• 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.

News Hardware Platform PS5's SSD is "far ahead" of those found in high-end PCs, according to Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney

May 7, 2014
431
476
555
Ireland
The use of SSD in this demo comes down one thing.
Virtual Memory used to store Textures and Meshes.

You do not try to pull in an entire texture or an entire mesh, but only a) what you can see b) the appropriate detail level.

Meshes and Textures are usually stored in a data structure which much be traversed and these data structures can be massive, much more massive that your RAM would allow. You really aren't trying to pull in gigs of assets though, but constant small reads for what may have entered the view frustum . So you must traverse the data structure with the mesh index / texture index of the data you needed, and either hit a specific LOD level, or have a structure which has sub details the further you drill down. To the person calling the data, it's transparent to them if the data was memory resident or was pulled from a disk.

The most important thing above is latency, and speed always helps of course if you have big scene changes.

We have no way of knowing how pegged the SSD was in the demo (RAGE did a similar thing with Megatextures.. from a DVD), but it's not hard to imagine you can add more details to the assets, so you can drill further down and resolve more detail if you have more speed. If you don't, you can just return a slightly lower quality asset instead of drilling down. So yes it is possible that a highly optimized SSD will allow more detail, but that doesn't mean it will always be available in the first place.

I also believe they have a fair few more optimizations to make on this, 20 million polygons when you have ~9 million pixels is overdraw (unless they mean it's just in RAM).

Not everyone is going to be using this tech, so while it's a killer app, it's not going to be the be all and end all.
 
Last edited:

Ar¢tos

Gold Member
Oct 24, 2017
4,308
6,526
740
Krynn
Here's what I expect and what most should.

PS5 - More shit on screen slightly lower textures - Targeting 4K/60 or 2k/60 depending on how demanding the game is.
XSX - Less shit on screen slightly higher textures - Targeting 4K/60 or 2k/60 depending on how demanding the game is.
3rd party devs are not going to make 2x of every scene with different levels of detail / number of objects because ps5 can load faster. It's easier for them to make the same scene and reduce the quality of the textures (and file size) for the XSX version, since the difference in ssd speed is more relevant for this than the difference in Gpu power.
For the XSX, It will probably be the same level of detail/objects, lower quality models but higher res overall and better effects (AF, AA, RT, etc).
 

ToadMan

Report me for trolling MS/Xbox threads > 06/20
Dec 2, 2018
1,348
5,172
635
We should be careful accepting the impact of SSD speeds on performance. 2x the possibilities? What impact does the XSX own IO solution in addition to its faster bus speeds, increased performance of its GPU, locked clock speeds, and faster CPU play in this? It sounds like SONY had already convinced its biggest fans that their design is superior. 3rd party titles will be the only apples to apples comparison. Show me 3rd party multiplatform games running better on PS5 than XSX and I will buy that their design was the way to go.
They won’t run better. Multiplats on PS5 and Xsex will run the same to all intents and purposes.

The power difference between the 2 isn’t large enough to make a difference. Devs will build for PS5, port to xsx and the games will run the same as a result. Maybe xsx gets lower quality textures and loses an FPS or two, maybe it doesn’t. From a practical perspective multiplat games will be identical.

1st party is where any differences will be found and that will just come down to the experience of the teams doing the work and how they exploit the hardware available.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
16,806
7,604
2,055
That right they won’t, but they also aren’t going to switch to the kind of high speed SSDs we’re talking about overnight either.


If Cerny is right, and SSDs in console result in a different game design paradigm, PCs won’t be coming on that ride because companies will just keep making games the way they’re making them now - compromising the game design, and tweaking the storage to match the hardware capability.

Whether Sony 1st party can actually capitalise on the capability they now have to make something that stands out from previous game design remains to be seen too.

I guess if Sony come up with something that is a major revolution in game design and/or graphical fidelity and it turns out their SSD solution enables that, then of course people will try to copy that success to other platforms. But it’s a big if...
I think that between much faster SSD dropping in price and PC’s having at least 2x the memory consoles have they should be able to deal with it better and better with the biggest inconvenience being a much longer initial loading screen.
 

Nikana

Go Go Neo Rangers!
Jan 26, 2016
8,662
11,103
850
They won’t run better. Multiplats on PS5 and Xsex will run the same to all intents and purposes.

The power difference between the 2 isn’t large enough to make a difference. Devs will build for PS5, port to xsx and the games will run the same as a result. Maybe xsx gets lower quality textures and loses an FPS or two, maybe it doesn’t. From a practical perspective multiplat games will be identical.

1st party is where any differences will be found and that will just come down to the experience of the teams doing the work and how they exploit the hardware available.
I'll take an avatar bet that most third party games will look better on XSX. If there's any advantage in effects, frame rate, textures, etc. It'll most of the time be XSX.
 
Last edited:

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
1,449
1,186
1,555
They won’t run better. Multiplats on PS5 and Xsex will run the same to all intents and purposes.

The power difference between the 2 isn’t large enough to make a difference. Devs will build for PS5, port to xsx and the games will run the same as a result. Maybe xsx gets lower quality textures and loses an FPS or two, maybe it doesn’t. From a practical perspective multiplat games will be identical.

1st party is where any differences will be found and that will just come down to the experience of the teams doing the work and how they exploit the hardware available.
Based on what some have said here XSXs advantages are smaller than the PS5s advantages. I'd fully expect see those advantages in games that could be found on both platforms. 1st party stuff can't be fully compared because Halo won't be on PS5 and HZD 2 won't be on XSX.
 
Last edited:

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
10,620
16,500
960
UK
So by your logic PS5 should load an un-edited, un-optimized PS4 version of RDR2 in under 1 seconds on release day. Right? Infact it has to load EVERY SINGLE PS4 game under 1 seconds.
RDR2 is done by a third party called Rockstar, you may of hear of them. Third party is independent of the console maker just for your information.

So, MS is a $ 43 billion company and the game in question state of decay was done by an MS division called Xbox game studios, and it took about 10 seconds being generous was the demo.

So pick a Sony game studio game for comparson by any sane persons logic. Sony have already stated all ps4 games will load instantly, do you want the link ? Might be slowed by game studio start screens if its utouched of course and may contact servers, the usual.

I saw no special load screens on state of decay demo, so xbox game studios did somethiing to remove the usual start up messages and banners allowing a straight up fast loading.

There has been only ps5 demo, it was called spiderman, and it loaded in under a second. I am sure they removed the loading and other start screens as well if thats what you mean.

Sorry I dont have exact time, it wa shard to press the start and stop button fast emough.


If by optimisation, you mean removing all the crap display at the start, then yes both games had that.
 
Last edited:

Exodia

Banned
Mar 21, 2020
158
399
230
Your logic is flawed, R2Dr2 is done by a third party called Rockstar I believe, you may of hear of them.

So, for your eduction, MS is a $ 43 billion company and the game in question was done by a division called Xbox game studios.

So pick a Sony game studio game for comparson, There has been only 1 demo, it was called spiderman, and it loaded in under a sceond. Sorry I dont ahve eact time, it wa shard to press the start and stop button fast emough.

Wait wtf? You are contradicting yourself. This has nothing to do with firsty party or third party.
MS ran a Xbox One version of SOT with no code changes. No edits. No optimizations. Period. Just raw SSD performance.

You presented a logic and if we follow that logic and the conclusion is true then the premise must be true. You can't then just change it up the moment it comes to your favorite company. You need to apply the same logic to Sony.

1) Xbox one and PS4 have 8 GB Memory.
2) Both system have around 2.5 GB reserved for OS and 5.5 GB reserved for Gaming
3) If system X was truly 2.4 GB/s then it should load ALL respective games just over 2 secs.
4) If system X was truly constant 5.5 GB/s then it should load ALL respective games at/under 1 secs.

You trying to switch up the sony exposed yourself.
But i'm not surprised.

 
Last edited:

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
10,620
16,500
960
UK
Wait wtf? You are contradicting yourself. This has nothing to do with firsty party or third party.
MS ran a Xbox One version of SOT with no code changes. No edits. No optimizations. Period. Just raw SSD performance.

You presented a logic and if we follow that logic and the conclusion is true then the premise must be true. You can't then just change it up the moment it comes to your favorite company. You need to apply the same logic to Sony.

1) Xbox one and PS4 have 8 GB Memory.
2) Both system have 2.5 reserved for OS and 5.5 reserved for Gaming
3) If system X was truly 2.4 GB/s then it should load ALL respective games just over 2 secs.
4) If system X was truly constant 5.5 GB/s then it should load ALL respective games at or under 1 secs.

You trying to switch up the sony exposed yourself.
But i'm not surprised.
Yes they will load on Ps4 in a second if there is no special screens, logos or other things displayed such as safety banners / contacting servers or checking other network parameters..

State of decay also had all load and warning / health and safety screens removed - its in the vidoe so you are incorrect.

Go watch it, you just exposed yourself as biased and just repeated the untouched was not our best try narritive.

You cant use the excuse that state of decay was not changed but it was an Xbox studio and had been changed, its on the damn microsoft video. So your just wrong.

If you mean its unoptimised by the fact they have not got BcPack up and running and the compression APIs going full steam and not compressed the textures, then it does not need them if its 2.4 GB/s does it, it would load in 2 seconds.

Explain what you mean by unoptimised and the excuse for 11 seconds.

I noticed you started the ad hominem, and calling me a fanboy, thats the sign of a true warrior - you cant answer can you ?

PS as you seem to have some dev background, joined recently and promoting MS, do you know if MS are having trouble with BCpacka nd the compression APIs, as they are struggling with IO speed it seems.
 
Last edited:

Exodia

Banned
Mar 21, 2020
158
399
230
Yes they will load on Ps4 in a second if there is no special screens, logos or other things displayed such as safety banners / contacting servers or checking other network parameters..

State of decay also had all load and warning / health and safet screens removed - FACT.

Go watch it, you just exposed yourself as biased and just repeated the untouched was not our best try narritive.

You cant use the excuse that state of decay was not changed but it was an Xbox studio and had been changed, its on the damn microsoft video. So your just wrong.
We are not talking about the launch screen. We are talking about loading a game from the main menu.
The SOD2 video didn't compare when you launched the game from home screen. It compared when you loaded a game from "Continue Game" button on the main menu.
Nothing was removed or edited. This has nothing to do with First Party/Third Party. You are clearly out of your element.

 
Last edited:

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
10,620
16,500
960
UK
We are not talking about the launch screen. We are talking about loading a game from the main menu.
The SOD2 video didn't compare when you launched the game from home screen. It compared when you loaded a game from "Continue Game" button on the main menu.
Nothing was removed or edited. This has nothing to do with First Party/Third Party. You are clearly out of your element.

Yes its loading a saved game state, should be even quicker- why 11 seconds to get how much into RAM ?

By unoptimised do you mean compression of textures and stuff - that should make no difference, the RAW speed is 2.4 Gb/s so it should not matter.

Explain what is optimised ?

You joined GAF recently and seem to have some dev knowledge and info, are MS struggling with BCPack API and their IO speeds I read - I am sure you know something.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: chilichote

Exodia

Banned
Mar 21, 2020
158
399
230
You joined GAF recently and seem to have some dev knowledge and info, are MS struggling with BCPack API and their IO speeds I read - I am sure you know something.
So now you want to change the topic? After being proven wrong. To move a discussion forward, you first have to acknowledge that you are wrong.
Acknowledge the fact that you thought that SOD2 tested the game launching from the home screen and that you didn't know they only tested the game loading a saved game on the main menu using the "Continue Game" button.

Once you acknowledge then we can continue. if not then there's nothing to talk about.

I noticed you started the ad hominem, and calling me a fanboy, thats the sign of a true warrior - you cant answer can you ?
I did no such thing. We all have our favorites. I like steph curry shoes.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: DoctaThompson

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
10,620
16,500
960
UK
So now you want to change the topic? After being proven wrong. To move a discussion forward, you first have to acknowledge that you are wrong.
Acknowledge the fact that you taught that SOD2 tested the game launching from the home screen and that you didn't know they only tested the game loading a saved game on the main menu using the "Continue Game" button.

Once you acknowledge then we can continue. if not then there's nothing to talk about.



I did no such thing. We all have our favorites. I like steph curry shoes.
I could not read the small screen without my glasses. I just looked at the loading time, yes its loading a save point I could not see it clearly. You happy, I am getting old man and had to use my glasses.

My points still stands, what can you optimise to get from 11 seconds to 2 seconds for 5 GB or so to be loaded as 2.4 GB/s is the raw speed (no need for texture compression).

Do you know if MS are having bottlenecks that means the SSD raw speed is not realised in practice ?

Also is BCpack having problems or late to the party (I read on a forum elsewhere MS were behind on the API so we wont see any fast loading stuff from MS until it can help ?)
 
Last edited:

Ar¢tos

Gold Member
Oct 24, 2017
4,308
6,526
740
Krynn
Back on topic:

The Sweeney PR for Sony is good and all, but at the time of the PS5 actually launching, there would be faster SSD’s on the market too.
Theoretical speeds, sure. Real speeds, I doubt it.
Standard pc SSDs don't have controllers optimized for reading, they are balanced r/w, same with pc file systems. They also lack custom hw decompression, aren't carefully designed with chip numbers/channels to maximize performance, and don't communicate directly with the CPU/GPU like the SSD's in the next gen consoles.
They also have to deal with bigger OS overheads and abstraction/virtualization layers to ensure legacy compatibilities.
So I wouldn't be surprised if a 8gb/s speed ssd on pc performed worse than the 5.5gb/s ssd of the ps5.
 

LordOfChaos

Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,075
5,802
915
Tim Sweeney has been replying to a lot of folks regarding UE5 and the PS5. Imagine thinking you know more than him because you may have built a PC.


This is where Linus seemed to willfully misunderstand-


The peak speed isn't the only or even main point of the PS5 SSD, the IO complex was built around removing the things that make games gain less than they should from them - you may get 10x faster than a HDD, but a game only loads twice as fast, because of DMAs, check-ins, definitely decompression and other things putting a load on the CPU and limiting speeds. The IO complex is meant to remove all of these as bottlenecks. Hence "far ahead" rather than "higher peak speed". It's funny because Linus does eventually stumble into the point of this being CPU bound after thrashing Sweeney for his statement.

Is all this a productive avenue? We'll all find out together through the course of next gen, but I'm banking on Sweeney not talking out of his ass.
 

Nikana

Go Go Neo Rangers!
Jan 26, 2016
8,662
11,103
850
Tim Sweeney has been replying to a lot of folks regarding UE5 and the PS5. Imagine thinking you know more than him because you may have built a PC.


This is where Linus seemed to willfully misunderstand-


The peak speed isn't the only or even main point of the PS5 SSD, the IO complex was built around removing the things that make games gain less than they should from them - you may get 10x faster than a HDD, but a game only loads twice as fast, because of DMAs, check-ins, definitely decompression and other things putting a load on the CPU and limiting speeds. The IO complex is meant to remove all of these as bottlenecks. Hence "far ahead" rather than "higher peak speed". It's funny because Linus does eventually stumble into the point of this being CPU bound after thrashing Sweeney for his statement.

Is all this a productive avenue? We'll all find out together through the course of next gen, but I'm banking on Sweeney not talking out of his ass.
Tim Sweeny doesn't talk out of his ass but he most definitely overhypes and stretches the "truth." Something that's "ground breaking" and "incredibly easy" always need about *(1) *(2) after them.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: DoctaThompson

LordOfChaos

Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,075
5,802
915
Tim Sweeny doesn't talk out of his ass but he most definitely overhypes and stretches the "truth." Something that's "ground breaking" and "incredibly easy" always need about *(1) *(2) after them.
Well he's talking about complicated systems on limited mediums to people with less intricate understandings of them.
 

ToadMan

Report me for trolling MS/Xbox threads > 06/20
Dec 2, 2018
1,348
5,172
635
I'll take an avatar bet that most third party games will look better on XSX. If there's any advantage in effects, frame rate, textures, etc. It'll most of the time be XSX.
Any advantage? Like 1 frame, 1 extra particle?

You’re gonna have to quantify it to something tangible.

Doesn’t some DF guy claim Xsex will have a 40 to 50 FPS frame boost over PS5 with the same res ....
 

Exodia

Banned
Mar 21, 2020
158
399
230
I could not read the small screen without my glasses. I just looked at the loading time, yes its loading a save point I could not see it clearly. You happy, I am getting old man and had to use my glasses.
Now that we have established that and now you know why MS didn't demo launching from home screen because of the required splashes, video clips and disclaimers that are shown.
To make a claim that the game was un-edited and running the exact same XO version, it really has to be un-edit.
Even removing the splash screens, clips, disclaimers and rebuilding with 4.25 for example would lead to a dramatic decrease in load times. Why? well you heard from the Engine engineer Lead that they have made drastic changes in the engine to take more advantage of SSDs.

This is why MS ran the Xbox One version of the game with no changes.
Now you ask, why not test the "Start New Game". Again you run into the issues of un-necessary splash screens, video clips, intros, instructions that are displayed when you start a new game.
Loading from a save point is the only independently verifiable way to test SSD speed improvement.
Because all games take you straight to your last saved point.

My points still stands, what can you optimise to get from 11 seconds to 2 seconds for 5 GB or so to be loaded as 2.4 GB/s is the raw speed (no need for texture compression).
Do you know if MS are having bottlenecks that means the SSD raw speed is not realised in practice ?
To revisit your point we have to then go back and apply your logic mathematically and universally.

If your logic checks out when applied then your theory/hypothesis is right. Your premise is that, since games has access to just 5.5 GB of Ram wouldn't that mean a SSD with raw 2.4 GB/s of speed would load the game *from a saved point* in 2 seconds.

For this logic to be true it would also means that an unedited RDR2 PS4 version will have to load at/under 1 second on PS5 and likewise every PS4 version game will have to load at/under 1 second.

Here is the logic laid out mathematically.

1) Xbox one and PS4 have 8 GB Memory.
2) Both system have 2.5 GB reserved for OS and 5.5 GB reserved for Gaming
3) If system X was truly sustained 2.4 GB/s then it should load ALL respective games just over 2 secs.
4) If system X was truly sustained 5.5 GB/s then it should load ALL respective games at/under 1 sec.

IF All PS4 version games don't load at/under 1 second come october/november then your theory is wrong.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: DoctaThompson

Nikana

Go Go Neo Rangers!
Jan 26, 2016
8,662
11,103
850
Any advantage? Like 1 frame, 1 extra particle?

You’re gonna have to quantify it to something tangible.

Doesn’t some DF guy claim Xsex will have a 40 to 50 FPS frame boost over PS5 with the same res ....
Like I said generally. If there is an difference it'll be in XSX favor. High Rez, more stable frame rate, better particles.

I have no idea what DF said. Not really pertinent.
 

ToadMan

Report me for trolling MS/Xbox threads > 06/20
Dec 2, 2018
1,348
5,172
635
Based on what some have said here XSXs advantages are smaller than the PS5s advantages. I'd fully expect see those advantages in games that could be found on both platforms. 1st party stuff can't be fully compared because Halo won't be on PS5 and HZD 2 won't be on XSX.
The SSD advantage of PS5 is difficult to translate.

What’s the worst case? A multiplat designed for PS5 being ported to a HDD based “average” PC (or to Switch for that matter). In this case the game would have to be significantly redesigned in the port to account for the slower loading of assets (ignoring for a moment any GPU, CPU and RAM differences).

One could say it would’t even be the same game since HDD based systems drive game design compromises.

I suppose there is the possibility that OS5 could gethigher res textures because that would basically be “free” from a developer perspective. PS5 should have better sound quality of course - perhaps Ray Tracing will be used for sound since that’s relatively cheap to implement.
 
Last edited:

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
10,620
16,500
960
UK
Now that we have established that and now you know why MS didn't demo launching from home screen because of the required splashes, video clips and disclaimers that are shown.
To make a claim that the game was un-edited and running the exact same XO version, it really has to be un-edit.
Even removing the splash screens, clips, disclaimers and rebuilding with 4.25 for example would lead to a dramatic decrease in load times. Why? well you heard from the Engine engineer Lead that they have made drastic changes in the engine to take more advantage of SSDs.

This is why MS ran the Xbox One version of the game with no changes.
Now you ask, why not test the "Start New Game". Again you run into the issues of un-necessary splash screens, video clips, intros, instructions that are displayed when you start a new game.
Loading from a save point is the only independently verifiable way to test SSD speed improvement.
Because all games take you straight to your last saved point.



To revisit your point we have to then go back and apply your logic mathematically and universally.

If your logic checks out when applied then your theory/hypothesis is right. Your premise is that, since games has access to just 5.5 GB of Ram wouldn't that mean a SSD with raw 2.4 GB/s of speed would load the game *from a saved point* in 2 seconds.

For this logic to be true it would also means that an unedited RDR2 PS4 version will have to load at/under 1 second on PS5 and likewise every PS4 version game will have to load at/under 1 second.

Here is the logic laid out mathematically.

1) Xbox one and PS4 have 8 GB Memory.
2) Both system have 2.5 GB reserved for OS and 5.5 GB reserved for Gaming
3) If system X was truly sustained 2.4 GB/s then it should load ALL respective games just over 2 secs.
4) If system X was truly sustained 5.5 GB/s then it should load ALL respective games at/under 1 sec.

IF All PS4 version games don't load at/under 1 second come october/november then your theory is wrong.
Yup and I think Ps5 will load all ps4 games uninterupted by spash / health or contacting servers in 1 second.

Cerny in his speach said the words immediately, thats all we have, Sony sure are confident.

You have to admit, you suspect also there is a bottleneck somehere in that XSX demo to take so long, also at 3.6 Ghz I doubt the game is taking seconds to determine logic to start play lol. You and I know that is not true, nanosocenonds more likley and is not worth discussion at fractions of a frame.

The only possibility is if contacting a server for an online game....which I dont believe the demo was, and if it was doing that then what a stupid game to choose for a loading speed demo lol.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: megreotsugua

ToadMan

Report me for trolling MS/Xbox threads > 06/20
Dec 2, 2018
1,348
5,172
635
Like I said generally. If there is an difference it'll be in XSX favor. High Rez, more stable frame rate, better particles.

I have no idea what DF said. Not really pertinent.
Well if you can’t quantify your expectation of the Xsex advantage, I don’t see how you can try an avatar gamble.

I mean what if the PS5 loads a game 0.1 seconds faster than xsex - is that enough for you to admit defeat? I’d say it isn’t but it would fulfil your criteria of “any advantage”.
 
Last edited:

Nikana

Go Go Neo Rangers!
Jan 26, 2016
8,662
11,103
850
Well if you can’t quantify your expectation of the Xsex advantage, I don’t see how you can try an avatar gamble.

I mean what if the PS5 loads a game 0.1 seconds faster than xsex - is that enough for you to admit defeat? I’d say it isn’t but it would fulfil your criteria of “any advantage”.
Again...generally it would be better. Having a better/more stable frame rate, higher Rez, higher particles etc.

A .01 second fatser load doesn't eclipse a higher Rez, frame rate and effects.

I'm not sure what you are fishing for? Do you want exact resolutions and frame rates? That's silly.

A higher frame rate and more stable is higher and more stable.

A higher rez is higher.

More/better particles are better.
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
5,685
6,544
680
Tim Sweeney has been replying to a lot of folks regarding UE5 and the PS5. Imagine thinking you know more than him because you may have built a PC.


This is where Linus seemed to willfully misunderstand-


The peak speed isn't the only or even main point of the PS5 SSD, the IO complex was built around removing the things that make games gain less than they should from them - you may get 10x faster than a HDD, but a game only loads twice as fast, because of DMAs, check-ins, definitely decompression and other things putting a load on the CPU and limiting speeds. The IO complex is meant to remove all of these as bottlenecks. Hence "far ahead" rather than "higher peak speed". It's funny because Linus does eventually stumble into the point of this being CPU bound after thrashing Sweeney for his statement.

Is all this a productive avenue? We'll all find out together through the course of next gen, but I'm banking on Sweeney not talking out of his ass.
PS5 compression and I/o means nothing for PC mate.

PC can slam out raw speeds far above when compressed kraken can push out, it can feed this directly into v-ram and memory without issue's. U can feed SSD data into v-ram without issue's already right now. however its completely pointless for games because nothing makes use out of it as the industry sits at HDD caps mostly because of consoles and old laptops. ( what linus adresses )

Now with EU 5 that's going to change as software is the only problem that PC has on this front nothing else. Which is just software. With sony arriving it will become more of a standard same with xbox that also tags along ( very important, also what linus describes )

The decompressed part he's also spot on, decompression = CPU related. PC doesn't have to decompress anything first off all but even if they do, they can simple just slam in a higher core CPU's and call it a day if PC did care for it at all.

Linus goes in on this and frankly that's exactly what's up.

This means all the advantages of PS5 are gone. Specially because GPU and CPU and memory are not even remotely close towards top end PC solutions right now.

Technically however tim is right as they also discussed, the PS5 SSD is the fastest single SSD on the market right now even while PC already sits with 5gbps SSD's and can pretty much slam 8 of those next towards each other today in raid configs to get 30gbps with 8tb storage cap, now compress that on 64 zen 2 core cpu solution that walks circles around anything the PS5 has multiple times over. But factual 1 ssd its still faster so he's right on that front but really misleading for the masses. Also something he adressed with how much did they pay him.

Now PS5 at the end of the day only has 14gb of v-ram ( some is reserved for OS i think its 2gb ) which leaves 2-4gb for system ram and 10gb for v-ram that's probably how its going to be split up. Also reason why xbox series x went for 10gb faster memory on a split pool.

PC with nvlink sits with 48gb of v-ram with 2x titan rtx solutions. that's lets say 4-5x the amount of data that can be stored. they can swap from a SSD endlessly and load in new data on the fly far bigger and more then PS5 could ever deliver.. Now slam 128 gb of ram with it that also loads in huge chunks of data in a second to both ram and v-ram far beyond the PS5 and u now start to realize how laughable the sweeny remarks were really.

Why do i use a 64 core and 128 gb of ram and 2x titan rtx gpu's as example? because money can buy tim remark.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with what linus says. He's more in the reality then most of this forum gloating over meaningless shit. exactly what he also mentions. People buy PS5 for exclusives / controller / friends / price and that's about it, even if the PS5 SSD was more efficient and better nobody will notice it even remotely because they simple don't care. Have fun looking if a texture is 16k or 8k or 4k u won't notice for shit on a statue.

EU 5.0 will have to be optimized for PC's and PC's ssd's are finally going to be used. All PC will see most likely is a bit more memory usage and that's about it. If tim doesn't optimize it for PC ( which he will and already stated ) he will lose against another engine that will do just that.

PS5 has zero advantage over PC, its just that it features a impressive SSD solution for the console space and even for high end PC's because of its 5,5gbps metric. Does it mean it has the edge and makes that tech demo showcased not being able to run on a PC? not even remotely. However tim could say that because there is no software that currently makes use of PC's in this way because EU5 is the first to incoporate it. So its he technically right? probably, is it misleading as hell? totally.

And that's why linus goes off at tim.
 
Last edited:
May 7, 2014
431
476
555
Ireland
PS5 compression and I/o means nothing for PC mate.

PC can slam out raw speeds far above when compressed kraken can push out, it can feed this directly into v-ram and memory without issue's. U can feed SSD data into v-ram without issue's already right now. however its completely pointless for games because nothing makes use out of it as the industry sits at HDD caps mostly because of consoles and old laptops. ( what linus adresses )

Now with EU 5 that's going to change as software is the only problem that PC has on this front nothing else. Which is just software. With sony arriving it will become more of a standard same with xbox that also tags along ( very important, also what linus describes )

The decompressed part he's also spot on, decompression = CPU related. PC doesn't have to decompress anything first off all but even if they do, they can simple just slam in a higher core CPU's and call it a day if PC did care for it at all.

Linus goes in on this and frankly that's exactly what's up.

This means all the advantages of PS5 are gone. Specially because GPU and CPU and memory are not even remotely close towards top end PC solutions right now.

Technically however tim is right as they also discussed, the PS5 SSD is the fastest single SSD on the market right now even while PC already sits with 5gbps SSD's and can pretty much slam 8 of those next towards each other today in raid configs to get 30gbps with 8tb storage cap, now compress that on 64 zen 2 core cpu solution that walks circles around anything the PS5 has multiple times over. But factual 1 ssd its still faster so he's right on that front but really misleading for the masses. Also something he adressed with how much did they pay him.

Now PS5 at the end of the day only has 14gb of v-ram ( some is reserved for OS i think its 2gb ) which leaves 2-4gb for system ram and 10gb for v-ram that's probably how its going to be split up. Also reason why xbox series x went for 10gb faster memory on a split pool.

PC with nvlink sits with 48gb of v-ram with 2x titan rtx solutions. that's lets say 4-5x the amount of data that can be stored. they can swap from a SSD endlessly and load in new data on the fly far bigger and more then PS5 could ever deliver.. Now slam 128 gb of ram with it that also loads in huge chunks of data in a second to both ram and v-ram far beyond the PS5 and u now start to realize how laughable the sweeny remarks were really.

Why do i use a 64 core and 128 gb of ram and 2x titan rtx gpu's as example? because money can buy tim remark.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with what linus says. He's more in the reality then most of this forum gloating over meaningless shit. exactly what he also mentions. People buy PS5 for exclusives / controller / friends / price and that's about it, even if the PS5 SSD was more efficient and better nobody will notice it even remotely because they simple don't care. Have fun looking if a texture is 16k or 8k or 4k u won't notice for shit on a statue.

EU 5.0 will have to be optimized for PC's and PC's ssd's are finally going to be used. All PC will see most likely is a bit more memory usage and that's about it. If tim doesn't optimize it for PC ( which he will and already stated ) he will lose against another engine that will do just that.

PS5 has zero advantage over PC, its just that it features a impressive SSD solution for the console space and even for high end PC's because of its 5,5gbps metric. Does it mean it has the edge and makes that tech demo showcased not being able to run on a PC? not even remotely. However tim could say that because there is no software that currently makes use of PC's in this way because EU5 is the first to incoporate it. So its he technically right? probably, is it misleading as hell? totally.

And that's why linus goes off at tim.
PS5 is optimized for low latency reads, you don't even need large amounts of data, TIm knows what his engine is optimized for, smalls pages at low latency. I also wonder how you think your GPU loads from an SSD...
 
Last edited:

Exodia

Banned
Mar 21, 2020
158
399
230
Yup and I think Ps5 will load all ps4 games uninterupted by spash / health or contacting servers in 1 second.
Remember I said load a save game point. Not launching the game which is meaningless because it doesn't load everything needed to play the game and there are already splash screens which you can't edit out.
But to confirm you are saying that an un-edited PS4 version of games will load saved game points in 1 second?
 
Last edited:

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
2,408
3,544
505
People, stop reading at this point if you value your sanity.
There is actually very little stopping developers from allowing the files on PC to be less compressed or not compressed at all, to alleviate CPU load, since PC CPU's don't have hardware decompression like the consoles do. The files would be larger on disk on PC compared to the consoles. Then again, if you have a 12 core or 16 core CPU, you could likely decompress them just fine.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: DoctaThompson

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
10,620
16,500
960
UK
Remember I said load a save game point. Not launching the game which is meanless because it doesn't load everythin needed to play the game.
But to confirm you are saying that un-edited PS4 version of games will load saved game points in 1 second?
Go watch Cerny speech...they have said 1 second and instantaneous.

I am sure there will be games contacting servers and other DRM crap that get in the way at times...you cannot account for every game, there are too many, but in general yes there is no reason to take longer if your sequential and random read speeds and access are as fast as claimed.

But you have not answered my question - why 11 seconds for what is probably less than 5 GB. Its order of 4 x slower than the headline ability.

There must be some API or layers getting in the way or something MS are working on as its not right.

And game code runs at 3.6 Ghz on zen 2 with 16 threads... so its fractions of a frame to do the CPU stuff world building and whatever, so thats out i dont buy that done enough hardware in my time thats laughable. .
 
Last edited:

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
5,685
6,544
680
People, stop reading at this point if you value your sanity.
Good because u are clueless on this shit anyway. Now stop quoting me and i am a happy camper.

PS5 is optimized for low latency reads, you don't even need large amounts of data, TIm knows what his engine is optimized for, smalls pages at low latency. I also wonder how you think your GPU loads from an SSD...
They can optimize all they want. 64 core ryzen will absolutely dwarf the decompression kraken does and the lower i/o gets checkmate by actual ram..

U will see when games start to hit how PC will utterly dwarf any of it.

The only thing thats interesting in the PS5 is the 5,5gbps (5gbps is the top atm on pc for single SSD solution ) ssd that is not gainable at this point in time on PC, but so is the PS5, so the moment its out its already even on that single meaningless metric behind PC. Let's not even talk about all the other parts.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: DoctaThompson

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
1,449
1,186
1,555
The SSD advantage of PS5 is difficult to translate.

What’s the worst case? A multiplat designed for PS5 being ported to a HDD based “average” PC (or to Seitch for that matter). In this case the game would have to be significantly redesigned in the port to account for the slower loading of assets (ignoring for a moment any GPU, CPU and RAM differences).

One could say it would’t even be the same game since HDD based systems drive game design compromises.

I suppose there is the possibility that OS5 could gethigher res textures because that would basically be “free” from a developer perspective. PS5 should have better sound quality of course - perhaps Ray Tracing will be used for sound since that’s relatively cheap to implement.
If the PS5s advantages don't make development easier for 3rd party multiplatform developers is it really an advantage? Do you believe that faster SSD speeds are more important than faster RAM, CPU, and more robust GPU? It would make more sense for 3rd parties to make games with standard HDD and SSDs in mind and then port the titles to PS5.
 
  • Fire
Reactions: DoctaThompson

geordiemp

Member
Sep 5, 2013
10,620
16,500
960
UK
If the PS5s advantages don't make development easier for 3rd party multiplatform developers is it really an advantage? Do you believe that faster SSD speeds are more important than faster RAM, CPU, and more robust GPU? It would make more sense for 3rd parties to make games with standard HDD and SSDs in mind and then port the titles to PS5.
Businesses will make games for what will likely generate most revenue for intended game.

If a console sells more and looks to be market leader out of the gate, it will be lead platform (outside of marketing deals). Facts of life, people work for money.

Games are competing with other games for attention of gamers.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: DoctaThompson
Mar 17, 2020
437
1,713
385
Good because u are clueless on this shit anyway. Now stop quoting me and i am a happy camper.



They can optimize all they want. 64 core ryzen will absolutely dwarf the decompression kraken does and the lower i/o gets checkmate by actual ram..

U will see when games start to hit how PC will utterly dwarf any of it.

The only thing thats interesting in the PS5 is the 5,5gbps (5gbps is the top atm on pc for single SSD solution ) ssd that is not gainable at this point in time on PC, but so is the PS5, so the moment its out its already even on that single meaningless metric behind PC. Let's not even talk about all the other parts.
If you decompress data it gets larger.
You'll have to transfer more data /s.
NVME Speed with PCIE4 is 5000mb Readspead currently
( https://www.gamingpcbuilder.com/best-m-2-nvme-ssd/ quick google search don't flame me for the source )
By the end of the year we will probably hit 7.000mb readspeed afaik.

So how on earth is a pc going to outmatch a ps5s 8-9GB/s of compressed data?

Please enlighten me.

Btw. these nvmes are priced with 200$€ - lets assume those 7.000mb readspeed ones will be priced the same, thats already 40% the cost of the entire console ( assuming it will be priced 500$€)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pawel86ck

cyber69

Member
Sep 21, 2018
1,617
2,548
385
There is actually very little stopping developers from allowing the files on PC to be less compressed or not compressed at all, to alleviate CPU load, since PC CPU's don't have hardware decompression like the consoles do. The files would be larger on disk on PC compared to the consoles. Then again, if you have a 12 core or 16 core CPU, you could likely decompress them just fine.
I'm not saying its not possible or not feasible. Similar to alleviating limited RAM with more RAM. Similar to adding more cores to do decompression to ease CPU load. It is costly. From a business perspective, its not worth spending the development time if most of the user base don't have the requirements to support this.
 
Last edited:

cyber69

Member
Sep 21, 2018
1,617
2,548
385
Good because u are clueless on this shit anyway. Now stop quoting me and i am a happy camper.



They can optimize all they want. 64 core ryzen will absolutely dwarf the decompression kraken does and the lower i/o gets checkmate by actual ram..

U will see when games start to hit how PC will utterly dwarf any of it.

The only thing thats interesting in the PS5 is the 5,5gbps (5gbps is the top atm on pc for single SSD solution ) ssd that is not gainable at this point in time on PC, but so is the PS5, so the moment its out its already even on that single meaningless metric behind PC. Let's not even talk about all the other parts.
Agreed. The real reason a major version change to Unreal Engine was announced this week was because most PC users have a 2080 TI, 100 GB of System Ram, 64 Core Ryzens, and ultra fast SSDs.


/s
 

Lethal01

Report me for trolling MS/Xbox threads > 07/02
Jun 15, 2019
1,287
2,230
540
It's gonna be tons of fun seeing Devs taking advantage of the SSD.
No load screens means you can design around the player being able to really move around your world without frustration.
You could make missions that involve switching two locations like inside and outside of a very detailed key location and the town just outside. They are now effectively one big map instead of two separated spots.
 
Jun 10, 2019
459
546
355
It's gonna be tons of fun seeing Devs taking advantage of the SSD.
No load screens means you can design around the player being able to really move around your world without frustration.
You could make missions that involve switching two locations like inside and outside of a very detailed key location and the town just outside. They are now effectively one big map instead of two separated spots.
Maybe not loading screens but they won't be gone 100% that I'm certain... consoles are fixed hardware, and developers are gonna take full advantage of them, at some point they will reach their Max compute power. SO WE CAN ADVANCE TO THE NEXT GEN
 
Last edited:

Lethal01

Report me for trolling MS/Xbox threads > 07/02
Jun 15, 2019
1,287
2,230
540
Maybe not loading screens but they won't be gone 100% that I'm certain... consoles are fixed hardware, and developers are gonna take full advantage of them, at some point they will reach their Max compute power. SO WE CAN ADVANCE TO THE NEXT GEN
You can swap everything in ram in the time it takes to open the door, or jump out the window
 
Last edited:

Lethal01

Report me for trolling MS/Xbox threads > 07/02
Jun 15, 2019
1,287
2,230
540
I mean, imagine if a game looks exactly like avatar, you think it would load everything in time this next gen?
Gotta consider what the GPU can actually handle, my point is that you can now swap between any two scenes that the GPU can handle in a second vastly expanding possibilities in level design and the utilization of your entire game world as a single entity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yakuzakazuya

cyber69

Member
Sep 21, 2018
1,617
2,548
385
I mean, imagine if a game looks exactly like avatar, you think it would load everything in time this next gen?
You would still need a lot more GPU grunt to render realistic scenes (at avatar level). Think of the SSD with the custom I/O chip in the PS5 as a revolutionary change versus more GPU/CPU power as a evolutionary change.
 
Last edited:

TheMan

Member
Jul 31, 2006
8,057
753
1,500
Yeah, my main concern is going to be upgrading. Next gen games are going to be size queens and If this HD is basically proprietary, are we going to be in another Vita memory card situation? I don't think the pack in HD size is that big either
 
K

Kise Ryota

Unconfirmed Member
What is sustained ?

The theoretical 2.4 GB/s or the well below 1 GB/s demonstrated on state of decay slow loading demo ?

Theoretical maximums or actual ?

Please explain ?
I think the quick resume was a better demo to show read speeds. Basically it was ~6 seconds to save the actual state (so writing speed was also consistent) and load the next one.

I believe that games were the one x version (which has 9GB available for games). They probably have compressed and decompressed the state files (?), helping the raw speeds.

With the quick resume feature there's no excuse because there's no need to games to be optimized for the ssd (and I think they showed they can delivery the speed they advertised).