LONG Load Times. The Future of PS3 Games? - IGN

[Shifty Geezer]

And since 6x Blu-Ray recordable devices exist "in the lab", then logic would tell us that at least 12x Blu-Ray readable devices exist "in the lab" also, since read speeds are always far greater than write speeds. This may not be true, but i'm just using it to point out...

That since a 6x recordable drive exists in the lab then logic would tlel us a 12x bluray readable exists .

He was saying, and it's true, that generally read speeds are faster than write speeds. Therefore one could presume that the fastest read speed is higher than the fastest write speed. That's totally different to your comparisons...

There are 5ghz p4s in the lab. Does that mean at least 10 ghz p4s exist in the lab ? They have 8 layer discs in the lab , does that mean in some lab there are 16 layer bluray discs ?

Gholbine was considering the relationship between two different technologies (readers and writers) and not the same technology pumped up as you did.

Gholbine was even clear in stating he wasn't sure that was the case, but at least his case is logical based on historical development of optical readers and writers.

 

[Bjorn]

That since a 6x recordable drive exists in the lab then logic would tlel us a 12x bluray readable exists .

Which is horrible logic and I gave some examples of why .

Your example:

There are 5ghz p4s in the lab. Does that mean at least 10 ghz p4s exist in the lab ?

Which makes zero sense since your talking about a P4 vs another P4.

Where is another one . We have 16x dvd rw drives on shelves . Yet there are no 32x dvd readers in existance .

That is what he said ..

Yes, but the technology is new (BR) and afaik, the write speed has always trailed the read speed until you start to see the limits of the read speed, probably because of vibrations because of the actual media and stuff like that. My old DVD burner was f.e 8X read, 4X write.

 

[Nick Laslett]

As Fafalada & DemoCoder have already pointed out all this obsessing about the PS3 BR drive speed is pointless.

The route for short load times is with the developers and how they code their games.

I actually tried to start a thread about streaming game engines but it did not attract much interest.

http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22691&highlight=

Games like JakIII, God of War, Primal, Ghosthunter and Haunting Grounds show how loading should be handled.

There is no reason why Resident Evil 4 or Metal Gear Solid 3 couldn't have the same streaming level loading system. All it takes is a bit of thought and planning.

 

[Bjorn]

As Fafalada & DemoCoder have already pointed out all this obsessing about the PS3 BR drive speed is pointless.

The route for short load times is with the developers and how they code their games.

Fafalada mentioned that seek times is the biggest problem (duh) when it comes to the reading of data, not the raw speed of the drive. BR should then have the clear advantage since it has much more space to use for redundant data.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I s'pose transfer rates are kinda like FLOPS - a metric that means something but is far from the whole story.

This poses the question : given a 12x DVD and a 1x BRDVD, what would the real-world differences be in loading times in well-written code? Will the higher speed on the DVD win, or the greater storage providing lower seek times? Would there be that much difference?

 

[London Geezer]

I s'pose transfer rates are kinda like FLOPS - a metric that means something but is far from the whole story.

This poses the question : given a 12x DVD and a 1x BRDVD, what would the real-world differences be in loading times in well-written code? Will the higher speed on the DVD win, or the greater storage providing lower seek times? Would there be that much difference?

Since a 1X BR drive has around the same transfer speed of a 5X DVD drive, and the same drive against a 12X DVD drive would be half as fast. But we all know how transfer speeds have very little to do with some games' loading times.

The PS3 2X BR drive will be just fine against a 12X DVD drive. The PS3 drive also reads DVD at 12X so the problem is pretty much non-existant.

 

[PC-Engine]

Writers usually trail readers in speed due to the slow development of recording dyes for blank discs not due to some fundamental difficulty in making writers over readers. The laser may cost more for the writers because you need more power to write than to read. Having 6x BR writers in tha lab doesn't really idicate faster or slower readers will be available in the next 8 months. It shouldn't have been brought up in the first place. What we do know from history is that consoles always lagged behind what was available on the market with regards to optical disc speeds at any given timeframe. There are no 6x readers OR writers on the market as of right now. In 8 months there may or may not be 6x readers or writers on the market. If PS3 is getting a 4x BR reader or higher speed drive then it will be the first time a console has ever surpassed what was available in the martket with respect to drive speeds.

 

[London Geezer]

Is there an upper limit on BlueRay? Like the 16x DVD limit? And is the limit due to the fact that one can't spin the disc any faster or is it because of something else?

 

[PC-Engine]

Is there an upper limit on BlueRay? Like the 16x DVD limit? And is the limit due to the fact that one can't spin the disc any faster or is it because of something else?

The physical limit of the disc itself is 10,000 rpm which equals about 12x BR.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

As BRD's aren't limited to polycarb discs there's no reason a stronger, less brittle substrate can't be used, but presumably there's design limitations as to how fast you can spin a disc with it sitting neat on the spindle that would have to be addressed.

 

[London Geezer]

Is there an upper limit on BlueRay? Like the 16x DVD limit? And is the limit due to the fact that one can't spin the disc any faster or is it because of something else?

The physical limit of the disc itself is 10,000 rpm which equals about 12x BR.

Right. Why is it that CDs can spin much faster? Seems, with each generation, the upper limit is lower. Though transfer speeds are much higer obviously.

 

[PC-Engine]

As BRD's aren't limited to polycarb discs there's no reason a stronger, less brittle substrate can't be used, but presumably there's design limitations as to how fast you can spin a disc with it sitting neat on the spindle that would have to be addressed.

Technically you can use some other stronger materials as a substrate, but then you're starting to speculate beyond the scope of what we're talking about here which is PS3. You will not see carbon BDs in the next 8 months...

Is there an upper limit on BlueRay? Like the 16x DVD limit? And is the limit due to the fact that one can't spin the disc any faster or is it because of something else?

The physical limit of the disc itself is 10,000 rpm which equals about 12x BR.

Right. Why is it that CDs can spin much faster? Seems, with each generation, the upper limit is lower. Though transfer speeds are much higer obviously.

CDs have the same 10,000 rpm limitation. 54x CDs only mean 150KB/s X 54. 1X CD is 150KB/s while 1X DVD is 1.4MB/s or equal to 9X CD.

 

[SanGreal]

Writers usually trail readers in speed due to the slow development of recording dyes for blank discs not due to some fundamental difficulty in making writers over readers.

They even mention that in the whitepaper

Although the recording speed of the media itself limited the development in the past, the limiting factor for the use of Blu-ray is the capacity of the hardware.

They also seem to rule out 3x, wherever that idea came from:

The transfer rate for data will advance from double speed to quadruple speed (144 Mbps).

 

[London Geezer]

CDs have the same 10,000 rpm limitation. 52x CDs only mean 150KB/s X 52. 1X CD is 150KB/s while 1X DVD is 1.4MB/s or equal to 9X CD.

Ooooh I'm so blond.

 

[Bjorn]

Anandtech has released a test of the Gigabyte i-Ram (basically 4 Gb of RAM with a separate mem controller on a card acting as Sata hd). And there's some interesting info there afa load time of games goes:

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2480&p=8

The benefits are very small for some reason. F.e from 25 to 20 s in Battlefield 2. You would think that loading the level directly from a RAM drive would take just a coouple of seconds, or at least the the difference from the HD would be huge. I would really like to know what the bottleneck could be in this case.

 

[zidane1strife]

enables up to 3X Blu-Ray Disc write performance.

http://www.intersil.com/pr/shell/0,1091,818,00.html


Not sure exactly what they mean, but at least it's nice to hear 3x blu-ray be mentioned 3yrs ago...

 

[scooby_dooby]

I can tell you that loading games off my harddrive is MUCH MUCH faster than loading them off of a DVD.

For example, many games the load screens go by so quickly I can't even read the directions or controller layout. GAmes load 2-3times faster from my HDD than they do from a DVD-ROM.

Maybe this has to do with the HD's better seek time and not so much transfer rates, but I find it hard to believe that increases in transfer speeds will not make for reduced load times.

It may be up to the Dev to design good logic for their loading, but reality is, many DON'T! So in reality, having higher transfer speeds/lower seek times reduces load times.

 

[jvd]

Where is another one . We have 16x dvd rw drives on shelves . Yet there are no 32x dvd readers in existance

That would be because 16x is the physical limt for DVD media. Back in 2001 when you bought your 16xDVD the fastest writers were 2x speed.

Not that this has any bearing on BR though.

Yes because a dvd rw carries a price preimum . Not because faster ones did not exist . When I bought my 52x cdrom drive there were 24x rw drives for around the same price and at twice the cost there were 42r drives and soon to be released there were 52x drives . There are also diffrences in the media not just the drives . I.e I bought a 16x dvd rw drive and it took a year before the media came out for 16x media and even then it was much more expensive than the 12x it replaced .

Also you do not know what the physical limit of bluray is . Blurays physical limit can be 8x , it can be 4x , it could be 52x . To claim something has to exist because of another one is wrong and you know it .


Yet still no one has shown any article about a 2x , 4x or 8x drive being mass production ready , or even a small release within the next 8 months . Which you need for a console releasing in 8months .

So Fafal do you believe that sony will take a 4x in the lab or 6 / 8 x in the lab and in about 6or so months have it ready for mass production in the hundreds of thousands of units ?

 

[jvd]

enables up to 3X Blu-Ray Disc write performance.

http://www.intersil.com/pr/shell/0,1091,818,00.html


Not sure exactly what they mean, but at least it's nice to hear 3x blu-ray be mentioned 3yrs ago...

This i believe is the controler card . It talks about the chips itself not any speed . The chips will be able to feed up to a 3x writing speed .

 

[Thowllly]

f the 54 Mbps read rate applies to data as well as video, then a 3x may be enough, though.

Except i've never heard of an odd numbered optical format ?

A long time ago, when most cd-rom drives were 2x, somebody made a 3x drive.