• 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.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Exodia

Banned
Maybe he's talking about what it's missing compared to the PS5s?

I know the only difference isn't just the design of the actual SSD.

pNiNrOU.jpg


Does the Series X has all the hardware that the I/O complex has or something similar?

All what i mentioned plus BcPack and then this:
EYLybBJXkAspcwu


UE4's Nanite is literally what SFS was made for.

Additionally

52 CUs vs 36

320 Bus vs 256

560 Gb/s BW vs 440 Gb/s

These are night and day numbers for nanite. These are all numbers that benefits nanite's compute shader algorithms.
Nanite will run way faster on XSX than on PS5. This is without taking into account the incoming frequency bump on XSX GPU everyone is expecting because their current freq is so conservative. Even the biggest sony youtubers expect it.

I mean if XSX had a harddrive or a sata SSD and thats it, maybe you would have a case that the demo can't run on XSX at the same fidelity/quality or even better.
But with the high end SSD with thermal heatsink, hardware decompressor, DMA, BcPack, I/O improvements through Direct Storage and SFS (both hardware and software) implementation. There's absolutely no way.

As I have said nanite isn't pulling 5.5 GB/s every second. Almost all of what it uses is already in memory. Its only pulling new things into memoy that it needs and with most of the models/textures being reused throughout the scene. Its not pulling anything new from the SSD most of the time since it already has it in memory.
 
Last edited:

Sinthor

Gold Member
Its kinda strange people only talke only about the teraflop difference .. which is by itself is significant '' i still belevie the PS5 is a 9 TF mechine''
while ignoring other XSX hardware advantages like :
- 112GB/s higher mem bandwidth
- 3.1GPixels higher fillrate
- 58GTexels higher texture rate
Mark my words .. the XBX will be > 40 % faster

Ok, buddy.....tell us ALL about it! We'll wait for you and your buddies to get your stories straight.

 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
A very interesting tech released by Sony 4 days ago, could it be implemented for PSVR2? Or a new AI cam compatible with PS5? Sony still flexing with stacked sensors:




@BGs only let us know about it if it's not under NDA. Thanks


Sony does make the best imaging sensors in the world, so I am definitely interested in how this all incorporates into PSVR and the like.
 

Ascend

Member
All what i mentioned plus BcPack and then this:
EYLybBJXkAspcwu
In light of this, I think it's relevant that I post what I posted in another thread....

Regarding sampler feedback streaming... I'm not sure people get what it actually does... So I'm going to try and explain things step by step...

First, the transfer value given for the I/O slash SSD is basically a bandwidth value. The 2.4 GB/s raw value of the XSX means that at most, 2.4 GB of data can be transferred per second.
The compressed value does not magically increase the 2.4 GB/s. What it does is, compress the files to make them smaller. The max amount transferred is still going to be 2.4GB in a second. But when you decompress it again on the 'other side', the equivalent size of the data would have been 4.8GB if you could have transferred it as raw data. So effectively, it's 4.8GB/s, but in practice, 2.4GB/s is being transferred.

Then we get to SFS. First, take a look at what MS themselves say on it;

Sampler Feedback Streaming (SFS) – A component of the Xbox Velocity Architecture, SFS is a feature of the Xbox Series X hardware that allows games to load into memory, with fine granularity, only the portions of textures that the GPU needs for a scene, as it needs it. This enables far better memory utilization for textures, which is important given that every 4K texture consumes 8MB of memory. Because it avoids the wastage of loading into memory the portions of textures that are never needed, it is an effective 2x or 3x (or higher) multiplier on both amount of physical memory and SSD performance.

That last sentence is important. It is an effective 2x or 3x (or higher) multiplier on both amount of physical memory and SSD performance. Now what does that mean? If you want to stream part of textures, you will inevitably need to have tiling. What is tiling? You basically divide the whole texture in equally sized tiles. Instead of having to load the entire texture, which is large, you load only the tiles that you need from that texture. You then don't have to spend time discarding so many parts of the texture that you don't need after you spent resources loading it. It basically increases transfer efficiency. Tiled resources is a hardware feature that is present since the first GCN, but there are different tiers to it, the latest one being Tier 4, which no current market GPU supports. It is possible that the XSX is the first one to have this, but don't quote me on that. It might simply be Tier 3 still.

In any case. When tiling, the size of the tiles will determine how efficient you can be. The smaller the tiles, the more accurate you can be for loading, and the less bandwidth you will need. Theoretically, you can be bit-precise so to speak, but that's unrealistic and requires an unrealistic amount of processing power. There is an optimum there, but we don't have enough information to determine where that point is in the XSX. Apparently 64KB is typical. Microsoft is claiming that with SFS the effective mulitplier can be more than 3x. This means that, after compression (everything on the SSD will inevitably be compressed), you can achieve a higher than 3x 4.8GB/s in effective streaming. To put it another way, effectively, the XSX is capable of transferring 14.4 GB/s of data from the SSD. This does not mean that 14.4GB/s is actually being transferred. Just like with compression, the amount of transferred data is still max 2.4GB/s. What it does mean is that if you compare loading the 2.4GB/s of compressed tiled data to loading the full raw uncompressed data, you would need more than 14.4GB/s bandwidth to transfer the same amount of data, i.e. to ultimately achieve the same result. This also helps RAM use obviously, because you're loading everything from the SSD into RAM, and you would be occupying RAM space that you wouldn't have. Basically, it decreases the load on everything, including the already mentioned RAM, the CPU and GPU.

I don't see the 3x reduction in bandwidth usage by SFS as impossible. The thing is, it is not guaranteed, because if you're up close to an object and that object is all you see, you will not be able to avoid loading the highest quality of the textures nor the full texture, which means SFS will basically give zero advantage in such a case, since there is nothing to 'discard', or in better terms avoid loading to RAM. But for far away objects that have extremely detailed textures, SFS will likely reduce the required bandwidth by quite a lot. The PS5 will have its 8-9GB/s at all times, while the benefit of SFS is sort of situational, although calling it situational kind of downplays its capability a bit, since in the majority of cases/games, you won't be hugging walls constantly.

And here I'm going to speculate for a little bit, in comparison to the PS5. Tiled resources has been a feature in GPUs for a while. And the main part that allows this is sampler feedback. Now, you can have sampler feedback, but that does not mean that you necessarily have sampler feedback streaming. That would depend on the I/O. I recall Cerny mentioning that the GPU is custom built, and that they choose which features they wish to include and not include on the GPU. That implies they did not include everything that AMD has to offer in the GPUs. Most likely neither did MS. But if the PS5 still has this feature, then things regarding the SSDs remain proportionally the same between the compressed values in terms of performance difference, 9GB/s vs 4.8 GB/s. However, considering the beefy I/O of the PS5, it is actually quite possible that Sony ditched the tiled resources feature, and instead opted to beef up the I/O to allow the streaming of the full textures instead. If this is the case, then really, the difference in the SSD performance between the two consoles will be quite minimal. Why they would do that is beyond me though, so, most likely it's still in there. Whether they can stream it immediately is another story.

Just to confirm...;





So conclusion is, the PS5 can most likely do sampler feedback streaming, but would need CPU resources for it, while the XSX does it in hardware. And some more info;

"The general process of loading texture data on-demand, rather than upfront-all-at-once, is called texture streaming in this document, or streaming for short. It makes sense to use streaming in scenarios where only some of a texture’s mips are deemed necessary for the scene. When new mips are deemed necessary– for example, if a new object appears in the scene, or if an object has moved closer into view and requires more detail– the application may choose to load more-detailed parts of the mip chain.
There is a kind of Direct3D resource particularly suitable for providing control to applications under memory-constrained scenarios: tiled resources. To avoid the need to keep all most-detailed mips of a scene’s textures in memory at the same time, applications may use tiled resources. Tiled resources offer a way to keep parts of a texture resident in memory while other parts of the texture are not resident.

To adopt SFS, an application does the following:

  • Use a tiled texture (instead of a non-tiled texture), called a reserved texture resource in D3D12, for anything that needs to be streamed.
  • Along with each tiled texture, create a small “MinMip map” texture and small “feedback map” texture.
    • The MinMip map represents per-region mip level clamping values for the tiled texture; it represents what is actually loaded.
    • The feedback map represents and per-region desired mip level for the tiled texture; it represents what needs to be loaded.
  • Update the mip streaming engine to stream individual tiles instead of mips, using the feedback map contents to drive streaming decisions.
  • When tiles are made resident or nonresident by the streaming system, the corresponding texture’s MinMip map must be updated to reflect the updated tile residency, which will clamp the GPU’s accesses to that region of the texture.
  • Change shader code to read from MinMip maps and write to feedback maps. Feedback maps are written using special-purpose HLSL constructs.
 
Last edited:

Fake

Member
Why hint HZD2 based solely on the expansion? Bigger part of the first game wasn't even on a cold climate.

Iceberg. Read the follow up post.
If the "insider" is right it couldn't be a new IP, how can you highly anticipate something you never saw before?

Anyone can think of a Sony IP on an icy environment besides HZD's The Frozen Wilds? GOW?

'My guess'. Putting ice on a random picture don't help either.
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned
Sony does make the best imaging sensors in the world, so I am definitely interested in how this all incorporates into PSVR and the like.

Yup, and I'm using all those senors myself! It's dominant in the imaging sensor market share. Would love to know about this new sensor, I can see it in future smartphones if it's small enough.

148991.jpg
 
Last edited:

Sinthor

Gold Member
I don’t remember, was Sony talking about that feature in terms of it being a first party games only feature or were they saying every game will be done that way?

It's just been talked about like as 'you will be able to....' Not really clear if it's 1st party only or not. I wouldn't imagine it would be. Just a feature that CAN be supported by devs. If that's the case, certainly 1st party will support it more consistently, but that's my question. IF that's a reality this time I assume it's a call developers will have to make and support with their code.
 
T

Three Jackdaws

Unconfirmed Member
Amazing video analysis of the PS5 demo. Thank you for sharing it, man!

Dont miss it guys.
yeah he pretty much went on record saying the technical demo would only be achievable because of a blazingly fast SSD which could fill the VRAM instantly. I think more people should watch it, it's also consistent with what the EpicGames said and also Cerny about I/O streaming whilst turning and moving the camera. What's more interesting is he's a game engine developer so if anyone is an expert on this subject it's going to be him. Another interesting this is he is not even a Sony fan just look at his channel, he even stated a number of times he was not familiar with the PS5 specifications during the video.

But sure lets just carry on listening to dubious and shady sources from long retired "developers" and pseudo game technicians who have a history of fanboy war nonesense lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:
All what i mentioned plus BcPack and then this:
EYLybBJXkAspcwu


UE4's Nanite is literally what SFS was made for.
BcPack is good but is no enought to reach the delta with PS5 we had discussion about this many times here.

SFS is a good tool but is not unique and was made for many reason not only for Nanite.

52 CUs vs 36

320 Bus vs 256

560 Gb/s BW vs 440 Gb/s
According to Cerny hard to feed all those CU, the bandwidth of Xbox doesn't works as PS5 is not the same for all the situation, you
basically will have an average between the the time where the XSX access the slow memory and the fast memory, the last is need it
for feed more CUs so even you bandwidth per CU is almost the same

These are night and day numbers for nanite. These are all numbers that benefits nanite's compute shader algorithms.
Nanite will run way faster on XSX than on PS5. This is without taking into account the incoming frequency bump on XSX GPU everyone is expecting because their current freq is so conservative. Even the biggest sony youtubers expect it.
Xbox could be better than PS5 in some situation like those with more lights but in you best scenario will best around 18% but you had use less data streamed compared to
PS5 for the slower SSD bandwidth and the missing Coherency engines in the GPU.

I also expect in some moment Xbox jump the clock, we expect and this become and reality are different things because:

1)Increment the clock will increment in a significant quantity the power consumption and with this the heat remember not all the chips require the same quantity of energy
and this will increase in a way or another the failure rate.

2)They create his cooling solution around that clock is not like one the day they will do it without tested for enough time.

3) They already can use the 12.1 TF for marketing so why.

I mean if XSX had a harddrive or a sata SSD and thats it, maybe you would have a case that the demo can't run on XSX at the same fidelity/quality or even better.
But with the high end SSD with thermal heatsink, hardware decompressor, DMA, BcPack, I/O improvements through Direct Storage and SFS (both hardware and software) implementation. There's absolutely no way.

You basically the make a fallacy here called 'ad consequentiam' you cannot say from the conclusion that you think the XBOX should run the demo in a better way than PS5 as
an argument for than the spec sheets of XSX is superior in all way to the PS5.

As I have said nanite isn't pulling 5.5 GB/s every second. Almost all of what it uses is already in memory. Its only pulling new things into memoy that it needs and with most of the models/textures being reused throughout the scene. Its not pulling anything new from the SSD most of the time since it already has it in memory.
And you say this because you have access to the PS5 dev ki running the tech demo another fallacy called ad ignorantiam (any of use can prove how much the bandwidth is used in any moment).

For example If was Xbox I try to show my strengths in for example an scene running to 4k with raytracing so even if the PS5 do the same RT effects they will need to use around 18% less pixels[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:

HAL-01

Member
All what i mentioned plus BcPack and then this:
EYLybBJXkAspcwu


UE4's Nanite is literally what SFS was made for.

Additionally

52 CUs vs 36

320 Bus vs 256

560 Gb/s BW vs 440 Gb/s

These are night and day numbers for nanite. These are all numbers that benefits nanite's compute shader algorithms.
Nanite will run way faster on XSX than on PS5. This is without taking into account the incoming frequency bump on XSX GPU everyone is expecting because their current freq is so conservative. Even the biggest sony youtubers expect it.

I mean if XSX had a harddrive or a sata SSD and thats it, maybe you would have a case that the demo can't run on XSX at the same fidelity/quality or even better.
But with the high end SSD with thermal heatsink, hardware decompressor, DMA, BcPack, I/O improvements through Direct Storage and SFS (both hardware and software) implementation. There's absolutely no way.

As I have said nanite isn't pulling 5.5 GB/s every second. Almost all of what it uses is already in memory. Its only pulling new things into memoy that it needs and with most of the models/textures being reused throughout the scene. Its not pulling anything new from the SSD most of the time since it already has it in memory.
The conversation wasn't even about wether it can run the demo, it was about setting up unrealistic expectations about power differences.
But now that you've brought it up, those big numbers youve thrown around have little to do with nanite performance. Will most certainly help with lumen, though.
The big unknown right now is how does nanite performance scale with IO speed, and how may that affect XsX performance due to its slower ssd. We don't know, and we will not know for a while.
 
yeah he pretty much went on record saying the technical demo would only be achievable because of a blazingly fast SSD which could fill the VRAM instantly. I think more people should watch it, it's also consistent with what the EpicGames said and also Cerny about I/O streaming whilst turning and moving the camera. What's more interesting is he's a game engine developer so if anyone is an expert on this subject it's going to be him. Another interesting this is he is not even a Sony fan just look at his channel, he even stated a number of times he was not familiar with the PS5 specifications during the video.

But sure lets just carry on listening to dubious and shady sources from long retired "developers" and pseudo game technicians who have a history of fanboy war nonesense lol
Exactly, this is why I give this dev even more credibility. The guy did not know the PS5 specs and his channel is full of technical staff.

I post it again so people know about what we are talking about:

 
Last edited:

Sinthor

Gold Member
So, instant loading versus better graphics? I feel like many people would choose Better graphics but ultimately it comes down to games.

The point is if the average consumer can't SEE the difference in graphics, a few more pixels they can read about may not make as much of an impression as seeing a device that is 'instant on' and that loads games 'instantly' as well. All speculation though. We'll have to see as we get more info and start seeing real demos and gameplay of the same titles running and loading on the consoles. Most people I know though, if they can't see an actual difference, they would tend to think that the faster loading is 'more powerful.' Again, that's assuming they can't tell the difference with their eyes. We shall see!
 

Exodia

Banned
BcPack is good but is no enought to reach the delta with PS5 we had discussion about this many times here.

Its atleast 20% better than Kraken

SFS is a good tool but is not unique and was made for many reason not only for Nanite.

Its unique to MS and perfectly facilitates Nanite.

According to Cerny hard to feed all those CU, the bandwidth of Xbox doesn't works as PS5 is not the same for all the situation, you
basically will have an average between the the time where the XSX access the slow memory and the fast memory, the last is need it
for feed more CUs so even you bandwidth per CU is almost the same

Not according to benchmarks from Digital Foundry and other publications.
But specifically for Nanite which we are currently talking about. The demo is compute bound. So it disproportionately favours wide GPUs (XSX) over narrow (PS5). Compute shaders are no longer augmenting the FF pipeline, they are doing all the work. This will benefit wide (XSX) over clockrate (PS5).

Xbox could be better than PS5 in some situation like those with more lights but in you best scenario will best around 18% but you had use less data streamed compared to
PS5 for the slower SSD bandwidth and the missing Coherency engines in the GPU.

I'm not talking about lumen. I'm talking about Nanite compute shader algorithms that crunches billions of polygons into 20 million triangles and then attempts to draw them.
That scales with compute. XSX higher CUs is huge in those calculations happening in the compute shader. That means nanite algorithm will be faster on XSX regardless of the situation of SDD/I-O

1)Increment the clock will increment in a significant quantity the power consumption and with this the heat remember not all the chips require the same quantity of energy
and this will increase in a way or another the failure rate.

2)They create his cooling solution around that clock is not like one the day they will do it without tested for enough time.

3) They already can use the 12.1 TF for marketing so why.

Xbox One frequency was bumped and they had a regular cooling solution and nothing crazy like XSX gosh damn tower.
Secondly the bump happened in August. We are currently in May. The bump was 6%. If they did the same thing. It would bring them to 12.9
There's absolutely no way they are not bumping it atleast .5+ TFLOP. Especially with the variable boost clock of PS5 which no one expected. I'm pretty sure they expected PS5 to be 9 TFLOPs which was why they were so confident.

I'm sure they tested XSX running at different clock speeds besides their target speed just in case.

source.gif
 
Last edited:

Exodia

Banned
The conversation wasn't even about wether it can run the demo, it was about setting up unrealistic expectations about power differences.
But now that you've brought it up, those big numbers youve thrown around have little to do with nanite performance. Will most certainly help with lumen, though.
The big unknown right now is how does nanite performance scale with IO speed, and how may that affect XsX performance due to its slower ssd. We don't know, and we will not know for a while.

It does because Nanite disproportionately favours wide GPUs (XSX) over narrow (PS5). Compute shaders are no longer augmenting the FF pipeline, they are doing all the work. This will benefit wide (XSX) over clockrate (PS5) despite whatever happens with the SSD/IO performance.
 
T

Three Jackdaws

Unconfirmed Member
Tim Sweeney on the PS5:

"See the coverage of Mark Cerny's talk for technical details. The software and hardware stack go to great lengths to minimise latency and maximize the bandwidth that's actually accessible by games. On PC, there's a lot of layering and overhead."

Mark Cerny on the objectives of the PS5's SSD solution:

“What if the SSD is so fast, that as the player is turning around it’s possible to load textures within that split second

VP of engineering at EpicGames:

"Nanite allowed the artists to build a scene with geometric complexity that would have been impossible before, there are tens of billions of triangles in that scene and we couldn't simply have them all in memory at once and what we end up needing to do is streaming in triangles as the camera moves around the environment and the I/O capabilities of the PS5 are what allow us to achieve that level of realism."

A real game engine developer who had no knowledge of the PS5 specs when viewing the UE5 tech demo:

"Just having to sort through all this data, I'm sure this demo is like hundreds of gigabytes , because there is so much texturing, so much triangles, so just reading that data, it's interesting to look at the PS5 architecture, I'm sure a lot of this is being streamed in from disk (SSD), every frame, that SSD has to be blazingly fast, that relationship between disk and VRAM, has to be really tight and think it has to be specific to this architecture"

This is the last time I'll talk about the UE5 tech demo running on the PS5, here is a compilation of quotes with the some of the most credible sources on the I/O and SSD of the PS5 in relation to the UE5 tech demo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ToadMan

Member
Won't take any work unless you think the 2080ti is one of the slowest nvidia cards because it has lowest clocks. I admire the devotion to the net burst line thinking. Just like the 80cu rdna2 pc card will be lower clocked but best performance.

We’re talking about Xsex compared to PS5 right? I fail to see what a Graphics card designed for a general purpose PC has to do with usage model of a custom gpu in a game console.

In the case of Xsex vs PS5 gpus, the trade off of parallelism vs clock speed is not clear cut.

Wait will the Series X run games at a fixed 12TF’s or am I misunderstanding anything?

Technically speaking no. That slide is for people who don’t really understand what they’re looking at and just want a number to argue over.

12TFs is a hand calculated theoretical peak. They’re misusing the term “fixed” relating to clock speed and applying it to the theoretical number of operations that could be performed.
 
Last edited:

HAL-01

Member
It does because Nanite disproportionately favours wide GPUs (XSX) over narrow (PS5). Compute shaders are no longer augmenting the FF pipeline, they are doing all the work. This will benefit wide (XSX) over clockrate (PS5) despite whatever happens with the SSD/IO performance.
no one's arguing the XsX compute units couldn't outperform the PS5s standing on equal ground. Of course they can. But they're not standing on equal ground.
We know nanite is extremely reliant on fast asset streaming. And it is entirely possible that it could bottleneck the XsX in some way. As i said, we don't know yet, and no one can claim to know.
 

ToadMan

Member
Console warrior bullshit to one side

I am seeing many people saying the ps5 downclocks from 10tf which sounds like the most retarded thing as pretty much every computer device upclocks

But the official ps4 blog states Varaible up to 10tf meaning its base is probably 9tf and it will uplock under load

Anyone able to shed some light?

Light has been shed many times, but im
Not busy so once more ....

Sony have capped power consumption, and allowed clock to vary. Traditional design including the Xsex is to fix the clock and allow power to vary - it’s why fans get louder and louder as the processors work harder despite the clock rate remaining fixed (and 360/rrod if not handled properly for example).

Sony are predicting these machines will get so hot, limiting the power and thus the thermal output will be critical.

MS are predicting they’ve developed a cooling solution that no matter how developers misuse the hardware in future their fans will run fast and loud enough to protect the system from excessive thermal load.

In Sony’s case they expect that developers will optimise their code to ensure they remain within the power budget. In this case the PS5 will be running at 100% clock.

If developers should demand too much power from let’s say the GPU, there are two possible solutions the PS5 can implement.

1) Use SmartSwitch. In this case, if the cpu is using less than its max power budget, that power is reallocated to the GPU, the clock of both the CPU and GPU continue at 100%.

2) In the unlikely case that the cpu and gpu are both at max power use and the demand comes to exceed the power budget, the system downclocks instead to remain at max power and not exceed the cap. The theory is a 2% reduction in clock will produce around a 10% power reduction so one can get an idea of how much downclock will be necessary to stay within the power budget.

There is no boost mode, the clock speed can potentially droop if the power demand is exceeding the power cap. If this scenario is not taking place, the clocks are just as fixed as those of the Xsex.
 
Its atleast 20% better than Kraken
Only in textures while is working for an slower SSD you don't even know how those compare in speed decompression and compression.

Its unique to MS and perfectly facilitates Nanite.
Ad consequentiam again

Not according to benchmarks from Digital Foundry and other publications.
But specifically for Nanite which we are currently talking about. The demo is compute bound. So it disproportionately favours wide GPUs (XSX) over narrow (PS5). Compute shaders are no longer augmenting the FF pipeline, they are doing all the work. This will benefit wide (XSX) over clockrate (PS5).
Yes because DF guys has years working in AAA so they know more than Tim Sweeney and the demo is about to show REYES finally working and how and big stream data can increment the geometry if was about compute raw power they will choose a PC with 2080 TI and the XSX cannot feed his CUs in the same speed as PS5.

I'm not talking about lumen. I'm talking about Nanite compute shader algorithms that crunches billions of polygons into 20 million triangles and then attempts to draw them.
That scales with compute. XSX higher CUs is huge in those calculations happening in the compute shader. That means nanite algorithm will be faster on XSX regardless of the situation of SDD/I-O
I am talking a situation where I will agree the XSX should be better, OK so you already know exactly those triangles are reduced without wait the technical talk from Epic and again your CU are
with luck 18% better your definition or huge is very different than possible most the dictionaries of any language but even then you can give to them less data of your assets.

Xbox One frequency was bumped and they had a regular cooling solution and nothing crazy like XSX gosh damn tower.
Secondly the bump happened in August. We are currently in May. The bump was 6%. If they did the same thing. It would bring them to 12.9
There's absolutely no way they are not bumping it atleast .5+ TFLOP. Especially with the variable boost clock of PS5 which no one expected. I'm pretty sure they expected PS5 to be 9 TFLOPs which was why they were so confident.

I'm sure they tested XSX running at different clock speeds.

source.gif
Yes they tested for hundred or even thousands of hours that is why decide that clock I know this will surprise you but the possible risk of more failure rate
is possible not worth it, in this kind of render as Nanite you only will increment pixels in exchange of what more errors in production for gain what less around
4% pixels (yeah that is .5 TF) for those resolutions is just not worth it.

For the traditional render XSX is around 18% better using this new techniques looks like is less sorry for destroy your bubble, Cerny's bet apparently went well.

BTW good gif that impressive as an argument.
 
Last edited:

Exodia

Banned
Tim Sweeney on the PS5:

"See the coverage of Mark Cerny's talk for technical details. The software and hardware stack go to great lengths to minimise latency and maximize the bandwidth that's actually accessible by games. On PC, there's a lot of layering and overhead."

Mark Cerny on the objectives of the PS5's SSD solution:

“What if the SSD is so fast, that as the player is turning around it’s possible to load textures within that split second

VP of engineering at EpicGames:

"Nanite allowed the artists to build a scene with geometric complexity that would have been impossible before, there are tens of billions of triangles in that scene and we couldn't simply have them all in memory at once and what we end up needing to do is streaming in triangles as the camera moves around the environment and the I/O capabilities of the PS5 are what allow us to achieve that level of realism."

A real game engine developer who had no knowledge of the PS5 specs when viewing the UE5 tech demo:

"Just having to sort through all this data, I'm sure this demo is like hundreds of gigabytes , because there is so much texturing, so much triangles, so just reading that data, it's interesting to look at the PS5 architecture, I'm sure a lot of this is being streamed in from disk (SSD), every frame, that SSD has to be blazingly fast, that relationship between disk and VRAM, has to be really tight and think it has to be specific to this architecture"

This is the last time I'll talk about the UE5 tech demo running on the PS5, here is a compilation of quotes with the some of the most credible sources on the I/O and SSD of the PS5 in relation to the UE5 tech demo.

I don't understand how quoting someone who doesn't even know the spec of the PS5 is a positive.
Your bad assumption is thinking that the demo is running full throttle at 5.5 GB/s.
This is simply not true, its not how virtual textures works nor is it how virtual geometry works (which works just like how virtual textures works btw).

Remember that 2.5-3 GB of memory is reserved for the OS. That leaves just around 13 GB for gaming.
Are you telling me that the RAM is filled every two seconds? Seriously? With what? Repeated textures? Repeated Assets?

Most of the data you need is ALREADY in the memory and there's caching in advance for when you move the camera. What happens when you move is that new data is then pulled IN ADVANCE in preparation of you needing it.

Take for example the room with 500 statues with each being 33 million and having 24 8k texture. What you didn't know is that the statues were instanced meses and its not 24 8k textures * 500 in memory. Its just 24 8k textures. the same 24 8k Textures is reused. So it REMAINS IN MEMORY even as you turn.

How is it that you people don't understand?
The problem is people think the Ram is nuked every second and new data fill it.

In a room there will be many object reusing the same textures. In that specific room you have 500 reusing a bunch of textures in memory.
This is a demo with around 100 or so unique assets and 100 or so unique textures.
So many things are reused and only one copy of it exists in memory. its ridiculous. This is just a tiny vertical slice people!

This is kinda illustrates how it works. You’re only loading in new data coming in from the SSD that you need and just like virtual texturing has a tile cache, the virtual geometry system has a cache. That way if the camera shifts slightly you already have most of the tiles you need. This prevents as much loading as possible like you would in virtual texturing.

ucoln8kedwfglsrlxvm5.gif
 
Last edited:

Bo_Hazem

Banned
Sony just dropped this gigantic, intelligent library/archive. Would they have a jump in a new SSD architecture for the PC market? If someone is arguing that it doesn't produce NAND or other modules, we all know that big companies share supplies, no 100% independent company out there:

 
It does because Nanite disproportionately favours wide GPUs (XSX) over narrow (PS5). Compute shaders are no longer augmenting the FF pipeline, they are doing all the work. This will benefit wide (XSX) over clockrate (PS5) despite whatever happens with the SSD/IO performance.
Any official source to back that up?👆

Or it is another of your unsourced fantasy posts (44 since Saturday!) where you talk as a sort of guru in the matter?
 
Last edited:

Bo_Hazem

Banned
Depends if that actually happens though. I don't know if developers will make the textures better on the PS5 instead of the Series X.

Well Sony could use some hollywood 8K assets, if available as they are already on UE5 then they'll use them if the size overall is good to sustain them (game size).

Anyway, all of those multiplats will look like shit compared to Sony's first party, they're just not good enough when it comes to Sony, a major player in Hollywood and CGI with gigantic library of assets and expertise. They can use Quixel Megascans as well on their engines for supplementation.
 
Last edited:

HAL-01

Member
This is kinda illustrates how it works. You’re only loading in new data coming in from the SSD that you need and just like virtual texturing has a tile cache, the virtual geometry system has a cache. That way if the camera shifts slightly you already have most of the tiles you need. This prevents as much loading as possible like you would in virtual texturing.

ucoln8kedwfglsrlxvm5.gif
What you're showing is a gif demonstrating frustum culling, a technique which does not save memory.
For nanite to work, any assets that are not onscreen are removed from memory.
We know we're not streaming 5.5gb/s at a constant rate, that doesnt mean the speed isnt important.
hear me out: we know the 33 million poly statue is about 600mb. what if you had that, as well as a 600mb environment right behind you? If you were to turn around, and turning the camera around takes 1/4 of a second, Those 1.2gb would need to be loaded in 1/4 of a second.
Requiring a minimum IO speed of 4.8GB/S
 
I don't understand how quoting someone who doesn't even know the spec of the PS5 is a positive.
Your bad assumption is thinking that the demo is running full throttle at 5.5 GB/s.
This is simply not true, its not how virtual textures works nor is it how virtual geometry works (which works just like how virtual textures works btw).

Remember that 2.5-3 GB of memory is reserved for the OS. That leaves just around 13 GB for gaming.
Are you telling me that the RAM is filled every two seconds? Seriously? With what? Repeated textures? Repeated Assets?

Most of the data you need is ALREADY in the memory and there's caching in advance for when you move the camera. What happens when you move is that new data is then pulled IN ADVANCE in preparation of you needing it.

Take for example the room with 500 statues with each being 33 million and having 24 8k texture. What you didn't know is that the statues were instanced meses and its not 24 8k textures * 500 in memory. Its just 24 8k textures. the same 24 8k Textures is reused. So it REMAINS IN MEMORY even as you turn.

How is it that you people don't understand?
The problem is people think the Ram is nuked every second and new data fill it.

In a room there will be many object reusing the same textures. In that specific room you have 500 reusing a bunch of textures in memory.
This is a demo with around 100 or so unique assets and 100 or so unique textures.
So many things are reused and only one copy of it exists in memory. its ridiculous. This is just a tiny vertical slice people!

This is kinda illustrates how it works. You’re only loading in new data coming in from the SSD that you need and just like virtual texturing has a tile cache, the virtual geometry system has a cache. That way if the camera shifts slightly you already have most of the tiles you need. This prevents as much loading as possible like you would in virtual texturing.

ucoln8kedwfglsrlxvm5.gif
If u would have read the article with tim sweeney he mentions ps5 ssd with extremely low latency plays a part. Many textures are streamed directly and dont go through ram making 8k texture possible. Which in fact will not be possible on xsx due to speed of ssd and latency issues it has by io being out side the apu physically while ps5 io is right next to cpu and gpu.
 

bitbydeath

Member
I don't understand how quoting someone who doesn't even know the spec of the PS5 is a positive.
Your bad assumption is thinking that the demo is running full throttle at 5.5 GB/s.
This is simply not true, its not how virtual textures works nor is it how virtual geometry works (which works just like how virtual textures works btw).

Remember that 2.5-3 GB of memory is reserved for the OS. That leaves just around 13 GB for gaming.
Are you telling me that the RAM is filled every two seconds? Seriously? With what? Repeated textures? Repeated Assets?

Most of the data you need is ALREADY in the memory and there's caching in advance for when you move the camera. What happens when you move is that new data is then pulled IN ADVANCE in preparation of you needing it.

Take for example the room with 500 statues with each being 33 million and having 24 8k texture. What you didn't know is that the statues were instanced meses and its not 24 8k textures * 500 in memory. Its just 24 8k textures. the same 24 8k Textures is reused. So it REMAINS IN MEMORY even as you turn.

How is it that you people don't understand?
The problem is people think the Ram is nuked every second and new data fill it.

In a room there will be many object reusing the same textures. In that specific room you have 500 reusing a bunch of textures in memory.
This is a demo with around 100 or so unique assets and 100 or so unique textures.
So many things are reused and only one copy of it exists in memory. its ridiculous. This is just a tiny vertical slice people!

This is kinda illustrates how it works. You’re only loading in new data coming in from the SSD that you need and just like virtual texturing has a tile cache, the virtual geometry system has a cache. That way if the camera shifts slightly you already have most of the tiles you need. This prevents as much loading as possible like you would in virtual texturing.

ucoln8kedwfglsrlxvm5.gif

PS5 is completely different from the old way of running games that you described above.

71340_233_understanding-the-ps5s-ssd-deep-dive-into-next-gen-storage-tech.png


No longer is it bound to loading a huge amount of assets in advance aka load screens, it is now fast enough to stream content every second you move and yes it is constant even for the memory as can be seen below.

71340_52_understanding-the-ps5s-ssd-deep-dive-into-next-gen-storage-tech.png


The PS5 is completely centred around streaming and all bottlenecks were said to be addressed such as adding Cache Scrubbers to the GPU so it too can keep up with the constant changes in streaming.

71340_512_understanding-the-ps5s-ssd-deep-dive-into-next-gen-storage-tech.png


This is a brand new architecture for gaming and a lot of people don't seem to get that.
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned
I have a question about 8k textures. If the game has 8k textures but the game resolution is 2k or 4K won’t the textures only match the resolution of the game? Won’t 8k textures be a waste?

Sorry if this is a dumb question

Has nothing to do with resolution, for example Halo Infinite seems to have a mix of 1080p/2K/4K assets pretty compressed that look nice at some parts, insanely sharp on another, crappy on others. Overall, it has a very bad lighting and looks more current gen with that overall cartoonish color, but it's Native 4K.

For 8K assets, the more you zoom in, the more you can render those micro pixels sharp and clear instead of it being exposed and blurry. Do you need 8K assets? Maybe for some models. Making insane work with UNCOMPRESSED Hollywood-level 8K assets means you'll smash 4K assets like nothing.
 
Last edited:
T

Three Jackdaws

Unconfirmed Member
I don't understand how quoting someone who doesn't even know the spec of the PS5 is a positive.
Your bad assumption is thinking that the demo is running full throttle at 5.5 GB/s.
This is simply not true, its not how virtual textures works nor is it how virtual geometry works (which works just like how virtual textures works btw).

Remember that 2.5-3 GB of memory is reserved for the OS. That leaves just around 13 GB for gaming.
Are you telling me that the RAM is filled every two seconds? Seriously? With what? Repeated textures? Repeated Assets?

Most of the data you need is ALREADY in the memory and there's caching in advance for when you move the camera. What happens when you move is that new data is then pulled IN ADVANCE in preparation of you needing it.

Take for example the room with 500 statues with each being 33 million and having 24 8k texture. What you didn't know is that the statues were instanced meses and its not 24 8k textures * 500 in memory. Its just 24 8k textures. the same 24 8k Textures is reused. So it REMAINS IN MEMORY even as you turn.

How is it that you people don't understand?
The problem is people think the Ram is nuked every second and new data fill it.

In a room there will be many object reusing the same textures. In that specific room you have 500 reusing a bunch of textures in memory.
This is a demo with around 100 or so unique assets and 100 or so unique textures.
So many things are reused and only one copy of it exists in memory. its ridiculous. This is just a tiny vertical slice people!

This is kinda illustrates how it works. You’re only loading in new data coming in from the SSD that you need and just like virtual texturing has a tile cache, the virtual geometry system has a cache. That way if the camera shifts slightly you already have most of the tiles you need. This prevents as much loading as possible like you would in virtual texturing.

ucoln8kedwfglsrlxvm5.gif
There are so many problems with your posts but I'll let those who are more technically minded and more informed than me to debunk your fantasies about the Series X magical compression and decompression, I don't want to sound like an expert and make stuff up like "others" on this thread.

I rely on the opinions of experts and people who work hands on with software, heck they even developed it unlike those who rely on unsubstantiated opinions and fantasy speculation.

As for me quoting the developer who is not familiar with the PS5 specs, this is indeed more than positive. A) because he is a game engine developer and B) because even he understands that the tech demo relies on a ultra fast SSD solution
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom