Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2022]

Status
Not open for further replies.

PS5 has 12.5 gig available for games at launch. First time we've got some form of numbers.

The info from their written article @ https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfo...-memory-boost-and-the-massively-fast-rtx-4090

There's also discussion of the news that Xbox Series S has more memory given to developers via a new update to the GDK development environment. The question is, can the 'hundreds of megabytes' added to the existing 8GB of memory make a significant difference? Alex suggests that we may see more RT modes, with the new RAM allocated to the BVH structures required to trace rays. As a counterpoint, I suggest that with 12.5GB of RAM available to developers on PS5 (at least at launch - and it's 13.5GB on Xbox) there's still a yawning chasm between Series S and other systems. I think any extra RAM is useful but I'm not sure how much of a game-changer it will be.

Why are developers being told that it's 'hundreds of megabytes' more memory and not a more concrete figure? Since recording the Direct, I've discovered that the amount of memory is somewhat fluid. There's a block of new memory available to all developers, but this can be augmented by disabling system level features the game may not be using, freeing up extra memory that otherwise wouldn't be used anyway.
 

PS5 has 12.5 gig available for games at launch. First time we've got some form of numbers.
good discussion here. Nice to see the return of dee eff triple after the summer break. Alex is right about the version differences, turn up something else that isn't resolution. Especially as you get into that higher dynamic resolution, it's so hard to tell anyway without analysis.
 
Can current consoles ever get something like DLSS? Or rather, can FSR ever improve to come even remotely close to DLSS 2.0 original in terms of IQ? That would be a complete game changer.
 
good discussion here. Nice to see the return of dee eff triple after the summer break. Alex is right about the version differences, turn up something else that isn't resolution. Especially as you get into that higher dynamic resolution, it's so hard to tell anyway without analysis.
Still wonder why series s still goes below 1080p in so quite some titles. It is more a PS4 pro so why does it dip so low. Settings are also almost always turned back. It more or less seems like lack of optimization so far. Don't think that a bit more memory will make such a big difference but it is always good to have more. Still don't understand why the os needs so much. After all xb360 is used just a few megabytes ...
Developers really must learn again how to reduce the footprint of software ... But we life in a world where "hallo world" needs 200+MB of main memory with a 2gb download size ;)
 
Still don't understand why the os needs so much.
I get your point, but to be fair ...

Lots of things done today that wasn't done in X360 days like running the entire Hypervisor for the host in order to run the Games and Apps containers as well as video encoding for recording gameplay or streaming. I'm surprised that they were able to cut 512 Meg off for Series X and and entire 1024 Meg for Series S in comparison to the Xbox One. They Series OS using 1 GB and 1.5 GB less than PlayStation 5 OS uses and that platform doesn't have any Hypervisor going on.
 
Why are developers being told that it's 'hundreds of megabytes' more memory and not a more concrete figure? Since recording the Direct, I've discovered that the amount of memory is somewhat fluid. There's a block of new memory available to all developers, but this can be augmented by disabling system level features the game may not be using, freeing up extra memory that otherwise wouldn't be used anyway.
I wonder what system level features a dev would be able to turn off. Dolby Atmos or Vision? HDR related stuff? Xbox Live related stuff?
 
Can current consoles ever get something like DLSS? Or rather, can FSR ever improve to come even remotely close to DLSS 2.0 original in terms of IQ? That would be a complete game changer.
FSR 2.0 is arguably already pretty close, and it should improve.

Intels XeSS - not released yet and uses machine learning like DLSS 2.0.
It can run on any dp4a supported gpu which XS is.
PS5 may be able to run it, but would take some amount work to port it and wouldn't be as performant, which doesn't mean it wouldn't be worth it, we don't know.
Personally not expecting it.

Consoles have had TAAU for a while now, so not as big a game changer as you probably think.
But all these TAAU 2.0 (FSR 2.0, XeSS, TSR) will democratise good TAAU so will definitely be a big plus!
 
I think the potential performance advantage of DLSS over current console upscaling methods is if it can offer a visual presentation that is just as good or better than the console presentation while using a lower internal resolution.

One could argue though that at a fixed performance target on consoles that is held solid by DRS then on PC that would just translate into slightly better image quality.

Although the PC gamer could also elect for higher visual settings with similar visual quality and performance (assuming a console level GPU).
 
At 1440p and above input resolution they are all pretty close now.
Lower than that and DLSS starts showing its advantages.
 
At 1440p and above input resolution they are all pretty close now.
Lower than that and DLSS starts showing its advantages.

It depends how we define pretty close though. You could argue DLSS Performance is pretty close to DLSS Quality so if 4k DLSS P is comparable to 4k TAUU at 1440p internal then there's a pretty big performance saving to be claimed there.
 
It depends how we define pretty close though. You could argue DLSS Performance is pretty close to DLSS Quality so if 4k DLSS P is comparable to 4k TAUU at 1440p internal then there's a pretty big performance saving to be claimed there.
Yep, I don't disagree.
I was just talking IQ, at the moment you can probably get more performance for the same IQ from DLSS.
Simply by running DLSS at a lower resolution.
At 1440p they are all close in IQ to looking like 4K now, DLSS can go lower though.
 

If what's shown here in this video is representative (posted by @snc in the other tech thread), then it looks like there are still types of detail where DLSS rules supreme over other reconstruction techs. Insomniac's technique appears to come in last, but I guess I should know more about what "balanced" means for each of them before I say that with any high degree of confidence.

DLSS continues to offer the most optimistic view of future reconstruction technology, IMO.
 

If what's shown here in this video is representative (posted by @snc in the other tech thread), then it looks like there are still types of detail where DLSS rules supreme over other reconstruction techs. Insomniac's technique appears to come in last, but I guess I should know more about what "balanced" means for each of them before I say that with any high degree of confidence.

DLSS continues to offer the most optimistic view of future reconstruction technology, IMO.
Also apparently dsr2 is better and there was opinion consoles doesn't need much dsr2 as they already use similar reconstruction techniques ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top