Returnal is a heavy SSD streaming game. Housemarque says lighting data was very dependent on SSD to reduce memory footprint on PS5. Also consider procedural nature of game going from one area to next area. The RAM boost won't be enough to maintain optimal performance but it is the best that can be available right now. PC player get used to it until there is a similar storage solution for initial boot and in game stream.
Next-Generation NVMe SSD and I/O Technology [PC, PS5, XBSX|S]
- Thread starter Shortbread
- Start date
Silent_Buddha
Legend
I thought his point is significant digits and precision matters as 14.8% is not 15%.
No, I just felt like breaking out the calculator and making a point that they could potentially both be correct since we don't know the breakdown of the "other" category.
Some of it will be more than 32 GB, some of it will be less than 32 GB.Alternatively, that Albuquerque was in the 14.8% category while my PC last year was in the 0.71% "other" category with 48 GB which would have also put it in the 15% category that Dsoup was referring to as was Albuquerque's PC with 64 GB.
Although it's possible that more than 28.2% of the 0.71% category contains PCs with less than 32 GB of memory which would mean that there isn't 15% of users with 32 GB or more of memory.Pointless.
I need more coffee.Possibly. Could also just be some random thing to do before coffee woke my brain up and forced me to do real work.
Regards,
SB
Last edited:
Bad approach to think about it. PS5 i/o can swap RAM data on per frame basis. PC can't. System RAM is not a suitable replacement. It is a mediocre bandage.
This seems like a totally unwarranted claim, what's your basis for making it?
32GB system memory should comfortably leave at least 20GB free as a pure IO cache. The game is only 56GB on disk on the PS5 so you could literally store well over a third of the game in system RAM at any one time on top of what you have cached in VRAM. You'd have to have a pretty atrocious streaming system to not have the data that you might need at any given point available in system memory under those circumstances. And transfers from system memory would be much faster than transfers from disk on the PS5.
There are already faster IO solutions available on the PC. They are however less common than 32GB system RAM or above, hence why that is the recommendation.
As noted above, transfers from system RAM would be much faster than the PS5's IO. And PC's absolutely can access data as fast or faster than the PS5 from disk provided it's equipped with a fast NVMe drive. A RAM cache simply offers a more universally available alternative for those with slower IO systems.
Yes, compressed.
This isn't true. I/O isn't just SSD speed. We are discussing hardware software solution and integration. PS5 is unmatched so far. Let us be patient to see DirectStorage. Hopefully it is a big winner.
Is the cached data compressed or no?
Yes, and there's no reason it couldn't sit cached in system RAM in a compressed state with only those blocks that are called on for transfer into VRAM to be decompressed on demand.
It's absolutely true. The physical throughputs are the same or higher on PC. Latency will take a very minor hit due to the need for an extra copy through system RAM, but outside of that there's no reason it would be slower than the PS5. The need to decompress relatively small amounts of data on the CPU while streaming isn't going to be a bottleneck for throughput and that's before DS removes that requirement and AMD's Direct Access Storage removes the need for the system memory copy. So where is your assumed PS5 throughput advantage coming from here?
Either. If there's sufficient space in system memory to decompress it during the caching process then that can be done. If not then it can be decompressed on demand by the CPU prior to transferring it to the GPU. Exactly as the PS5 would do (using it's hardware block rather than the CPU).
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Why is every PC in every forum technical debate, always equipped with a good amount of RAM, the latest bus technologies and the fastest I/O technologies available? I know mine is, but the Steam hardware survey tells me most PCs are vastly behind the consoles that launched more than two years ago.
This process is much slower on PC and lessens performance. Spiderman ports prove this out. Nixxes confirms as much.
32 GB is enough to be ok. At worst they will just have longer loading at launch with a HDD or a SATA SSD and if needed they can load some data between biome.
Last edited:
What is the relevance of that to the current conversation? It goes without saying that many PC's that will end up playing Returnal, probably even a majority of them will be behind the PS5 in streaming capability even accounting for the RAM cache option. But that's not what is being discussed here. The topic is whether any PC can match or exceed the PS5's IO capabilities. In fact very specifically CD33 claims a system with 32GB RAM wouldn't be sufficient to keep up. So obviously we're going to be talking about systems with 32GB of RAM or more when discussing that point.
How does spiderman prove that exactly? Spiderman shows us that CPU requirements are higher on PC in that game than console to achieve the same result which manifests both at load times and in game. Nixxes then confirms that is for the following reasons:
- BHV building (where it can be streamed on PS5)
- Shader compilation (at load times where they will be pre-compiled on PS5)
- CPU based decompression
- Thicker API's
Full snark mode was engaged, hence my cackling.I thought his point is significant digits and precision matters as 14.8% is not 15%.
davis.anthony
Veteran
So can every other gaming device that's been released in the last 3 decades
So PC has been doing everything from it's internal cache without having to go back and forth to VRAM multiple times per frame
System ram can transfer at 50GB/s+ depending on your RAM set-up, how fast is PS5's SSD at peak again?
Not only this but system memory latency is several orders of magnitude lower than NVMe memory. Hence why that extra system memory copy has a negligible overall impact on the end to end latency.
Which forum do you think you're posting on? I love Beyond3D and everything we do and discuss here, but we're an itty bitty tiny microcosm of hard nerds. Most of us with PCs probably have at least one rig in the house that costs as much as a half decent highschooler's first used car.
There's no rational gaming need for my 16c/32t 5950x at 5GHz, two Sammy 980 Pro NVMes, my four dual-rank DIMMs of 16GByte CAS14 DDR4 3600 memory and my 3080Ti overclocked to the moon nor the 10Gbps NIC I recently dropped into it. But here I am, soaking up all the goodness, because I'm one of those 32-ACT-scoring-pocket-protector-hornrim-glasses-negative-17-diopter-pasty-colored-beard-turning-white-Gen-X'ers who have nothing else better to do with the thousands of stock options I've racked up at my Fortune 250 job.
And by the way, I'm talking about stock options that have grown 600% in the eight years I've worked here; I'm not FAANG
I can't get through when you keep comparing PS5 ssd and system memory as if process isn't more streamlined on PS5. Decompression is i/o related. Abstraction is i/o related. That is why I mention hardware software integration. Pc streaming for spiderman tells us a lot about PS5 when you have high res textures failing to ever load in completely on the best PC hardware.
All I ask is patience. Let us see. Random generation can stress streaming performance.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
So what you're saying is most PCs - as the Steam hardware survey shows - is way more modest and not in any way representative of recent modern technologies standards?
Exactly most point.
Similar threads
