• 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.

Xbox Series X’s BCPack Texture Compression Technique 'might be' better than the PS5’s Kraken

Heisenberg007

Member
Nov 16, 2020
1,987
6,767
445
Wrong. SFS apply WITH 4.8-6gb figure of the effective speed of the XSX IO.
This means that if a scene needs 12-15gb of texture data it can be loaded in about 1 sec using the AVERAGE numbers provided by Microsoft. (4.8gb/sec ucompressed x 2.5 SFS)

It doesn't make the IO go above it's weight. But the textures needed are more effectively transfered with SFS.
SFS isn't something that can increase XSX's uncompressed speed beyond what is already specified. Also, texture compression is primarily handled by BCPack.

All these techniques contribute to the 4.8 Gb/s uncompressed speed which is the average / most common. It can be pushed to up to 6 Gb/s if everything is optimized perfectly, which is the theoretical peak. PS5's theoretical peak is 22 Gb/s -- but that would be extremely rare, especially without Oodle.
 

MrLove

Member
Aug 4, 2020
94
457
250
I explained it with an example above. Please check.


Velocity Architecture is an umbrella term that contains 4 components (one of them is SFS). Because of those 4 components, XSX's 2.4 Gb/s raw speed becomes 4.8 Gb/s compressed data speed. Velocity Architecture or SFS doesn't apply after 4.8 Gb/s to increase it further.

For comparison: PS5's is double that speed at roughly 9 Gb/s (and that was before Oodle's introduction -- which can put it up in the range 15-17 GB/s).
Micrososft PR machine obviously takes old and well-known technologies, packaged under new marketing names and the fans are freaking out. The Velocity Architecture is nothing more than just a marketing name for the 4.8 GB/s compressed.

Partly resident textures (PRT +), sparse texture tilling can the PS4, XBone since 2013. The PS4 even in hardware


SFS in GCN (2011)


Official DX12 features


All the same. Microsoft sells the fans for stupid
 

Godfavor

Member
Jul 10, 2020
185
157
205
SFS isn't something that can increase XSX's uncompressed speed beyond what is already specified. Also, texture compression is primarily handled by BCPack.

All these techniques contribute to the 4.8 Gb/s uncompressed speed which is the average / most common. It can be pushed to up to 6 Gb/s if everything is optimized perfectly, which is the theoretical peak. PS5's theoretical peak is 22 Gb/s -- but that would be extremely rare, especially without Oodle.

No it won't compress it beyond the max theoretical speed of 4.8/6 gb sec.
SFS is not part of the IO, and it is not about compression at all.

SFS will determine which parts of the textures to be loaded. It requires partial texture rendering from the game engine for this to work. This is before any compression takes place and before the IO is activated.

SF and PRT was the previous method and it is not the same as SFS. SF uses partial textures that HAVE already been drawn in memory.

SFS takes it beyond and scraps textures before they were transferred through the IO, make it an effective multiplier for the 4.8 gb/sec figure.

Here are the links:

Talks about multiplying effective speed of the IO and memory usage:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/16217/the-xbox-series-x-review-ushering-in-next-gen/3

"Microsoft calculates that Sample Feedback Streaming on its own is an average 2.5x multiplier on how much memory is in the console, and the same 2.5x on SSD performance."

What SFS does:
 
Last edited:

Heisenberg007

Member
Nov 16, 2020
1,987
6,767
445
Micrososft PR machine obviously takes old and well-known technologies, packaged under new marketing names and the fans are freaking out. The Velocity Architecture is nothing more than just a marketing name for the 4.8 GB/s compressed.

Partly resident textures (PRT +), sparse texture tilling can the PS4, XBone since 2013. The PS4 even in hardware


SFS in GCN (2011)


Official DX12 features


All the same. Microsoft sells the fans for stupid
This is exactly what Velocity Architecture is. Not necessarily a bad thing, but in itself, it's nothing.

Velocity Architecture is neither a hardware nor a software. It's an umbrella term that basically refers to how Xbox takes the 2.4 Gb/s raw data throughput speed and convert it into 4.8 Gb/s.
 
Mar 17, 2020
1,340
4,418
490
Saudi Arabia
Go check the official PS5 spec sheets released from Sony, just stop with the rubbish it's misleading and not attainable in games. Why do you think Sony haven't revised their own spec sheet?
Their spec sheet says up to 22gb/s if data happens to compress very well.
The guy here said 13 to 15 gb/s. He gave you a conservative estimate.
 

Negotiator101

Member
Jan 24, 2021
1,394
1,849
340
Their spec sheet says up to 22gb/s if data happens to compress very well.
The guy here said 13 to 15 gb/s. He gave you a conservative estimate.
It does not say that, Cerny said that. The spec sheet has not been revised at all, I personally think it could be possible but it's all relative until we see it in action.
 

Heisenberg007

Member
Nov 16, 2020
1,987
6,767
445
It does not say that, Cerny said that. The spec sheet has not been revised at all, I personally think it could be possible but it's all relative until we see it in action.
It doesn't say that in the spreadsheet because that's a theoretical peak. You advertise with what's more possible in normal circumstances. That's why Xbox does not advertise the 6 Gb/s, which is their theoretical peak. They advertise 4.8 Gb/s.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,877
12,557
2,110
It does not say that, Cerny said that. The spec sheet has not been revised at all, I personally think it could be possible but it's all relative until we see it in action.
The spec sheet does not need to be revised everytime someone updates a texture compression result, the system is out and developers have the details anyways.

If you want to dispute the numbers offered by the Oodle Texture makers themselves on a title they did measurements on (see the blog post linked) showing 15-17 GB/s decompression rate (and the decompression speed) well fill your boots :).
Not sure why Cerny is not in a position to comment on the peak decompression throughput of the Kraken unit (22 GB/s)... especially as he qualifies that it is a peak figure few cases will actually reproduce.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,877
12,557
2,110
This is exactly what Velocity Architecture is. Not necessarily a bad thing, but in itself, it's nothing.

Velocity Architecture is neither a hardware nor a software. It's an umbrella term that basically refers to how Xbox takes the 2.4 Gb/s raw data throughput speed and convert it into 4.8 Gb/s.
XVA does include some GPU improvements that automate filtering and pre-fetching of texture data without stalls in the shaders that are new and include DirectStorage which is a new API. BCPACK is also a new HW decompressor that was not there... are they trying to over sell it a bit? Yes. Are they making shit up to troll gullible fans? No.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,877
12,557
2,110
I explained it with an example above. Please check.


Velocity Architecture is an umbrella term that contains 4 components (one of them is SFS). Because of those 4 components, XSX's 2.4 Gb/s raw speed becomes 4.8 Gb/s compressed data speed. Velocity Architecture or SFS doesn't apply after 4.8 Gb/s to increase it further.

For comparison: PS5's is double that speed at roughly 9 Gb/s (and that was before Oodle's introduction -- which can put it up in the range 15-17 GB/s).
For a title that does not implement virtual texturing or does it in a bit shader inefficient way, SFS can help you implement virtual texturing in a more performant way so your throughput is not effectively going at a higher rate than that but it wast less time streaming in unnecessary data which is similar in effect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bo_Hazem

rickybooby87

Member
Nov 2, 2020
269
889
310
I can't believe I missed this thread lol. Man, it did not age well, folks heard buzz words from MS marketing and ran to the bank with it. Scoffed at an actual tech talk by an actual hardware engineer. So, that's Control so far? And Apparently RE8 will have smaller size, allegedly.
 

rickybooby87

Member
Nov 2, 2020
269
889
310
Another alt posting flamebait lol. Nothing new on gaf
What's hilarious is how much this isn't true, just because someone rips on BCPack, doesn't mean that they're an "Alt". Is that the common theme here? Someone cuts against the grain, or even mentions in a thread, this one in particular, that the OP was just posting FUD, means that they must be an alt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kumomeme

smithg5

Member
Nov 4, 2014
287
384
455
I can't believe I missed this thread lol. Man, it did not age well, folks heard buzz words from MS marketing and ran to the bank with it. Scoffed at an actual tech talk by an actual hardware engineer. So, that's Control so far? And Apparently RE8 will have smaller size, allegedly.
Control was not compressed on Series X, only on PS5, so there’s no comparison.
 

rickybooby87

Member
Nov 2, 2020
269
889
310
Control was not compressed on Series X, only on PS5, so there’s no comparison.

And you know this how? Do you have a source?

**On second thought, I guess you could look at PC versions and arrive at that conclusion.

So I wonder why Control dev's weren't assisted/down with compressing the game for XSX?
 
Last edited:

MonarchJT

Member
Sep 25, 2020
2,234
3,260
375
SFS isn't something that can increase XSX's uncompressed speed beyond what is already specified. Also, texture compression is primarily handled by BCPack.

All these techniques contribute to the 4.8 Gb/s uncompressed speed which is the average / most common. It can be pushed to up to 6 Gb/s if everything is optimized perfectly, which is the theoretical peak. PS5's theoretical peak is 22 Gb/s -- but that would be extremely rare, especially without Oodle.
sfs it cannot be counted in any speed measurement. It allows you to lighten the necessary bandwidth so you don't need a lot of it by loading a lot less textures. On another console without sfs you would need much more bandwidth to load the same scene.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Godfavor

Heisenberg007

Member
Nov 16, 2020
1,987
6,767
445
Or that they do not have time / get paid for that... still weird, I mean good for PS users, but weird.
I don't think any devs are paid separately for compression 😛 Given that PS5 has roughly 400% more powerful decompressors than Xbox, if we Occarm Razor this shit, I think mine is a simpler explanation.

Just to be clear though, I'd love if that was the case on both PS5 and XSX, but both these consoles had different priorities. So not a negative point for either console per se. Each has its advantages.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,877
12,557
2,110
sfs it cannot be counted in any speed measurement. It allows you to lighten the necessary bandwidth so you don't need a lot of it by loading a lot less textures. On another console without sfs you would need much more bandwidth to load the same scene.
Not if they have PRT/tiled resources support, SFS is a good improvement and makes it easier to use efficiently but efficient virtual texturing allowing you to only load portions of a texture in GPU memory based on visibility is not new and that is where the main savings on bandwidth comes from. You are over selling it because... well... not sure... is it that much of a problem if SFS does not bridge the gap with PS5’s solution in a way that makes the effective difference trivial/small?
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,877
12,557
2,110
I don't think any devs are paid separately for compression 😛 Given that PS5 has roughly 400% more powerful decompressors than Xbox, if we Occarm Razor this shit, I think mine is a simpler explanation.

Just to be clear though, I'd love if that was the case on both PS5 and XSX, but both these consoles had different priorities. So not a negative point for either console per se. Each has its advantages.

Sure, but the PS4 version is also a lot smaller than the Xbox version, right? I am aware that Oodle can help compression, but on PS4 wouldn’t that affect loading times too a bit (and wouldn’t it be available on Xbox too?)?

I am saying I am curious of how they achieved this much space savings and if they can teach the NBA2K21 team (100+ GB basketball game... yuck)...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heisenberg007
Jan 29, 2019
6,070
6,594
495
Or that they do not have time / get paid for that... still weird, I mean good for PS users, but weird.
Yup, why can't they just do it on Xbox? ... The answer is Sony has a new toy that MS doesn't, I don't know enough to tell if the xbox OS and SDK can be made to offer something similar without other sacrifices being done.
It confirms that they aren't reducing the size. That's it. Anything beyond that is guesswork.
What do you make of the place where he points out that the Xbox version is the same size as last gen version, but it offers bigger textures (more stuff in the same space).

They do use some form of compression.
I ‘might’ bed Margot Robbie one day

True statement, cannot be disputed
If believe in yourself anything can happen 🌈.
What's the reason for that, I have been out of the loop for a while.
Someone disrespected Microsoft PR.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,877
12,557
2,110
Weird? Maybe impossible?
I do not know, maybe they can compress more on PS5, but when the difference is that wide I get curious about why that would be. Technically curious, so yeah it feels a bit weird :).

Particularly so because the PS4 version is a lot smaller than the Xbox version too and yet it does not take a lot longer to load than before.

Sony is giving out free licenses to Oodle Texture to PS4/PS5 devs and the base Oodle Texture does increased compression rates of zlib compressed content too (both Xbox One and PS4 support basic zlib HW decompression engines), but I would guess the license would not be PS platforms only or that given the savings they would implement the same compression scheme for Xbox.

Sure, it would compress less than it does on PS5 thanks to Kraken maybe, but the size gap should be smaller I think.
 

BeardGawd

Member
Dec 16, 2019
737
1,337
485
I do not know, maybe they can compress more on PS5, but when the difference is that wide I get curious about why that would be. Technically curious, so yeah it feels a bit weird :).

Particularly so because the PS4 version is a lot smaller than the Xbox version too and yet it does not take a lot longer to load than before.

Sony is giving out free licenses to Oodle Texture to PS4/PS5 devs and the base Oodle Texture does increased compression rates of zlib compressed content too (both Xbox One and PS4 support basic zlib HW decompression engines), but I would guess the license would not be PS platforms only or that given the savings they would implement the same compression scheme for Xbox.

Sure, it would compress less than it does on PS5 thanks to Kraken maybe, but the size gap should be smaller I think.
Perhaps you've answered your own question. If PS4 also uses Oodle Texture perhaps it's not on Xbox simply because of cost to implement vs Playstation (where Sony pays for it so it's free).
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: mckmas8808

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Jun 7, 2004
18,877
12,557
2,110
Perhaps you've answered your own question. If PS4 also uses Oodle Texture perhaps it's not on Xbox simply because of cost to implement vs Playstation (where Sony pays for it so it's free).
Possibly, but I would assume MS would do this for devs to help them out (especially ones with close MS ties like Remedy) and that an additional platform was worth the cost.

If this were the case it would be important for MS to address as:
  1. BCPACK was meant to provide equivalent savings for textures on XSX
  2. You can expect more and more games to be noticeably smaller to download and keep on PS5 and PS4 (not ideal)
  3. Why would devs spend extra to make the XSX|S version smaller in the future if they are not now?
 
Last edited:

Bernd Lauert

Member
Apr 15, 2018
4,150
12,226
690
I don't think any devs are paid separately for compression 😛 Given that PS5 has roughly 400% more powerful decompressors than Xbox, if we Occarm Razor this shit, I think mine is a simpler explanation.

Just to be clear though, I'd love if that was the case on both PS5 and XSX, but both these consoles had different priorities. So not a negative point for either console per se. Each has its advantages.
They did a simple PC -> XSX port and called it a day because they didn't want to spend any more ressources on what is generally a "good enough" port. They couldn't do a simple PC -> PS5 port so since they had to invest additional work anyway they decided to spend that time playing with decompression.

It has nothing to do with PS5 having faster decompressors. After all, Xbox has a much more powerful decompressor than your average PC, and yet the file sizes are the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kuncol02

Heisenberg007

Member
Nov 16, 2020
1,987
6,767
445
Possibly, but a.) I would assume MS would do this for devs to help them out (especially ones with close MS ties like Remedy) and that an additional platform was worth the cost.

If this were the case it would be important for MS to address as:
  1. BCPACK was meant to provide equivalent savings for textures on XSX
  2. You can expect more and more games to be noticeably smaller to download and keep on PS5 and PS4 (not ideal)
  3. Why would devs spend extra to make the XSX|S version smaller in the future if they are not now?
While the official numbers aren't out yet, rumors (based on leaked info) are that the Resident Evil Village is also roughly ~35% smaller on PS5 than XSX.
 

TBiddy

Member
Mar 16, 2015
4,817
7,057
830
Denmark
What do you make of the place where he points out that the Xbox version is the same size as last gen version, but it offers bigger textures (more stuff in the same space).

James Stanard shot it down. I have nothing further to add.
 
Last edited:

mrmeh

Member
Sep 8, 2020
170
163
210
For the biggest chunk of the disparity for Control it makes most sense that they repackaged the game without the duplicate assets needed for it to run on mechanical hd. It may have Kraken/oodle as well but the size disparity is way more than the Kraken/Oodle PR would explain. Control also does not load any quicker which I would expect it too with Kraken/oodle/hardware decompression.

If the Xbox port is the same size as the PC port It would indicate that they have not repackaged and removed duplicate textures - unless the PC port is specifying SSD only in the requirements.

MS did mention an enhanced version of BCpack to improve texture compression but I bet they haven't rolled this out yet being late to the ball on most things so far. Ultimately in a best case scenario from both teams tech, I would think PS5 games will be smaller but I don't think current comparisons are a best case for Xbox.
 

mrmeh

Member
Sep 8, 2020
170
163
210
...following on from that.

The fact that many games show little/no difference in load times between platforms is very probably down to both machines using the cpu to decode textures etc so that becomes the limiting factor rather than the speed of the ssd - and they pretty much have the same cpu.
 
Last edited:

Heisenberg007

Member
Nov 16, 2020
1,987
6,767
445
...following on from that.

The fact that many games show little/no difference in load times between platforms is very probably down to both machines using the cpu to decode textures etc so that becomes the limiting factor rather than the speed of the ssd - and they pretty much have the same cpu.
PS5's engineer pretty much said the same thing on his Twitter. Once the old-gen is completely abandoned, mods devs will start writing the new code that would use the decompressor units instead of CPU for decompression.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mckmas8808

SLB1904

Member
Oct 24, 2017
2,677
5,214
575