With Sporfokenusing DS on PC we will have a first pointer how future will be for the tech. On PS5 the Demos fast travel is realy instantaneous. Like < 1sec.
It's already been covered in the various topics where it's insignificant percentage of TFs to easily surpass the decompression rate of the PS5. Perhaps you should do some reading of discussions already had.
PC can actually leverage faster IO than PS5. The demands of decompression on the GPU through DirectStorage will be less impactful to game performance than if they were done on the CPU. That's just simply logic. The CPU is the bottleneck, on PC we have GPU cycles for days. Streaming during gameplay isn't even remotely as bandwidth intensive as initial bulk loading assets into memory. PCs have FARRRRR more memory. So not only can the GPU bulk load data at much higher bandwidths than consoles (it's way more than 14GB/s) into memory.. that data also remains compressed until it is needed and RAM to VRAM has far less latency than retrieving data directly from console storage. So PC doesn't need to be as efficient as consoles... it never has needed to be, and never will... and that doesn't stop the results from being better.i think real PS5 Exclusives pose a challenge for PC ports though. The custom hardware in PS5 is massive. Leveraging fast io just like PS5 is simply not possible on PC. Iam a hard disbeliever of Direct Storage Efficiency and only a realy good implementation that pulls just like PS5 in the same Game will make me revise my thoughts on the matter. A cobbled together Solution of making use of ~some GPU Ressources while using a very new API AND the SSD Protocols cannot be as efficient and friction less as PS5 all hardware based abstracted Solution.
Cerny made it very clear that ALL Steps need to be friction less not only the decompression. DMA , Check In and Load Management are done on PS5 with another custom unit wich is equivalent to another 2 zen 2 cores. The plus in latency on PC for all those steps will eventually cause friction. Then there are the PCs inferior to PS5. Can they also profit from Direct Storage?
Dont get me wrong Direct Storage WILL enhance PC games!
I just dont think that it will be on par with PS5 on most PCs.. The GPU Ressources alone.. I mean it is cute that Jensen thinks that every RTX Card could produce 14GB/s of decompressed Data.. But i want to know how will that pull away Rasterisation performance or heck Raytracing Performance.. But if the Ram Pool solution is enough than all the mumbo jumbo i just wrote is irrelevant . And of course lowering some settings might do it for some aswell of course .
With Sporfoken
Being able to turn over all of your sound/mesh/texture assets within one second isn't the same as doing it literally every second, unless they're shipping very disorienting multi terabyte games.Their plan for PS5 Exclusives is - according to Cerny - to have only the next second of gameplay sitting in ram. Such a Scenario will be a challenge for Direct Storage and also will melt the the occasional SSD without proper cooling in Desktop PCs i suppose
lol no. Why would it be a challenge for DirectStorage... especially when you could keep the next 3-4 seconds in RAM? Game levels aren't changing entirely every 60 frames... They aren't swapping out the entire RAM and loading all new assets every second.. No games are streaming in that much data. No PS5 games will be doing that this generation. There's so many other bottlenecks elsewhere which prevent that from even being close to reality.on pure "load this level" scenarios it will be 100% fine with Direct Storage. I remain doubtfull with the on demand streaming during gameplay exept maybe super high end rigs.. IIRC Ratchet & Clank Rift Apart uses the PS5 I/O not only with the portals und generl loading but as well with streaming during Gameplay. I think one of their Devs made a Twitter post wich said that they only load what is in Player Vieport plus some percentage outside the players view to have a little wiggle room with the loading during fast turns. Their plan for PS5 Exclusives is - according to Cerny - to have only the next second of gameplay sitting in ram. Such a Scenario will be a challenge for Direct Storage and also will melt the the occasional SSD without proper cooling in Desktop PCs i suppose
ithink you misunderstood me. Ratchet & Clank has not ~ 3-4 seconds (like the emidiate area around the player) Actually, what you dont see (aka in your sight) is not in ram. when you turn the world behind you vanishes from ram. And is loaded in again if you again turn a 180°.
Nah, I understood. I'm well aware of how it works. What I said was that on PC you could keep the next 3-4 seconds in RAM, unlike PS5... because there's far more of it... but that's not even the point. The point is that in a game level, even the stuff behind you, out of the view frustrum is using many of the same assets as what's right in front of you. There's not unique textures and assets for every object in the game's worlds... the world is full of repeat assets and textures and enemies. That stuff always stays in RAM.. so the demands of streaming in the "missing" data that isn't already in memory is much lower.
R&C isn't as read intensive as many people think. I recorded a full 8 hour playthrough when I bought my secondary drive and it read exactly 1512GB from disk which translates to 53MB/s on average.
Keep in mind that these loads happen in much less than a second. 500MB loaded in 0.1s is still equivalent to 5GB/s.
So yeah i read the linked Thread and i still would not believe Jensen everything. The Idea that a GPU will outperform PS5 with 2 TF is a statement from Nvidia. I believe it when i see it. Btw iam talking here about RTX 2xxx cards and maybe 3xxx Cards. A PS5 does not need to be better as a RTX 4xxx Card. A GPU with 100 add TF will of course have enough ressources to do the decompression. Also again - decompression is one thing. But PS5 has alot more custom tech no account for bottlenecks that would follow the decompression. Iam not seeing the PS5 I/O Block in its Entirety being mimiced with Direct Storage.
And another Thought ( i mentioned that before) :
If decompressing per GPU would be such a logic and viable thing to do why did they not choose this path with the PS5. They could have avoided all the custom I/O Shenanigens and have a beefier GPU instead. But they went with the heavy custom I/O Solution anyways.
Something is not adding up. Theres more to PS5s I/O and lovely Jensen flipping a switch and "just leave the GPU all the work" is not going to cut it.
I remember reading about that 400MB/s with Ratchet & Clank aswell. Also the Fact that lesser Addon SSDs where cabable of Streaming the Game on PS5. Wich both makes perfect sense if the solution they´ve found with their first PS5 Exclusive is a mediocre one because their engine is not at all fitted to the bandwith provided by PS5.
But that means contrary to what one might think not that PS5 Exclusives will be also in the future not I/O heavy, but rather that they will be much more heavy relient on PS5s bandwith. What we see is just the beginning and devs on PS5 and Xbox and PC are just start to figure out what to do with all those Cores and I/O.
Happy Times ahead.
