man gaming communities are living of rumours and misinformation lately, what the fuck is going on
what's killzone has to do with nanite?
if it doesn't matter then why it says Nanite memory?Nanite is a barren spell. The console transfers data from the SSD to RAM. It doesn't matter what you call the code on the side of the game engine that processes the data. Nanite, Granite, No-name. It doesn't matter. Efficient streaming aims to save bus throughput and RAM space. That is all.
I guess that's what happens when you treat every bit of positive news as the second coming and every bit of negative news as lies straight from the mouth of Satan himself. You start jumping at shadows.Wikipedia has a good page on what has happened at the beginning of this gen (and last gen) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty,_and_doubt#Microsoft
Not enough next gen games are out to compare. The games that are out doesn’t show any of the magic sauce Xbox fanboys have been wet dreaming about since the console launch. At least Sony fanboys have a few games that show what’s possible.man gaming communities are living of rumours and misinformation lately, what the fuck is going on
no they not talking about streaming pool as a global streaming pool for every asset it's pool only for geometry... sure .. /as I have already spokenth !! .. .. "streaming pool is a streaming pool .. just a little bigger /+ textures, + audio/"./
no they not talking about streaming pool as a global streaming pool for every asset it's pool only for geometry.
textures takes up most of RAM out of 16gb geometry takes just 768mb speaking about UE5 demo hope that makes things clear.
traditional mip streaming means no PRT. Virtualised textures is not synonymous with PRT+ but is how PRT is done. PRT is very specific.Traditional mip streaming does not mean with PRT, he mentions this specifically in the demo where he says the entire floor is loaded. What is partially resident about that if the whole thing needs to be loaded?Traditional mip streaming in today's AAA games market almost certainly means some form of virtualized texture paging system aka PRT. What would be the point in Microsoft building their console around a technique that has absolutely zero real benefit over what was already being used largely across Xbox consoles?
Microsoft built their system around technology and features designed to greatly outperform what was being used on xbox one generation titles. Enter Sampler Feedback Streaming. I highly doubt a Microsoft engineer working on it would be calling it a brand new feature or capability. I
my argument to you was that streaming in UE5 demo 768mb is just for geometry not how engine streams anything it needs of course it does i'm not arguing about that. you seem ignorant to fact that textures takes way more then 768mb to stream one asset in UE5 takes more then that so how is? like you said textures + audio takes just little bit over that? that ' doesn't makes sense.Definitive language barrier. I dont give a flying fuck what Nanite does with geometry in an ordinary demo. In the game UE5 will stream anything as needed / texture, geometry, audio /. It doesn't matter how much space the texture will take up from RAM. The aim is to work with as little data as possible, directly in the screen space. If the GTA6 has 500 gigabytes of data and 380 gigabytes of textures, it doesn't matter how much RAM you have.
my argument to you was that streaming in UE5 demo 768mb is just for geometry not how engine streams anything it needs of course it does i'm not arguing about that. you seem ignorant to fact that textures takes way more then 768mb to stream one asset in UE5 takes more then that so how is? like you said textures + audio takes just little bit over that? that ' doesn't makes sense.
remember that we're talking about streaming SSD to RAM it doesn't work per frame basis this is not RAM to GPU caching.
Microsoft might have an ace up its sleeve to trump the PS5′ Kraken tech.
Of the many things Mark Cerny explained in detail during Sony’s recent deep dive into the PS5’s tech, one thing he mentioned was the console’s new texture decompression tech, called Kraken. Though it’s too specific to be anything but technical jargon to the layman, it should prove to be quite useful to developers, owing to how much more efficiently it operates than the current gen consoles.
Texture decompression isn’t something that Microsoft have talked about for the Xbox Series X too much yet, but according to industry professionals, their solution might be better even than Sony’s Kraken. Richard Geldreich, who formerly worked at Valve and Ensemble Studios, took to Twitter to say that Microoft’s texture decompression, BCPack, is their “dark horse” and might be a stronger option than Kraken.
He posed that question to James Stanard, who works on graphics optimization R&D and engine architecture on Microsoft. Though Stanard was reluctant to divulge many details about it, he went on to explain it briefly, it is specifically designed for texture decompression, before Geldreich added that being dedicated tech for this purpose will allow it to function more efficiently than Kraken, which is more of a general purpose system.
One thing that’s becoming clearer in recent days is that the PS5 and the Xbox Series both have significant advantages over the other in different areas– but both of them are incredible pieces of hardware that developers are quite excited to work on. Here’s hoping both of them reveal more details about their next-gen consoles in the near future.
before Geldreich added that being dedicated tech for this purpose will allow it to function more efficiently than Kraken, which is more of a general purpose system.
does that link have to prove something?
does that link have to prove something?
do you think assets just accumulate in size inside RAM until it fills up when streaming? you know what's flushing is? you can have 4GB of RAM if you have very fast SSD it will work just fine even if game is 500GB in size.
does that link have to prove something?Total language barrier. You answer me in my own words and you ask something that no one asks, because it is completely clear and repeatedly answered. I have no idea what you're asking now.
i'm telling you that's streaming pool can't be so small for every asset if that would be the case we won't need 16GB of ram because 15GB would be unused. we're in 2021 modern game assets take at least 8GB... sure .. /as I have already spokenth !! .. .. "streaming pool is a streaming pool .. just a little bigger /+ textures, + audio/"./
Games are not video-playback (well, most games) so no - that's not how those numbers work.you can't have games long 10 hours with a size of 47gb and stream 22gb/s....cmon now ...lol the stream will be even lower 500 mb/s
Yes and both are bad really.It is as disingenuous (well unless taken and explained with a pinch of salt) as discussing about compression ratios in a way.
Microsoft was not comparing to games w/ PRT on Xbox One.
You can tell that by looking at the slide right before the demo of SFS.. where they outright state PRT was rare last generation.
Which I believe it was.. the idea that most games were doing PRT last gen seems to be a bit of a straw man. The tech was developed and in the chips for last gen, and in PC GPUs, but the i/o limitations held it back.. iD was one of the only companies to do anything decent with it, as they had experience with that tech even on the PS3 gen, but the same I/O limitations existed between PS3/PS4, and Rage 2 still had pop-in issues fairly apparent.
Look at the slide that appears RIGHT before the SFS demo:
Through specialized hardware added to the Xbox One X, we were able to analyze texture memory usage by the GPU and we discovered that the GPU often accesses less than 1/3 of the texture data required to be loaded in memory. A single scene often includes thousands of different textures resulting in a significant loss in effective memory and I/O bandwidth utilization due to inefficient usage.
As textures have ballooned in size to match 4K displays, efficiency in memory utilisation has got progressively worse - something Microsoft was able to confirm by building in special monitoring hardware into Xbox One X's Scorpio Engine SoC. "From this, we found a game typically accessed at best only one-half to one-third of their allocated pages over long windows of time," says Goossen.
With this insight, we were able to create and add new capabilities to the Xbox Series X GPU which enables it to only load the sub portions of a mip level into memory, on demand, just in time for when the GPU requires the data. This innovation results in approximately 2.5x the effective I/O throughput and memory usage above and beyond the raw hardware capabilities on average. SFS provides an effective multiplier on available system memory and I/O bandwidth, resulting in significantly more memory and I/O throughput available to make your game richer and more immersive.
The point I continue to make is Microsoft was comparing to all Xbox One generation games period, with PRT, without, doesn't matter. And they came away from all that extensive monitoring and analysis with this one conclusion.
I edited my post.. your point about the 3 bars is a good one.In that demo if they were comparing to SFS running on Series X to Xbox One X, the multiplier would be 4.9x or higher in some cases.
Microsoft is saying that games that use Sampler Feedback Streaming on Series X will have a major advantage over games that don't use Sampler Feedback Streaming on Series X where effective system memory and effective I/O bandwidth are concerned.
The conclusion that "X, we were able to analyze texture memory usage by the GPU and we discovered that the GPU often accesses less than 1/3 of the texture data." Often.. meaning, for the majority of games?
Like.. how they said the majority of games don't use PRT last gen?
Why in the world would you read that statement and conclude that it was based on some average over "all games"?
Even if it was.. MS themselves stated that PRT had "limited adoption of this feature".. right before doing the SFS demo.
So if it wasn't used very much.. even if your weird logic is true, and they were comparing based on some average, that average would lean heavily towards how much data non PRT solutions use.
I edited my post.. your point about the 3 bars is a good one.
edit: you know what? Actually it's a terrible point lol
They are clearly comparing against non-PRT solutions since SFS IS their next-gen PRT solution.
SFS does not make PRT 3 times more efficient.. that's.. nutty.
As we look to the future, the Xbox Series X’s Sampler Feedback for Streaming (SFS) is a game-changer for how we think about world streaming and visual level of detail. We will be exploring how we can use it in future titles to both increase the texture detail in our game beyond what we can fit into memory, as well as reduce load times further by increasing on-demand loading to just before we need it, instead of pre-loading everything up-front as we would use a more traditional ‘level loading’ approach.”
While this is true. By using PRT without SF, the game would need a lot of mips stored into RAM just to have them on standby in case they need to be used later (still better memory savings than having the whole texture stored into RAM). As HDD (which game engines were built in mind) is not fast enough to stream mips in real time, and there is no information from SF of what would load in the next frame.Sorry for the edits.. you are making no sense bro.
SFS is PRT+ w/ includes PRT.. which is why MS's explanations of it include an explanation of what PRT does w/o SFS.
You don't load entire mip levels with PRT... so their explanation of how games used 3 times the memory they needed for textures, they clearly aren't referring to PRT.
MIcrosoft's demo is about an advancement over last gen.. which is A-OK.. what's bizarre is this obsession w/ acting like it's some multiplier over what PS5 could do.. PS5 almost certainly supports PRT at the very least.
You want to believe the 2.5x multiplier effect won't be happening, but it almost has to if the large majority of Xbox One generation games and Xbox Series X games now aren't using PRT.
While this is true. By using PRT without SF, the game would need a lot of mips stored into RAM just to have them on standby in case they need to be used later (still better memory saving than storing the whole texture). As HDD is not fast enough to stream them in real time.
I never said this and it wasn't my point.
The multiplier is real; it's just not some multiplier fully exclusive to Xbox Series consoles, as we don't know how much more efficient it is than PRT w/o it, as MS is clearly using numbers comparing to last-gen games that don't use PRT.
Their R&D lead says it's more efficient than PRT, and I believe them.. but that's not what the 3x multiplier is based on.
For sure.. others have implied it's a multiplier over what other systems could do, sorry if I misunderstood you.I never said it was... I'm only talking about how this can make xbox series games better over games that don't use it. I'm not comparing it to anything else. But clearly this is a major focus of Microsoft's entire Xbox Velocity Architecture for next gen. SFS is the heart of it all.
For sure.. others have implied it's a multiplier over what other systems could do, sorry if I misunderstood you.
And I do agree with you, the multiplier is real, it's logical.
People have been repeating the myth that every game used PRT last generation to justify it not being a good measure... but that wasn't true. PRT existed, the tech was invented many years ago.. it was used here or there.. but 5400RPM drives weren't really going to ever be able to do PRT for the most part.
Many games did some really insane things with data streaming as far back as Xbox 360 days... the fact that ANYONE pulled off anything like PRT on last gen, and iD the gen before it.. is insane...and the best of the best streaming engines likely outdid what MS is using as a baseline by quite a bit. So it's not likely to be a "3 times multiplier over the absolute best streaming data implementation from last gen".. but it definitely would still be an advancement over even those engines.
Hopefully it's also as easy to use as MS has said, and hopefully it actually DOES get used lol
Either way, fast I/O will enable people doing similar things w/ engines that don't actually leverage SFS on Xbox as well. It's sort of that compounding factor of having many times the speed of last gen as well as that much more processing power on the CPU side. The speed enables techniques that make memory usage more EFFICIENT as well as just... well.. giving more speed.
How many more times do you want to post these screenshots? You already done this atleast ten times in last 24 hours alone.Yep, the fact that PRT is waster of memory due to its lack of accuracy even if it does have some memory saving elements is being lost in the mix. It's not as effective without Sampler Feedback, as explained by the man who works on this stuff more than any of us in this thread.
Do I believe SFS is roughly 2.5x more memory efficient than PRT on last gen consoles and 2.5x more memory efficient than PRT on next gen consoles? Absolutely! Because no matter how much faster the SSD gets for next gen consoles, that fundamental lack of accuracy of what is missing and what to stream next is not as powerful without Sampler Feedback.
Read the below and it's clear. PRT might save some memory, but it doesn't truly come into its own without the help of Sampler Feedback. Hence, Sampler Feedback Streaming is CLEARLY more efficient than plain PRT, I'm betting the exact 2.5x-3x rough figure Microsoft has given.
lolIt better fucking get used!!!
Or else this is gonna be me coming back to the thread 7 years from now..
Do I believe SFS is roughly 2.5x more memory efficient than PRT on last gen consoles and 2.5x more memory efficient than PRT on next gen consoles? Absolutely!
And? It's the guy who practically wrote the code.. so he is right. Yet everyone keeps posting here .. they should close this thread and move on.How many more times do you want to post these screenshots? You already done this atleast ten times in last 24 hours alone.
How is it relevant? Nobody said that content of tweets is not legit. Doesn't mean that we should post this every 15 minutes.And? It's the guy who practically wrote the code.. so he is right. Yet everyone keeps posting here .. they should close this thread and move on.