Velocity Architecture - Limited only by asset install sizes

This is AMD's take on Sampler feedback Streaming: https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2020159722A1/en?q=G06T15/005&assignee=Advanced+Micro+Devices,+Inc.&sort=new#patentCitations

I expect to see SFS becoming an established feature on all NVIDIA and AMD architectures going forward.
Sampler Feedback or Sampler Feedback Streaming?

SFS is where xbox made some customizations, although that doesn't mean GPUs doesn't have SFS also. Hard to know as not read into the DX12U support of SFS etc
 
There is a custom filter for XSX however wrt SFS.

The hardware will pull the tile from SSD as required, but will also generate a matching somewhat generated coloured tile to insert into the frame incase the texture doesn't arrive in time to avoid any sort of hiccuping etc. And the next frame the tile will be there.

I thought it would apply some scaling/ML technique from a small resolution tile in memory than just some "coloured" tile on a miss.
 
So do we expect SFS to offer much of an advantage for the XSX over PS5 when it is being used?
not particularly, it would appear they attempt to solve the same challenge, just differently. PS5 by freeing possible bottlenecks from SSD to cache (cache scrubbers), and series consoles freeing as much as they can, and if they fall behind to apply an intelligent filter to replace the texture that hasn't arrived in cache yet.
 
I thought it would apply some scaling/ML technique from a small resolution tile in memory than just some "coloured" tile on a miss.
I think it depends on the distance of which this tile appears. if you're panning left right, you're just going to need a slightly wider rendering range so that the tiles are appearing as required. If they are appearing at over the long distance forward, some pixels representing that tile will suffice.
 
Here is a vid tech demo of XVA with emphasis on the benefits of SFS over just using XVA:
Of note the 2.5x multiplier is actually over the simulation of a gen 9 console using an SSD with a standard texture streaming engine like Granite using a conservative texture budget. To the surprise of none, SFS is better than software based texture streaming.
 
Of note the 2.5x multiplier is actually over the simulation of a gen 9 console using an SSD with a standard texture streaming engine like Granite using a conservative texture budget. To the surprise of none, SFS is better than software based texture streaming.
Not watched it properly yet but I thought I heard it mentioned that the multiplier remains pretty constant.

Although the comparison with 1X & HDD could have been better if done with SX SSD. Or placed somewhere else as comparison of previous gen with current, but oh well.

Edit: Was wrong, was in right place but they should have also given the figure of how long it took without SFS.
 
Last edited:
Not watched it properly yet but I thought I heard it mentioned that the multiplier remains pretty constant.

Although the comparison with 1X & HDD could have been better if done with SX SSD. Or placed somewhere else as comparison of previous gen with current, but oh well.

Memory for traditional MIP streaming is basically simulating last gen (PS4/Xbox One) and every current cross gen game currently on the market, as games are not yet build with SSD streaming in mind and still have to run on the older consoles. This is true even for current PC games running on an NVMe SSD.

Memory for XVA without SFS is basically simulating a next gen title programmed with DirectStorage NVMe SSD streaming in mind, but without an DirectX12 Ultimate capable GPU like RDNA1, Pascal or GCN.

Memory for XVA with SFS is simulating a next gen title using DirectStorage as well as Sampler Feedback, meaning a system equipped with an NVMe drive and a DX12U capable GPU (Turing, Ampere, RDNA2).

Hope that clears it up.
 
Memory for traditional MIP streaming is basically simulating last gen (PS4/Xbox One) and every current cross gen game currently on the market, as games are not yet build with SSD streaming in mind and still have to run on the older consoles. This is true even for current PC games running on an NVMe SSD.

Memory for XVA without SFS is basically simulating a next gen title programmed with DirectStorage NVMe SSD streaming in mind, but without an DirectX12 Ultimate capable GPU like RDNA1, Pascal or GCN.

Memory for XVA with SFS is simulating a next gen title using DirectStorage as well as Sampler Feedback, meaning a system equipped with an NVMe drive and a DX12U capable GPU (Turing, Ampere, RDNA2).

Hope that clears it up.
Looks like you probably wrote this as I did an edit.

I was specifically talking about the load time, the memory is included for all 3 different implementations (the bars at the top). But missed out the load time for non SFS, which would highlight how much benefit SFS gives beyond SSD, hardware decompression, new IO stack. Wasn't a big deal as I said, but would've been a nice data point.
 
Wonder if the first use will be flight sim?
That's current gen only I believe.

XSS would really benefit, and the speed improvement would be nice benefit for XSX.

Be nice to get more details on bcpac also, unless I missed when details of that was released.
 
Here is a vid tech demo of XVA with emphasis on the benefits of SFS over just using XVA:

That's really impressive seeing it in action. Impressive that it has no need to load the entire mip level if not needed.

Basically it'll allow titles that use it to effectively present an image that would require significantly more memory if SFS weren't used (IE - all current games on the market).

I wonder what game will be the first to ship with the SFS? I wonder how easy/hard it is for the developer to implement.

Regards,
SB
 
That's really impressive seeing it in action. Impressive that it has no need to load the entire mip level if not needed.

Basically it'll allow titles that use it to effectively present an image that would require significantly more memory if SFS weren't used (IE - all current games on the market).

I wonder what game will be the first to ship with the SFS? I wonder how easy/hard it is for the developer to implement.

Regards,
SB
Well, it really get's time that MS presents something running and not just some kind of tech-demos.
Not even the RT patch is out for Minecraft. Microsoft is really slow on adapting new features these days.
 
Back
Top