Support NeoGAF

[lynux3]

Do you have a source for that? I know the numbers, but do you have a source that says it's 8-9GB/s on average?

Really dude? Like... really?

 

[TBiddy]

Really dude? Like... really?

Really. Instead of acting like a 14-year old, please point me in the right direction. I'm well aware of the compressed speeds in the PS5 and the XSX, but do you (or anyone) know that these are the average speeds we can expect or are we talking best case scenarios?

And yes, I know it says "typical" in the spec sheet, but that isn't really useful.

 

[Panajev2001a]

And we don't know nothing about MS technique. So saying nothing can match Sony ssd is stupid

The problem is that yet again you either conceptualise total enemy obliteration, to the point you end up making up less and less realistic scenarios up, or you seem to start seeing red.

They said BCPack, for textures, and zlib, for everything else, and MS quoted in their specs sheet 4.8 GB/s of compressed bandwidth and that the BCPack encoder cannot push out more than a theoretical throughput of 6 GB/s.
So we have a good idea about both and literature is out there around all these compression approaches, you are looking for magic.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Really. Instead of acting like a 14-year old, please point me in the right direction. I'm well aware of the compressed speeds in the PS5 and the XSX, but do you (or anyone) know that these are the average speeds we can expect or are we talking best case scenarios?

And yes, I know it says "typical" in the spec sheet, but that isn't really useful.

Likely best case scenarios for both considering an ideal mix of data. If developers found a way to abuse the HW and get a bit more it would not be unheard of.

 

[lynux3]

Really. Instead of acting like a 14-year old, please point me in the right direction. I'm well aware of the compressed speeds in the PS5 and the XSX, but do you (or anyone) know that these are the average speeds we can expect or are we talking best case scenarios?

And yes, I know it says "typical" in the spec sheet, but that isn't really useful.

Yes, these are considered ideal speeds in ideal conditions. The source is Mark Cerny's "The Road to PS5" GDC presentation. Xbox Series X's SSD specifications are also considered as such with the source being Microsoft.

 

[TBiddy]

Yes, these are considered ideal speeds in ideal conditions. The source is Mark Cerny's "The Road to PS5" GDC presentation. Xbox Series X's SSD specifications are also considered as such with the source being Microsoft.

That was what I figured. So the average speeds will probably be somewhat lower than that on both consoles.

 

[lynux3]

That was what I figured. So the average speeds will probably be somewhat lower than that on both consoles.

It's possible. It's hard to say without knowing what the benchmark was for the results they've obtained. Some studios could probably push it a few notches up and some not. It makes it more the interesting, IMO. Who can take the most advantage of the toys they have in front of them.

 

[Goliathy]

Do you have a source for that? I know the numbers, but do you have a source that says it's 8-9GB/s on average?

00:16:53,700

let's talk compression for a moment PlayStation 4 used Z live as its compression format. We decided to use it again on PlayStation 5 but on my 2017 tour of developers I learned about a new format called Kraken from rad game tools. it's like Z libs smarter cousin simple, similar types of algorithms but about 10% better compression which is pretty big.
that means 10% more game on the UHD blu-ray disc or on the SSD. kraken had only been out for a year but it was already becoming a de-facto industry standard. half of the teams I talked to or either using it or getting ready to evaluate it.
So we hustled and built a custom decompressor into the i/o unit, one capable of handling over 5 gigabytes of crack and format input data a second after decompression that typically becomes eight or nine gigabytes

Source:

 

[-kb-]

That was what I figured. So the average speeds will probably be somewhat lower than that on both consoles.

For SSDs its actually not that hard to get the max speed provided the file is large enough. I would expect the actual average speed to be better than expected.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

These aren't considered "theoretical" in the least. These are considered "ideal" conditions; literally the baseline for each SSD. If these were theoretical we'd be seeing 22GB/s for PS5 and 6GB/s for XSX both based on their physical limits and whatever compression methods they're touting whether that be Kraken or BCPack. It's only "fuck all" in the end because its not in favor of your preferred system. Who are you trying to kid here?

However, of course you have zero idea of expectations or expectations of others because you have no idea in the first place.

The irony in this is palpable, because not one, and I mean NOT ONE of you guys stanning for this SSD nonsense ANYWHERE on the internet can quantify where it would provide some kind of development divergence. Not even just a meaningful divergence, an actual divergence of any kind.. You guys also gloss over the rendering implications like it hasn't been brought up fifty different ways.

Not even a real loading advantage is a given here because of speeds we're talking about not only in general but comparatively. Sony keeps going on about eliminating loading in its entirety, I mean what's the multiplication of load time on effectively zero? This shit is going to eat you guys alive in the end.

This mess is an overengineered marketing tool and you're like flies on shit just soaking it up. You don't even understand it but because X number is higher than Y you just run with it.

 

[oldergamer]

Understanding BCn Texture Compression Formats – Nathan Reed’s coding blog

Pixels and polygons and shaders, oh my!

www.reedbeta.com

Bcpack can have up to 8 to 1 compression

 

[TBiddy]

For SSDs its actually not that hard to get the max speed provided the file is large enough. I would expect the actual average speed to be better than expected.

Do you expect the game files to be one big file or a large amount of small files?

 

[sinnergy]

I am just laughing hard to all these SSD talks. At the end of the day,the GPU will draw everything not an SSD. I hate to break you but XSX is significantly superior than PS5 on that department. The customizations which MS made on XSX’s SSD will be MORE THAN ENOUGH when you combine it with better GPU,CPU and memory. An SSD will not be enough to save the day if you have inferior GPU,CPU and memory.

And that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

But for 399 the PS5 is a terrific deal!

 

[JägerSeNNA]

And that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

But for 399 the PS5 is a terrific deal!

It won’t be that cheap if they can achieve What they told on that GDC tech talk.

 

[lynux3]

The irony in this is palpable, because not one, and I mean NOT ONE of you guys stanning for this SSD nonsense ANYWHERE on the internet can quantify where it would provide some kind of development divergence. Not even just a meaningful divergence, an actual divergence of any kind.. You guys also gloss over the rendering implications like it hasn't been brought up fifty different ways.

Not even a real loading advantage is a given here because of speeds we're talking about not only in general but comparatively. Sony keeps going on about eliminating loading in its entirety, I mean what's the multiplication of load time on effectively zero? This shit is going to eat you guys alive in the end.

This mess is an overengineered marketing tool.

Just because you have zero clue as to the possibilities of an SSD (and I'm not just talking about PS5 here) doesn't mean there isn't an advantage compared to today's game design and development. Now whether that translates into an advantage on the PS5 vs. XSX from 3rd parties is TBD, but I suspect it'll be about as large as it is in compute power going by your skepticism (ie: negligible).

I think your problem is that the SSD advantage is not on Series X thus it is "fuck all". If it were turned around we wouldn't hear the end of it. The reality is only few studios out of the majority will be able to answer this question and it just so happens that a lot of the discourse around here use them as ammunition. First party studios are everything if you're a warrior.

Additionally, I think you need to pay less attention to the marketing and more to the developer comments. Forget about the buzzwords and acronyms; they're the easiest ticket to shillville. There have been multiple developers excited about the streaming capabilities (of both boxes), loading times and even a few skeptical about zero load times because, well lets be real, not every studio is equal and their designs are different then the intention.

 

[sinnergy]

It won’t be that cheap if they can achieve What they told on that GDC tech talk.

Than they have a real problem, maybe 449 is still save but higher with that TF count and smaller SSD size ... not a good look.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

Just because you have zero clue as to the possibilities of an SSD (and I'm not just talking about PS5 here) doesn't mean there isn't an advantage compared to today's game design and development. Now whether that translates into an advantage on the PS5 vs. XSX from 3rd parties is TBD, but I suspect it'll be about as large as it is in compute power going by your skepticism (ie: negligible).

I think your problem is that the SSD advantage is not on Series X thus it is "fuck all". If it were turned around we wouldn't hear the end of it. The reality is only few studios out of the majority will be able to answer this question and it just so happens that a lot of the discourse around here use them as ammunition. First party studios are everything if you're a warrior.

Additionally, I think you need to pay less attention to the marketing and more to the developer comments. Forget about the buzzwords and acronyms; they're the easiest ticket to shillville. There have been multiple developers excited about the streaming capabilities (of both boxes), loading times and even a few skeptical about zero load times because, well lets be real, not every studio is equal.

I think I'm going to maintain what I've said because it remains a constant, and what also remains as a constant if none of you can quantify how this bandwidth difference would actually translate into a tangible divergence in game development that wouldn't equally apply to both.

It's fast, but they're both fast. They're both an order of magnitude beyond anything which is really even necessary. This also comes right back around to the rendering implications, what is going to be loading in to such a magnitude that this GPU could even handle displaying? It's pure and total nonsense.

I couldn't give less of a shit what developers are saying because if you actually sift through these tweets they all link back to a heavy connection related to either manufacturer. It's shill marketing in full force, it's worse than here because these smart idiots know better but they still have to back their brand.

 

[oldergamer]

Here is info on Rdo compressed block textures

Improving the compression of block-compressed textures Revisited

ADD: the best solution for this now is our new product Oodle Texture I'm leaving this post for historical reference, but it is now obso...

cbloomrants.blogspot.com

 

[lynux3]

I think I'm going to maintain what I've said because it remains a constant, and what also remains as a constant if none of you can quantify how this bandwidth difference would actually translate into a tangible divergence in game development that wouldn't equally apply to both.

It's fast, but they're both fast. They're both an order of magnitude beyond anything which is really even necessary. This also comes right back around to the rendering implications, what is going to be loading in to such a magnitude that this GPU could even handle displaying? It's pure and total nonsense.

I couldn't give less of a shit what developers are saying because if you actually sift through these tweets they all link back to a heavy connection related to either manufacturer. It's shill marketing in full force, it's worse than here because these smart idiots know better but they still have to back their brand.

On the contrary, you've yet to demonstrate how it won't quantify as a tangible difference (if any) other than "just because this is how I see it" despite developer reactions. I mean if you have some information you're withholding to the public or know better please do enlighten us.

Consider this. The baseline is being uplifted from 20-100MB/s to 2.4-5.5GB/s. That's pretty sick.

While there have been developers from both camps doesn't mean their opinions/thoughts on the matter make it any less relevant. There have also been developers outside of those camps praising it. The idea here push developers to rethink the possibilities without being confined to 20-100MB/s. They've been stuck to that standard for over a decade. There's been plenty of examples on design philosophy around the new standards versus the old lately made public and I'm sure there are a shit ton more that aren't.

With that said, I don't think this is going to change over night, as in within the next 2 years, this is something that's going to be done after cross-gen transition is completed. I think both Sony and Microsoft's first party studios are conjuring up a storm of amazing ideas.

 

[ethomaz]

Do you have a source for that? I know the numbers, but do you have a source that says it's 8-9GB/s on average?

Cerny presentation.

 

[ethomaz]

That was what I figured. So the average speeds will probably be somewhat lower than that on both consoles.

The best case scenario Cerny talks is 22GB/s.

8-9GB/s is the average/typical.

 

[TBiddy]

The best case scenario Cerny talks is 22GB/s.

8-9GB/s is the average/typical.

It's highly unlikely that 8-9GB/s is the average speed, if Sony presents the speed as "typical". As a few others posted above, this is likely under ideal circumstances - just like on the XSX.

 

[ethomaz]

It's highly unlikely that 8-9GB/s is the average speed, if Sony presents the speed as "typical". As a few others posted above, this is likely under ideal circumstances - just like on the XSX.

Under ideal circumstances Cerny said they could reach 22GB/s.
That average is not even that impressive... 8-9GB/s is only 30-40% compression.
It is lower compression than Xbox average.

 

[TBiddy]

Under ideal circumstances Cerny said they could reach 22GB/s.
That average is not even that impressive... 8-9GB/s is only 30-40% compression.
It is lower compression than Xbox average.

I suspect the 22GB/s number is about as trustworthy as Microsofts XB1 memory bandwidth of 272 GB/s.

 

[ethomaz]

I suspect the 22GB/s number is about as trustworthy as Microsofts XB1 memory bandwidth of 272 GB/s.

You quoted me about the best case scenario.
That is what they got in Lab with some ideal data that not reflect 90% of what games uses.

 

[TBiddy]

You said the best case scenario.
That is what they got in Lab with some ideal data that not reflect 90% of what games uses.

Best case scenario is about the 9GB/s in my mind. I don't care much for theoretical limits of any given hardware, just like I thought the bandwidth claim from Microsoft was bogus. It's marketing and no-one should fall for that.

 

[ethomaz]

Best case scenario is about the 9GB/s in my mind. I don't care much for theoretical limits of any given hardware, just like I thought the bandwidth claim from Microsoft was bogus. It's marketing and no-one should fall for that.

8-9GB/s is average of what devs can get.
What that means what most game data will compress... 30-40% compression.

Theoretical limit is way over 22GB/s... 80% compression gives you about 25GB/s for example... 90% compression give you 55GB/s... for example text data that had over 80% compression ratio even with non light compression algorithms.

22Gb/ is what they got in the best scenario with some game data but that is really very rare.

 

[TBiddy]

8-9GB/s is average of what devs can get.
What that means what most game data will compress... 30-40% compression.

Until we see actual numbers, I consider all specs from Microsoft and Sony to be best case scenario for developers.

 

[Dante83]

So aside from SSD, what advantage does the ps5 really have over the beast XSX?

 

[ZywyPL]

So aside from SSD, what advantage does the ps5 really have over the beast XSX?

 

[ethomaz]

Until we see actual numbers, I consider all specs from Microsoft and Sony to be best case scenario for developers.

These are actual numbers from Cerny presentation lol

 

[it_wasn't_me]

So aside from SSD, what advantage does the ps5 really have over the beast XSX?

Basically nothing, even SSD

 

[TBiddy]

These are actual numbers from Cerny presentation lol

So were the numbers from Microsoft with their bandwidth. When I say actual numbers, I mean actual measured numbers from a 3rd party, not marketing numbers.

 

[ethomaz]

So were the numbers from Microsoft with their bandwidth. When I say actual numbers, I mean actual measured numbers from a 3rd party, not marketing numbers.

I don’t believe you will ever get that... it is not that important.

MS give you numbers too they algorithm can average with game data at 4.8GB/s (50% compression) and can in best case scenario with game data reach 6GB/s (60% compression).

 

[TBiddy]

I don’t believe you will ever get that... it is not that important.

Of course it is important. Otherwise people will start accepting any numbers as gospel, because someone from their favorite company said it.

 

[ethomaz]

Of course it is important. Otherwise people will start accepting any numbers as gospel, because someone from their favorite company said it.

The compression numbers are reliable... there is nothing out of this world.

 

[TBiddy]

The compression numbers are reliable... there is nothing out of this world.

We're not talking compression ratios here. If you wish to accept marketing numbers as the truth, feel free to do so, but I don't think you did the same when Microsoft added the bandwidth of the ESRAM and the DDR together. Did you?

 

[Goliathy]

So aside from SSD, what advantage does the ps5 really have over the beast XSX?

The SSD is just on paper better. It will make loading times a little bit shorter. Other than that it will not provide any difference for Multiplatform games.

 

[darkinstinct]

Understanding BCn Texture Compression Formats – Nathan Reed’s coding blog

Pixels and polygons and shaders, oh my!

www.reedbeta.com

Bcpack can have up to 8 to 1 compression

So XSX SSD is actually up to 19.2 GB/s.

 

[it_wasn't_me]

People are downplaying TF and hardware power so. Lol


And we don't know nothing about MS technique. So saying nothing can match Sony ssd is stupid

Don't waste your time. You can't win against blind fanboys.

They just imagining that PS5 SSD will change everything and XSX is doomed

Difference is small. Does that bothers you, hm? Btw. we already know which solutions XSX has for compression. BCpack and Zlib, that's why you get 4.8 GB/s for SSD in XSX.

 

[48086]

Difference is small. Does that bothers you, hm? Btw. we already know which solutions XSX has for compression. BCpack and Zlib, that's why you get 4.8 GB/s for SSD in XSX.

You don't know to what extent BCPack has been optimized to work with the xsx hardware.

 

[it_wasn't_me]

You don't know to what extent BCPack has been optimized to work with the xsx hardware.

We have the numbers for both. Didn't MS said before that their SSD will work as virtual RAM? Yes, they did, last year. Also, they've mentioned that Velocity tech too and how BCpack and Zlib works.

 

[48086]

We have the numbers for both. Didn't MS said before that their SSD will work as virtual RAM? Yes, they did, last year. Also, they've mentioned that Velocity tech too and how BCpack and Zlib works.

 

[it_wasn't_me]

He is referring to raw compression numbers. And the numbers are......4.8 GB/s for XSX. Looks like Xbox fans are seeing the problem in these numbers.

 

[Reindeer]

Wait, wasn't Series X supposed to be all "brute force"?

 

[48086]

He is referring to raw compression numbers. And the numbers are......4.8 GB/s for XSX. Looks like Xbox fans are seeing the problem in these numbers.

Lol ok.

 

[it_wasn't_me]

Lol ok.

Just check his previous tweets in post 41. All of them are referred to compression numbers.

 

[Three]

Not even a issue.

All sony tries to do is emulate ram and that's about it. They won't be able to render anything from that SSD on the fly into the v-ram at the speeds that the gpu and cpu needs, so they have to park the data in the v-ram pool anyway which is the ultimate problem with the concept people are championing for here. SSD's just aren't remotely fast enough to do it on the fly.

This is also why cerny stated that its pure for loading speeds improvements because on the fly isn't possible.

All u will see next gen is probably a bit more ram requirements on PC and that's about it. But that's normal for PC market.

a SSD connected to ram that can swap data in out freely and reserve it for the gpu/cpu that needs it is far more superior and frankly consoles don't have the ram for it.

They showed on the fly asset loading in the spiderman demo.

 

[JägerSeNNA]

Difference is small. Does that bothers you, hm? Btw. we already know which solutions XSX has for compression. BCpack and Zlib, that's why you get 4.8 GB/s for SSD in XSX.

The difference is not that small if you consider an unstable GPU performance of the PS5. XSX’s larger GPU is another big advantage when RT enabled.

 

[it_wasn't_me]

The difference is not that small if you consider an unstable GPU performance of the PS5. XSX’s larger GPU is another big advantage when RT enabled.

Unstable????