• 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?

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
4,240
13,332
645
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
If you say you require something, the specifics of that something are assumed to be required.

If those specifics are given then yes. Insomniac never said that a base drive with raw speeds of 5.5GB/s was required. Factually, with the I/O in place speeds greater than 5.5 GB/s are possible even when the speed of the drive itself is slower. That's the whole point of the hardware compression which Insomniac explicitly said was needed for R&C to achieve what it does.
 
Last edited:

skit_data

Member
Nov 3, 2020
2,832
6,905
455
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
When marketing a product for the company you work for you can’t really say ”made possible with the speed of many other different SSD manufacturers SSDs”.

You say the name of your product, not someone elses. It’s not lying, its marketing.

It’s obvious it doesn’t even come close to maxing out the speed, I saw interviews with Mike Fitzgerald where he said they barely knew the specs of the PS5 when designing the game. They knew it had a fast SSD but they started designing and building the game before the first gen 4 SSDs were even on the market, so of course its built for a slower SSD than the one in the PS5.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: scydrex

dano1

Member
Sep 25, 2013
2,363
909
720
You would have to be either dumb or really cheap to put in a drive that doesn’t meet Sonys requirements!
 

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,536
4,132
725
The Netherlands
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?

So you say all hardware components for you pc is just marketing? how many TF does your PC GPU have? What GHZ is your CPU running? About how many MT/s is your memory running? Well it doesn't matter since it's all marketing.

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

Yeah so what? They are not developing anything for any other platform, so they promote their game for....guess fucking what...the PS5. So you say it will also work perfectly on a HDD or SATA SSD. Why didn't they just stick with a HDD right?

Still you don't want to hear that it's still a launch window title. Insomniac was always clear to say that they were just scratching the surface with Rift Apart and that they had plenty of headroom, so what's all the fuzz? Why does it matter that it runs on a slower drive, they tested the game themselves on a slower drive and they did see performance issues in heavy areas. To me that says enough and why even go for a slower disk?

Just to be that dick that will rant in the future on forums because you brought that slow ass drive yourself.

You guys are really annoying...damn.
 
Last edited:

Loope

Member
Dec 7, 2020
851
1,075
325
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.
Always Sunny Fx GIF
 
  • Fire
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong
Oct 26, 2018
22,739
31,950
885
When marketing a product for the company you work for you can’t really say ”made possible with the speed of many other different SSD manufacturers SSDs”.

You say the name of your product, not someone elses. It’s not lying, its marketing.

It’s obvious it doesn’t even come close to maxing out the speed, I saw interviews with Mike Fitzgerald where he said they barely knew the specs of the PS5 when designing the game. They knew it had a fast SSD but they started designing and building the game before the first gen 4 SSDs were even on the market, so of course its built for a slower SSD than the one in the PS5.
Technically, Insomniac never said (I dont think) the specific 5.5gb/s SSD is required.

But how Sony was PRing 5.5 gb/s SSD with even more due to Kraken etc... and Insomniac vaguely saying the SSD is required, they kind of go hand in hand.

That's like BMW head office saying their new car has an engine that is 500 HP in a TV ad. The dealership sales guy says you can go 0-60 in 4 seconds and can only be done with that super fast engine.

It makes sense the average person would put those two together as they're promoted together. You cant fault a car buyer for thinking different. Although technically the salesman is right since he's not comparing against other engines. He's just talking about that specific engine in isolation where it turns out 500 HP is overkill and he knows it (but the customer doesn't).

Turns out a different BMW model in the showroom also can go 0-60 in 4 seconds but has a 350 HP engine.
 
Last edited:

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
9,468
11,771
815
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.

My point was that SSD's and I/O of the PS5 wasn't needed for PC because of RAM.

Its still useful tho and a improvement at the end of the day, but absolutely not needed to get things to run on what the PS5 is doing.

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...



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.

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

- CPU compression will never be done on the CPU at 3+gbps ( lower also ), its either gpu or no compression. So talking about loaded the CPU up to the brim is useless as it will never happen. RTX I/O solutions will take this into account whenever it released other then that compression won't be a thing at higher speeds simple as that.
- Ram can be used heavily that's why ram is there.
- Jup it lowers ram requirements, which is also useful for PC that's why we see movements towards it by nvidia and microsoft its not needed however,.

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 am saying DDR is a fuck ton more faster then SSD's this is why PC has Ram and consoles would have had Ram if it wasn't for there constrains. Ignoring ram entirely like u did and move straight to PS5 architecture without considering how PC work but still judge them is ignorant and i corrected that.

The picture showcases speed u can move through a scene once it sits in ram.

I will tell you something funny, u think the PS5 demo at the end is impressive, i will tell you they could have speeded it up far faster. Because all the data is already in the ram. the low requirements on PC suggests this. They just choose to keep it at that speed, i am pretty sure there is even a demo from sony in some game where they slam through a city at rocket speed. I could be wrong about that tho can't remember anymore.
They where probably limited elsewhere or just made the choice that it was enough and limited it there. we don't know because no data.



Ram shits all over SSD's, this is why u still got a 16gb pool of ram in the PS5. And they would have gone for more if the APU allowed them most likely.

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 can u show me the numbers what exactly was loaded into the ram and when? they did bother to showcase you polygons right? so why not just showcase what the SSD was doing and the i/o solution u talk about? In a demo completely focused on that aspect? interesting demonstration right?

The demo there had 6gb of v-ram usage, deload and reloading that in while having stuff on the screen would take 1-2 seconds. That SSD is 100% doing jack shit for 99% of that part. Welcome to the world of ram as everything has to sit in it. not even system ram could be used as its way to slow to load data in on the fly in that scene to be pushed out by the gpu/cpu at time. it needs to sit in the v-ram and it does exactly that.

Unless they where streaming a video from the SSD at a bittrate that requires 5,5gbps.

Why is this necessary if, in your opinion, it would all work well? So why do we need RTXI/O

Because its a improvement all around. There is no reason to not move towards it.

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.

I just explain you how the world works in reality and not in some fairy tale bullshit world. if you disagree with any point i make come with arguments instead of idiotic cursing against a wall. U sound pathethic.

CPU taxing and memory taxing i already covered.

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.

Good for you, i have consoles and i have PC's also. ( well consoles handhelds switch, have ps1/ps2/n64 so there's that. And honestly if you wonder about tech always good to dig deeper into it. However keep a open mind and stop shouting stuff like "pc fantastic". Its just a plastic box, same for computers.

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?

Where did i say consoles need 32gb of memory. I said they could drop the SSD performance ( keep the i/o ) and invest into a nvidia GPU so we don't have games like control at below low settings performance and every game will have RT in it without effort. There are reasons why i say something.

All console games will be limited if they do move over however to new solutions towards xbox outputs, which means 5,5gbps will never be used other then for first party games ( well improved loading times probably ). But lets be honest there first party games will build games no matter what for the box so they are hardly relevant in this matter.

the demo was made for the PS5 not PC. PC has its own demo which is not on the PS5 because it was not made for it.

Everything else is just dumb rambling with no actual argument other then "i don't like things u say" zero interest in starting a piss contest.

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?

Where did i say the PS5 didn't had v-ram exactly? I just state PC has Ram that helps problems like this out at higher overheads.
 
Last edited:

Md Ray

Member
Nov 12, 2016
4,138
13,345
785
Where did i say the PS5 didn't had v-ram exactly? I just state PC has Ram that helps problems like this out at higher overheads.
You made a comparison between DDR4 vs SSD in your post when a more fair comparison would be DDR4 vs GDDR6. PS5 also has RAM, y'know?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: chilichote
Jun 1, 2016
2,865
3,817
795
If those specifics are given then yes. Insomniac never said that a base drive with raw speeds of 5.5GB/s was required. Factually, with the I/O in place speeds greater than 5.5 GB/s are possible even when the speed of the drive itself is slower. That's the whole point of the hardware compression which Insomniac explicitly said was needed for R&C to achieve what it does.
They were given. "The SSD of the ps5"
That's very specific.
To be clear I don't care about the argument this pertains to, only this one thing. The stats of said drive are greatly implied by that statement.
 
Oct 26, 2018
22,739
31,950
885
They were given. "The SSD of the ps5"
That's very specific.
To be clear I don't care about the argument this pertains to, only this one thing. The stats of said drive are greatly implied by that statement.
Exactly. Implied and co-promoted.

Although a naysayer will say Insomniac didn't mean PS5's 5.5 gb/s SSD, since they didnt say specifically 5.5.

More akin to: "They just meant any SSD that so happens to be in a PS5"

So if DF found an archaic 1 gb/s SSD and it worked. Technically, Insomniac would still be right.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
4,240
13,332
645
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
They were given. "The SSD of the ps5"
That's very specific.
To be clear I don't care about the argument this pertains to, only this one thing. The stats of said drive are greatly implied by that statement.

No, the general capabilities of the PS5 SSD is greatly implied in that statement. You are attempting to use that general statement to drill down to hard requirements. That's an incredible reach.
 
Oct 26, 2018
22,739
31,950
885
No, the general capabilities of the PS5 SSD is greatly implied in that statement. You are attempting to use that general statement to drill down to hard requirements. That's an incredible reach.
Not really though.

PS5 and Series X have good cpus running at I think about 3.5 ghz (give or take).

If a dev says "We can only make our game's AI due to the super fast cpus in next gen systems", are they correct or misleading if an Xbox One and PS4 with Jaguar cpus has the same AI? He never said the game needs specific 3.5 ghz new cpus.

Technically, they are correct because a next gen system with good cpus go together as a package. But it turns out it's overkill since last gen systems run it the same.
 
Last edited:
Jun 1, 2016
2,865
3,817
795
No, the general capabilities of the PS5 SSD is greatly implied in that statement. You are attempting to use that general statement to drill down to hard requirements. That's an incredible reach.
If I ask for the wrench on the bench, you don't need to give me that exact wrench but one with those specs.
 

staticshock

Member
Jun 24, 2020
100
339
340
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.
Again i repeat that purposely spreading misinformation like you are doing right now after its been proven without a shadow of doubt to be false by multiple epic games engineers should not be allowed here because this is 100% bad faith.

The facts are, as proven. A 16GB RAM PC with a SATA SSD running on Windows 10 (so no DirectStorage or RTX IO) with Nvidia 3070 will run the demo when its released in Q1 2022 at the exact same visual fidelity but with higher resolution and framerate.

Put your account where your keystrokes are.
When a 16 GB RAM, SATA SSD, Windows 10, No DirectStorage, No RTX IO, Nvidia 3070 runs the Lumen in the land of Nanite demo completely at exact same fidelity at higher res and fps. You get permanent banned.
If it can't I get permanent banned.

Deal with mods being witnesses?
Ofcourse you won't do it because you don't actually believe the BS you are spreading.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
4,240
13,332
645
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Not really though.

PS5 and Series X have good cpus running at I think about 3.5 ghz (give or take).

If a dev says "We can only make our game's AI due to the super fast cpus in next gen systems", are they correct or misleading if an Xbox One and PS4 with Jaguar cpus has the same AI? He never said the game needs specific 3.5 ghz new cpus.

Technically, they are correct because a next gen system with good cpus go together as a package. But it turns out it's overkill since last gen systems run it the same.

And what if PS5 and Series X have specialized hardware in place that is not found on the PS4 and Xbox One? Kind of like with both of their SSD implementations?

If I ask for the wrench on the bench, you don't need to give me that exact wrench but one with those specs.

Here. I found this adjustable wrench.
 

Loxus

Member
Sep 18, 2020
722
2,947
345
The Caribbean
My point was that SSD's and I/O of the PS5 wasn't needed for PC because of RAM.

Its still useful tho and a improvement at the end of the day, but absolutely not needed to get things to run on what the PS5 is doing.





- CPU compression will never be done on the CPU at 3+gbps ( lower also ), its either gpu or no compression. So talking about loaded the CPU up to the brim is useless as it will never happen. RTX I/O solutions will take this into account whenever it released other then that compression won't be a thing at higher speeds simple as that.
- Ram can be used heavily that's why ram is there.
- Jup it lowers ram requirements, which is also useful for PC that's why we see movements towards it by nvidia and microsoft its not needed however,.



I am saying DDR is a fuck ton more faster then SSD's this is why PC has Ram and consoles would have had Ram if it wasn't for there constrains. Ignoring ram entirely like u did and move straight to PS5 architecture without considering how PC work but still judge them is ignorant and i corrected that.

The picture showcases speed u can move through a scene once it sits in ram.

I will tell you something funny, u think the PS5 demo at the end is impressive, i will tell you they could have speeded it up far faster. Because all the data is already in the ram. the low requirements on PC suggests this. They just choose to keep it at that speed, i am pretty sure there is even a demo from sony in some game where they slam through a city at rocket speed. I could be wrong about that tho can't remember anymore.
They where probably limited elsewhere or just made the choice that it was enough and limited it there. we don't know because no data.



Ram shits all over SSD's, this is why u still got a 16gb pool of ram in the PS5. And they would have gone for more if the APU allowed them most likely.



So can u show me the numbers what exactly was loaded into the ram and when? they did bother to showcase you polygons right? so why not just showcase what the SSD was doing and the i/o solution u talk about? In a demo completely focused on that aspect? interesting demonstration right?

The demo there had 6gb of v-ram usage, deload and reloading that in while having stuff on the screen would take 1-2 seconds. That SSD is 100% doing jack shit for 99% of that part. Welcome to the world of ram as everything has to sit in it. not even system ram could be used as its way to slow to load data in on the fly in that scene to be pushed out by the gpu/cpu at time. it needs to sit in the v-ram and it does exactly that.

Unless they where streaming a video from the SSD at a bittrate that requires 5,5gbps.



Because its a improvement all around. There is no reason to not move towards it.



I just explain you how the world works in reality and not in some fairy tale bullshit world. if you disagree with any point i make come with arguments instead of idiotic cursing against a wall. U sound pathethic.

CPU taxing and memory taxing i already covered.



Good for you, i have consoles and i have PC's also. ( well consoles handhelds switch, have ps1/ps2/n64 so there's that. And honestly if you wonder about tech always good to dig deeper into it. However keep a open mind and stop shouting stuff like "pc fantastic". Its just a plastic box, same for computers.



Where did i say consoles need 32gb of memory. I said they could drop the SSD performance ( keep the i/o ) and invest into a nvidia GPU so we don't have games like control at below low settings performance and every game will have RT in it without effort. There are reasons why i say something.

All console games will be limited if they do move over however to new solutions towards xbox outputs, which means 5,5gbps will never be used other then for first party games ( well improved loading times probably ). But lets be honest there first party games will build games no matter what for the box so they are hardly relevant in this matter.

the demo was made for the PS5 not PC. PC has its own demo which is not on the PS5 because it was not made for it.

Everything else is just dumb rambling with no actual argument other then "i don't like things u say" zero interest in starting a piss contest.



Where did i say the PS5 didn't had v-ram exactly? I just state PC has Ram that helps problems like this out at higher overheads.
I don't know why your so fixated on RAM like it's one large pool.

DDR is used as system memory with CPU and GDDR memory is used with the GPU to speed up performance of graphics card.

GPUs like the 3080 only have 10 GB of GDDR RAM. Some games already use 6-8 GB of RAM, so saying you can just fill doesn't make any kind of sense.

Putting the data in the DDR RAM can be a bottleneck because the CPU will still have to fetch the data to put it in DDR RAM and GDDR RAM for the GPU to use.

Dedicated decompression hardware in the PS5 is fast enough that when the GPU needs a piece of data, it's readily available to use or put in RAM.

The decompression in PS5 is capable of reaching 22 GB/s, which is up there with DDR4 based on this chart.





So in reality, putting data in DDR RAM isn't feasible. It's a bottleneck that reduces CPU performance when trying to reach those kind of throughput.

Also using DDR as RAM for the GPU isn't feasible either, since system RAM is a few times slower than VRAM and has much higher latency. Running out of VRAM would translate into a performance loss and the performance will be limited also by the PCIe bandwidth.

Having storage fast enough to get it in GDDR RAM when needed without using CPU resources, is much more better than having it stored in DDR RAM.

It also reduces the need to have large amounts of GDDR, which is costly. Imagine how expensive a 64 GB GDDR 3080 would cost.
 

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
5,138
5,511
735
So you say all hardware components for you pc is just marketing? how many TF does your PC GPU have? What GHZ is your CPU running? About how many MT/s is your memory running? Well it doesn't matter since it's all marketing.



Yeah so what? They are not developing anything for any other platform, so they promote their game for....guess fucking what...the PS5. So you say it will also work perfectly on a HDD or SATA SSD. Why didn't they just stick with a HDD right?

Still you don't want to hear that it's still a launch window title. Insomniac was always clear to say that they were just scratching the surface with Rift Apart and that they had plenty of headroom, so what's all the fuzz? Why does it matter that it runs on a slower drive, they tested the game themselves on a slower drive and they did see performance issues in heavy areas. To me that says enough and why even go for a slower disk?

Just to be that dick that will rant in the future on forums because you brought that slow ass drive yourself.

You guys are really annoying...damn.

coarse it’s launch window games, just the majority of people around here saying it’s not possible on other hardware.

Remember when Tim sweeny was saying the unreal 5 demo was only possible because of the SSD in the PS5 which turned out to not be true.

do not get me wrong the SSD in the ps5 is awesome and the I/O is equally as awesome but a lot of people thought it would jump it ahead of the competition which so far it hasn’t.

with everybody saying it’s because of first gen games, couldn’t that be said of series x extra power not being utilised yet. Or doesn’t that not count?
 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

3liteDragon

Member
Mar 3, 2020
2,176
13,134
765
but a lot of people thought it would jump it ahead of the competition which so far it hasn’t.

with everybody saying it’s because of first gen games, couldn’t that be said of series x extra power not being utilised yet. Or doesn’t that not count?
What exactly does that mean? Because from the looks of it, it has a far better & more robust I/O pipeline and SSD than the Series and if mid-gen first-party games fully saturate it, I don’t see it being possible to run on the Series consoles.
 
Last edited:
  • LOL
Reactions: Andodalf

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,536
4,132
725
The Netherlands
Again i repeat that purposely spreading misinformation like you are doing right now after its been proven without a shadow of doubt to be false by multiple epic games engineers should not be allowed here because this is 100% bad faith.

The facts are, as proven. A 16GB RAM PC with a SATA SSD running on Windows 10 (so no DirectStorage or RTX IO) with Nvidia 3070 will run the demo when its released in Q1 2022 at the exact same visual fidelity but with higher resolution and framerate.

Put your account where your keystrokes are.
When a 16 GB RAM, SATA SSD, Windows 10, No DirectStorage, No RTX IO, Nvidia 3070 runs the Lumen in the land of Nanite demo completely at exact same fidelity at higher res and fps. You get permanent banned.
If it can't I get permanent banned.

Deal with mods being witnesses?
Ofcourse you won't do it because you don't actually believe the BS you are spreading.

What are you up to? You can’t prove shit with pc’s, like i said. No pc is the same, majority are running SATA drives. In the end PS5 will top in performance for assets streaming since all of them are the same. PC gamers won’t have the same experience like they don’t have now with their hardware. But when RTXI/O is around the corner, i bet you guys will suddenly care a lot. Did the Valley demo run the same on every system? They are not fixed platforms, so you can’t claim it “runs better”.

The butthurt already started when they showed UE5 on the PS5, And here we are, the same people in the UE5 thread are triggered again.

Ask for bans, you might get one first.
 
Last edited:
Oct 26, 2018
22,739
31,950
885
And what if PS5 and Series X have specialized hardware in place that is not found on the PS4 and Xbox One? Kind of like with both of their SSD implementations?
What difference does that make in the real DF R&C comparison or my AI comparison?

Either way, a company promotes one thing like it's mandatory, yet a weaker system can do it after all. The DF test is actually a much better example because the entire game ran and looked just as good on a weaker SSD with similar load times, while my example I made up was just about AI.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

Loxus

Member
Sep 18, 2020
722
2,947
345
The Caribbean
coarse it’s launch window games, just the majority of people around here saying it’s not possible on other hardware.

Remember when Tim sweeny was saying the unreal 5 demo was only possible because of the SSD in the PS5 which turned out to not be true.

do not get me wrong the SSD in the ps5 is awesome and the I/O is equally as awesome but a lot of people thought it would jump it ahead of the competition which so far it hasn’t.

with everybody saying it’s because of first gen games, couldn’t that be said of series x extra power not being utilised yet. Or doesn’t that not count?
Tim Sweeney Explains Exactly Why the PS5’s SSD and I/O Architecture Is Way More Efficient Than PC’s
Systems integration and whole-system performance. Bringing in data from high-bandwidth storage into video memory in its native format with hardware decompression is very efficient. The software and hardware stack go to great lengths to minimize latency and maximize the bandwidth that's actually accessible by games.

Those PC numbers are theoretical and are from drive into kernel memory. From there, it's a slow and circuitous journey through software decompression to GPU driver swizzling into video memory where you can eventually use it. The PS5 path for this is several times more efficient. And then there's latency.

On PC, there's a lot of layering and overhead. Then you have the issue of getting compressed textures into video memory requires reading into RAM, software decompressing, then calling into a GPU driver to transfer and swizzle them, with numerous kernel transitions throughout.

Intel's work on non-volatile NVDIMMs is very exciting and may get PC data transfer on a better track over the coming years.


All Tim is saying is it's more efficient. Dude never said it wasn't possible on PC.


Unreal Engine 5 Demo Is Rendering at 1440P Most of the Time on PS5; RTX 2070 Super Could Run It at ‘Pretty Good Performance’
Tim Sweeney expanded on that in the following statement to Digital Foundry, pointing to PC SSDs being able to deliver 'awesome' performance, too (while HDDs are probably going the way of the dodo rather quickly).

A number of different components are required to render this level of detail, right? One is the GPU performance and GPU architecture to draw an incredible amount of geometry that you're talking about - a very large number of teraflops being required for this. The other is the ability to load and stream it efficiently. One of the big efforts that's been done and is ongoing in Unreal Engine 5 now is optimising for next generation storage to make loading faster by multiples of current performance. Not just a little bit faster but a lot faster, so that you can bring in this geometry and display it, despite it not all fitting and memory, you know, taking advantage of next generation SSD architectures and everything else... Sony is pioneering here with the PlayStation 5 architecture. It's got a God-tier storage system which is pretty far ahead of PCs. On a high-end PC with an SSD and especially with NVMe, you get awesome performance too.

Nowhere did Tim said the demo can't run on PC.

About it running on a 2070S.
They said in the article, "from Epic's Chief Technical Officer that even an RTX 2070 Super could run the Unreal Engine 5 demo at 'pretty good performance'."

Pretty good performance doesn't really say much, especially when compared the the PS5.

At the 23 second mark when he caps the frame rate to 30. You can see it's running at 24 fps in EDITOR MODE.

And as seen in this video below, editor mode has higher fps than in gameplay. From 60fps in editor to 50fps in gameplay.

So imagine the fps if they hit play on the PS5 demo.

About the RAM usage.
The 6.14 GB was only Nanite data in it's COMPRESSED FORM, that doesn't cover textures. Which is for larger than any of the geometry data.

So imagine the size of the uncompressed data in RAM. It would require the SSD to be streaming data in and out quickly.

With that being said, Tim Sweeney was right about the PS5s SSD in the beginning on my post.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
4,240
13,332
645
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
What difference does that make in the real DF R&C comparison or my AI comparison?

Either way, a company promotes one thing like it's mandatory, yet a weaker system can do it after all. The DF test is actually a much better example because the entire game ran and looked just as good on a weaker SSD with similar load times, while my example I made up was just about AI.

The hardware that is dedicated entirely to the SSD is implicitly involved in any discussion of the capabilities of the "SSD" of the PS5. Not once did Sony promote a "mandatory" raw drive speed. There isn't anything more to be said. If you want to believe that Insomniac was blatantly wrong in what they said in a three minute promotional video about R&C then that is up to you.

I'll agree to disagree.

Nor was I. You probably shouldn't argue if you can't follow along.

Yep. Wrench analogies get me every time.

Confused Hanna Barbera GIF by Warner Archive


Maybe I have a screw loose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lysandros
Jun 1, 2016
2,865
3,817
795
The hardware that is dedicated entirely to the SSD is implicitly involved in any discussion of the capabilities of the "SSD" of the PS5. Not once did Sony promote a "mandatory" raw drive speed. There isn't anything more to be said. If you want to believe that Insomniac was blatantly wrong in what they said in a three minute promotional video about R&C then that is up to you.

I'll agree to disagree.



Yep. Wrench analogies get me every time.

Confused Hanna Barbera GIF by Warner Archive


Maybe I have a screw loose.
You don't use a wrench with a screw.
 

Andodalf

Member
Oct 20, 2013
6,463
9,830
965
24
Earth
What exactly does that mean? Because from the looks of it, it has a far better & more robust I/O pipeline and SSD than the Series and if mid-gen first-party games fully saturate it, I don’t see it being possible to run on the Series consoles.

There's literally nothing to indicate this will be the case.
 

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
5,138
5,511
735
Tim Sweeney Explains Exactly Why the PS5’s SSD and I/O Architecture Is Way More Efficient Than PC’s
Systems integration and whole-system performance. Bringing in data from high-bandwidth storage into video memory in its native format with hardware decompression is very efficient. The software and hardware stack go to great lengths to minimize latency and maximize the bandwidth that's actually accessible by games.

Those PC numbers are theoretical and are from drive into kernel memory. From there, it's a slow and circuitous journey through software decompression to GPU driver swizzling into video memory where you can eventually use it. The PS5 path for this is several times more efficient. And then there's latency.

On PC, there's a lot of layering and overhead. Then you have the issue of getting compressed textures into video memory requires reading into RAM, software decompressing, then calling into a GPU driver to transfer and swizzle them, with numerous kernel transitions throughout.

Intel's work on non-volatile NVDIMMs is very exciting and may get PC data transfer on a better track over the coming years.


All Tim is saying is it's more efficient. Dude never said it wasn't possible on PC.


Unreal Engine 5 Demo Is Rendering at 1440P Most of the Time on PS5; RTX 2070 Super Could Run It at ‘Pretty Good Performance’
Tim Sweeney expanded on that in the following statement to Digital Foundry, pointing to PC SSDs being able to deliver 'awesome' performance, too (while HDDs are probably going the way of the dodo rather quickly).

A number of different components are required to render this level of detail, right? One is the GPU performance and GPU architecture to draw an incredible amount of geometry that you're talking about - a very large number of teraflops being required for this. The other is the ability to load and stream it efficiently. One of the big efforts that's been done and is ongoing in Unreal Engine 5 now is optimising for next generation storage to make loading faster by multiples of current performance. Not just a little bit faster but a lot faster, so that you can bring in this geometry and display it, despite it not all fitting and memory, you know, taking advantage of next generation SSD architectures and everything else... Sony is pioneering here with the PlayStation 5 architecture. It's got a God-tier storage system which is pretty far ahead of PCs. On a high-end PC with an SSD and especially with NVMe, you get awesome performance too.

Nowhere did Tim said the demo can't run on PC.

About it running on a 2070S.
They said in the article, "from Epic's Chief Technical Officer that even an RTX 2070 Super could run the Unreal Engine 5 demo at 'pretty good performance'."

Pretty good performance doesn't really say much, especially when compared the the PS5.

At the 23 second mark when he caps the frame rate to 30. You can see it's running at 24 fps in EDITOR MODE.

And as seen in this video below, editor mode has higher fps than in gameplay. From 60fps in editor to 50fps in gameplay.

So imagine the fps if they hit play on the PS5 demo.

About the RAM usage.
The 6.14 GB was only Nanite data in it's COMPRESSED FORM, that doesn't cover textures. Which is for larger than any of the geometry data.

So imagine the size of the uncompressed data in RAM. It would require the SSD to be streaming data in and out quickly.

With that being said, Tim Sweeney was right about the PS5s SSD in the beginning on my post.

what also wasn’t discussed at that time was Sony had paid 200 mill to epic at that time. When Tim was biging up the SSD he didn’t talk about Xbox or pc. He avoided it.
 
Last edited:

3liteDragon

Member
Mar 3, 2020
2,176
13,134
765
what also wasn’t discussed at that time was Sony had paid 200 mill to epic at that time. When Tim was buligging up the SSD he didn’t talk about Xbox or pc. He avoided it.
There was no marketing deal people are talking about & the $200M investment into them has a lot more to do with Sony & their other divisions rather than just PlayStation.

I see people keep bringing up this dumb “marketing agreement” argument cause I didn’t see PlayStation advertising the UE5 demo anywhere on their channels or social media handles, sounds like a waste of a “marketing deal” to me.
 

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
5,138
5,511
735
There was no marketing deal people are talking about & the $200M investment into them has a lot more to do with Sony & their other divisions rather than just PlayStation.

I see people keep bringing up this dumb “marketing agreement” argument cause I didn’t see PlayStation advertising the UE5 demo anywhere on their channels or social media handles, sounds like a waste of a “marketing deal” to me.
I never said marketing agreement but the fact 200 mill just came into the accounts of epic am sure they would make sure they kept Sony happy.

he also never mentioned any other console or hardware at that reveal, that was a choice. He also never said it could run the same on other hardware just people thought it couldn’t run like that on other hardware
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andodalf and Loxus

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
50,761
110,635
1,510
I actually meant to say Allen wrench is a brands product. Kinda like Kleenex it's just what people call them now.

You got me there. You still don't use a wrench with a screw. You can use a wrench with a lag screw though. I feel like I'm talking to my wife in all this.
I know, just giving you shit.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Werewolfgrandma

3liteDragon

Member
Mar 3, 2020
2,176
13,134
765
I never said marketing agreement but the fact 200 mill just came into the accounts of epic am sure they would make sure they kept Sony happy.

he also never mentioned any other console or hardware at that reveal, that was a choice. He also never said it could run the same on other hardware just people thought it couldn’t run like that on other hardware
The PS5 has a higher triangle culling rate than the X and if it isn’t running at the same fidelity as the PS5 (people still won’t notice a difference anyway), I don't know why Sweeney would wanna talk about that when asked about it.

Epic started working on the demo around February & it was shown off in May & the interviews with Geoff Keighley were done on the same day of the reveal, Sony’s first $250M investment came in July (2 months AFTER the demo reveal). So I doubt all the praise the console was getting from them was only to get that investment, it actually might have something to do with the custom hardware itself. Even when the specs were first revealed, Jason Schreier (as much as I hate this POS) has some of the best sources in the industry & even he said the people he talked to praised the hell out of the console with one even calling it superior to the competition.

Heck, you even got id Tech's lead engine programmer Billy Khan praising it before the reveal.
Third-party games aren't gonna fully take advantage of these consoles as much as first-party, so by 2023 or '24, we'll have current-gen only FP titles from both platforms, we can make comparisons then & see which one stands out more.

Schreier's full quote from his podcast:
Everybody is now seeing this spec sheet and they see PS5 10.2 TFLOPs and Xbox Series X 12 TFLOPs, but meanwhile, the people that I've been talking to over the past few months, over the past couple of years, who are actually working on the PlayStation 5, have pretty much unanimously all said 'This thing is a beast, it is one of those the coolest pieces of hardware that we've ever seen or used before, There are so many things here that are revolutionary'. The general consensus is that these things are both extremely powerful and both very similar in a lot of ways, both do different things in really cool ways. These are both extremely impressive pieces of technology. But because of the way Sony has actually presented and marketed this thing, now the narrative is that the Xbox Series X is way more powerful than the PS5. And I think that is such a maybe fatal flaw on Sony's part for this console generation. Maybe it'll be forgotten if the PS5 comes in cheaper or has a killer launch line app, but right now, it's just such a dropping the ball after so many years of smart decisions on Sony's part.

What I'm hearing from the people who are actually working on these things, working on the metal, is that the Xbox Series X is not significantly more powerful than the PS5 despite this teraflops number. Sony has dropped the ball and there's going to be like weeks and weeks, if not months and months, especially with Corona disrupting everything, of people just talking about how the Xbox Series X is the most powerful console and it's beating the PS5 in every single way. Meanwhile, I'm getting texts and DMs, even today as this was going on, from developers being like 'This is such a shame, the PS5 is so superior in all these other ways that they're not actually able to message right now or can't talk about right now'. I heard from at least three different people in the past couple of hours since the Cerny talk being like 'The PS5 is actually like the more superior piece of hardware in a lot of different ways despite what you're seeing in these paper spec sheets'. And so again, yes, plenty of room to talk about this, for all these companies to keep messaging and showing games. But I do think that Sony has really dropped the ball so far from what we've seen.
 
Oct 26, 2018
22,739
31,950
885
The PS5 has a higher triangle culling rate than the X and if it isn’t running at the same fidelity as the PS5 (people still won’t notice a difference anyway), I don't know why Sweeney would wanna talk about that when asked about it.

Epic started working on the demo around February & it was shown off in May & the interviews with Geoff Keighley were done on the same day of the reveal, Sony’s first $250M investment came in July (2 months AFTER the demo reveal). So I doubt all the praise the console was getting from them was only to get that investment, it actually might have something to do with the custom hardware itself. Even when the specs were first revealed, Jason Schreier (as much as I hate this POS) has some of the best sources in the industry & even he said the people he talked to praised the hell out of the console with one even calling it superior to the competition.

Heck, you even got id Tech's lead engine programmer Billy Khan praising it before the reveal.
Third-party games aren't gonna fully take advantage of these consoles as much as first-party, so by 2023 or '24, we'll have current-gen only FP titles from both platforms, we can make comparisons then & see which one stands out more.

Schreier's full quote from his podcast:
You're brining up a 18 month old tweet before the PS5 reveal, and a couple tweets as proof?

What do you expect any dev to publicly say about any piece of hardware? It sucks? It's not as great as it seems? Of course the rah-rah crowd of industry people like to post positive vibes.

If I go on Linkedin and look at my news feed I don't think I'll find one nitpicker criticizing a person or feel good article.

Dont get taken by Twitterverse and PR.

If Pepsi launched a new drink, do you really think someone from Walmart head office will say anything contraversial? Of course not. He'll say congrats and expects great things from it.
 

3liteDragon

Member
Mar 3, 2020
2,176
13,134
765
You're brining up a 18 month old tweet before the PS5 reveal, and a couple tweets as proof?

What do you expect any dev to publicly say about any piece of hardware? It sucks? It's not as great as it seems? Of course the rah-rah crowd of industry people like to post positive vibes.
It’s not any dev’s job to publicly defend whatever console, those were private DM’s made to him who have access to devkits which he chose to make public on his podcast, that ain’t PR from the devs. The proof will be in the pudding with the first-party games, so we’ll see.
 
Last edited:

Snake29

Member
Jul 30, 2013
2,536
4,132
725
The Netherlands
I never said marketing agreement but the fact 200 mill just came into the accounts of epic am sure they would make sure they kept Sony happy.

he also never mentioned any other console or hardware at that reveal, that was a choice. He also never said it could run the same on other hardware just people thought it couldn’t run like that on other hardware

At this point, you guys are only searching and searching desperately to shit on everything PS related.

cure GIF


First we had the SSD talk itself, then the speeds, then UE5 butthurt nonense, then the narrative changed to “it’s all marketing”, and were now at “but but they payed them 250 milliiieee”.
 
Last edited:

staticshock

Member
Jun 24, 2020
100
339
340
What are you up to? You can’t prove shit with pc’s, like i said. No pc is the same, majority are running SATA drives. In the end PS5 will top in performance for assets streaming since all of them are the same. PC gamers won’t have the same experience like they don’t have now with their hardware. But when RTXI/O is around the corner, i bet you guys will suddenly care a lot. Did the Valley demo run the same on every system? They are not fixed platforms, so you can’t claim it “runs better”.

The butthurt already started when they showed UE5 on the PS5, And here we are, the same people in the UE5 thread are triggered again.

Ask for bans, you might get one first.

So you admit that my 16 GB system ram, Nvidia 3070 with SATA SSD no direct storage, no rtx io will in 6 months run the demo better than the super fast god tier ssd i/o PS5?
 
Last edited:

staticshock

Member
Jun 24, 2020
100
339
340
Nowhere did Tim said the demo can't run on PC.

About it running on a 2070S.
They said in the article, "from Epic's Chief Technical Officer that even an RTX 2070 Super could run the Unreal Engine 5 demo at 'pretty good performance'."

Pretty good performance doesn't really say much, especially when compared the the PS5.

At the 23 second mark when he caps the frame rate to 30. You can see it's running at 24 fps in EDITOR MODE.
Did you hear the UE engineer tell you that editor mode is more resource heavy than the compiled version?
Running something in editor gives you up to 2x+ worse performance.

Valley demo for example required 64GB System RAM to run in editor but 7 GB in the compiled version.
And as seen in this video below, editor mode has higher fps than in gameplay. From 60fps in editor to 50fps in gameplay.

So imagine the fps if they hit play on the PS5 demo.
Dude you have no idea what you are talking about. They are both Editor.
One is resized to 60%-70% render screen percentage. The other is full screen 100%.
That's why it has lower FPS. This is like saying look "running this game at 4k has less fps than running it at 1080p".

About the RAM usage.
The 6.14 GB was only Nanite data in it's COMPRESSED FORM, that doesn't cover textures. Which is for larger than any of the geometry data.

So imagine the size of the uncompressed data in RAM. It would require the SSD to be streaming data in and out quickly.

With that being said, Tim Sweeney was right about the PS5s SSD in the beginning on my post.
The data isn't uncompressed in RAM. That 6.14 GB is in Nanite data format. Its exactly 6.14 GB in RAM.
That's why the Valley of the Ancient demo only uses 3GB RAM and 7GB VRAM while being around 6 GB Nanite data.
Lastly Valley of the Ancient demo has a bigger Texture data size than the PS5 Lumen in the land of nanite demo.
 
Last edited:

Loxus

Member
Sep 18, 2020
722
2,947
345
The Caribbean
Did you hear the UE engineer tell you that editor mode is more resource heavy than the compiled version?
Running something in editor gives you up to 2x+ worse performance.

Valley demo for example required 64GB System RAM to run in editor but 7 GB in the compiled version.

Dude you have no idea what you are talking about. They are both Editor.
One is resized to 60%-70% render screen percentage. The other is full screen 100%.
That's why it has lower FPS. This is like saying look "running this game at 4k has less fps than running it at 1080p".


The data isn't uncompressed in RAM. That 6.14 GB is in Nanite data format. Its exactly 6.14 GB in RAM.
That's why the Valley of the Ancient demo only uses 3GB RAM and 7GB VRAM while being around 6 GB Nanite data.
Lastly Valley of the Ancient demo has a bigger Texture data size than the PS5 Lumen in the land of nanite demo.
Clearly the dude mixed up his words as you can see with video proof, in gameplay you get a performance hit.

And you only prove my point, the video with the PS5 demo running in editor mode has less pixels to render and it's doing less than 30 fps. So imagine if he when into gameplay at full screen. Frame rate probably would have been @ 20 fps.

In the other video, the guy literally said it's Nanite data on disk in it's compressed form comes out to be 16.14GB. 16.14GB not 6.14GB and on disk not in RAM. Turn on closed caption and read what's really being said.

Clearly some butthurt PC fanboy nonsense going on with those two videos description.

The funny thing it doesn't even mention the other stuff like textures, other meshes and audio all uncompressed in RAM.
 

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
5,138
5,511
735
Clearly the dude mixed up his words as you can see with video proof, in gameplay you get a performance hit.

And you only prove my point, the video with the PS5 demo running in editor mode has less pixels to render and it's doing less than 30 fps. So imagine if he when into gameplay at full screen. Frame rate probably would have been @ 20 fps.

In the other video, the guy literally said it's Nanite data on disk in it's compressed form comes out to be 16.14GB. 16.14GB not 6.14GB and on disk not in RAM. Turn on closed caption and read what's really being said.

Clearly some butthurt PC fanboy nonsense going on with those two videos description.

The funny thing it doesn't even mention the other stuff like textures, other meshes and audio all uncompressed in RAM.

So you saying that the unreal 5 demo CANNOT run on pc with the same settings and fidelity?
 
  • Fire
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong