Next-Gen PS5 & XSX |OT| Console tEch threaD

Status
Not open for further replies.
ZehDon said:
Sorry friend, you might be a touch confused there. It hasn't been "available" - the technology was unveiled in November of 2019, and DirectX 12 Ultimate was only publically unveiled on March 19 of 2020. Developers may have had access to the technology earlier, but they'll be under tight NDAs if they're using Microsoft's proprietary technology. As for a demo, like all of the DX12U features, Microsoft have implemented "developer demos". The demo for SFS demonstrates rendering a more accurate scene faster at 1/10th of the VRAM, and they highlight the gains will only improve in real-world scenarios due to the nature of the technology. The video I linked above is a part of a series, each one showing off the features of DX12U and going under the hood on the hows and whys. This is why I'm sold on the tech - Microsoft have the science to prove the theory, and AMD and Nvidia built the hardware to use it.
Click to expand...

but, as with Sony's ssd and third parties, every developer needing to sell on non dx12U hardware will not change core game design to take advantage of it. It will take years to see those changes. Bells and whistles, sure; but not the actual game. At least with ps5, we will get 5 or 6 exclusives leveraging their tech.
 
BluRayHiDef said:
What are you talking about? It fully loaded the game and did so with no pop-in. Wow, people are so biased that they don't even see reality when they don't like it. Unbelievable.
Click to expand...
I was talking about the top xbox video, it's easy to see the ground and textures on the car pop in after the game has loaded. You go off on someone without seeing the context of your own post. It's ok, I expect nothing on an online forum.
 
Last edited:
joe_zazen said:
but, as with Sony's ssd and third parties, every developer needing to sell on non dx12U hardware will not change core game design to take advantage of it. It will take years to see those changes. Bells and whistles, sure; but not the actual game. At least with ps5, we will get 5 or 6 exclusives leveraging their tech.
Click to expand...
Not quite, in my opinion. Microsoft and Sony have implemented differing techniques to achieve the same goal: better utilisation of RAM. On the PlayStation, you just stream in the assets quickly using raw IO throughout, on Xbox you implement the DX12U feature set and get comparable results through significantly more efficient texture streaming.
PC is really the outlier. I suspect you'll see things like "On DX12U cards you need 8gb VRAM, on older cards you need 16gb VRAM", in combination with a huge jump in system RAM requirements to offset the potentially slower disc speeds. Similar to dynamic resolution, we'd see a dynamic RAM usage to offset IO speeds - the faster your disc, the less RAM needed.
It'll be interesting to see how developers address this in their titles. It's been an entire generation since we've had bespoke solutions - exciting times ahead!!
 
SatansReverence said:
Proceeds to link video showing state of decay, a massive open world game, being loaded in 8 seconds.

Okaaaaaay.

I guess those other videos showing, in real time, the XSX switching from one active game state to another active game state in a mere 5 seconds with completely unoptimised games were fictional and never actually happened.
Click to expand...
Counted 10, but I'll give it to you, be it 8. But if you look closer, you'll notice after game screen appears textures are still loading, so I think you have to add some more seconds to that loading time.
 
ANIMAL1975 said:
And there you have it: another power battle lost for the Sony Defence Force! No games gonna use more than 10Gb of RAM next gen, an actual dev:



And don't even try to debate it: if by any means, by any unlikely remote chance of that happening in a game ... Xbox 10GB RAM is actually like 30 GB with SFS!

Click to expand...


Oh shit , now Xbox Series X is 48GB of RAM?! LOL 🤣
 
X-Fighter said:
Did you even watch that video? They clearly said, unoptimised purely to show how much faster it even is when you don't do anything special. Do you have the feeling that the Spiderman demo was not optimised?
Click to expand...
And how is that everyone else's problem if they chose to use unoptimized content for their demo? There's no excuse for that, if you want to show what you can do you'll use the best case scenario, something Sony wisely chose to do with that Spidey demo.
 
Last edited:
ZehDon said:
That's... not how comparisons work. Let's pretend that the Spiderman code wasn't re-engineered for the purposes of being a demo (it was). The base load time of State of Decay 2 is apprximately 45 seconds, which the Series X decreases to approximately 7 seconds. This is approximately just 15% of the original load time. The base load time of Spiderman on the PS4 is approximately 8 seconds, which the PS5 decreases to approximately 0.8 seconds. This is approximately just 10% of the original load time. So, we see a 10% vs 15% final load time. However, it's likely that a game with a significantly improved asset streaming service - such as Spiderman, in direct comparison to State of Decay 2 - would see a better improvement overall from the SSD speeds. So, even when adjusting the numbers to enable a correct comparison, we're still not comparing apples to apples.

Further to your posts, Sony haven't invented "game-changing technology", they just have a fast SSD. Microsoft are also using a fast SSD, but I think we can agree it's certainly not as fast as Sony's. Microsoft, however, actually have invented some game-changing technology. In addition to Mesh Shaders - worth pointing out that the PS5 has the Geometry Engine to replicate this functionality - the real dark horse is SFS, or Sampler Feedback Streaming. This tech, available in DX12 Ultimate, is going to shrink IO bandwidth requirements and memory footprints pretty significantly for texture assets, which are vast majority of game data being loaded in. If you care to learn more, check out Microsoft's 17 minute developer-focused presentation on it. Warning: it's dense and technical in nature.
The short version is that, while Sony can load an 8mb 4k texture quickly, Microsoft have developed a way to load just 800kb of that same texture for the same rendered result. Thus, Microsoft's slower SSD combined with SFS will most likely outpace Sony's faster SSD when loading the same texture assets. Being as this is patented technology that requires the suitable hardware to utilise it, it's unlikely that Sony will be able to replicate this within their own API in the near-term.

Anyway, I hope this helps you understand why, while Sony's loading presentation is impressive, I'm not convinced that their raw IO throughput is the best method to achieve the goals of diminished load times and better asset streaming.
Click to expand...
Ok, then explain to everyone if MS have this magical feature, why did they choose to use unoptimized content to show their tech?
 
EUbAlXvXYAIJTDI
 
BluRayHiDef said:
I understand that because Microsoft is the most successful software company in the world, that their claims about the efficiency of software that they've invented should be respected. However, I find it strange that they haven't demonstrated SFS being implemented by the Xbox Series X in real time considering how revelatory they've been about the console thus far (e.g. revealing what it looks like months ago, allowing YouTubers to assemble it and play games on it, continually tweeting about it, etc).

In fact, what's particularly strange is that in the demonstrations of the machine running games, it loads games quickly but much slower than the PS5 loads Spider-Man and that the excuse for this is that the games used in these demonstrations were unoptimized. In the demonstration whose primary purpose is to demonstrate the machine's faster loading times relative to current-gen tech, it takes a whole ten seconds to do so (i.e. to load State of Decay). If the reason for the long load time relative to what we've seen and heard of the PlayStation 5 is that State of Decay is unoptimized, then why use it in the demonstration? Why not use a game that's optimized for SFS?

Considering that the XSX is similar to PC in terms of its architecture and its software (APIs, Drivers, etc) and considering that SFS is available on PC via DX12 already, Microsoft could have certainly demonstrated SFS being implemented on XSX by now. So, I have my suspicions that it's not as effective as the PS5's raw, hardware-level processing speed.
Click to expand...

Yeah MS can rely on directX but they can't make use of faster "hard drives" for gamedesign purpose. Well they could but then they wouldn't be able to target a wide range of pc users. I couldn't find any survey that shows how many pc gamers use ssd's or nvm's but I wouldn't be suprised if thats still a minority. Most people, myself included, are still playing in 1080P. However I do own sdd's but not nvmes.

Sony on the other hand can make full use of their nmve speed, and take that into account. And yes I oversimplified and therefore made incorrect statements. However Sony does invest in supporting at least their first party studios with development of gameengins and so on. So at least their first party studios can create engines that make full use of that.

Obviously I'm no expert despite beeing able to create a game. And thats part of what I was trying to convey.
Only because some developer makes some statement about the next gen consoles hardware that dosn't mean he knows what hes talking about.

Actually I am quite sure that right now, only very few people actually know how much of a game changer faster drives might be in regard to game development. That has something to do with first princibles vs. the humans nature to rely on previous technology.
I'm probably just bad at explaining myself with what I'm trying to say.

Regarding first principles a Timestamped video ( for generally technical interested people i would reccomend the whole video ):
 
FranXico said:
WOW LOL.

Nice FAKE.

"Do we play The Last of Us II online?" ROFL
There won't be any online multiplayer!
Click to expand...

I don't intend to imply that it's not fake and I don't intend to be rhetorical, but do you honestly think that someone would 3D-print a fake PS5 development kit and create a program that runs a fake PS5 UI? I personally don't know what to think.
 
BluRayHiDef said:
I don't intend to imply that it's not fake and I don't intend to be rhetorical, but do you honestly think that someone would 3D-print a fake PS5 development kit and create a program that runs a fake PS5 UI? I personally don't know what to think.
Click to expand...
Well, it has already been done mate, no surprise here.
 
BluRayHiDef said:
I don't intend to imply that it's not fake and I don't intend to be rhetorical, but do you honestly think that someone would 3D-print a fake PS5 development kit and create a program that runs a fake PS5 UI? I personally don't know what to think.
Click to expand...
Some people go to great lengths for an April Fool's prank
 
Neo Blaster said:
I don't think you understand what loading and streaming are.
Click to expand...

What?

The videos he linked compared two different things.

One (MS) was loading the game from the menu.

The other (Sony) was how long it takes when you travel from point A in a level to point B in the same level when the game is already loaded.

So - how much new assets where loaded in this 0,8 seconds? Same amount like when you start the game from menu? 80% 50% 30%
 
Since we talk about loading, one question.
Cerny showed this slide with GoW loading. A PS4 with SSD just reduced loading to half even though the ssd was 10 times faster due to bottlenecks. He then showed another slide that for PS5. The 100 times faster ssd will translate to 100 times more speed because no bottlenecks.

If this is true how could loading for PS5 be more that 1 second? Could a game need to load 50 GB (10 second loading - 5 compressed)?
 
nosseman said:
What?

The videos he linked compared two different things.

One (MS) was loading the game from the menu.

The other (Sony) was how long it takes when you travel from point A in a level to point B in the same level when the game is already loaded.

So - how much new assets where loaded in this 0,8 seconds? Same amount like when you start the game from menu? 80% 50% 30%
Click to expand...
The XSX demo shows only level loading where as the PS5 demo not only shows the level loading times but also game world streaming by speeding through the city.
 
nosseman said:
What?

The videos he linked compared two different things.

One (MS) was loading the game from the menu.

The other (Sony) was how long it takes when you travel from point A in a level to point B in the same level when the game is already loaded.

So - how much new assets where loaded in this 0,8 seconds? Same amount like when you start the game from menu? 80% 50% 30%
Click to expand...
You have to understand that loading is always happening inside the game, it's called streaming. The initial loading is no different than the others, you grab all assets needed for that specific portion of the game from storage and put them in main memory.
 
Kusarigama said:
The XSX demo shows only level loading where as the PS5 demo not only shows the level loading times but also game world streaming by speeding through the city.
Click to expand...

Are you sure?

When I read about this demo it was described as teleporting to a different location on the map when the game was already loaded. If you watch the demo you can also see that they keep teleporting around the level (after the first 0,8 second is shown).

Another thing is that Sonys demo was running specific code made just to demo this. MS demo show a real game loading on real hardware.
 
protonion said:
Since we talk about loading, one question.
Cerny showed this slide with GoW loading. A PS4 with SSD just reduced loading to half even though the ssd was 10 times faster due to bottlenecks. He then showed another slide that for PS5. The 100 times faster ssd will translate to 100 times more speed because no bottlenecks.

If this is true how could loading for PS5 be more that 1 second? Could a game need to load 50 GB (10 second loading - 5 compressed)?
Click to expand...
In worst case scenario(5.5GB/s) you need 2,9 seconds to fill the entire memory. Compressed, worst case(9GB/s) would still be 1,8 seconds.
 
Neo Blaster said:
You have to understand that loading is always happening inside the game, it's called streaming. The initial loading is no different than the others, you grab all assets needed for that specific portion of the game from storage and put them in main memory.
Click to expand...

Yes - but there is a big difference from loading the game and start playing from nothing (loading from menu) and instantly teleport to another location when the game is already running. When loading from menu you have to load ALL the things and when you teleport while the game is running you dont have to load everything - just what is "new" .
 
nosseman said:
Yes - but there is a big difference from loading the game and start playing from nothing (loading from menu) and instantly teleport to another location when the game is already running. When loading from menu you have to load ALL the things and when you teleport while the game is running you dont have to load everything - just what is "new" .
Click to expand...
Nope, you can load the basic engine even before you press the button from menu. Everything else would just be "new".
 
Neo Blaster said:
Nope, you can load the basic engine even before you press the button from menu. Everything else would just be "new".
Click to expand...

Yeah , but that was obviously not what they demo:ed.

First they showed PS4 Pro and how long it takes when you instantly teleport to another location and have to load x% new assets and that takes 8 seconds. (Remember that PS4 Pro use a mechanical HD)
Then they showed the next generation (PS5) and that takes 0,8 seconds.

They also stress how much faster PS5 is by keep teleporting around the map (I count 6 locations on the PS5 and 1 on PS4 Pro).

Then they show the difference again but instead of teleporting around the map they zoom thorough it at great speed. The PS4 Pro start to slow down and stop sometimes while PS5 keep on zooming though the level at high speed.

Also - again - Sony used a special case. Special version of the game just to show how fast they can load/stream new assets to the game. MS used a existing unoptimized game just to show how long it would take to load a "normal" game on Series X.

Sony has fast SSD and special hardware to stream stuff from the HD. MS has fast SSD and special hardware to stream stuff from the HD.

Sonys solution is 100% faster but not 1000% faster as some people try to make it out like by comparing those videos.

If MS made a custom demo where they did the same thing in State of Decay it would probably take 1,6 seconds.
 
Last edited:
nosseman said:
Yeah , but that was obviously not what they demo:ed.

First they showed PS4 Pro and how long it takes when you instantly teleport to another location and have to load x% new assets and that takes 8 seconds. (Remember that PS4 Pro use a mechanical HD)
Then they showed the next generation (PS5) and that takes 0,8 seconds.

They also stress how much faster PS5 is by keep teleporting around the map (I count 6 locations on the PS5 and 1 on PS4 Pro).

Then they show the difference again but instead of teleporting around the map they zoom thorough it at great speed. The PS4 Pro start to slow down and stop sometimes while PS5 keep on zooming though the level at high speed.

Also - again - Sony used a special case. Special version of the game just to show how fast they can load/stream new assets to the game. MS used a existing unoptimized game just to show how much a "normal" game would take to load on Series X.

Sony has fast SSD and special hardware to stream stuff from the HD. MS has fast SSD and special hardware to stream stuff from the HD.

Sonys solution is 100% faster but not 1000% faster as some people try to make it out like by comparing those videos.

If MS made a custom demo where they did the same thing in State of Decay it would probably take 1,6 seconds.
Click to expand...
Honest question here: how do you know that was a special version of Spiderman? As far as we know they could've just remove the avatar and move the camera, no other changes in the code.
 
nosseman said:
If MS made a custom demo where they did the same thing in State of Decay it would probably take 1,6 seconds.
Click to expand...

Then why didn't they? I can't stress that enough, if you want to show what your machine can do, you show your best case scenario just like Sony did on that Spiderman demo.
 
VanSiriusGabriel said:
Honest question here: how do you know that was a special version of Spiderman? As far as we know they could've just remove the avatar and move the camera, no other changes in the code.
Click to expand...

We just have to wait and see when the games are here.

I just have a hard time believing PS5 will load the games 1000% faster.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Rust to get next gen patch for X S|X and PS5, previous gen version being discontinued
0
24
cormack12 replied
Sony unveils next-gen RGB mini-LED TV Tech | "OLED Killer?"
2 3
118
7K
dave_d replied
What are your top 3 (non-cross gen) PS5/XSX games this gen?
46
2K
ToneyJ replied
Rocksteady’s Next Batman Game Being Developed Using Unreal Engine 5. Targeting Cross-Gen Launch With PS5, Series S|X, and Next-Gen Consoles!
News Rumor Hype  2
89
3K
Feel Like I'm On 42 replied
Xbox Wants Out of the Console War - (IGN Next-Gen Console Watch Podcast)
2 3 4
194
11K
Viruz replied
Top Bottom