Support NeoGAF

[Karak]

I can only add this that I got from devs for our podcast.

Improved SSD speed allows for companies to adjust and possibly create titles somewhat differently where their prior game performance budgets in a particular area made them a design a game solely around those limits. Which they all stated was rare if not truly unheard of.

Thats from devs who have worked on all systems and on PC games. And one who has also worked on switch. Also all of them stressed that the BIG difficulty would be creating a title where SUPER fast SSD showed a massive difference between a VERY fast ssd , if everyone is accustomed to slow storage. And how you would draw attention to that in a way that makes any sense and if even proving that delta made sense in the game's design.
None were unhappy about it, many were excited. But they were all more excited about faster storage in general versus the difference between the two as that makes a smaller difference in design changes than the holistic leap together does.

Hope folks try but as with all big improvements we shall see.

 

[DForce]

I think you are trying to argue now. I gave my answer and that's all I'm going to say. You can argue with some of the other XSX fans. Streaming limitations in a console are not the same limitations on a PC. Period.

None of those talks compare the next-gen consoles to a PC. It's ludicrous to do since the PC has money limits and not hardware limits. A PC can store an entire game in RAM and can use 99% of it's VRAM on a GPU.

I think it's clear to everyone now that you're not even paying attention to what others are asking you.

Why do you keep bringing up a PC?

We're talking about DATA STREAMING.

We have referenced the Spider-Man streaming several times, but you keep telling us that the PC is more capable of handing more data.

THIS has NOTHING to do with a PC.

They specifically talk about limitations with Spider-Man because the HDD was not able to stream data fast enough. They had a limit of data they could stream while Spider-Man is swinging, they also had a limit in which which assets were loaded when Spider-Man dropped on the streets.

Based on Spider-Man's move speed, they were limited by RAM AND STORAGE SPEED.

If they were limited by both, then that means the standard HDD will not be capable of streaming higher quality assets (because they're bigger in file size) based on what was shown on the in the Spider-Man GDC video presentation.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Maximov also said even on current gen consoles objects could be more detailed thanks to SDD.

Hellblade 2 trailer already shows extremely quality assets and hopefully retail game will look comparable .

Nope about HB2.

When Maximov is saying that, he means that you can take ONE asset, put it in a viewer and spend all the resources of the console to make it look highly detailed (within the GPUs limits of course).

With a limited amount of RAM to access on next-gen consoles, you'll need a fast streaming cache system that the SSD can give ONLY in an open world game. You don't need to stream in a SP game that's not open world. PC doesn't apply to this.

 

[DForce]

Incorrect. Not only have MANY people said it. A couple people that should have been in the know said it. We have actual comments on youtube channel questions thread stating it, and 2 here did before they edited their posts.
BUT exactly as you stated other people are stating things have improved on both consoles and we have faster drives. Which yep is the right thing for sure.

Some have said it on comment sections? Sure, but it's not the narrative DF and Cerny pushing in which they would be considered liars. They never talked about limitless accesses, they talked about improvements in data streaming. Improvements can bring better quality assets. But again, still, that doesn't mean they were saying they have unlimited access.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

I'm saying you need that for console because it won't have the abundance of memory that the PC has. Is that not clear?

Yes it won't have 64+GB to 1TB of ram like some hypothetical top of the line PC.

I think it would be better if we said the average PC to which most target, and which will be affected by limitations. The average pc has 16GB or less of main ram. Many only have 6GB of vram.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

 

[VFXVeteran]

I think it's clear to everyone now that you're not even paying attention to what others are asking you.

Why do you keep bringing up a PC?

We're talking about DATA STREAMING.

We have referenced the Spider-Man streaming several times, but you keep telling us that the PC is more capable of handing more data.

THIS has NOTHING to do with a PC.

They specifically talk about limitations with Spider-Man because the HDD was not able to stream data fast enough. They had a limit of data they could stream while Spider-Man is swinging, they also had a limit in which which assets were loaded when Spider-Man dropped on the streets.

Based on Spider-Man's move speed, they were limited by RAM AND STORAGE SPEED.

If they were limited by both, then that means the standard HDD will not be capable of streaming higher quality assets (because they're bigger in file size) based on what was shown on the in the Spider-Man GDC video presentation.

Dude, I don't know wtf you want from me. Why are you continuing to bother me with this shit. I told you what I thought about that Spiderman demo with regards to the comparison with PS4 and new PS5. You saw the damn demo. It is much faster with streaming the cityscape than the PS4. What else?

 

[DForce]

Maximov also said even on current gen consoles objects could be more detailed thanks to SDD.

Hellblade 2 trailer already shows extremely quality assets and hopefully retail game will look comparable .

Yeah, and DF SSD video was made after AMD's presentation and the the HB2 trailer reveal. They said it could be a result of having access to large sets of data.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Yes it won't have 64+GB to 1TB of ram like some hypothetical top of the line PC.

I think it would be better if we said the average PC to which most target, and which will be affected by limitations. The average pc has 16GB or less of main ram. Many only have 6GB of vram.

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

If a PC version is made of any game, it will run the best of all the platforms. That's an objective fact. So stop with the assumptions that a game on a PS5 and the same one on a PC will prove the PS5 having the advantage.

 

[Shmunter]

Good lord, a youtuber misunderstands the ability of an ssd to fetch data faster meaning exponentially less caching needed in ram and the world resets to stupid town again.

Imagine thinking an ssd so fast it can saturate a GPU.. May as well get rid of ram and on chip cache then. Oh brother.

 

[martino]

If a PC version is made of any game, it will run the best of all the platforms. That's an objective fact. So stop with the assumptions that a game on a PS5 and the same one on a PC will prove the PS5 having the advantage.

not for everybody though but still a fact.

 

[Three]

I didn't give an answer to get into an argument. A regular HDD on a console will not be able to cache textures from HDD to main memory. That's true for current gen consoles..

NEVER has it been the case for PCs. Even these comments from ND devs is comparing console to console. NOT PC to console.

Which ND dev comments? Also what do you mean by cache textures from HDD to main memory? Are you saying you can't stream textures in a game? In a game like spiderman the bottleneck was the HDD streaming speed. Watch the video and then say how this does not help the bottleneck mentioned. In the video it's clearly stated that lower res textures are used when the player is moving due to the streaming from HDD limit. They even showed a demo of the improvement on that game specifically and we have all the info as to how that game works from that GDC talk.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

You don't need to stream in a SP game that's not open world. PC doesn't apply to this.

The ex naughty dog dev said improved data management did massive in regards to single player, and suggested ssd would further improve in the context of single player non open world example. edit: He seemed to imply that lifelike object detail was possible, which is another word for photoreal, even current gen if the ssd was there. That the design of world's of such detail would probably present a challenge of itself too.

If a PC version is made of any game, it will run the best of all the platforms. That's an objective fact. So stop with the assumptions that a game on a PS5 and the same one on a PC will prove the PS5 having the advantage.

Yes it will run the best, but what will the requirements be? Say a 160~GB city with fast flight and fast easy access to the ground. Are we going to require 160GB of ram to get comparable settings?

It certainly won't run best on a 1060GB which is the most common card. We can easily see it will run worst on most pcs, most gaming pcs don't even have 8 core cpus.

edit

. In the video it's clearly stated that lower res textures are used when the player is moving due to the streaming from HDD limit. They even showed a demo of the improvement on that game specifically and we have all the info as to how that game works from that GDC talk.

this.

 

[martino]

The ex naughty dog dev said improved data management did massive in regards to single player, and suggested ssd would further improve in the context of single player non open world example. edit: He seemed to imply that lifelike object detail was possible, which is another word for photoreal, even current gen if the ssd was there. That the design of world's of such detail would probably present a challenge too.

Yes it will run the best, but what will the requirements be? Say a 160~GB city with fast flight and fast easy access to the ground. Are we going to require 160GB of ram to get comparable settings?

It certainly won't run best on a 1060GB which is the most common card. We can easily see it will run worst on most pcs, most gaming pcs don't even have 8 core cpus.

then 1060 will not remain the most common card for long.
will you play ps5 games on ps4 ? no.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Nope about HB2.

Is that your personal opinion?

then 1060 will not remain the most common card for long.

yes it will change to either the 2060 or 3060. Let's see how much ram nvidia puts in the 3060.

 

[DForce]

Dude, I don't know wtf you want from me. Why are you continuing to bother me with this shit. I told you what I thought about that Spiderman demo with regards to the comparison with PS4 and new PS5. You saw the damn demo. It is much faster with streaming the cityscape than the PS4. What else?

This discussing is pointless now.

I mentioned several times that I was NOT talking about the PS4 Spider-Man Demo that was showed off by Sony.

We're not talking about the Spider-Man demo.

Dude, you're clearly not reading my posts.

Spider-Man on Playstation 5 with an SSD
VS
Spider-Man on PlayStation 5 with just a Standard HDD

But you keep saying this.

I told you what I thought about that Spiderman demo with regards to the comparison with PS4 and new PS5. You saw the damn demo.

You think people are just looking to argue, when in fact people are trying to get you to understand the context of our question.

Again, this discussion is pointless now.

 

[VFXVeteran]

The ex naughty dog dev said improved data management did massive in regards to single player, and suggested ssd would further improve in the context of single player non open world example. edit: He seemed to imply that lifelike object detail was possible, which is another word for photoreal, even current gen if the ssd was there. That the design of world's of such detail would probably present a challenge of itself too.

Yes it will run the best, but what will the requirements be? Say a 160~GB city with fast flight and fast easy access to the ground. Are we going to require 160GB of ram to get comparable settings?

160GB of RAM with a view distance of what? What's the FOV? What's the target framerate? What's the resolution? How fast can it render pixels, etc.. there are way too many variables that none of us know about to speculate.

 

[Three]

With a limited amount of RAM to access on next-gen consoles, you'll need a fast streaming cache system that the SSD can give ONLY in an open world game. You don't need to stream in a SP game that's not open world. PC doesn't apply to this.

Again not true. Driveclub for example was not open world but streamed assets nonetheless. Open world is just where you would see the biggest freedom in player movement so can't plan your data management as well. Even SP games like uncharted have level designs that are based on the HDD loading speed. You have to crawl through a crack in the wall? Time to load the next level from the HDD without removing player agency!
COD too. You get knocked down screen goes blurry and somebody gives you a hand? Loading the next part of the game! Unskippable cutscene in Spiderman? Loading the next level. If you could do these things very fast then the game design changes.

 

[hyperbertha]

I've already showed you the quotes where it's obvious for everyone (including you) how you changed your stance. I'm sorry you won't admit it, but I guess this is the internet after all. Never admit failure. Especially not on an anonymous internet forum.

PS. If you think your posts are anywhere near "technical explanations"... well, sorry, I think you need to reconsider your stance on that.

And i've provided the quotes that disprove any change of stance in my part. Its painfully clear you're still holding onto that weak argument since you have nothing else to say. And yes there are technical arguments fully explaining how streaming works beyond 'bigger worlds' and loading. And your second sentence applies far more to you. Just admit you don't understand how this works and move on.

 

[pawel86ck]

Nope about HB2.

When Maximov is saying that, he means that you can take ONE asset, put it in a viewer and spend all the resources of the console to make it look highly detailed (within the GPUs limits of course).

With a limited amount of RAM to access on next-gen consoles, you'll need a fast streaming cache system that the SSD can give ONLY in an open world game. You don't need to stream in a SP game that's not open world. PC doesn't apply to this.

So why he is talking about real game scenario then (not to mention TLOU is SP game)?

 

[VFXVeteran]

Again not true. Driveclub for example was not open world but streamed assets nonetheless. Open world is just where you would see the biggest freedom in player movement so can't plan your data management as well. Even SP games like uncharted have level designs that are based on the HDD loading speed. You have to crawl through a crack in the wall? Time to load the next level from the HDD without removing player agency!
COD too. You get knocked down screen goes blurry and somebody gives you a hand? Loading the next part of the game! Unskippable cutscene in Spiderman? Loading the next level. If you could do these things very fast then the game design changes.

I'm not talking about console versions of games. Of course the newer consoles needed to have high speed SSDs. I've never refuted that. What I'm refuting is the PC requiring such hardware.

 

[VFXVeteran]

So why he is talking about real game scenario then (not to mention TLOU is SP game)?

He's talking about a console. Not the PC.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

160GB of RAM with a view distance of what? What's the FOV? What's the target framerate? What's the resolution? How fast can it render pixels, etc.. there are way too many variables that none of us know about to speculate.

There are LODs. Obviously you'd only get the most detail when you're in an area in the ground. But in theory the city can use total 160GB of data for all assets. The ps5 can load 10GB in about a second. So you can easily move about the city taking a few seconds, and the highest LOD of that area can be loaded in.

So why he is talking about real game scenario then (not to mention TLOU is SP game)?

single player and non openworld.

 

[pawel86ck]

He's talking about a console. Not the PC.

But arnt we talking about consoles here? Why you even mention PC?

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

What I'm refuting is the PC requiring such hardware.

do you mean the ssd? I've played black desert, and the difference between ssd and hdd is dramatic. Sure you could have massive amount of ram and store it all in ram. But one way or another you either need a fast ssd or potentially up to 100+GB of ram.

edit:

But arnt we talking about consoles here? Why you even mention PC?

The problem is we don't know how badly PCs are affected by the bottlenecks Cerny mentioned. That's been my point. PCie 4.0 nvme's have been seen no faster than sata ssds which have been seen only 2-5 times faster than hdds. Is that due to lack of optimizations? Or is that due to the bottlenecks Cerny mentioned? ps5 ssd is 100 times faster than an hdd.

Now the point that's been made is that in theory a PC could have 32-64+GB of ram and could do similar using ram. Probably but again, imagine the loading time to load 64+GB of ram from an hdd, and even the ssds apparently being only 2-5x faster. With an hdd that'd be 640 seconds, or ten+ minutes. 2-5~minutes on ssd.

 

[hyperbertha]

Nope about HB2.

When Maximov is saying that, he means that you can take ONE asset, put it in a viewer and spend all the resources of the console to make it look highly detailed (within the GPUs limits of course).

With a limited amount of RAM to access on next-gen consoles, you'll need a fast streaming cache system that the SSD can give ONLY in an open world game. You don't need to stream in a SP game that's not open world. PC doesn't apply to this.

You call yourself VFX veteran yet make blunders like this. What did I just read?

 

[DForce]

I think we have enough evidence that SSD will help increase the quality of used assets.

But I'll make this perfectly clear again. We still know they're limited by other factors, but it will still help regardless.

 

[VFXVeteran]

But arnt we talking about consoles here? Why you even mention PC?

Read around pages 6. The PC was mentioned as not being able to run with a game using SSD.

 

[hyperbertha]

Also I like how you ignored this one:

No. It can stream more assets. Higher quality is relative. Higher quality could mean more triangles for a character or larger texture sizes. So be specific.

Devs have already showed how your points are wrong. Even current gen GPUs are capable of outputting more quality 'polycount, texture resolution' etc than they were able to work with, thanks to memory bottlenecks. People have already given you posts proving this which you conveniently ignored. Texture resolution does not put a heavy load on GPU and if I understand correctly, techniques such as deferred shading makes polycount less of a factor too. Drawcalls are far more important than pure polycount. Vertices are more important than pure polycount. A scene containing 10000 seperate traingles is far harder to render than a scene containing 1 mesh with 10000 traingles. Polycount and asset quality is NOT the factor that held back visuals this gen. It was an inavaliability of memory, that the SSDs are addressing. The Xbox's main advantage this gen lies in its greater RTX functionality due to dedicated RTX hardware, not in its extra raster TFLOPS which will practically only lead to a few extra pixels at same framerates.

There are so many factors that contribute to a reduction in rendering performance that are more important and impactful than Asset quality. The SSDs we get this gen will absolutely contribute to a more than tangible increase in quality, and the PS5 in this department is about 3 times stronger than the Xbox in this regard, and can, if devs so choose, practically have 3x the size of assets Xbox has depending on the scene, without taking a hit to FPS if the devs do their optimization right.

 

[VFXVeteran]

You call yourself VFX veteran yet make blunders like this. What did I just read?

I didn't stutter. Why would you need to stream textures in a non-open world game where you don't need to render the entire level when you can't see it?

 

[Panajev2001a]

I'm not talking about console versions of games. Of course the newer consoles needed to have high speed SSDs. I've never refuted that. What I'm refuting is the PC requiring such hardware.

With 16/32 GB of main RAM + 6-8 GB of VRAM vs consoles with 16 GB total they can cover a lot more ground even if the console “extend” the RAM.
Hopefully the Direct Storage API hits the PC too as you would need separate code paths in your PC code to do caching instead of hitting the filesystem hard and fast trying to max out the SSD bandwidth as you do on consoles.

 

[martino]

I didn't stutter. Why would you need to stream textures in a non-open world game where you don't need to render the entire level when you can't see it?

that can change though, no ?

 

[VFXVeteran]

Also I like how you ignored this one:

Please stop trying to challenge me with another developer's comments and not your own experience writing code. I'm not going to try parsing what another developer meant just because you heard what you wanted to hear.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I didn't stutter. Why would you need to stream textures in a non-open world game where you don't need to render the entire level when you can't see it?

Well, that depends on how big the resources are, your available memory (minus streaming buffers), and your definition of open world.
Is Crash Bandicoot open world then? If it is, then many many games are.

 

[TBiddy]

And i've provided the quotes that disprove any change of stance in my part. Its painfully clear you're still holding onto that weak argument since you have nothing else to say. And yes there are technical arguments fully explaining how streaming works beyond 'bigger worlds' and loading. And your second sentence applies far more to you. Just admit you don't understand how this works and move on.

You have a weird definion of "disprove", I must say. I don't hold it against you though. You'e dug the hole way to deep to admit your mistake now.

If you ever wish to discuss in adult manner, make sure to let me know.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Well, that depends on how big the resources are, your available memory (minus streaming buffers), and your definition of open world.
Is Crash Bandicoot open world then? If it is, then many many games are.

The definition of open world of course. I've never played Crash Bandicoot so I can't speak to that.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

I didn't stutter. Why would you need to stream textures in a non-open world game where you don't need to render the entire level when you can't see it?

I haven't seen the video yet. But I think even crash bandicoot one streams part of the level as you're moving through it.

 

[hyperbertha]

I didn't stutter. Why would you need to stream textures in a non-open world game where you don't need to render the entire level when you can't see it?

Please clarify. Are you saying in non open world games the whole level isn't loaded into memory?

 

[hyperbertha]

You have a weird definion of "disprove", I must say. I don't hold it against you though. You'e dug the hole way to deep to admit your mistake now.

If you ever wish to discuss in adult manner, make sure to let me know.

You mean your mistake? Anyway how can I discuss this with someone without basic technical understanding of this? Let me talk with people who know how streaming works, good day.

 

[hyperbertha]

Please stop trying to challenge me with another developer's comments and not your own experience writing code. I'm not going to try parsing what another developer meant just because you heard what you wanted to hear.

You don't have to parse anything. This is not another developer saying it this is me saying it and its clear as day. You said streaming will not let you increase quality because Gpu's can't handle it. This is my counter:

Even current gen GPUs are capable of outputting more quality 'polycount, texture resolution' etc than they were able to work with, thanks to memory bottlenecks. People have already given you posts proving this which you conveniently ignored. Texture resolution does not put a heavy load on GPU and if I understand correctly, techniques such as deferred shading makes polycount less of a factor too. Drawcalls are far more important than pure polycount. Vertices are more important than pure polycount. A scene containing 10000 seperate traingles is far harder to render than a scene containing 1 mesh with 10000 traingles. Polycount and asset quality is NOT the factor that held back visuals this gen. It was an inavaliability of memory, that the SSDs are addressing.

There are so many factors that contribute to a reduction in rendering performance that are more important and impactful than Asset quality. The SSDs we get this gen will absolutely contribute to a more than tangible increase in quality, and the PS5 in this department is about 3 times stronger than the Xbox in this regard, and can, if devs so choose, practically have 3x the size of assets Xbox has depending on the scene, without taking a hit to FPS if the devs do their optimization right.

 

[TBiddy]

You mean your mistake? Anyway how can I discuss this with someone without basic technical understanding of this? Let me talk with people who know how streaming works, good day.

Ignorance is bliss. I hope you grow up one day. Enjoy your evening.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Just for you ..

Devs have already showed how your points are wrong. Even current gen GPUs are capable of outputting more quality 'polycount, texture resolution' etc than they were able to work with, thanks to memory bottlenecks.

I am going to assume you mean memory storage and not memory bandwidth. If storage, of course this is true until you run out of memory bandwidth.

People have already given you posts proving this which you conveniently ignored. Texture resolution does not put a heavy load on GPU

No it doesn't. But texture resolution directly impacts how much of those high res textures you can fit in VRAM every frame. We aren't talking about loads here in the sense of moving data. We're talking about static data that resides in a pool.

and if I understand correctly, techniques such as deferred shading makes polycount less of a factor too.

Yep - with opaque geometry. Unfortunately transparent polygons are used in every single game and can't be avoided.

Drawcalls are far more important than pure polycount.

OK. What does that have to do with SSD bandwidth?

'

Polycount and asset quality is NOT the factor that held back visuals this gen.

FIrst of all, it wasn't a factor because the consoles had crappy I/O devices. Fixing that doesn't mean it can't or won't be a factor. Try to model fur/hair using triangular ribbons. Displace your polygonal props down to sub pixel sizes to get the detail found in CG. You can't. See how easy that was.

There are so many factors that contribute to a reduction in rendering performance that are more important and impactful than Asset quality. The SSDs we get this gen will absolutely contribute to a more than tangible increase in quality, and the PS5 in this department is about 3 times stronger than the Xbox in this regard, and can, if devs so choose, practically have 3x the size of assets Xbox has depending on the scene, without taking a hit to FPS if the devs do their optimization right.

Great! I look forward to the release of "can only be played on PS5 due to it's SSD bandwidth" games. Just make sure you don't "port" said game to the PC because it'll make you look like a liar. And I *know* there will be PC ports from PS exclusives. And you know too if you are a Sony developer.

 

[mckmas8808]

I addressed the apples to oranges Spiderman demo very clearly. Is that the only basis you have for your argument?

You've gotta be freaking kidding me dude. Like honestly man. Are you serious?

 

[hyperbertha]

No it doesn't. But texture resolution directly impacts how much of those high res textures you can fit in VRAM every frame. We aren't talking about loads here in the sense of moving data. We're talking about static data that resides in a pool.

Exactly, which means now that you have an SSD that can load 9 Gb/s you can have so much more data per unit space compared to before, since you can fill up/clear in an instant you don't have to worry about it.

Yep - with opaque geometry. Unfortunately transparent polygons are used in every single game and can't be avoided.

Still doesn't change the fact that polycount isn't much of a load.

OK. What does that have to do with SSD bandwidth?

Lesser the drawcalls even less the stress on GPU. Which means in a scene with less drawcalls you can push quality even higher ie load more data/sec without having to worry about overloading GPU.

FIrst of all, it wasn't a factor because the consoles had crappy I/O devices. Fixing that doesn't mean it can't or won't be a factor. Try to model fur/hair using triangular ribbons. Displace your polygonal props down to sub pixel sizes to get the detail found in CG. You can't. See how easy that was.

So you admit it wasn't a factor. And you also admit it wasn't a factor BECAUSE of the I/O bottleneck. This proves right here that merely addressing the bottleneck makes it so that GPUs can finally start having asset quality as the bottleneck, rather than data limitations, which is what's actually important.
1.8 tf were held back by I/O. So imagine 10 or 12 TF without I/O bottlenecks. Its an entirely new epoch in visual quality.

Great! I look forward to the release of "can only be played on PS5 due to it's SSD bandwidth" games. Just make sure you don't "port" said game to the PC because it'll make you look like a liar. And I *know* there will be PC ports from PS exclusives. And you know too if you are a Sony developer.

PC games will be restricted by HDDs for atleast a few more years, unless third parties start mandating NVME SSDs as a minimum requirement. If Sony first party devs make full use of the PS5 SSD in their games, then they won't run on a PC without severe optimizations that'll result in much lower visual fidelity. And no, just because Horizon came to PC doesn't mean they are going to have to develop to PC from now on. We don't know the details regarding that, and if true, it'd be a waste as it would render the SSD almost entirely pointless. Even if they do bring them to PC, it could happen much later in time, when its reasonable to have NVMEs as a minimum requirement.

 

[K.N.W.]

I haven't seen the video yet. But I think even crash bandicoot one streams part of the level as you're moving through it.

Textures and polygons are feeded to the GPU only when needed(it loads just what you see), those come from the main RAM, which can store less than 10 seconds of running before it needs to stream more data. Funny, eh? Nice example BTW, I really hope Sony brings out something so ingenious for PS5!

PC games will be restricted by HDDs for atleast a few more years, unless third parties start mandating NVME SSDs as a minimum requirement.

And, sadly, those games are going to be limited on consoles too!

 

[DForce]

He says you can get more with streaming with an SSD, but instead of adding more, you can't increase the quality on other assets?

That doesn't make sense.

 

[hyperbertha]

He says you can get more with streaming with an SSD, but instead of adding more, you can't increase the quality on other assets?

That doesn't make sense.

Whats 'more'?

 

[mckmas8808]

I can only add this that I got from devs for our podcast.

Improved SSD speed allows for companies to adjust and possibly create titles somewhat differently where their prior game performance budgets in a particular area made them a design a game solely around those limits. Which they all stated was rare if not truly unheard of.

Thats from devs who have worked on all systems and on PC games. And one who has also worked on switch. Also all of them stressed that the BIG difficulty would be creating a title where SUPER fast SSD showed a massive difference between a VERY fast ssd , if everyone is accustomed to slow storage. And how you would draw attention to that in a way that makes any sense and if even proving that delta made sense in the game's design.
None were unhappy about it, many were excited. But they were all more excited about faster storage in general versus the difference between the two as that makes a smaller difference in design changes than the holistic leap together does.

Hope folks try but as with all big improvements we shall see.

That makes perfect sense to me. It's what all the reasonable people on GAF have been saying. I'm shocked why so many people can't seem to talk about the SSD in the PS5, without discussing the XSX or PC.

 

[DForce]

Whats 'more'?

Textures and objects. If VFX says you can increase the number assets on screen, then that data can be used for something else.

 

[VFXVeteran]

Exactly, which means now that you have an SSD that can load 9 Gb/s you can have so much more data per unit space compared to before, since you can fill up/clear in an instant you don't have to worry about it.

You can't clear up and fill "in an instant". What does that mean? My goal is to access main memory so I can push it to the texture memory faster than pushing it straight from SSD to texture memory which is slow unless you have a unified memory model like the consoles. Even then, when I access a texture, I want the texture to already be in memory. At no point will a developer EVER make a texture call where the texture resides on the SSD. 448Gb/s >>>>>>> 9GB/s.

Lesser the drawcalls even less the stress on GPU. Which means in a scene with less drawcalls you can push quality even higher ie load more data/sec without having to worry about overloading GPU.

Drawcalls are overshadowed by the shaders. Drawcalls can be optimized on any platform. The speed of shader execution is another story. That's directly dependent on memory bandwidth and TFLOPS - not SSD I/O storage bandwidth. When you start talking about draw calls, your program is already working in main memory.

So you admit it wasn't a factor. And you also admit it wasn't a factor BECAUSE of the I/O bottleneck. This proves right here that merely addressing the bottleneck makes it so that GPUs can finally start having asset quality as the bottleneck, rather than data limitations, which is what's actually important.

If you are talking about the comparison from PS4 to PS5 yes. Not XSX vs. PS5 vs. PC.

1.8 tf were held back by I/O. So imagine 10 or 12 TF without I/O bottlenecks. Its an entirely new epoch in visual quality.

Not going to be mindblowing dude.. I don't know why you are coming to that realization. This reminds me of last gen when the tech demos came out (all of which were playing on the PC).

PC games will be restricted by HDDs for atleast a few more years, unless third parties start mandating NVME SSDs as a minimum requirement. If Sony first party devs make full use of the PS5 SSD in their games, then they won't run on a PC without severe optimizations that'll result in much lower visual fidelity. And no, just because Horizon came to PC doesn't mean they are going to have to develop to PC from now on. We don't know the details regarding that, and if true, it'd be a waste as it would render the SSD almost entirely pointless. Even if they do bring them to PC, it could happen much later in time, when its reasonable to have NVMEs as a minimum requirement.

You don't know what you are talking about with this paragraph. You talk like you know but I can tell you don't. I'll leave it at that. Wait for the next PS exclusive announcement coming to PC.

 

[VFXVeteran]

You've gotta be freaking kidding me dude. Like honestly man. Are you serious?

Go back and look at my responses. I've addressed that the Spiderman demo applies to PS4->PS5 conversion. That demo does NOT apply to PS5 -> XSX or PS5 -> PC. In other words, you wouldn't notice the difference between those platforms (and even more @ higher res @ faster FPS with a high-end PC).