• 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.

Forspoken Load Times Are Barely A Second Long On PS5, Has Multiple Graphics Modes

Why faster loading times should count less? I can smell the hypocrise there.

Depends on the game I guess. If it’s one where you die a ton in and often faster loading might be desired over visuals. Like for example if one system lets you load in one second while the other takes two minutes it’s pretty obvious that the latter can get really annoying if you die often.

But in most cases if the difference is small then visuals are preferred over load times in most cases.

I’m not insulting you BTW.
Again, based on the quote I was responding to, it's comparing 1sec vs 1.Xsec loading times for having higher resolution, better visuals, better performance/framerate. I'll take the fraction of a second longer loading times, for better everything else. It's a no brainer. And it's kinda weird that only a "select" few that have an issue with something the majority of people would agree with me on. I smell hypocrisy.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
Again, based on the quote I was responding to, it's comparing 1sec vs 1.Xsec loading times for having higher resolution, better visuals, better performance/framerate. I'll take the fraction of a second longer loading times, for better everything else. It's a no brainer. And it's kinda weird that only a "select" few that have an issue with something the majority of people would agree with me on. I smell hypocrisy.

Oh no I have no issue with your hair cut. I was only talking about if the differences were big. Of course someone with a high end PC with an extremely fast I/O will never choose a console version over a PC one. I’m just stating the situation in which someone might prefer a console version over a PC version due to the load times. Anything is possible here and not everyone has the same hardware setup.

Nothing wrong with your underwear though.
 
Last edited:

Bo_Hazem

Gold Dealer
I don't know why any PC gamer would worry about load times in games. It's never been an issue even if it's a few seconds. I'm much more concerned with rendering speed and quality.

Because it can mean better data streaming in gameplay as well which could help with wasted GPU/RAM/CPU resources. Every extra bit is important, that's why nothing comes close to the quality of Ratchet & Clank and Spiderman on consoles so far.
 
Last edited:

Javthusiast

Gold Member
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
i mean ... considering FSR 2.0 can run on a generation or two older cards as well .. no it absolutely isn't something that needs RDNA 2.

Unless you're being cheeky here.

Nah your the one being cheeky.

I honestly thought it was something like DLSS 2.0 which requires certain hardware to run.
 

adamsapple

Gold Member
Nah your the one being cheeky.

I honestly thought it was something like DLSS 2.0 which requires certain hardware to run.

No, RDNA2 will have some "optimizations" over older generations, but that's basically saying newer thing runs it better than older thing.

It's not a minimum mandatory requirement. Official support goes back to the 10xx series cards as well.

 
Last edited:

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
No, RDNA2 will have some "optimizations" over older generations, but that's basically saying newer thing runs it better than older thing.

It's not a minimum mandatory requirement. Official support goes back to the 10xx series cards as well.


Yeah I agree with you since both systems are RDNA 2 they should have the same optimizations for FSR 2.0 . That’s if I’m understanding the article correctly BTW.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
Because it can mean better data streaming in gameplay as well which could help with wasted GPU/RAM/CPU resources. Every extra bit is important, that's why nothing comes close to the quality of Ratchet & Clank and Spiderman on consoles so far.
He like like other PCMR archair devs don't have a clue about anything regarding the "best in class" I/O of the PS5 and how games can take advantage of it.
 

lh032

I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
Cool, but i want to know whether this game will be good or just a tecnical showcase
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
He like like other PCMR archair devs don't have a clue about anything regarding the "best in class" I/O of the PS5 and how games can take advantage of it.

I know that if you have an SSD fast enough on PC you can equal or even surpass the PS5s I/O. But the PS5 has a lot of customizations (Ex I/O Complex) that allows it to be very efficient with its SSD and any SSD that you add to the system. That’s one of the benefits of fixed hardware.

I know that PCs will always be ahead but due to the open nature of the hardware there’s just some things you can’t do with them. Not that it’s needed of course if you brute force it enough.
 
Last edited:
PS5 continues to deliver the goods

Happy In Love GIF by TLC Europe

Damn that PS5 is big. I've seen so many pictures of it, and it still surprises me seeing that GIF. But I've always said that I don't care how big the PS5 is as long as it is efficient at it's thermal management. I can't stand my PS4 Pro sounding like a jet taking off on a daily basis.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Isa
Yeah, I'll take higher resolution, image quality, and framerates over a split second load times. Weird how that is so high on the ladder all of a sudden this generation?
Except PS5 out performs Series X in those categories just as often as the reverse. But, I'm guessing you are picking and choosing which games you want to believe Digital Foundry on.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
Damn that PS5 is big. I've seen so many pictures of it, and it still surprises me seeing that GIF. But I've always said that I don't care how big the PS5 is as long as it is efficient at it's thermal management. I can't stand my PS4 Pro sounding like a jet taking off on a daily basis.

Yes it definitely is big. But like you said it’s amazing how quiet it is when compared to the Pro. The Pro was so loud I can even hear it with my headphones on.

Anyways hopefully in the future Sony can shrink it down and keep the thermals in check.
 

MasterCornholio

Gold Member
Who mentioned XSX at all? I'm taking about PC this whole time. Some of y'all need to lay off the battle stuff...

I don’t think he read everything to be honest. What you said does sound like an argument that could be used for the XSX. I know you were just talking about PC Vs Consoles though.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
I know that if you have an SSD fast enough on PC you can equal or even surpass the PS5s I/O. But the PS5 has a lot of customizations (Ex I/O Complex) that allows it to be very efficient with its SSD and any SSD that you add to the system. That’s one of the benefits of fixed hardware.

I know that PCs will always be ahead but due to the open nature of the hardware there’s just some things you can’t do with them. Not that it’s needed of course if you brute force it enough.
Nope "currently" The PS5 has the fastest consumer grade I/O. If you aint running a workstation PC or dev kit you aint beating it.

Actually they have some catching up to do.
Direct Storage is a step towards catching up.
 

Unknown?

Member
We was specifically talking about the PC platform. That article was silly to mention the PC when they don't care about 10-20 secs of loading time. Nearly every game out loads fast enough with just an HDD. Anyone with a standard SSD doesn't even care about the loading times.

Consoles are a different matter.
If they didn't care they wouldn't be so butthurt when a console has one or two things better than their 3K machine.
 

Shmunter

Gold Member
True, things must be getting sweaty

If Direct storage underperforms compared to console, there will be blood. My only interest is pc not holding back advancement in the most neglected part of the memory pipeline.
 
Last edited:

Lone Wolf

Member
I've seen it

I think adamsapple adamsapple & @SenjutsuSage both were very very concerned.:lollipop_anxious_sweat:

You would be surprised, but then again, probably not....lol.

Its damn near the middle of 2022 and pre launch, launch year nonsense is still rearing its ugly head.

Amazing.

I even saw a post suggesting it would take more work to get FSR 2.0 to work on the PS5. Thats a valid opinion, but still...why someone would think that, I have no idea.

And as far as loading speeds being talked about so much....

You would think that loading actually getting worse as years went by
And damn near anything related to graphics getting better as years went by

Loading getting better would be talked about more.

Thats like common sense.
I Know VRS 2.0 was mentioned, never saw FSR 2.0 brought up as impossible on PS5.
 
True, things must be getting sweaty

If Direct storage underperforms compared to console, there will be blood. My only interest is pc not holding back advancement in the most neglected part of the memory pipeline.
PC already has faster drives than PS5, and there's no reason the direct storage software won't do its job.

Really I think slower nvme drives than PS5 has will still be faster on PC due to much faster cpu speed.
 

jaysius

Member
It’s a shame the combat and other gameplay looks like pure shit.

A game can’t sell well on fast load times alone.
 

OsirisBlack

Member
I've been up and down on this game didn't like the first showing at all then the second was a bit better but now I really just don't know. I don't go by review scores and generally just buy things that I think I will play (Eventually, backlog = most of 2019-2021) It's weird but for a SE game, the music and art style really hasn't grabbed me at all.
 
  • Empathy
Reactions: Isa
PS5 storage i/o isn’t handled by cpu at all. Its completely offloaded when used correctly by devs.
Direct storage on PC seems to do the same "will reduce cpu overhead by up to 40%, with an nvme drive using windows 11."

Microsoft is recommending drives with at least 2.5gb/s speed... Which is on the slow side. There's PC drives that hit 7gb/s.
 
Last edited:

hlm666

Member
That makes perfect sense because compared to consoles PCs have always had access to multiple times the RAM, so when 2nd gen cheap streaming storage reached consoles it had a much bigger impact on consoles than on PC because it helped data arrive just in time to that small memory to leverage the processing of the consoles better.

Despite the advent of clipmaps, it wasn't really until Carmack's second iteration of megatextures in Rage - underpinned by clipmap techniques - that the PC joined the streaming party.

The enthusiasm for the IO complex, Velocity Architecture and direct storage in the console space isn't about faster loading times as the objective. The whole end game is to have REYES streaming and do away with loading times completely. So at some point when REYES becomes the new standard for graphics engines on a console or consoles(probably 2027 at the latest), the HDD and SATA SSD, and possibly even the non RTX IO accelerated nvme SSD might not be enough for a 16GB RAM PC with a 12GB VRAM to stream the game, or stream as smoothly as the XsX/PS5,
Direct Storage should be enough. We have had Epic say it's fine (or not even needed really) for nanite and we are seeing stuff like this where they say a 300mb buffer is all they need for 40gb assets.

 

Isa

Member
Well it could've been true on last gen too if you have a huge gas capacity.
Ah man, takes me back to the good ol' days of waiting forever to go between loading screens. I think this guy might be able to do it, what with a staple diet of cabbage, soft cheeses and beer.

Seriously though, I'm looking forward to trying it. I actually really appreciate the loading times in these new systems. Even playing last-gen games is often improved. I actually have to pause the game if I want to quickly do something. Besides tear ass.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
I dont know if you even need direct storage for load times. Just stick a 7.0 gbps ssd in there and every game will load in seconds.

i think red dead 2 is the only game that takes a long time. every recent game takes 2-3 seconds to load. Horizon was fast traveling in seconds.

That's not how pc works at all though, they've never been able to saturate that kind of speed on a PC nvme drive before. Loading times haven't been hugely different between an sata drive and an nvme in a PC. So if they can get close to the custome built PS5 solution in their first attempt I'll be highly impressed. Even if its like 1 second vs 1.8 or something that's damn cool.
 
Top Bottom