Just been reading about big navi and how its a MCM design in a similar vain to Ryzen, I wonder if that means the PS5 Pro will be easy to build with backwards compatibility essentially switching off one of the clusters in a similar vain to PS4 Pro
The foundation of the Xbox Velocity Architecture is our custom, 1TB NVME SSD, delivering 2.4 GB/s of raw I/O throughput. The custom NVME SSD (...) is designed for consistent, sustained performance as opposed to peak performance. Developers have a guaranteed level of I/O performance at all times and they can reliably design and optimize their games removing the barriers and constraints they have to work around today
(...) With hardware accelerated support for both the industry standard LZ decompressor as well as a brand new, proprietary algorithm specifically designed for texture data named BCPack, Xbox Series X provides the best of both worlds for developers to achieve massive savings with no loss in quality or performance (...). Assuming a 2:1 compression ratio, Xbox Series X delivers an effective 4.8 GB/s in I/O performance to the title, approximately 100x the I/O performance in current generation consoles. To deliver similar levels of decompression performance in software would require more than 4 Zen 2 CPU cores.
(...) Game textures are optimized at differing levels of detail and resolution, called mipmaps, and can be used during rendering based on how close or far away an object is from the player. (...) Today, developers must load an entire mip level in memory even in cases where they may only sample a very small portion of the overall texture. Through specialized hardware added to the Xbox One X, we were able to analyze texture memory usage by the GPU and we discovered that the GPU often accesses less than 1/3 of the texture data required to be loaded in memory. A single scene often includes thousands of different textures resulting in a significant loss in effective memory and I/O bandwidth utilization due to inefficient usage. With this insight, we were able to create and add new capabilities to the Xbox Series X GPU which enables it to only load the sub portions of a mip level into memory, on demand, just in time for when the GPU requires the data. This innovation results in approximately 2.5x the effective I/O throughput and memory usage above and beyond the raw hardware capabilities on average. SFS provides an effective multiplier on available system memory and I/O bandwidth, resulting in significantly more memory and I/O throughput available to make your game richer and more immersive.
Thanks for the clarification, but I don't think I've been confused, rather it was someone trying to feed us misinformationYou got confused in the reading. AMD TrueAudio Next needed to reserve 4 CU's to produce around 32 true 3D sources around 2017:
Microsoft has a way with words, their marketing team is strong. It looks like most Xbox only fans seem to be buying into the 12GB/s narrative, even though that is NOT what Microsoft said (but worded to purposely mislead). This information is from https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2020/07/14/a-closer-look-at-xbox-velocity-architecture/.
First, let's look into the actual I/O performance. There will be omissions as I don't want to copy the whole text, but please check the original article as I want to keep the context intact:
Custom NVME SSD
Translation: As opposed to normal PC SSD's, this one is designed to deliver consistent 2.4 GB/s raw I/O throughput. That's it. That's as much as you're gonna get.
Hardware Accelerated Decompression
Translation: If you assume a 2:1 compression ration, which is perfectly possible, you will get a 4.8 GB/s compressed I/O throughput. I will assume this is on average, so the peaks will likely be higher, up to whatever their decompressor allows, and some data will not compress as well, but that's it. Your average is 4.8 GB/s, not more, not less.
Sampler Feedback Streaming (SFS)
Translation: First, let's clarify again - The Series X still has a raw I/O throughput of 2.4 GB/s. Now that we've clarified that, let's clarify the funny word play. Assuming the numbers they mentioned are correct, on older systems you'd access 1/3 or less of the loaded textures, and with the new tech, you boost utilization by 2.5 of the effective raw bandwidth. This means that if you didn't have this tech, your available bandwith would be equivalent to 0.96 GB/s, as you'd be loading that data you don't need. This is pretty much what we saw with their old gen game switching (video below), where the average time to switch between game A and B was of 6 seconds, or 5.76 GB/s of RAM being loaded (games were programmed for 5.5 GB/s AFAIK).
So, to recap, the capabilities are:
Also, I'm not devaluing the tech. This is great, because without SFS, they would be loading 10 or 13.5GB into RAM only to actually need 1/3 of that. This gives Devs way more usable space which, coupled with the super fast SSD speeds, will effectively provide a generational leap.
- 2.4 GB/s raw I/O throughput
- 4.8 GB/s compressed I/O throughput.
- A boost of 2.5 times compared to old gen tech, meaning you can fully utilize the numbers above, as opposed to 1/3 of the numbers available to last gen games
Edit: Sorry, forgot the video I mentioned above
Where is this Navi info from? Moore'sLawisDead?
Microsoft has a way with words, their marketing team is strong. It looks like most Xbox only fans seem to be buying into the 12GB/s narrative, even though that is NOT what Microsoft said (but worded to purposely mislead). This information is from https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2020/07/14/a-closer-look-at-xbox-velocity-architecture/.
First, let's look into the actual I/O performance. There will be omissions as I don't want to copy the whole text, but please check the original article as I want to keep the context intact:
Custom NVME SSD
Translation: As opposed to normal PC SSD's, this one is designed to deliver consistent 2.4 GB/s raw I/O throughput. That's it. That's as much as you're gonna get.
Hardware Accelerated Decompression
Translation: If you assume a 2:1 compression ration, which is perfectly possible, you will get a 4.8 GB/s compressed I/O throughput. I will assume this is on average, so the peaks will likely be higher, up to whatever their decompressor allows, and some data will not compress as well, but that's it. Your average is 4.8 GB/s, not more, not less.
Sampler Feedback Streaming (SFS)
Translation: First, let's clarify again - The Series X still has a raw I/O throughput of 2.4 GB/s. Now that we've clarified that, let's clarify the funny word play. Assuming the numbers they mentioned are correct, on older systems you'd access 1/3 or less of the loaded textures, and with the new tech, you boost utilization by 2.5 of the effective raw bandwidth. This means that if you didn't have this tech, your available bandwith would be equivalent to 0.96 GB/s, as you'd be loading that data you don't need. This is pretty much what we saw with their old gen game switching (video below), where the average time to switch between game A and B was of 6 seconds, or 5.76 GB/s of RAM being loaded (games were programmed for 5.5 GB/s AFAIK).
So, to recap, the capabilities are:
Also, I'm not devaluing the tech. This is great, because without SFS, they would be loading 10 or 13.5GB into RAM only to actually need 1/3 of that. This gives Devs way more usable space which, coupled with the super fast SSD speeds, will effectively provide a generational leap.
- 2.4 GB/s raw I/O throughput
- 4.8 GB/s compressed I/O throughput.
- A boost of 2.5 times compared to old gen tech, meaning you can fully utilize the numbers above, as opposed to 1/3 of the numbers available to last gen games
Edit: Sorry, forgot the video I mentioned above
Maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but wasn't there supossed to be a deep dive about XVA? Hope this wasn't it... It's like they were just making a summary of past months info.The 2.5 x is misleading as it does not establish a proper base to compare the 2.5 x .
On last gen you loaded a level or maybe 10-15 seconds of prefetch or you loadedd the whoe level.
If you can load next 5 seconds of gameplay, then memory requirement is less. Maybe 2.5 x less, but thats compared to loading the level or loading 15 seconds ?
Statement is vague on purpose.
The 2.5 x is misleading as it does not establish a proper base to compare the 2.5 x .
On last gen you loaded a level or maybe 10-15 seconds of prefetch or you loadedd the whoe level.
If you can load next 5 seconds of gameplay, then memory requirement is less. Maybe 2.5 x less, but thats compared to loading the level or loading 15 seconds ?
Statement is vague on purpose.
What people are saying is that if you wanted to use the old tech you would need a 12GB/s SSD, now a 4.8GB/s SSD is enough.
Lol what a beautiful pictorial way to show you have no idea what SFS is...So, basically what SFS does is the same as what Cerny was talking about? Refer to pictures attached.
![]()
![]()
What people are saying is that if you wanted to use the old tech you would need a 12GB/s SSD, now a 4.8GB/s SSD is enough.
Lol what a beautiful pictorial way to show you have no idea what SFS is...
I guess SFS is to do with loading data .. and your pic shows data being loaded ...
of course none of that actually relates to what SFS is and why its such a huge advantage.
SFS looks what what is being rendered and automatically triggers a SSD read and hardware decomposition .. so rather than a program requesting all the data that may be needed to be loded in ... the game in realtime triggers the read requests.
Imagine a cube spinning with a texture on each side .. the ps5 like all traditional games will load all sides of the cube so they are ready to be rendered at any time ... thexbox sfs waits for one side to slighly visible then loads the texture... thus meaning a huge amount less RAM usage and 2.5 times faster loading.
Games usually stream in a new area as the player enters they dont stream in partial textures as they are being required for rendering.
I deliberately never discussed the PS5 because I don't know enough about it. Does it have an exact same solution as SFS? Or something that's similar but not equally as efficient? If so how efficient is PS5's solution? Do they even need that since their SSD is already so fast? So many unanswered questions for me when it comes to PS5, which is why I always make the comparison with old systems.The problem is thinking this only applies to XSX and in comparison to PS5.
I think it's smart of MS to market it this way, but it's also a clear sign they haven't been getting the traction they thought they would because they keep coming out with the same info just in different colors.
True, what they say is that IF PS5 doesn't have a similar solution it will only utilize 3.6GB of the passed on 9, which is still less than 4.8. But like I said in my post above, I don't know if PS5 has something similar to SFSNo, that's not what people are saying. What people are saying is that the effective throughput is 12GB/s and comparing that to PS5's 9GB/s, saying somehow the Xbox has higher throughput and can better utilize. This is a lie in both accounts.
Lol what a beautiful pictorial way to show you have no idea what SFS is...
I guess SFS is to do with loading data .. and your pic shows data being loaded ...
of course none of that actually relates to what SFS is and why its such a huge advantage.
SFS looks what what is being rendered and automatically triggers a SSD read and hardware decomposition .. so rather than a program requesting all the data that may be needed to be loded in ... the game in realtime triggers the read requests.
Imagine a cube spinning with a texture on each side .. the ps5 like all traditional games will load all sides of the cube so they are ready to be rendered at any time ... thexbox sfs waits for one side to slighly visible then loads the texture... thus meaning a huge amount less RAM usage and 2.5 times faster loading.
Games usually stream in a new area as the player enters they dont stream in partial textures as they are being required for rendering.
its very clear, on aveage 2/3 of a texture load are never used, they were loaded but did not need to be.
By providing smaller blocks and realtime feedback of actual runtime game needs you can avoid loading over 60% of texture data.
If the xbox one x had this, it could get by with about 6 gigs of total ram rather than 12... with still the same quality textures rendered.
I deliberately never discussed the PS5 because I don't know enough about it. Does it have an exact same solution as SFS? Or something that's similar but not equally as efficient? If so how efficient is PS5's solution? Do they even need that since their SSD is already so fast? So many unanswered questions for me when it comes to PS5, which is why I always make the comparison with old systems.
True, what they say is that IF PS5 doesn't have a similar solution it will only utilize 3.6GB of the passed on 9, which is still less than 4.8. But like I said in my post above, I don't know if PS5 has something similar to SFS
Sorry Babes!Ohmylord! Did you just assume my gender here???? I'm flabbergasted!
It's she![]()
Games right now stream some textures just as they are needed .. thats why games often have texture pop in. You dont need to load data 15 minutes beforehand ... you load all the data you need right now and stream in as the player moves around the world .. which is then limited by bandwidth ( the amount of data that you can stream in) and latency ( the time taken to get the data after you request it).No Xbox could not, its latency was huge. You had to load allot of data in advance, usinuslaly 10-15 minutes of gameplay
Your now saying the prefetch amount is now 16 ms.
MS are really good at confusing and giving vague information.
Instant, 2.5 x something....something....some understamd, somethink its now 15 GBs lol - MS know what they are doing, confusing the easily confused.
Then how come that textures were being loaded and only 1/3 was being used?For context:
To load / create a model you need Shaders and Textures.
![]()
If you cull the shader because you don't need it, it means you are also not loading the texture, effectively only loading what you can see.
The SSD speeds allow for the loading of Mips as needed, so you don't need the full mip map on any circumstance, as you can procedurally load it.
You don't even need something like SFS to smooth the transition because the raw speed of the SSD is more than doubled on the PS5.
So no, there's no advantage in the Xbox, it's still a pretty big difference in IO Throughput, no matter how people spin it.
The xbox loads only the part of the high res mip map it needs .. so the effective textures stored in memory size goes from 16gig to 24-32gig.For context:
To load / create a model you need Shaders and Textures.
![]()
If you cull the shader because you don't need it, it means you are also not loading the texture, effectively only loading what you can see.
The SSD speeds allow for the loading of Mips as needed, so you don't need the full mip map on any circumstance, as you can procedurally load it.
You don't even need something like SFS to smooth the transition because the raw speed of the SSD is more than doubled on the PS5.
So no, there's no advantage in the Xbox, it's still a pretty big difference in IO Throughput, no matter how people spin it.
SFS is a filter that allows a larger mimmap to be blended when it arrives LATE.
Then how come that textures were being loaded and only 1/3 was being used?
I deliberately never discussed the PS5 because I don't know enough about it. Does it have an exact same solution as SFS? Or something that's similar but not equally as efficient? If so how efficient is PS5's solution? Do they even need that since their SSD is already so fast? So many unanswered questions for me when it comes to PS5, which is why I always make the comparison with old systems.
Because the thought of having to call out a bottom feeding Tilapia is always cringy.
Absolutely yes. The only bit that is specific to XSX are texture filters that help avoid artifacts and pop induring the process of blending the lower res texture to higher res one. It's a cool bit, but it's not really a game changer by itself.
Games right now stream some textures just as they are needed .. thats why games often have texture pop in. You dont need to load data 15 minutes beforehand ... you load all the data you need right now and stream in as the player moves around the world .. which is then limited by bandwidth ( the amount of data that you can stream in) and latency ( the time taken to get the data after you request it).
The cerny pics show the increase in bandwidth reduces the size of the RAM cache required in memory ( whoch applies to the xbox as well but to a lesser extent since its slower), SFS reduces the number and size of textures that need to be loaded in. SFS tackles the latency limitation, the raw speed of SSD ( for both consoles )tackles the bandwidth.
The relationship between bandwidth and latency becomes quite complex ... needless to say SFS reduces the effective advantage the ps5 raw throughput offers.
The xbox loads only the part of the high res mip map it needs .. so the effective textures stored in memory size goes from 16gig to 24-32gig.
SFS requires exclusive hardware and integration to perform the selective realtime SSD reads. MS has been clear about that and Sony has never claimed to have that capability.
You claiming something without justification or rationale that even Cerny never has.
In short your wrong and i suggest you read my ... or say Microsofts descriptions of how it works. They do mention they ALSO have hardware high quality filtering to slowly transition texture loads.... but that is clearly and obviously not what SFs is.
I agree, and get what you are saying. But does the PS5 have the capabilities to chose which parts of a mip it should load? Because that's where the efficiency is for the XSX. It can choose which sub portions of the mips you should load, while the PS5 stil loads the complete mip?Because your effective throughput was 100X less, so you needed to load everything the player may need to see in the next 30 seconds / 1 min / whatever time.
Imagine a rock
In current gen, the player can either stand still for 1 min, move at a slow pace and require a new mip in 1 min, or run fast and require that in 10 sec. Then, after those 10 seconds (worst case) the player can turn around and look at the other side of the rock. So, you need to account for worst case, so you load all mips for the next minute (lets say 4 levels) + all textures of every single object from all angles, as you need to account for that worst case scenario.
In new gen games, since you can load 1 sec ahead, you don't need to account for even 10 seconds of loading, so you don't need to load all mips for that rock, nor you need all angles.
I think they will talk about this 2 games optimized for PS5 in August, after they've had the initial first and very important month of sales on PS4. If they had done it before many would wait to buy them cheaper and better latter. Doing like that they can have a second wind.Can anyone answer my question? It's been bothering me and i can't seem to find the right answer.
Question: TLOU2 and GOT are easily ps5 lauch titles. A lot of people gonna buy ps5 with those games just to play these 2 games.
Why Sony didn't push these 2 games for ps5, since their lauch time are also very close to PS5's lauch?
They will sell lots of PS5 with these games and nobody would complain. The visual quality also top notch and all they need is a little squeeze in pixels and FRAMERATES with fast loading times.
I understand this is good for consumers like us who has ps4 and didn't wanna upgrade to ps5 just for these 2 games, but hey even if Sony push for ps5 lauch games, i wouldn't complain. At least for me and i believe many others IMO.
No it doesn't. It means that in current gen you'd need 13.5 times 2.5. yeah, it's 13.5 for games, not 16.
Also, geometry culling achieves the same goal. You're not loading bloody texture maps for geometry you're not rendering.
The SFS 2x multiplier is only being used for textures, SFS 2.5x does not include the overal memoryGeometry culling is common practice and nothing new the textures are in memory already before the geometry is culled. You are absolutely loading texture data for geometry that becomes culled. Have you ever waited for a level to load .. its loading the textures.... then a small amount of extra textures are streamed.
13.5 x 2.5 = 33.4 gbytes .. i was being conservative by saying effective 24-32 gigs equivalent ram usage.
Geometry culling is common practice and nothing new the textures are in memory already before the geometry is culled. You are absolutely loading texture data for geometry that becomes culled. Have you ever waited for a level to load .. its loading the textures.... then a small amount of extra textures are streamed.
13.5 x 2.5 = 33.4 gbytes .. i was being conservative by saying effective 24-32 gigs equivalent ram usage.
Games right now stream some textures just as they are needed .. thats why games often have texture pop in. You dont need to load data 15 minutes beforehand ... you load all the data you need right now and stream in as the player moves around the world .. which is then limited by bandwidth ( the amount of data that you can stream in) and latency ( the time taken to get the data after you request it).
The cerny pics show the increase in bandwidth reduces the size of the RAM cache required in memory ( whoch applies to the xbox as well but to a lesser extent since its slower), SFS reduces the number and size of textures that need to be loaded in. SFS tackles the latency limitation, the raw speed of SSD ( for both consoles )tackles the bandwidth.
The relationship between bandwidth and latency becomes quite complex ... needless to say SFS reduces the effective advantage the ps5 raw throughput offers.
To answer some of your questions, Microsoft said:Had some questions on SFS which I think are just starting to be answered on this page. The x2.5 figure needs context.
Presumably that is for a given frame? So no need for parts textures on the other sides of objects, no need for parts of textures hidden by other objects? What if you move? What if objects move? Then you need those textures and they need to be loaded in really quickly? The x2.5 figure doesn't apply to all the other stuff you need to load either does it - models etc, just textures? It also won't make any difference if you are loading up a game/level which fits entirely into memory or doesn't need to load textures just in time?
We were able to create and add new capabilities to the Xbox Series X GPU which enables it to only load the sub portions of a mip level into memory, on demand, just in time for when the GPU requires the data.
On pc you can stream some textures from RAM to GPU ram .. on the consoles there is no seperate ram .. so in console space its either loaded into ram or not.Yeah, super common, but you are culling before sending the information in to your GPU. You effectively don't load the shader nor the texture.
Anyway, you are again misrepresenting what they said, so there's no point in arguing. Keep living in your fantasy land and brace yourself for disappointment.
You can shout SFS all you want, but the raw speed is still 2.4GB/s, and 4.8 compressed. How does SFS makes up for that i/o difference.The relationship between bandwidth and latency becomes quite complex ... needless to say SFS reduces the effective advantage the ps5 raw throughput offers.
There is a reason that they did not not have a presentation like Sony after all to give to give a deep dive, All they can do it misinform the fans.I think the MS strategy is missinforming their fans with catchy phrases, and being not transparent with things that are worse on their side. There is literally no chance that XSX SSD/IO is on the same level as PS5. Thinking that its better is just dumb.
So beacuse some testures POP in late on current gen, your assuming textures are requested , fetched and used within a frame ?
Because every byte of that 4.8GB is being used by the GPU thanks to SFS (in case of textures)You can shout SFS all you want, but the raw speed is still 2.4GB/s, and 4.8 compressed. How does SFS makes up for that i/o difference.