Musky_Cheese
Banned
I trust no information or speculation unless it is from a Hellpoint Dev
-
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.
Xbox Series X’s BCPack Texture Compression Technique 'might be' better than the PS5’s Kraken
- Thread starter greencoder
- Start date
thelastword
Banned
Well no, the last few days we have been discussing mostly tangibles.....12.1TF vs 10.3 + (custom hardware), 5.5 SSD vs 2.4 SSD, 3.6Ghz vs 3.5Ghz, Tempest Audio vs AMD+Dolby……..So yes we have been discussing tangibles, these tweets are discussing imaginary woulda shoulda coulda...…..
TBiddy
Member
Tempest vs. Acoustics/AMD/Atmos is very theoretical, considering none of us have seen/heard the effects. It's the same with the TF, the SSDs and every single other piece of hardware in the consoles. We have no idea how it will actually effect the games.
So yes. It's assumptions and guesswork. Very biased guesswork, mind.
martino
Member
what is even more imaginary for now is what will bring this ssd advantage
Last edited:
LostDonkey
Member
Shhhhhhhh ffs you cant make a thread like this.
PS5 is the best and thats final!!!!
PS5 is the best and thats final!!!!
oldergamer
Member
2.5GB is more then enough i?O bandwidth. we're coming from 50MB to 2.5 GB. More than 40x the i/o bandwidth. Do you really think double is going to help that much more? you are grasping at straws.
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
So if Kraken gives 20 to 30 % compression and PS5 uses Kraken - how can they achieve 8 to 9 GB of compressed data read speeds? It should be between 6.9 and 7.9 GB. Vs. XSX at 4.8 GB of compressed data (with BCPack at 50+ % compression).
SkeletonQuays
Member
So then the jury is still out for me one which console I will be getting first. It's not ALL about the specs (and I'll definitely be getting both machines at some point) but I will be honest in saying that when I plug in that first next gen console I expect to be blown away so I'll generally go with the more impressive tech first. Last gen it was ps5 first then the xbox got some games that I couldn't resist and I picked one up (TF, Ori, Sunset, Gears4). As much as people throw rocks at these threads for being system warrish I think they're pretty beneficial for those of us trying trying to determine the superior console as long as it remains flame free.
They are just explaining the advantages of the tech, has nothing to do with the raw speed of the SSD and the PS5 will still be faster, settle down.
Son_of_Zardoz
Banned
I am extremely disappointed because I was only interested in preordering the XSX on the assumption it was the most BRUTE FORCE-Y of all the consoles. I'll have to reconsider my purchase now since it appears that there may have been some efficiency engineered into the XSX. IF THAT'S THE CASE, NO DICE M$!!!!!
SleepDoctor
Banned
We seriously need an ot. All this shit is redundant. Show us games not specs, im over that.
I think the bandwidth of the memory is much more important
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
The quote is from a guy who literally works at MS right? Or am I misreading this?
Entrepreneur at Binomial, open source dev. Previously SpaceX, Valve, and Ensemble Studios
squarealex
Member
When I see State of Decay 2, yes
(and the game still loads textures / shaders )
The most funny part is Microsoft Vid was full official when Sony is "a leak" under on development..
The first thing Sony was build on PS5 is the SSD and all the bottleneck for an access instantaneous between (V)RAM/GPU/CPU and SSD.
When Microsoft build the Series X with the SSD on last on the concept.. (and cartridge)...
Last edited:
When I see State of Decay 2, yes
The most funny part is Microsoft Vid was full official when Sony is "a leak" under on developpement.
The first thing Sony was build on PS5 is the SSD and all the bottleneck for an access instantaneous entre (V)RAM/GPU/CPU and SSD.
When Microsoft build the Series X with the SSD on last on the concept.. (and cartridge)...
uh. The thing that Sony showed there was just a Demo in a controlled environment.
MS is just showing how an unoptimized Xbox one game could benefit from the SSD in terms of SSD.
The game wasn’t even enhanced for Xbox series X.
How was the Spider-Man demo? This is just a demo, not a real world scenario.
squarealex
Member
So Undead Labs wich is part of Microsoft Family (since 2018) dont know Xbox Series X and SSD for the "SoD2 Enhanced" than Insomniac was still independant when this demo appears?
Very promising for the future games Microsoft Games Studio! When you know the bottleneck of Series X is One S / One X (and PC Potato).
Last edited:
TBiddy
Member
Are you really comparing a non-optimized game with a tech demo designed to show of that particular feature?
squarealex
Member
So why show this "non-optimized" unless to say "hey Xbox One X users, look how your console at 499$ have shitty loading."
TBiddy
Member
Because if they did like Sony and showed a tech demo, people like you would say "LOL, it's just a tech demo. SHOW ME THE GAMES". No matter what, you'd be complaining. Maybe they pick SoD because it's infamous for long loading times. Maybe they picked it randomly. Who knows.
Comparing it with a tech-demo is just silly, though.
it_wasn't_me
Banned
Yep, XSX SSD decompression theoretical speed 6GB/s vs. PS5 SSD theoretical speed 22GB/s = XSX is better in every way
Since you bitching out how only Sony 1st and 2nd party INDIE devs are praising PS5, you forgot to mention that this person also is working at Microsoft.
Entrepreneur at Binomial, open source dev. Previously SpaceX, Valve, and Ensemble Studios/Microsoft
BUT THAT DOESN'T COUNT
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Cool. BCPack looks like a sweet feature for SeX.
TBiddy
Member
It would be more interesting to know the average decompression speeds than some theoretical number that will never ever be reached.
ethomaz
Banned
The base makes difference.
50% compression to 2.4GB/s will give you 4.8GB/s.
50% compression to 5.5GB/s will give you 11GB/s.
75% compression to 2.4GB/s will give you 7.2GB/s.
75% compression to 5.5GB/s will give you 22GB/s.
Actually MS specs already showed the compression is better then PS5 for typical tasks if we believe their numbers.
MS 4.8GB/s = 50%
PS5 9GB/a = ~40%
Sony doesn’t need better compression because the SSD is already so even low compression will looks pretty good.
Bu if if you need compression Kraken can reach 75% (22GB/s).
If MS reaches 75% compression they will be at 7.2GB/s only.
50% compression to 2.4GB/s will give you 4.8GB/s.
50% compression to 5.5GB/s will give you 11GB/s.
75% compression to 2.4GB/s will give you 7.2GB/s.
75% compression to 5.5GB/s will give you 22GB/s.
Actually MS specs already showed the compression is better then PS5 for typical tasks if we believe their numbers.
MS 4.8GB/s = 50%
PS5 9GB/a = ~40%
Sony doesn’t need better compression because the SSD is already so even low compression will looks pretty good.
Bu if if you need compression Kraken can reach 75% (22GB/s).
If MS reaches 75% compression they will be at 7.2GB/s only.
Last edited:
eastwood333
Banned
But.... PS5's gotta have a win in something.
On topic. There is a dev going in detail on twitter about why XSX BCPack appears better than Kraken. Maybe somebody can find it. This gamingbolt article does not go into any detail and the writer is clearly not a technical person.
On topic. There is a dev going in detail on twitter about why XSX BCPack appears better than Kraken. Maybe somebody can find it. This gamingbolt article does not go into any detail and the writer is clearly not a technical person.
ethomaz
Banned
Cerny give you the average... 8-9GB/s.
That is around 40% compression.
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
So PS5 SSD speeds increased from 5.5 gb/s on their official blog to 8-9 gb/s, to 11 gb/s to now a theoretical max of Kraken 22 gb/s.
I never knew great games needed 22 gb/s of data transfer on a 10 tf system.
Look out PC power riggers, your HDD or 1 gb/s SSD are obsolete.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
It is directly related to SSD speeds.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
Increase?
It was reveled with these numbers.
People already linked you Road of PS5 video but you keep blind lol
Games on PC barely uses SSD speeds... it is very underutilized.
Last edited:
it_wasn't_me
Banned
Yeah, you mean this guy.
Almost 5 days ago and.......................................................................
NOTHING!!!!
Last edited:
it_wasn't_me
Banned
Btw, about Dynamic Voltage Gaming, very young, opened twitter account this month.
Of course he would provide the SSD test between PS5 and XSX, but nevertheless :
Xbox Series X Exclusive From Dynamic Voltage Games Will Run At Native 4K, 120 FPS
Of course he would provide the SSD test between PS5 and XSX, but nevertheless :
Xbox Series X Exclusive From Dynamic Voltage Games Will Run At Native 4K, 120 FPS
eastwood333
Banned
No, that's not him
it_wasn't_me
Banned
No, that's not him
Nevertheless, still waiting for test where XSX is to beat PS5 SSD decompressions speed which you hardly wait.
it_wasn't_me
Banned
That's above XSX SSD theoretical number which is of course, imposibruuuuuuu
ethomaz
Banned
He doesn't have PS5 Devkit.
He will probably use a PC with SSD to try to "show" the evidence lol
Last edited:
it_wasn't_me
Banned
He is reliable, though. /s And the problem is, Jason Schreier didn't asked him what he thinks about PS5 SSD. When I think better, then he wouldn't be reliable if Jason asked him.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
Well but that is what compression do.
You have a SSD that can transfer 2.4GB/S of uncompressed data.
When you compress the data you continue transferring 2.4GB/s but your data is compressed so when it is decompressed it show it real size.
Exemple.
Xbox has 2.4GB data compressed in 50%... that means that real data is 4.8GB without compression... it takes 1s to reach the memory but before it is written in the memory the BCPack decompress it to 4.8GB.
So traveled 2.4GB but it was actually 4.8GB compressed... that is why they say you can do 4.8GB/s compressed.
So more compressed you will "virtually" get more speeds because you are traveling more data even that the hardware actually is only working at 2.4GB/s.
If MS compress the data with 75% then it will be traveling 7.2GB in one second.
There is no limit to compression... the biggest issue is that the decompression of the other side needs to be faster enough to not delay the data.
You can reach even 90% or more of compression but if you need too much to decompress then it is not viable... like if you need 1s to decompress a 90% compression then you will delay the GPU/CPU work.
Decompression needs to be more close possible to instantaneos.
That is why you can't use too strong algorithms.
Last edited:
eastwood333
Banned
Ah,here it is. Richard Geldreich(worked at SpaceX,Valve,MS etc) says "
Some back of the envelope figures:
- Kraken: Reduces the size of a complex non-RDO encoded BC7 format texture (say a normal map) by approx. 20-30%.
- BCPack: Approx. 50+% size reduction. Depends on how far MS pushed the tech. Definitely more effective than just Kraken alone.
Some back of the envelope figures:
- Kraken: Reduces the size of a complex non-RDO encoded BC7 format texture (say a normal map) by approx. 20-30%.
- BCPack: Approx. 50+% size reduction. Depends on how far MS pushed the tech. Definitely more effective than just Kraken alone.
it_wasn't_me
Banned
Yes, i know that. But 6GB/s is official theoretical max. That's what i'm saying.
eastwood333
Banned
Nobody is going to know for sure which is better until more info is out.
ethomaz
Banned
Why? The limit is 2.4GB/s... if you can compress and after decompress near instantaneous you can have anything.
it_wasn't_me
Banned
But you already have that tweet in post 41
Last edited:
alabtrosMyster
Banned
Both companies gave expected maximum throughput of compressed assets:
Sx: 4.8GB/sec
Ps5: 9GB/sec
This has been more or less settled before it was a thing.
Sx: 4.8GB/sec
Ps5: 9GB/sec
This has been more or less settled before it was a thing.
it_wasn't_me
Banned
But how it can go above 7.2 GB/s when 6 is already a theoretical max? That's why i'm asking
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
Using these numbers...
PS5 20% compression = ~7GB/s
PS5 30% compression = ~8GB/s
Xbox 50% compression = ~5GB/s
But Cerny said PS5 compression averages at 8-9GB/s so it is about 30-40% not 20-30%.
Last edited: