Support NeoGAF

[sinnergy]

Both are really good.

I can just see the console wars starting about whose is faster like it actually matters

Like I said a year ago SSD wars have begun and look now ... loading ... loading

the most important thing in games is now loading ..

screw graphics , story , who needs those ..

 

[Thirty7ven]

It’s near instant on PS5, look at Assassins Creed video, very impressive.

And this is nothing, these are just loadings, just the beginning. The real fun is around the corner when the likes of Unreal 5 games start hitting.

Exactly. I’ll rarely need to cold boot on the series X because I can have 5 games loaded in game at once indefinitely. It’s like arguing about console cold boot times - who cares, mine cold boots once a year.

You won’t be able to evade those fast travel loadings in a game like Valhala regardless of quick resume.

This whole reframing to cold boot is just a smoke screen that has been going on.

 

[NXGamer]

Need DF or IGN or DF proper comparisons. These are just all over the place

I will have more to come very soon on this.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Comparing loading times is hard - clicking buttons takes some time, loading with internet connection issues, menu navigation takes some time etc.
Guess it will become art at the end of the gen.

 

[Shmunter]

I will have more to come very soon on this.

Legend.

Are you in any position for gauging quality of 3D sound implementation?

 

[Thirty7ven]

Considering you're the one cherry picking numbers for some reason, it would seem the pot is calling the kettle. What am I trying to justify?

Back to the point, if we want to compare the cold boot exclusively, of course that's fine, and that's absolutely a valuable metric to have in understanding these systems. In the post you replied to, we weren't talking cold boot numbers. You just replied and pasted them in for seemingly no reason at all. But, to be fair, in the cold boot race, based on what we have, it seems Sony is the clear winner. Hats off, here's the bottle of bubbly, enjoy the celebration.
However, for a completely fair comparison, we also need to acknowledge that the cold boot race isn't the only one being ran. Cold boot isn't how people are going to be starting the majority of their games on the Series X and Series S. Microsoft have provided an OS feature called quick resume that allows me to get from the OS - or other games - into the game potentially faster than Sony's machine can cold boot. The feature is called quick resume and it's automatic - it just works as part of the console's operations. So, that comparison is just as valuable a metric as the cold boot - and, I'd argue more so for the real world use case discussions, because every Series X owner is going to be using it for every game after the first time they start it up.

Quick resume is a cool feature. But a game like Valhala for example where you can save anywhere and auto saves constantly, being able to load the save directly from the dashboard will provide similar results.

And then there’s the fast travel. Something you do a whole lot in a game like this. And fast travel, well, a OS feature like Quick Resume won’t make it any faster.

And this is just the sugar coating, the first bite of what’s possible.

 

[MrFunSocks]

It’s near instant on PS5, look at Assassins Creed video, very impressive.

And this is nothing, these are just loadings, just the beginning. The real fun is around the corner when the likes of Unreal 5 games start hitting.




You won’t be able to evade those fast travel loadings in a game like Valhala regardless of quick resume.

This whole reframing to cold boot is just a smoke screen that has been going on.

So what’s the load time difference for fast travel?

 

[Thirty7ven]

So what’s the load time difference for fast travel?

Considering it takes the same time to load the save as it does fast travel on Xbox, we are looking at 16-17s there, and if the video on the first page is any clue...much faster on PS5? We need to see it, but the loading there was 2 to 3 seconds.

We need to wait for more comprehensive comparisons. I was just highlighting that focusing on cold boot loading is just... come on, as if.

 

[Lort]

Load times on ps5 are instant!!

.. so on the xbox it will be 2x0 = 0 seconds right? So theres no advantage? ..

 

[MrFunSocks]

Considering it takes the same time to load the save as it does fast travel on Xbox, we are looking at 16-17s there, and if the video on the first page is any clue...much faster on PS5? We need to see it, but the loading there was 2 to 3 seconds.

We need to wait for more comprehensive comparisons. I was just highlighting that focusing on cold boot loading is just... come on, as if.

Yeh cold boot times are irrelevant, and I’ve mainly seen the Sony guys banging on about how important they are.

If Assassins creeds quick travel takes 2 seconds on PS5 but 17 seconds on Xbox then the devs have fucked up. We know the SSD speeds, so at worst the Xbox should be twice as slow. 2 seconds on PS5 = 4 seconds on Xbox. Anything worse and the devs have done something very wrong.

 

[BlueXImpulse]

I will have more to come very soon on this.

Looking forward to it.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Yeh cold boot times are irrelevant, and I’ve mainly seen the Sony guys banging on about how important they are.

If Assassins creeds quick travel takes 2 seconds on PS5 but 17 seconds on Xbox then the devs have fucked up. We know the SSD speeds, so at worst the Xbox should be twice as slow. 2 seconds on PS5 = 4 seconds on Xbox. Anything worse and the devs have done something very wrong.

I also think the loading on XSX was too slow considering the specs.

It’s early days so maybe it’s down to tools atm.

The I/O can be more than twice as fast on PS5 though, and will be more more and more often as devs explore options like oodle texture.

 

[Eternal21]

So PS5 is quite faster, just like expected. Seems the only exception are games that need to be ran in BC mode.

 

[J_Gamer.exe]

Watch dogs is actually 48 seconds from boot to being able to move the character, but there are several logos and unskippable sequences, then the menu, campaign, continue etc.

Watch dogs fast travel from the most southeast to the most northwest of the map is 8.9s.

Source: just tested it.

I'm on about from the new game or continue menu screen to into gameplay I saw.

From os is a bad test given all splash screens etc.

 

[RoboFu]

That's not really close if you think about it. Shows at least 20-30% faster on the PS5 side if you look at percent differences.

Yup right where I said it should be.

 

[v_iHuGi]

So PS5 is quite faster, just like expected. Seems the only exception are games that need to be ran in BC mode.

Well it's science & Maths. Differences will grow with time since Ps5 can reach 22gb/s in the future but don't expect that to to be the NORM.

I expect a average of 9.5/11gb per s.

 

[Stuart360]

Both are really good, and its closer than i expected to be honest. I'm sure 3 or 4 seconds difference will be a 'huge' problem for some people, but really i'd rather look at it from the angle of going from 1-3min loading time on current gen, down to literally a few seconds to half a minute on next gen.

 

[MrFunSocks]

I also think the loading on XSX was too slow considering the specs.

It’s early days so maybe it’s down to tools atm.

The I/O can be more than twice as fast on PS5 though, and will be more more and more often as devs explore options like oodle texture.

The series s/x have velocity and sfs too though. The reality is that only first party games are going to really take advantage of all of the IO customisation, and then you can’t really compare because the games aren’t on the other console.

People just need to settle down and be happy that both consoles are going to have very fast loading to the point where it’s irrelevant which one is faster by a few seconds.

 

[FritzJ92]

That's not really close if you think about it. Shows at least 20-30% faster on the PS5 side if you look at percent differences.

But someone said 20% advantage means nothing

 

[J_Gamer.exe]

Yeh cold boot times are irrelevant, and I’ve mainly seen the Sony guys banging on about how important they are.

If Assassins creeds quick travel takes 2 seconds on PS5 but 17 seconds on Xbox then the devs have fucked up. We know the SSD speeds, so at worst the Xbox should be twice as slow. 2 seconds on PS5 = 4 seconds on Xbox. Anything worse and the devs have done something very wrong.

Thats drastically oversimplified.

Your forgetting the bottlenecks that ps5 has dedicated hardware to overcome them all.

Xbox has a software solution that uses cpu cycles and probably adds latency.

If they haven't eliminated all bottlenecks then you won't see half as fast loading, but longer.

Thats why the superfast ssd alone can be only like this in real world results....

 

[assurdum]

Out...why people persist about the loading time argument? Two time faster SSD is not just for superior loading time...

 

[sinnergy]

Out...why people persist about the loading time argument? Two time faster SSD is not just for superior loading time...

It’s also about rendering .. its actually ssdgpus!! with rendering tech in them ..

 

[sinnergy]

Well it's science & Maths. Differences will grow with time since Ps5 can reach 22gb/s in the future but don't expect that to to be the NORM.

I expect a average of 9.5/11gb per s.

Same with Series X TF advantage, this will show in the future

 

[assurdum]

It’s also about rendering .. it actuate ssdgpus!!

Yes it is also for the rendering. It means ps5 can handle the double of data compared serie X so more various texture and details, and so on. Shocking, isn't it?

 

[Shmunter]

Same with Series X TF advantage, this will show in the future

Are teraflops hard to tap into?

 

[assurdum]

Same with Series X TF advantage, this will show in the future

Why in the future? I don't get this logic

 

[Bittermich]

Thats drastically oversimplified.

Your forgetting the bottlenecks that ps5 has dedicated hardware to overcome them all.

Xbox has a software solution that uses cpu cycles and probably adds latency.

If they haven't eliminated all bottlenecks then you won't see half as fast loading, but longer.

Thats why the superfast ssd alone can be only like this in real world results....

Bottlenecks? Is it why BC games on PS5 are taking so long to load?

 

[assurdum]

Bottlenecks? Is it why BC games on PS5 are taking so long to load?

General bottlenecks in any hardware between GPU , RAM and bandwidth usage. Ps5 SOC is customized to decrease it.

 

[Chukhopops]

I'm on about from the new game or continue menu screen to into gameplay I saw.

From os is a bad test given all splash screens etc.

Tried it now and it was 23.6 seconds from the "Continue" to in-game.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Same with Series X TF advantage, this will show in the future

This will show up straight away. Devs don’t need to rethink how their engine works to take advantage of more compute power, they have been doing it forever now.

 

[Allandor]

Like I said a year ago SSD wars have begun and look now ... loading ... loading

the most important thing in games is now loading ..

screw graphics , story , who needs those ..

you're totally right here. Up to a certain point, loading time matter. I really don't want to go back to 60s loading screens. But I really don't have a problem with 10s loading screens. This would be more than fast enough. On a certain point it really doesn't matter anymore how much faster the loading times are.

 

[Thirty7ven]

you're totally right here. Up to a certain point, loading time matter. I really don't want to go back to 60s loading screens. But I really don't have a problem with 10s loading screens. This would be more than fast enough. On a certain point it really doesn't matter anymore how much faster the loading times are.

While it’s true that for many people, you included, the difference in loading might not matter, this is just the easiest QOL boost the I/O puts on the table.

Once we start seeing Unreal 5 games and other engines properly tooled to take advantage of the new possibilities, we will finally start seeing why the improvement in I/O is such a huge deal for devs and games.

 

[J_Gamer.exe]

Tried it now and it was 23.6 seconds from the "Continue" to in-game.

Yeah, so ps5 can load openworld of spiderman feom a similar menu in under 2 seconds, so if utilised right we may see similar on watchdogs which if so would be a massive difference.

 

[J_Gamer.exe]

Bottlenecks? Is it why BC games on PS5 are taking so long to load?

We dont know for sure, could be a bc mode thing, could be because ps5 hardware is much different to last gen with revolutionary io hardware, its meant to use it, this doesn't, could be because old games were designed with the cpu to do the work where ps5 would use its extra hardware on next gen games and the xbox cpu runs at 3.8 ghz on some bc games. Who knows.

Either way, its a next gen console so what matters is what can be done with code designed for it.

When its written for or modified its ahead of anything, by far in some cases.

 

[sinnergy]

Yes it is also for the rendering. It means ps5 can handle the double of data compared serie X so more various texture and details, and so on. Shocking, isn't it?

To me it isn’t , I did 3d modeling, offline rendering and real time rendering ... but if you like to believe in pipe dreams, be my guest .

rendering depends on much more than a fast SSD.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Bottlenecks? Is it why BC games on PS5 are taking so long to load?

In the I/O system?

Well Spiderman through BC takes alot longer to load than the Remastered version. With the remastered version you can literally enter gameplay in 1 or 2 seconds while the game through BC takes alot longer.

 

[MilkyJoe]

I can wait an extra 1.5 seconds for 2 more tflops

Spoiler

Hello darkness my old friend...

 

[MasterCornholio]

I can wait an extra 1.5 seconds for 2 more tflops

Spoiler

Hello darkness my old friend...

Depends if those two extra flops make a massive difference. Otherwise most people are not going to care.

 

[sinnergy]

In the I/O system?

Well Spiderman through BC takes alot longer to load than the Remastered version. With the remastered version you can literally enter gameplay in 1 or 2 seconds while the game through BC takes alot longer.

So Sony didn’t really think through BC like MS did? Loading seems to go faster on Series X even for BC games ..

 

[Allandor]

While it’s true that for many people, you included, the difference in loading might not matter, this is just the easiest QOL boost the I/O puts on the table.

Once we start seeing Unreal 5 games and other engines properly tooled to take advantage of the new possibilities, we will finally start seeing why the improvement in I/O is such a huge deal for devs and games.

I know what you mean, but this doesn't ether make a huge difference. Because IO speed is still so much slower than main memory speed it does not really change much. At best you can load a bit less for the next few frames but that's about it. Not really much to get (also take into account, that many things from frame to frame don't change at all).
But yes, what we see right now (with the cross-gen games) we could even use SATA3 SSDs and wouldn't see a much increased loading speed until games really use the new SSDs.

 

[MilkyJoe]

Depends if those two extra flops make a massive difference. Otherwise most people are not going to care.

Oh they care...

 

[MasterCornholio]

So Sony didn’t really think through BC like MS did? Loading seems to go faster on Series X even for BC games ..

Pretty much but BC is still extremely good on the PS5 with the improvements that it has. It's not like the PS5 is playing the games like a PS4/PS4 Pro would. Did you know that?

 

[jigglet]

The PS5's speeds would legitimately sway me in the direction of PS. But the XBSX has so many other good qualities too. Hardest gen to decide between IMO.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Oh they care...

Then I'm predicting the XSX to outsell the PS5 because why would anyone buy a weaker console at the same price?

 

[MrLove]

Yeh cold boot times are irrelevant, and I’ve mainly seen the Sony guys banging on about how important they are.

If Assassins creeds quick travel takes 2 seconds on PS5 but 17 seconds on Xbox then the devs have fucked up. We know the SSD speeds, so at worst the Xbox should be twice as slow. 2 seconds on PS5 = 4 seconds on Xbox. Anything worse and the devs have done something very wrong.

 

[MrFunSocks]

Thats drastically oversimplified.

Your forgetting the bottlenecks that ps5 has dedicated hardware to overcome them all.

Xbox has a software solution that uses cpu cycles and probably adds latency.

If they haven't eliminated all bottlenecks then you won't see half as fast loading, but longer.

Thats why the superfast ssd alone can be only like this in real world results....

Ah yes, the bottlenecks that only Sony knew about. It’s not like Microsoft did any customisations or research around any of that either. They definitely didn’t make the velocity architecture or SFS or any of that stuff.

 

[assurdum]

To me it isn’t , I did 3d modeling, offline rendering and real time rendering ... but if you like to believe in pipe dreams, be my guest .

rendering depends on much more than a fast SSD.

Man it's hilarious every single time it points out some basic tech stuff, to the other side we need to paraphrase with "you know, I'm an expert because Im working with such things, you dream" followed with an inaccurate and opinable absolutism about the matter. So you say to have access to more faster data not means benefit as more various graphic assets and other stuff too. Mmm. GPU is all about quality pixels, sure, but for the quantity, I/O and storage access it's not meaningless or a minor factor and they play a big role. Of course if GPU is terribly weak, that's completely useless.

 

[assurdum]

Ah yes, the bottlenecks that only Sony knew about. It’s not like Microsoft did any customisations or research around any of that either. They definitely didn’t make the velocity architecture or SFS or any of that stuff.

Oh Good Lord. Bottlenecks are in the nature of any hardware. Sony has worked to improve the efficiency, is not just the only informed about this. The difference with MS is an hardware solution Vs software. The Xbox hardware is all about brute power but there isn't unique customisation in the hardware as in the ps5. I don't get it, if you are new to the argument should avoid to point out absurdity and talk just of what knows .

 

[J_Gamer.exe]

Ah yes, the bottlenecks that only Sony knew about. It’s not like Microsoft did any customisations or research around any of that either. They definitely didn’t make the velocity architecture or SFS or any of that stuff.

Yeah only Sony put all that dedicated hardware in for dealing with them.

We've seen the seriex x games with velocity architecture in use and upto 15 seconds on dirt when a big track. Watcheogs will utilise it too and like 24 seconds from game menu screen to game.

Sorry, not impressive considering the hype behind it and people claiming it would close the gap etc.

As said direct storage runs on a claimed tenth of a cpu core. The latency that will likely be added by using the cpu could be huge, in the tiny ms measurements.

So Sony has gone to unthinkable levels to eliminate the bottlenecks, the results tell us xbox is nowhere near as good.

 

[DavJay]

Sony hyped to eliminate load times completely. So disappointed in this gen.