am I downplaying anything by simply agreeing with what everyone has been saying? 1sec loading times vs 1.X sec load times with better graphics, image quality, and performance. The obvious choice is the second option. A fraction of a second more loading times for much better results. Not sure why you are taking that as a diss to ps5? Step out of your feelings, I'm just simply sharing my sentiment. There's no need to be upset bro. 😘
 

assurdum

Banned
How am I downplaying anything by simply agreeing with what everyone has been saying? 1sec loading times vs 1.X sec load times with better graphics, image quality, and performance. The obvious choice is the second option. A fraction of a second more loading times for much better results. Not sure why you are taking that as a diss to ps5? Step out of your feelings, I'm just simply sharing my sentiment. There's no need to be upset bro. 😘
Again, why you continue to talk of something completely irrelevant to the argument? No, you can't have better graphic "sacrifying" loading time. Why even do such comparison. And where I'm upset? Because I pointed out how ridiculous is try to lead the matter to something completely OT and frankly which smell of downplaying?
 
Last edited:
Again why you continue to talk of sonething completely irrelevant to the argument? No, you can't have better graphic "sacrifying" loading time. Why even do such comparison. And where I'm upset? Because I pointed out how ridiculous is your argument? Uh.
For the last time... My original post was replying to a comment about this exact thing. You randomly jumped on the bandwagon replies, and didn't even know what the original context is about. No, it's not about XSX. It's not about Ps5. I simply stated that I'd sacrifice a 1 sec vs 1.X sec loading times for better graphics and performance. Do you want to continue to reply to me with irrelevant stuff? Or would you like to add to the topic I was replying to? If not, feel free to move on. It's pointless for you to quote me, without understanding the basis for my comments, wouldn't you agree??
 

assurdum

Banned
For the last time... My original post was replying to a comment about this exact thing. You randomly jumped on the bandwagon replies, and didn't even know what the original context is about. No, it's not about XSX. It's not about Ps5. I simply stated that I'd sacrifice a 1 sec vs 1.X sec loading times for better graphics and performance. Do you want to continue to reply to me with irrelevant stuff? Or would you like to add to the topic I was replying to? If not, feel free to move on. It's pointless for you to quote me, without understanding the basis for my comments, wouldn't you agree??
Ok now it's me who I have misunderstood everything. Seems I'm not the only one though, reading some posters above.
 
Last edited:

John Wick

Member
How am I downplaying anything by simply agreeing with what everyone has been saying? 1sec loading times vs 1.X sec load times with better graphics, image quality, and performance. The obvious choice is the second option. A fraction of a second more loading times for much better results. Not sure why you are taking that as a diss to ps5? Step out of your feelings, I'm just simply sharing my sentiment. There's no need to be upset bro. 😘
Why would you even mention it eh?
Because every idiot knows PC's will have superior graphics? So why would you mention you'd prefer better graphics than load times when there is no position to defend?
We know exactly why because the PS5 is loading games faster than PC and you can't take it. Awww poor you........
 

Unknown?

Member
Why would you even mention it eh?
Because every idiot knows PC's will have superior graphics? So why would you mention you'd prefer better graphics than load times when there is no position to defend?
We know exactly why because the PS5 is loading games faster than PC and you can't take it. Awww poor you........
Well technically there are less PCs out there capable of PS5 graphics and above than there are PS5s... So.... Most PCs won't have superior graphics.
 
Why would you even mention it eh?
Because every idiot knows PC's will have superior graphics? So why would you mention you'd prefer better graphics than load times when there is no position to defend?
What does this have to do with either console for that matter? You still fail to realize you are jumping into a conversation you don't understand the context for, and it shows in your replies... Get with the program
We know exactly why because the PS5 is loading games faster than PC and you can't take it. Awww poor you........
I've already stated I'll gladly take a fraction of a second longer loading times, to have better graphics and performance across the board, so I'm not sure what that supposed "gotcha" is about 😂?

You might be one of the extremely rare case of people who would prefer a fraction of a second faster loading times to play @ 30fps w/ limited RT. The majority of us would prefer the full RT @ 60fps or more, Ultrawide support, etc. That was the point of my post. Hope you finally get it.
 
Last edited:

Darius87

Member
Direct storage on PC seems to do the same "will reduce cpu overhead by up to 40%, with an nvme drive using windows 11."

Microsoft is recommending drives with at least 2.5gb/s speed... Which is on the slow side. There's PC drives that hit 7gb/s.
and increase GPU usage depending of data streamed, good tradeoff but still tradeoff specially for these who uses lower tier GPU's.
Cerny talked about how worlds could be designed completely different because with the SSD they could make a world load instantly and could have parts of the world load as you turn. However, I don't think we will ever see this kind of implementation this gen at all. Games will just be designed as they have for so long and the SSD will only be used to reduce load times. Why? Because Sony will not design a game that could only be played on PS5 (that was PS3 era Sony, but not know). Third party would never do that! PC ports need to be able to be run on different specs, even lower than PS4 sometimes, so it short, this gen is just a waste of specs (or at least the SSD for now).
so they made very fast SSD reserved big silicon area just for it inside main chip and later decided fuck that we will do games just with fast loading times.
 

yurinka

Member
So when did Cerny and team finalize this I/O and all the working components? Was it 2018?

It wasn't just stuffing a fast drive in but hardware decompression and the path directly into video memory ready for use. Definitely a pioneer on this one that is still out in front all this time later.

Tim Sweeney:


On the user end it's just cartridge like speed if implemented correct.
To make the big jump of going from 5.5GB/s to up to 11GB/s or even 22GB/s (depending on the file type) to take full advantage of that SSD + I/O system they need the version of Kraken compression and decompression that was released late 2020. According to them, even if Sony bought licenses to all PS devs (including 3rd party) that didn't mean all PS5 launch window games were going to have it but mentioned that should be something common in the future.

Knowing part of the RAM is reserved for OS, means games have maybe acess to around 13 or 14GB of RAM. So at that speed loading times in games shouldn't go beyond 1 or 2 seconds, specially knowing that what is loaded in a loading screen typically doesn't fill the entire memory available for games.

So for native PS5 games should be super common in future games to see sub 1 or 2 seconds loading times unless in that loading time they are also doing some server stuff like to get user specific stuff for that player, upload stuff for internal stats/metrics, matchmaking in case of MP etc.
 
Last edited:
Once again, lot of people hate PS5 I/O that don't know anything about how it works and why it's better than anything in the consumer space.
I don't think many are "hating" ps5's capabilities, it's just there's people seemingly saying/worrying nothing will ever compete that's weird.

PS5 was obviously ahead of the curve on this and Cerny and company deserves praise but the software for PC is coming, and there's better drives on PC as well. And there will be gen 5 pcie drives as well, which will be much faster than those.
 
Last edited:

John Wick

Member
What does this have to do with either console for that matter? You still fail to realize you are jumping into a conversation you don't understand the context for, and it shows in your replies... Get with the program

I've already stated I'll gladly take a fraction of a second longer loading times, to have better graphics and performance across the board, so I'm not sure what that supposed "gotcha" is about 😂?

You might be one of the extremely rare case of people who would prefer a fraction of a second faster loading times to play @ 30fps w/ limited RT. The majority of us would prefer the full RT @ 60fps or more, Ultrawide support, etc. That was the point of my post. Hope you finally get it.
I don't need to get with anything. Your justification for your posts is proof enough of what your getting at and trying to subtly disguise it isn't going to fool anyone.
What I do know right now is my PS5 games load faster than PC games even though I'm using an NVME SSD. It's completely put me off using the One X. So I'll be selling that and getting SX sooner rather than later.
I might not be one of those persons but I can tell you one thing I don't need to keep on boasting about PC being superior resolution, framerate, RT etc etc.
Remember the idiots who posted Linus's video when they found an SSD that was faster than the one in PS5? Except it $4000
 
Last edited:

VFXVeteran

Banned
Because it can mean better data streaming in gameplay as well which could help with wasted GPU/RAM/CPU resources. Every extra bit is important, that's why nothing comes close to the quality of Ratchet & Clank and Spiderman on consoles so far.
R&C and Spiderman's level streaming isn't what makes them look good. They are completely different things. R&C has artwork, and Spiderman is just the same game running at a faster clip with RT reflections. Both of those games can be run on any console/PC without the need for an ultra fast SSD.
 
Top Bottom