• 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.

Xbox Velocity Architecture - 100 GB is instantly accessible by the developer through a custom hardware decompression block

semicool

Banned
And this is just ( one of ) the reason why i had right to doubt about Discord. Even members of ordinary Xbox Discord are doing that. Continuously spreading FUD about PS5 is astonishing
Again that post AND THIS thread is about XVA, SFS etc...in the XSX. Not about PS5 directly. Only PS5 mentions are for legitimate comparisons.
 
Last edited:
I recommend people take a look at Digital Foundry discussion about Senua Saga trailer back in December.
They were impressed by the level of environmental details and if that was possible in real time game play.
It seems it is possible with Nanites or something like that, even though Senua Saga is probably using Unreal 4.
 

THEAP99

Banned
here was this whole drama in Meta GAF, where the THEAP99 THEAP99 THEAP99 THEAP99 and his fans tried to get me banned from GAF first with out of context screenshot from my discord then with a photoshop of me being admin in XboxEra.
I didn't try getting anyone banned from anything. i only did what i was told to do so that I would be cleared from whatever drama was going to take place
 

Redlight

Member
lol no it can run on XSX, PC and laptops too (even better in some cases) .... your buying into the sony marketing crap.....

Just for the sake of clarity. The partial quote you're responding to was part of a longer argument pointing out that Epic have never made the claim that the Unreal 5 demo couldn't be done on the Series X. :)
 
D

Deleted member 775630

Unconfirmed Member
Interesting. I hadn't seen it yet. When he says:

If the speed of texture loading, after decompression, is around 3.8 GiB/s, that would allow loading 64 MiB per frame at 60fps. This is fast enough to load 1000 tiles each frame, about the equivalent of a single 4096x4096 texture.

How many tiles are their normally in a frame?
 

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!
Ljubomir Peklar, designer at Ebb Software
Series X is a very balanced system. The SSD solution(referring to Xbox Velocity Architecture) is an incredible improvement when it comes to loading assets, and as it stands now it seems that there will be complete parity between PC and Series X versions of the game.
 
Last edited:

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!
I dunno but so far we've seen State of Decay in 10 seconds on Series X and Spider man loading instantly on ps5.
You realize that Spiderman was optimized for the PS5? None of the games shown for Xbox was optimized. It was just regular quality of life functions just by being played on the machine. Only way to judge is to see how long it takes to go from XSX games.
Not to mention State of Decay 2 has load times from 40 seconds to around a minute, way more than Spiderman.
Why didnt Sony used Days Gone instead ? Xbox used the Xbox One X version of State of Decay 2, while Sony optimized Spiderman for PS5. Ultimately, Xbox took the worst offender of their platform and ran it unoptimized, Sony took the best thing and still optimized it for PS5.
 

sinnergy

Member
Why didnt Sony used Days Gone instead ? Xbox used the Xbox One X version of State of Decay 2, while Sony optimized Spiderman for PS5. Ultimately, Xbox took the worst offender of their platform and ran it unoptimized, Sony took the best thing and still optimized it for PS5.
I agree, but you could say it’s bad practice for marketing ;) as people like to be wowed. And like the best, So Sony did better in that regard. Now if that reflects real word performance is a whole different matter.
 
Last edited:
I dunno but so far we've seen State of Decay in 10 seconds on Series X and Spider man loading instantly on ps5.

6.5 seconds, and IIRC they saved the game and then did a load state. Either way, 6.5 seconds falls more or less exactly in line with the 2.4 GB/s raw sequential read speed MS's advertised.

The SpiderMan load was 0.8 seconds. Not instant, though very fast. But it was seemingly for a slice of the game.
 
Last edited:
I dunno but so far we've seen State of Decay in 10 seconds on Series X and Spider man loading instantly on ps5.

It wasn’t 10 seconds, and it wasn’t even optimized yet. We don’t even know what that Spidey demo fully entailed. Was it the full game?

State of Decay 2 goes from loading in about 45 seconds on Xbox One X to just seven seconds on Xbox Series X. Even more impressively, this is with no extra work or optimization done, that's just how much State of Decay 2 benefits when installed on an Xbox Series X.
 

THEAP99 THEAP99


I think you two need to take that stuff here and I'll join you if I think it's worth it.
 
And they could have done better. Obviously they made a really bad choice with that demo no idea how they came to that decision.

It's up to them to prove that they can do better.

How was it a bad demo? It loaded in 6.5 seconds, right in line with the drive's stated sustained raw sequential read speed. And it still wasn't optimized, at that.

People are blowing the SOD2 thing completely out of proportion and seemingly forgot how to count and what the other numbers already provided were when trying to count the time. Could they have done another game and not do a save > load state? Yes. But it's not like the demo was a disaster, either.
 

SirTerry-T

Member
I dunno but so far we've seen State of Decay in 10 seconds on Series X and Spider man loading instantly on ps5.
Ten whole seconds eh? That's practically a lifetime. How will gamers cope?

Hands up who remembers trying...and sometimes failing to load games from a cassette tape?

Hmmm, not many hands going up, thought as much.
 
How was it a bad demo? It loaded in 6.5 seconds, right in line with the drive's stated sustained raw sequential read speed. And it still wasn't optimized, at that.

People are blowing the SOD2 thing completely out of proportion and seemingly forgot how to count and what the other numbers already provided were when trying to count the time. Could they have done another game and not do a save > load state? Yes. But it's not like the demo was a disaster, either.

Well Microsoft should have shown a more optimized demo to give people an idea of what the I/Os capabilities are.

That's why called it a bad demo because they could have done a much better job demonstrating the I/O.
 
The ps4 Spiderman demo load was 8.10 seconds on a PS4 (im sure that that was NOT the whole game)

The optimized demo loaded in .8 seconds.

The State of Decay demo was a 45 second full game load.

That same game with no optimization loaded in 6.5 seconds. Sure an optimized load would be less... if an optimized load of the same game approached 4.5 seconds (optimization reducing load by 2 seconds) then the ratio is virtually the same.
 

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!
And they could have done better. Obviously they made a really bad choice with that demo no idea how they came to that decision.

It's up to them to prove that they can do better.
I guess going with the game that has the biggest loading screens to showcase faster loading times is a very logical choice and not make everything look like a PR.
 
Last edited:
I guess going with the game that has the biggest loading screens to showcase faster loading times is a very logical choice and not make everything look like a PR.

Well I keep hearing that it wasn't optimized. And if it was then we would have gotten much better results.

Are you suggesting that it was optimized?
 

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!
Well I keep hearing that it wasn't optimized. And if it was then we would have gotten much better results.

Are you suggesting that it was optimized?
It was not, but would they actually optimize all the games from 3 generations of Xbox? Its better to show what the tools can do
 
Can't be that difficult to put together an optimized demo to show off smart delivery and lightning fast load times.

It would have been cool if they did a side by side comparison of the upgraded version of the game versus the vanilla version of it.

Agreed. I think they were trying to show off the raw improvement which a developer would receive before doing anything.

I think that is also a very sound strategy... then everything became a benchmark against the competitor. Unfortunate that thats where we are.

Can't win either way really.
 
MS probably didn’t anticipate that them loading Xbox One games in 8 seconds without any optimization would be used by some to attack the console.

It was the 1st showing of the load times and they should have optimized the demo better. It's just weird that they didn't optimize it in the first place.
 

Dee_Dee

Member
Lol they show a game loading in 8 seconds on the SeX vs 40 seconds on the One X WITHOUT BEING OPTIMIZED and yet people still find something to complain about. Y’all are something else.

Luckily they have their hardware talk in August and will hopefully demonstrate what it will be like for games that are actually built to take advantage of XVA.
 

Ascend

Member
It was the 1st showing of the load times and they should have optimized the demo better. It's just weird that they didn't optimize it in the first place.
It was used to show backwards compatibility. And for some reason, no one ever reads the description, which says clear as day that it does not represent a game optimized for the XSX.

Man how the quality of this thread has degraded.
 
Last edited:

geordiemp

Member
The ps4 Spiderman demo load was 8.10 seconds on a PS4 (im sure that that was NOT the whole game)

The optimized demo loaded in .8 seconds.

The State of Decay demo was a 45 second full game load.

That same game with no optimization loaded in 6.5 seconds. Sure an optimized load would be less... if an optimized load of the same game approached 4.5 seconds (optimization reducing load by 2 seconds) then the ratio is virtually the same.


Noticed this thread still cannot count to ten yet.
 

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!

Noticed this thread still cannot count to ten yet.
A side-by-side load of State of Decay 2 illustrates that on an Xbox One X, it take about 52 seconds to load the open-world game from its main menu. On Xbox Series X, that load time is slashed to about 10 seconds.
Stop wasting our time if you dont have anything meaningful to add.
 
Last edited:
Why do different articles have different times?

State of Decay 2 goes from loading in about 45 seconds on Xbox One X to just seven seconds on Xbox Series X. Even more impressively, this is with no extra work or optimization done, that's just how much State of Decay 2 benefits when installed on an Xbox Series X.


Spidey demo

This is why, when PlayStation revealed how fast the PlayStation 5 is able to load a level in its game Marvel's Spider-Man - in just one second compared to the PS4 Pro's already-speedy five seconds - players were impressed.


I’ve read an article that said 7 seconds for SoD, I’ve read another that said 11, and everything in between. They also have different times for the One X performance as basis of comparison too
 
Last edited:

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!
OP updated with who James Stanard, Richard Geldreich and Mike Evans. Link to more Richard Geldreich tweets.
PS : James Stanard is Graphics Optimization R&D and Engine Architect at Microsoft. Richard Geldreich has worked at Space X, Valve and Ensemble. Mike Evans has worked for AMD and NASA.
More and even more from Richard Geldreich on Xbox Series X hardware decompression techniques.
 
Last edited:

Bernkastel

Ask me about my fanboy energy!
Man how the quality of this thread has degraded.
I would say it has gotten better. The first 17 pages were an absolute shitshow, with one post(after MiyazakiHatesKojia says devs like PS5 more) where someone reposts a ResetEra post about how many devs have liked PS5 more full of links to out of context tweets and RestEra posts from devs including this from Mike Evans(how are these even relevant to the thread?). After Page 17 people actually started talking about XVA. It definitely got a bit better.
 

Ascend

Member
I would say it has gotten better. The first 17 pages were an absolute shitshow, with one post(after MiyazakiHatesKojia says devs like PS5 more) where someone reposts a ResetEra post about how many devs have liked PS5 more full of links to out of context tweets and RestEra posts from devs including this from Mike Evans(how are these even relevant to the thread?). After Page 17 people actually started talking about XVA. It definitely got a bit better.
Fair enough. I was mainly comparing it to the bulk of the discussion that started to happen after page 20 or so. There were some good discussions there. After page 45 it all turned to the same discussions in the PS5/(not)XSX speculation thread.

In any case...

How many tiles are their normally in a frame?
That depends on a LOT of things. It's even hard to give a ball park figure.

If you have a wall, and you're directly in front of it, you might have a bunch of repeating mips, meaning you don't have that many unique tiles. Anything that is repeated doesn't require multiple loadings.
On the other hand, if the wall is extremely large and you're looking at it at an angle, you'd have to load multiple mip levels with different details in order to not overtax the GPU with unnecessary calculations for the mips that are located far away from the camera.

And you're gonna have draw distance be an influence on this, since generally the more draw distance the higher the chance unique assets need to be loaded.
If you have lots of different foliage it's gonna become more taxing... Too many variables.

I guess the absolutely worst case scenario that you will never reach is if each pixel requires a different tile. For practical purposes, all we can really say is that it's way way WAY below that.
I have no idea how many tiles you would need to load on average. But considering Microsoft measured the amount of textures that are actually used compared to the ones that are loaded, they most likely have a very good idea how much tiles require to be loaded each frame, and I don't think they'd deliberately under-design the console.
 
Why do different articles have different times?




Spidey demo




I’ve read an article that said 7 seconds for SoD, I’ve read another that said 11, and everything in between. They also have different times for the One X performance as basis of comparison too

Lack of consistency and poor counting, that's all. I started getting into keeping track of that stuff myself after the Rose Tico "controversy" in Rise of Skywalker where people kept saying she had, what, 20 or so seconds of screen time? Maybe it was 60, can't remember. Well, those people couldn't count, because I remember counting something like 147 seconds of screen time for her. That's over two minutes.

Is it still shittingly low for screen time? Absolutely. But it was still over 2x what the Twitter drama was going on about, and that was the point. A lot of these people today, don't even want to get their numbers straight, if it means they can gin up a bit of controversy.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
I dunno but so far we've seen State of Decay in 10 seconds on Series X and Spider man loading instantly on ps5.
And once again, old game has to be stored into a drive and new one has to be loaded, it's not one game loading...
 
Top Bottom