• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Analysis Hardware [DF] Can the Slowest PS5 SSD Upgrade Run Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart?

Oct 26, 2018
22,739
31,950
885
Sony never said R&C required 5.5 GB/s SSD specifically either. This suddenly seems like a race to the lowest common denominator spec. What is the point of a new generation again?
Youre right. Just like the vague statements that GT7 has RT. Then a year later, its actually RT only in replays. Technically Sony is correct. They never said RT is in driving gameplay.

But when claims are made with a feature, the average person will assume that feature (in it's entirety) is required. And in this case it's a 5.5 gb/s SSD.

If Apple says your iPhone can only be charged using an Apple cord that comes in the box. A cord that runs at 5.5 million gigwatts, its not dumb for people to assume the phone requires that official cord, especially if Apple has been touting their charging cord is the most powerful cord on the market at the time.

Turns out third party charging cords running at 3.2 million gigawatts works too. And just as well.

It makes sense for a user to assume they need the official cord or it wont work.

But due to vagueness, what Apple slyly meant was the iPhone just requires any "cord" as long as it fits, and not the Apple one that came in the box they've been promoting as a key feature all year.
 
Last edited:

JTCx

is on threat of perm for trolling. Please report.
Feb 24, 2016
1,308
3,826
620
DF: Ratchet & Clank can run with the slower SSD. People conclusion: 7x faster SSD is useless. Now let's talks about raytracing on console. What we have seen until now show it's identical on both console. So we can say 52 CUs are useless too? 🤷‍♀️ I follow your logic people.
Bu..but...untapped 25tf of ray tracing!

 

On Demand

Member
Dec 12, 2013
6,136
4,270
705
And right now a 3.2 gb/s SSD for $60 works perfectly fine with R&C. Even though R&C was the showstopper game Sony promoted the whole time as the big boomer for its 5.5 gb/s SSD.



A 3.2GB drive that’s in the PS5. SSD speed and the I/O aren’t separate. They work together. Once again, these videos are meaningless and tells absolutely nothing about the 5.5GB SSD potential. Nobody even knows how many gigabytes a second the damn game is using.


Clown show is still going on in this thread I see.

🧨🎪 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡🎪 🧨
 
Jun 1, 2016
2,865
3,817
795
I didn't design the PS5's custom IO.

Cerny and his team did. You assuming 5GB/s not being necessary, or you not seeing 100% of the IO being used are just that, assumptions. People that made them know what they were doing.
And your oh no it's actually easier but will take 4 years for some reason to figure out is also assumptions.
 

On Demand

Member
Dec 12, 2013
6,136
4,270
705
Demon’s Souls Remake loads data at 3GB to 4GB a second compressed. The developers at Bluepoint explain how Sony made sure to remove all bottlenecks from the system otherwise it wouldn’t work as well. The decompression needed cannot be done in software, only hardware.



So much for the SSD and I/O being “overkill.”

So yes in turns out that PS5 I/O “is that damn good“ DeepEnigma DeepEnigma
 

Md Ray

Member
Nov 12, 2016
4,138
13,345
785
And your oh no it's actually easier but will take 4 years for some reason to figure out is also assumptions.
Nope, I never said "it's easier" or any specific timeframe, not sure where you're getting that from. Go back and look at my posts.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
50,761
110,635
1,510
Demon’s Souls Remake loads data at 3GB to 4GB a second compressed. The developers at Bluepoint explain how Sony made sure to remove all bottlenecks from the system otherwise it wouldn’t work as well. The decompression needed cannot be done in software, only hardware.



So much for the SSD and I/O being “overkill.”

So yes in turns out that PS5 I/O “is that damn good“ DeepEnigma DeepEnigma
james franco sandwich GIF
 

staticshock

Member
Jun 24, 2020
100
339
340
What will be done better on the XSX? I do not think the last scene will ever been done better on XSX if that part is heavenly using the streaming tech. You guys hope too much, want too much, because you're struggling that the PS5 ends up doing better than you expected. By saying that the XSX would do better anyway is a bit of a pathetic way to be able to call something out.

Without RTXI/O? i'm not so sure about the last part of the demo at this time. But for that they should release a side by side:



This has been debunked 100x over by every Epic Games UE Engineer and the creator of Nanite himself and yet you are STILL pushing FUD. Whats wrong with you people?

 
Last edited:

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,536
4,132
725
The Netherlands
This has been debunked 100x over by every Epic Games UE Engineer and the creator of Nanite himself and yet you are STILL pushing FUD. Whats wrong with you people?


Nothing has been debunked. Running fine in editor mode, from start to finish. The PS5 demo was running on a PS5 devkit showing gameplay and all game features enabled, like VFX, animation, physics, character animation, sound, etc etc. It was a breakdown in editor not showing the same gameplay as we’ve seen on the PS5.

Big difference when a lot what they’ve shown in the editor was with s lot of disabled features. Run any demo in UE4 editor and you can move the camera over the scene, thats something totally different then a compiled version running with all gameplay feature on the console itself. The section were she is flying/running is not present at all in the breakdown. That’s because they might be able to run it on pc, but the demo was developed for PS5, so assets wouldn’t be streamed faster on pc due to missing the fast I/O.

We have not seen a side by side comparison. And that means running the same gameplay demo on both pc and PS5.

If you go back in this thread i already showed a lot. A breakdown of the map running in editor on pc, is not the same a equal gameplay.

While the Epic guys tried to explain that it’s running fine. They still confuse people with that word. Yes it’s running in editor. UE5 is running on pc fine. Since some people claimed that UE5 was exclusive for PS5 and thats nonsense. But the word “running” bad worded. It runs the created scene on PC, not the optimised gameplay demo. You create and and run your code on devkit.
 
Last edited:

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
9,468
11,770
815
Nothing has been debunked. Running fine in editor mode, from start to finish. The PS5 demo was running on a PS5 devkit showing gameplay and all game features enabled, like VFX, animation, physics, character animation, sound, etc etc. It was a breakdown in editor not showing the same gameplay as we’ve seen on the PS5.

Big difference when a lot what they’ve shown in the editor was with s lot of disabled features. Run any demo in UE4 editor and you can move the camera over the scene, thats something totally different then a compiled version running with all gameplay feature on the console itself. The section were she is flying/running is not present at all in the breakdown. That’s because they might be able to run it on pc, but the demo was developed for PS5, so assets wouldn’t be streamed faster on pc due to missing the fast I/O.

We have not seen a side by side comparison. And that means running the same gameplay demo on both pc and PS5.

If you go back in this thread i already showed a lot. A breakdown of the map running in editor on pc, is not the same a equal gameplay.

While the Epic guys tried to explain that it’s running fine. They still confuse people with that word. Yes it’s running in editor. UE5 is running on pc fine. Since some people claimed that UE5 was exclusive for PS5 and thats nonsense. But the word “running” bad worded. It runs the created scene on PC, not the optimised gameplay demo. You create and and run your code on devkit.


so assets wouldn’t be streamed faster on pc due to missing the fast I/O.

DDR4 3200mhz
25,6gbps
25 nano seconds access time.

PS5 SSD:
5,5gbps 8-9gb compressed.
25.0000.0000 nana seconds access time.

All your physics and animation focus are useless, pc will run it better and perform better because its far faster hardware then consoles.

Epic demo for the PS5 argument was that PC couldn't run it for the simple fact, it didn't had SSD's at 5,5gbps at the time, or compression tech which put PC far back. think about 3,5gbps versus 9gbps of the PS5.

Little those sony warriors knew, PC has system ram that shits all over SSD's and the entire demo could be easily loaded into it. What compression? hell u could strip the memory requirement by just preloading it with a slower SSD non stop, PS5 doesn't have memory for it PC does.

Now with PCI-e 4.0 and soon ddr5 and 5.0, we are currently already sitting at 7gbps ssds soon at 14gbps raw, so the only thing that's left is compression tech from NVIDIA and more optimizations from Microsoft.

Here's a example of DDR in action.




This is why i stated back in the day, sony should not have focused on SSD performance the way they did but instead invest massively into GPU performance because that will be the main problem this generation. Why?
4k 60fps RT.

Both Microsoft and sony should have ditched AMD and moved to nvidia.
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
19,543
13,926
2,110
DDR4 3200mhz
25,6gbps
25 nano seconds access time.

PS5 SSD:
5,5gbps 8-9gb compressed.
25.0000.0000 nana seconds access time.
Sure, you can require more main RAM and do a giant initial load to fill it up enough to deal with the lower disk bandwidth… and? The point of the work MS and Sony did was to be able to have less than 16 GB of RAM dedicated to the games total. This has been discussed plenty of times already, I do not think splitting hairs about this is necessary IMHO.
 
Last edited:

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,536
4,132
725
The Netherlands
DDR4 3200mhz
25,6gbps
25 nano seconds access time.

PS5 SSD:
5,5gbps 8-9gb compressed.
25.0000.0000 nana seconds access time.

All your physics and animation focus are useless, pc will run it better andperform better because its far faster hardware then consoles.

Epic demo for the PS5 argument was that PC couldn't run it for the simple fact, it didn't had SSD's at 5,5gbps at the time, or compression tech which put PC far back. think about 3,5gbps versus 9gbps of the PS5.

Little those sony warriors knew, PC has system ram that shits all over SSD's and the entire demo could be easily loaded into it. What compression or SSD? SSD will just feed the memory.

Now with PCI-e 4.0 and soon ddr5 and 5.0, we are currently already sitting at 7gbps ssds, so the only thing that's left is compression tech from NVIDIA and more optimizations from Microsoft.

It's all handled bij the I/O complex, something pc's doesn't have to offload all that to the custom controller without having the CPU constantly running for decompression or ram being used heavenly. It is all handled by the I/O complex to ensure that data can be extracted constantly and ram usage remains low.

Are you seriously going to tell me that a simple PC with DDR4 3200MB/s does that scene a little better than the PS5? Btw, what do you want to prove with that gif? that you can use the editor camera speed over a empty area with some rock assets?

I think I was very clear with what I meant, and that was this:


This part showed the SSD combined with the I/O. As far as i know, we have no comparison so at this point this demo runs only on PS5 (the full gameplay demo and not just a editor breakdown with a lot of stuff disabled). And it was not even final devkit back then...

so the only thing that's left is compression tech from NVIDIA and more optimizations from Microsoft.

Why is this necessary if, in your opinion, it would all work well? So why do we need RTXI/O? No if I read your post, it's another PC fanatic who can't have it that the PS5 has a chip that takes care of features the PC just can't do quickly at the moment, without taxing the CPU for it or Or fill up the memory completely.

And if you want to know, I game on both PC and console and I was able to run the UE5 editor myself. In editor all gameplay features are not enabled so also no heavier. If you throw a lot of assets in the editor, you can make it as heavy as you want.
 
Last edited:

assurdum

Member
Aug 14, 2020
3,864
6,642
545
Sony really should give at least 12 months PS+ to some of the guys here for all their hard work.
MS should really give for free at least a series X too for some of the guys here for all their hard work, because whatever it's better on ps5 hardware automatically it's useless and unnecessary because a launch game doesn't push it. The hypocrisy it's really strong on both sides it seems but sure let's blame just Sony fans.
 
Last edited:

Tschumi

Gold Member
Jul 4, 2020
6,290
6,767
815
If they certify it, like, their act of certifying this ssd as being compatible automatically pre-nulifies the premise of this video, Df sans
 

BlackTron

Member
Jun 30, 2016
2,181
2,566
510
Of course the slowest approved SSD can run Rift Apart. It can work any PS5 game.

If it couldn't, it would not be designated as a PS5 compatible drive lol. Isn't this obvious?

EDIT: Didn't realize this was not a Sony approved drive. By "slowest PS5 SSD upgrade" it seemed implied that the SSD was, you know...for PS5 lol.
 
Last edited:

staticshock

Member
Jun 24, 2020
100
339
340
Nothing has been debunked. Running fine in editor mode, from start to finish. The PS5 demo was running on a PS5 devkit showing gameplay and all game features enabled, like VFX, animation, physics, character animation, sound, etc etc. It was a breakdown in editor not showing the same gameplay as we’ve seen on the PS5.

Big difference when a lot what they’ve shown in the editor was with s lot of disabled features. Run any demo in UE4 editor and you can move the camera over the scene, thats something totally different then a compiled version running with all gameplay feature on the console itself. The section were she is flying/running is not present at all in the breakdown. That’s because they might be able to run it on pc, but the demo was developed for PS5, so assets wouldn’t be streamed faster on pc due to missing the fast I/O.

We have not seen a side by side comparison. And that means running the same gameplay demo on both pc and PS5.

If you go back in this thread i already showed a lot. A breakdown of the map running in editor on pc, is not the same a equal gameplay.

While the Epic guys tried to explain that it’s running fine. They still confuse people with that word. Yes it’s running in editor. UE5 is running on pc fine. Since some people claimed that UE5 was exclusive for PS5 and thats nonsense. But the word “running” bad worded. It runs the created scene on PC, not the optimised gameplay demo. You create and and run your code on devkit.
It requires more hardware to run things in editor mode.

And the features weren't disabled they were just played out because by the time they got to those location, the demo sequence already played through. All you do is spread FUD and disinformation that the creator of Nanite has to come out and scold you.

Brian Karis on Twitter: "Same goes for missing interactive elements, VFX, etc that get triggered through gameplay scripting. Also I was in 1080p for video streaming from my WFH machine which doesn't have a capture card. UE5 has gotten *substantially* better since we showed this demo. No "downgrades"." / Twitter

Daniel Wright Epic Game engineer literally told you that "In editor so performance is lower in editor than it would be in game" at 10 secs. Moving the camera in editor mode is more resource heavy than the slow panning movement in game.

Brain Karis the creator of Nanite literally said Valley of the ancient (a project of acouple weeks with acouple developers) is more taxing and less optimized than Lumen in the land of Nanite (years long project with hundreds of developers spanning multiple teams and companies).

The VFX, animation, sound, character animation, physics and gameplay has nothing to do with Nanite and its streaming.

Regardless, the released Valley of the Ancient has the same VFX, the same animation system, same character, more expensive physics and more gameplay.
And the other UE engineers have told you that Valley of the Ancient is more resource heavy than Lumen in the land of Nanite.

Here is Andrew another Unreal Engine Engineer



Keyword: "The new demo is heavier than the old one. The overdraw is pretty nuts and there are more lights with full screen coverage in the dark world segment."


secondly as I have said before...
Every thing you listed as reasons that PC can't run the demo. EXISTS in the valley of the ancient Demo. Infact more things exist there than the PS5 demo.
Teleportation, Attack Blast ability, explosion, drone flying mode, boss enemy.

1) Valley has physics
2) Valley needs only 3 GB Ram and 7 GB VRAM (I/O).
3) Valley has destruction,
4) Valley has Sound and music
5) Valley has VFX (the ancient ball is using the same Niagara particle system as the Portal)
6) Valley has different and dynamic lighting
7) Valley has walk, jump, attack, sit, drone flying
8) Valley has explosions which is more expensive

And its obvious, it takes 64GB to run Valley of the Ancient but only 3GB RAM and 7GB VRAM to run the compiled version.

1) The entire nanite data for the lumen in the land of nanite demo was 6.14 GB.

2) The entire nanite data for the Valley of the Ancient demo was a bit smaller than Land of Nanite demo.

3) However The entire texture data for Valley of the Ancient demo was a bit larger than Land of Nanite demo.

4) The compiled packaged demo of valley of the ancient is in the mid 20s GB compared to the 100 GB project file.

5) Valley of the ancient demo had more assets than Land of Nanite demo.

6) Valley of the ancient compiled version requires only 3 GB system ram and 7 GB VRAM.

The bugs and birds VFX has also been released and you can drag that into Valley of the ancient if you would like




But no continue to spread FUD and misinformation even after dozens of UE engineers have come out to correct you.
Clearly you're the maker of UE and nanite and the demos, not them.
 
Last edited:

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,536
4,132
725
The Netherlands
It requires more hardware to run things in editor mode.

And the features weren't disabled they were just played out because by the time they got to those location, the demo sequence already played through. All you do is spread FUD and disinformation that the creator of Nanite has to come out and scold you.

Brian Karis on Twitter: "Same goes for missing interactive elements, VFX, etc that get triggered through gameplay scripting. Also I was in 1080p for video streaming from my WFH machine which doesn't have a capture card. UE5 has gotten *substantially* better since we showed this demo. No "downgrades"." / Twitter

Daniel Wright Epic Game engineer literally told you that "In editor so performance is lower in editor than it would be in game" at 10 secs. Moving the camera in editor mode is more resource heavy than the slow panning movement in game.

Brain Karis the creator of Nanite literally said Valley of the ancient (a project of acouple weeks with acouple developers) is more taxing and less optimized than Lumen in the land of Nanite (years long project with hundreds of developers spanning multiple teams and companies).

The VFX, animation, sound, character animation, physics and gameplay has nothing to do with Nanite and its streaming.

Regardless, the released Valley of the Ancient has the same VFX, the same animation system, same character, more expensive physics and more gameplay.
And the other UE engineers have told you that Valley of the Ancient is more resource heavy than Lumen in the land of Nanite.

Here is Andrew another Unreal Engine Engineer



Keyword: "The new demo is heavier than the old one. The overdraw is pretty nuts and there are more lights with full screen coverage in the dark world segment."


secondly as I have said before...
Every thing you listed as reasons that PC can't run the demo. EXISTS in the valley of the ancient Demo. Infact more things exist there than the PS5 demo.
Teleportation, Attack Blast ability, explosion, drone flying mode, boss enemy.

1) Valley has physics
2) Valley needs only 3 GB Ram and 7 GB VRAM (I/O).
3) Valley has destruction,
4) Valley has Sound and music
5) Valley has VFX (the ancient ball is using the same Niagara particle system as the Portal)
6) Valley has different and dynamic lighting
7) Valley has walk, jump, attack, sit, drone flying
8) Valley has explosions which is more expensive

And its obvious, it takes 64GB to run Valley of the Ancient but only 3GB RAM and 7GB VRAM to run the compiled version.

1) The entire nanite data for the lumen in the land of nanite demo was 6.14 GB.

2) The entire nanite data for the Valley of the Ancient demo was a bit smaller than Land of Nanite demo.

3) However The entire texture data for Valley of the Ancient demo was a bit larger than Land of Nanite demo.

4) The compiled packaged demo of valley of the ancient is in the mid 20s GB compared to the 100 GB project file.

5) Valley of the ancient demo had more assets than Land of Nanite demo.

6) Valley of the ancient compiled version requires only 3 GB system ram and 7 GB VRAM.

The bugs and birds VFX has also been released and you can drag that into Valley of the ancient if you would like




But no continue to spread FUD and misinformation even after dozens of UE engineers have come out to correct you.
Clearly you're the maker of UE and nanite and the demos, not them.

Then were is the side by side comparison? The Valley demo heavier is not relevent since nothing in that scene needs to go fast. Also the transition takes longer then the Rifts in Rift Apart.

Pc’s won’t load that scene faster at the point i showed then the PS5. They need to fill up the ram completely something that is not necessary on the PS5. The Valley demo is a slow paced one, not comparable with the PS5 demo.

The PS5 will always have the lead in this for streaming assets quickly in and out. People still buying SATA SSD’s, and not everyone has a RTX card for RTXI/O in the future. Every PS5 had this dedicated silicon onboard. This is the part were pc’s will still struggle for years. You can’t say “pc is better”, there is no standard “pc”.
 
Last edited:

John Wick

Member
Jul 23, 2015
2,039
2,154
560
United Kingdom
DDR4 3200mhz
25,6gbps
25 nano seconds access time.

PS5 SSD:
5,5gbps 8-9gb compressed.
25.0000.0000 nana seconds access time.

All your physics and animation focus are useless, pc will run it better and perform better because its far faster hardware then consoles.

Epic demo for the PS5 argument was that PC couldn't run it for the simple fact, it didn't had SSD's at 5,5gbps at the time, or compression tech which put PC far back. think about 3,5gbps versus 9gbps of the PS5.

Little those sony warriors knew, PC has system ram that shits all over SSD's and the entire demo could be easily loaded into it. What compression? hell u could strip the memory requirement by just preloading it with a slower SSD non stop, PS5 doesn't have memory for it PC does.

Now with PCI-e 4.0 and soon ddr5 and 5.0, we are currently already sitting at 7gbps ssds soon at 14gbps raw, so the only thing that's left is compression tech from NVIDIA and more optimizations from Microsoft.

Here's a example of DDR in action.




This is why i stated back in the day, sony should not have focused on SSD performance the way they did but instead invest massively into GPU performance because that will be the main problem this generation. Why?
4k 60fps RT.

Both Microsoft and sony should have ditched AMD and moved to nvidia.
So how expensive do you think a console with 32gb ram gonna cost? Or with a Nvidia GPU? I think you've split yourself from reality with this PC is better at everything nonsense because you can buy a part that costs more than the PS5 alone. Bravo with this logic. Looks like little PC warriors are upset. Reminds me of when Linus went out of his way to find an SSD that was faster than the PS5's. Except it cost a few grand and only about 0.01% PC owners would have it. Bravo!
The PC couldn't stream in the data quick enough if it had total 16gb ram for whole system. It has to load everything into ram first.
Now why didn't Epic simply run the demo with a PC with 16gb ram total and a NVME drive both at the same time with a PS5?
 
Last edited:

John Wick

Member
Jul 23, 2015
2,039
2,154
560
United Kingdom
It requires more hardware to run things in editor mode.

And the features weren't disabled they were just played out because by the time they got to those location, the demo sequence already played through. All you do is spread FUD and disinformation that the creator of Nanite has to come out and scold you.

Brian Karis on Twitter: "Same goes for missing interactive elements, VFX, etc that get triggered through gameplay scripting. Also I was in 1080p for video streaming from my WFH machine which doesn't have a capture card. UE5 has gotten *substantially* better since we showed this demo. No "downgrades"." / Twitter

Daniel Wright Epic Game engineer literally told you that "In editor so performance is lower in editor than it would be in game" at 10 secs. Moving the camera in editor mode is more resource heavy than the slow panning movement in game.

Brain Karis the creator of Nanite literally said Valley of the ancient (a project of acouple weeks with acouple developers) is more taxing and less optimized than Lumen in the land of Nanite (years long project with hundreds of developers spanning multiple teams and companies).

The VFX, animation, sound, character animation, physics and gameplay has nothing to do with Nanite and its streaming.

Regardless, the released Valley of the Ancient has the same VFX, the same animation system, same character, more expensive physics and more gameplay.
And the other UE engineers have told you that Valley of the Ancient is more resource heavy than Lumen in the land of Nanite.

Here is Andrew another Unreal Engine Engineer



Keyword: "The new demo is heavier than the old one. The overdraw is pretty nuts and there are more lights with full screen coverage in the dark world segment."


secondly as I have said before...
Every thing you listed as reasons that PC can't run the demo. EXISTS in the valley of the ancient Demo. Infact more things exist there than the PS5 demo.
Teleportation, Attack Blast ability, explosion, drone flying mode, boss enemy.

1) Valley has physics
2) Valley needs only 3 GB Ram and 7 GB VRAM (I/O).
3) Valley has destruction,
4) Valley has Sound and music
5) Valley has VFX (the ancient ball is using the same Niagara particle system as the Portal)
6) Valley has different and dynamic lighting
7) Valley has walk, jump, attack, sit, drone flying
8) Valley has explosions which is more expensive

And its obvious, it takes 64GB to run Valley of the Ancient but only 3GB RAM and 7GB VRAM to run the compiled version.

1) The entire nanite data for the lumen in the land of nanite demo was 6.14 GB.

2) The entire nanite data for the Valley of the Ancient demo was a bit smaller than Land of Nanite demo.

3) However The entire texture data for Valley of the Ancient demo was a bit larger than Land of Nanite demo.

4) The compiled packaged demo of valley of the ancient is in the mid 20s GB compared to the 100 GB project file.

5) Valley of the ancient demo had more assets than Land of Nanite demo.

6) Valley of the ancient compiled version requires only 3 GB system ram and 7 GB VRAM.

The bugs and birds VFX has also been released and you can drag that into Valley of the ancient if you would like




But no continue to spread FUD and misinformation even after dozens of UE engineers have come out to correct you.
Clearly you're the maker of UE and nanite and the demos, not them.
This isn't specifically aimed at you but the PC warriors who think they are geniuses because they stated the bleeding obvious. UE5 is a game engine hence it will run on PC and Xbox as well as PS5. Epic make game engines. The way UE5 runs on these systems will differ. It won't run the same way on PC as it has access to far more powerful hardware. Same way we know PC SSD's will get faster. I don't know why some of you think your Nostradamus when stating obvious things and ignoring certain things. If any of you were that smart you'd have bought 100000 bitcoin back in the day......
 

Md Ray

Member
Nov 12, 2016
4,138
13,345
785
DDR4 3200mhz
25,6gbps
25 nano seconds access time.

PS5 SSD:
5,5gbps 8-9gb compressed.
25.0000.0000 nana seconds access time.

All your physics and animation focus are useless, pc will run it better and perform better because its far faster hardware then consoles.

Epic demo for the PS5 argument was that PC couldn't run it for the simple fact, it didn't had SSD's at 5,5gbps at the time, or compression tech which put PC far back. think about 3,5gbps versus 9gbps of the PS5.

Little those sony warriors knew, PC has system ram that shits all over SSD's and the entire demo could be easily loaded into it. What compression? hell u could strip the memory requirement by just preloading it with a slower SSD non stop, PS5 doesn't have memory for it PC does.

Now with PCI-e 4.0 and soon ddr5 and 5.0, we are currently already sitting at 7gbps ssds soon at 14gbps raw, so the only thing that's left is compression tech from NVIDIA and more optimizations from Microsoft.

Here's a example of DDR in action.




This is why i stated back in the day, sony should not have focused on SSD performance the way they did but instead invest massively into GPU performance because that will be the main problem this generation. Why?
4k 60fps RT.

Both Microsoft and sony should have ditched AMD and moved to nvidia.
PC DDR4 vs PS5 SSD? What kind of comparison is that?

PS5 also has system RAM (& VRAM) in a single pool. Where do you think the assets go from its SSD for the CPU and GPU to access?
 
Last edited:

staticshock

Member
Jun 24, 2020
100
339
340
Then were is the side by side comparison?
That's like someone saying RDR 2 is more graphically demanding than PS3/X360 GTA 5 and you responding with "Then where is the side by side comparison?"
The Valley demo heavier is not relevent since nothing in that scene needs to go fast.
Either you can't understand or you are refusing to understand.
NANITE is HEAVIER. Not just the demo. NANITE itself.
In that same sentence unreal engine engineers said "Why are people so convinced that some exotic IO is required or that IO is required at all".
Again this was addressed to people who continue to claim the ps5 demo can't run on pc with same or better performance.


Secondly You have no idea how Nanite works. This has been repeated to you by UE engineers dozens of times. Nanite does NOT stream per frame.
The entire Nanite data for that demo is 6.14 GB, the last level you keep harping on, IS ALREADY LOADED IN MEMORY.

The valley of the ancient demo DOES not require a super fast NVME SSD. IT doesn't even require a NVME. It runs exactly the same with a Sata SSD. IT doesn't even require a SSD.
it doesn't use RTX IO, It doesn't use Direct Storage.
Also the transition takes longer then the Rifts in Rift Apart.
Because its loading more data and this is before RTX IO and Direct Storage
Pc’s won’t load that scene faster at the point i showed then the PS5. They need to fill up the ram completely something that is not necessary on the PS5.
NOTHING IS BEING LOADED.
STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION.
THAT LAST SCENE IS ALREADY IN MEMORY.
The entire Nanite data is 6.14 GB
The Valley demo is a slow paced one, not comparable with the PS5 demo.
Valley has a drone that's faster than Lumen and the editor cam is also faster.
The PS5 will always have the lead in this for streaming assets quickly in and out. People still buying SATA SSD’s, and not everyone has a RTX card for RTXI/O in the future. Every PS5 had this dedicated silicon onboard. This is the part were pc’s will still struggle for years. You can’t say “pc is better”, there is no standard “pc”.
Valley demo doesn't need a fast SSD, infact a sata SSD performed identical nor did it use RTX IO or Direct Storage.

The thing is, Epic will release Lumen in the Land of Nanite demo in Q1 2022 with the release of UE5.
And you will be back here streaming misinformation then just as you are doing now. This frankly should be a ban-able offense.
 
Last edited:

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,536
4,132
725
The Netherlands
That's like someone saying RDR 2 is more graphically demanding than PS3/X360 GTA 5 and you responding with "Then where is the side by side comparison?"

Either you can't understand or you are refusing to understand.
NANITE is HEAVIER. Not just the demo. NANITE itself.
In that same sentence unreal engine engineers said "Why are people so convinced that some exotic IO is required or that IO is required at all".
Again this was addressed to people who continue to claim the ps5 demo can't run on pc with same or better performance.


Secondly You have no idea how Nanite works. This has been repeated to you by UE engineers dozens of times. Nanite does NOT stream per frame.
The entire Nanite data for that demo is 6.14 GB, the last level you keep harping on, IS ALREADY LOADED IN MEMORY.

The valley of the ancient demo DOES not require a super fast NVME SSD. IT doesn't even require a NVME. It runs exactly the same with a Sata SSD. IT doesn't even require a SSD.
it doesn't use RTX IO, It doesn't use Direct Storage.

Because its loading more data and this is before RTX IO and Direct Storage

NOTHING IS BEING LOADED.
STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION.
THAT LAST SCENE IS ALREADY IN MEMORY.
The entire Nanite data is 6.14 GB

Valley has a drone that's faster than Lumen and the editor cam is also faster.

Valley demo doesn't need a fast SSD, infact a sata SSD performed identical nor did it use RTX IO or Direct Storage.

The thing is, Epic will release Lumen in the Land of Nanite demo in Q1 2022 with the release of UE5.
And you will be back here streaming misinformation then just as you are doing now. This frankly should be a ban-able offense.

So i am still right. Performance on pc won’t be the same across all other pc’s with different hardware setups. SATA drives will struggle. In the end PS5 will still top it overall in assets streaming performance.

The PCMR gang is so triggered as fuck.
 
Last edited:

sinnergy

Member
Jun 16, 2007
5,530
3,164
1,435
So i am still right. Performance on pc won’t be the across all other pc’s with different hardware setups. SATA drives will struggle. In the end PS5 will still top it overall in assets streaming performance.

The PCMR gang is so triggered as fuck.
It will be very fast in last-gen engine designs .. would be hilarious if everyone goes with a nanite system , no streaming needed 🤣
 

hlm666

Member
Feb 25, 2021
480
574
290
If it's in the profiler you would expect that to be post decompression because that should be being done by the hardware on a system level right. So he is saying they were cpu bound at 5GB/s because you have to do stuff with that data to get it into a game state before throwing it on screen. If games get more complex which people were hoping with the cpu power increase this gen, loading times are probably going to increase a bit because we will be waiting for the game to process and initialise the game world/states.

So going by that if data being loaded hasn't compressed well you could see a difference between the 3200 ssd and the 5500 internal but if the compression is good the system could stuggle to maximise the use of the internal and the slower drives will handle it fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CamHostage

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
19,543
13,926
2,110
If it's in the profiler you would expect that to be post decompression because that should be being done by the hardware on a system level right. So he is saying they were cpu bound at 5GB/s because you have to do stuff with that data to get it into a game state before throwing it on screen. If games get more complex which people were hoping with the cpu power increase this gen, loading times are probably going to increase a bit because we will be waiting for the game to process and initialise the game world/states.

So going by that if data being loaded hasn't compressed well you could see a difference between the 3200 ssd and the 5500 internal but if the compression is good the system could stuggle to maximise the use of the internal and the slower drives will handle it fine.
I do not think anybody is close to maxing the use of all the HW and API’s Sony makes available to devs to move data around. It is a first generation exclusive game and, unless we are thinking that they have designed it in an incompetent way (unlikely considering their SCE WWS studios were likely involved in its design like for PS4 and its lead Architect is a game developer and optimiser), I think it is more likely the exploitation of the SSD bandwidth will get better than worse.

Thus, people that came off reading your posts and thought a cheap slower drive is a more sound investment may get burned.
So going by that if data being loaded hasn't compressed well you could see a difference between the 3200 ssd and the 5500 internal but if the compression is good the system could stuggle to maximise the use of the internal and the slower drives will handle it fine.
Even looking at it from this angle is a bit reductive: transferring a single 3 GB file that decompressed to 12 GB file is not the same thing as thousands of little files aggregating to streams of 8-9 GB/s of equivalent bandwidth.
 
Last edited:

DenchDeckard

Member
Feb 28, 2021
2,568
4,601
395
I can’t believe that ue5 demo is still being used as evidence in these conversations…..what an affective use of marketing. It will be used for years to come and one day in 5 years from now a game may have a section that looks like that…..and it will be multi platform….I’m calling it haha.
 
Last edited:

Rea

Member
Jul 7, 2020
1,017
4,047
455
Secondly You have no idea how Nanite works. This has been repeated to you by UE engineers dozens of times. Nanite does NOT stream per frame.
The entire Nanite data for that demo is 6.14 GB, the last level you keep harping on, IS ALREADY LOADED IN MEMORY.
Nanite streams data on disk on demand. Of course it will works on any hardware, but it will be scaled according to the hard ware.
 

Rea

Member
Jul 7, 2020
1,017
4,047
455
If games get more complex which people were hoping with the cpu power increase this gen, loading times are probably going to increase a bit because we will be waiting for the game to process and initialise the game world/states.
Not really, he was talking about game engine which is bottlenecked by I/O previously, but now they have PS5 their game engines is updated to I/O bound to CPU bound and throws many databases for CPU to process, still have headroom in the I/O. It doesn't matter the game world is bigger or smaller.
 

On Demand

Member
Dec 12, 2013
6,136
4,270
705

You mean what I’ve been basically saying in this thread all along????

😦


Once again.....

Low speed SSD’s are still going trough the PS5’s I/O system. So you can’t just look at the number and assume anything about 5.5GB not being needed.

You have make a game designed around the PS5’s SSD and I/O on another platform for a proper comparison. Comparing the game on the same hardware it was designed for is useless and a stupid way to come to any conclusions. It’s simple. Digital Foundry should now this. Everybody should know this.

I shouldn’t be surprised though with the FUD for PS5 being an agenda since last year and one of the people from DF is a member of a certain discord.
 

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
5,138
5,511
735
You mean what I’ve been basically saying in this thread all along????

😦


Once again.....

Low speed SSD’s are still going trough the PS5’s I/O system. So you can’t just look at the number and assume anything about 5.5GB not being needed.

You have make a game designed around the PS5’s SSD and I/O on another platform for a proper comparison. Comparing the game on the same hardware it was designed for is useless and a stupid way to come to any conclusions. It’s simple. Digital Foundry should now this. Everybody should know this.

I shouldn’t be surprised though with the FUD for PS5 being an agenda since last year and one of the people from DF is a member of a certain discord.
It’s simple though, it has been marketed by Sony as games will only work because of the super fast SSD. When people have tried slower SSD’s and they still work people will just call
It out. That’s what’s happend , simple as that
 

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,536
4,132
725
The Netherlands
It’s simple though, it has been marketed by Sony as games will only work because of the super fast SSD. When people have tried slower SSD’s and they still work people will just call
It out. That’s what’s happend , simple as that

That's because they market the internal SSD. They can't market something external but they can give you what speeds you minimal need for the future. These dumb ass people will still blame Sony if some developers will go for higher then 4GB/s in the future with other games, that's why you need at least 5.5GB/s external. And also these are the same people who shill for Velocity Architecture and RTXi/O and such fancy names.

Why people bother buying pci4.0 SSD's for pc if you don't need that speed at all?, heck none of the pc developers will use it but will only target SATA drives.
 
Last edited:
Jun 1, 2016
2,865
3,817
795
That's because they market the internal SSD. They can't market something external but they can give you what speeds you minimal need for the future. These dumb ass people will still blame Sony if some developers will go for higher then 4GB/s in the future with other games, that's why you need at least 5.5GB/s external. And also these are the same people who shill for Velocity Architecture and RTXi/O and such fancy names.

Why people bother buying pci4.0 SSD's for pc if you don't need that speed at all?, heck none of the pc developers will use it but will only target SATA drives.
Save some money, use internal if/when it's necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: phil_t98

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
5,138
5,511
735
That's because they market the internal SSD. They can't market something external but they can give you what speeds you minimal need for the future. These dumb ass people will still blame Sony if some developers will go for higher then 4GB/s in the future with other games, that's why you need at least 5.5GB/s external. And also these are the same people who shill for Velocity Architecture and RTXi/O and such fancy names.

Why people bother buying pci4.0 SSD's for pc if you don't need that speed at all?, heck none of the pc developers will use it but will only target SATA drives.
So lots of marketing on this can only be done because of the 5.5gb SSD but then a slower drive is doing it? Is that not lying?
 

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
4,240
13,330
645
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
It’s simple though, it has been marketed by Sony as games will only work because of the super fast SSD. When people have tried slower SSD’s and they still work people will just call
It out. That’s what’s happend , simple as that

No, it isn't. I don't understand how you can continue to simply ignore the IO aspect of this as if it has no part to play.

So lots of marketing on this can only be done because of the 5.5gb SSD but then a slower drive is doing it? Is that not lying?

What "marketing" was referencing 5.5gb? How would that even be a thing when the official SSD FAQs only "recommend" 5.5?
 
Last edited:

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
5,138
5,511
735
No, it isn't. I don't understand how you can continue to simply ignore the IO aspect of this as if it has no part to play.



What "marketing" was referencing 5.5gb? How would that even be a thing when the official SSD FAQs only "recommend" 5.5?

So insomniac sad

Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart is a game that utilizes dimensions and dimensional rifts, and that would not have been possible without the solid state drive of the PlayStation 5. The SSD is screamingly fast. It allows us to build worlds and project players from one place to another in near instantaneous speeds. It is an unbelievable game-changer in terms of, we can now do gameplay where you’re in one world and the next moment you’re in another.”
And now it’s only recommend speed? Change in the narrative again
 

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
4,240
13,330
645
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
So insomniac sad

Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart is a game that utilizes dimensions and dimensional rifts, and that would not have been possible without the solid state drive of the PlayStation 5. The SSD is screamingly fast. It allows us to build worlds and project players from one place to another in near instantaneous speeds. It is an unbelievable game-changer in terms of, we can now do gameplay where you’re in one world and the next moment you’re in another.”
And now it’s only recommend speed? Change in the narrative again

And yet not once does that quote say 5.5gb/s is required. You said there was "lots of marketing" of this. Where?
 

scydrex

Member
Aug 10, 2017
923
745
375
So insomniac sad

Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart is a game that utilizes dimensions and dimensional rifts, and that would not have been possible without the solid state drive of the PlayStation 5. The SSD is screamingly fast. It allows us to build worlds and project players from one place to another in near instantaneous speeds. It is an unbelievable game-changer in terms of, we can now do gameplay where you’re in one world and the next moment you’re in another.”
And now it’s only recommend speed? Change in the narrative again

And they said the game is not fully utilizing the SSD/IO solution. There is a lot of performance or headroom left.
 
Last edited: