anexanhume
Veteran
Even if not common, not having to go off die saves considerable latency, as evidenced by the 4900HS results.
Playstation 5 [PS5] [Release November 12 2020]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
Off die is completely separate thing from going CCX to CCX. Each Zen2 CCX is 4 cores+xMB L3 no matter if it's on chiplet or part of monolith.
anexanhume
Veteran
Yes, I am aware. I was pointing out a console monolithic design has a latency advantage over comparisons to a desktop CPU. The latency drop shows up in benchmarks for the mobile Zen 2 designs.
Inuhanyou
Veteran
I dunno. Outside of some texture issues i think the game looks and plays good. Most 9f the areas outside of sector 7 slums look pretty good.
They left some low res textures and geometry in the final game that's pretty jarring. mainly shows up around 7th Heaven though.
Ah yes, I misunderstood your point.
I guess when Mark Cerny was designing the PS5 he would have thoroughly done the math of determining the right balance of gpu power, SSD speed, bandwidth etc when rendering at all sorts of next gen resolutions right? The fact that Epic worked very closely with Sony on UE5 should tell us Cerny knew the ins and outs of Nanite and how much of his SSD would affect the visual fidelity of it. If, it's only using a fraction of the SSD streaming speed when running that demo then wouldn't he consider a lesser, cheaper SSD instead? Does he really think for the remaining bandwidth it's all lulz and giggles to load a level a couple of seconds faster? I wonder if we'll ever get to see the SSD's workload screen during a level.
The raster hardware output pixels to be shaded with pixel shaders. The smaller the triangles the slower the raster hardware runs, so the CUs are waiting on pixels to shade. Something like that. It also may have something to do with draw calls. A draw call for an object that calls a small number of pixels would resuce occupancy because of context switching between draw calls ... I think.
There's no such thing as that kind of maths. There isn't a formula for designing an optimal console. He'd have picked tech based on what he wanted to achieve in software, and more, what resources he'd provide developers to experiment with and find best-methods with. At the end of the day, his balances might not be as synergistic with what games want 5 years from launch as a differently balanced design.
TL;DR : Mark Cerny isn't infallable.
PS5 wasn’t made to run just UE5. Other games may require more or less ssd bandwidth. Can’t build the hardware around one software implementation.
not all games run on UE5 and both consoles most likely have exactly the same hardware implementation of RTRT. Microsoft seems to be taking an approach that’s very synergistic with PC. Both get dx12 ultimate as a baseline and some technology like direct storage is coming to pc from Xbox.
Yup and also they probably came to the conclusion that a super fast SSD would have a more perceptible difference to the mainstream console player than 15-20 % resolution improvement.
(Mod redaction)
More on topic though, I think that cherno video wasnt too informative about details, but it is still nice to have actual programmer focused slightly on graphics go over the demo in layman terms.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you should start with assuming that choices are made based on solving expected bottlenecks in a whole host of areas, and that the only difference between what choices are being made by Epic, Microsoft and Sony is what areas are most important to them.
For instance for making games, something which Epic‘s whole UE premise is based on, the biggest costs of making games now is the art pipeline. So if they can provide a way to make that part cheaper and easier, that will be a huge selling point. This whole UE5 demo is demonstrating two important technological innovations that have a huge impact on how costly it will be to create high quality assets.
I will not go into the PS5 / Cerny stuff you mentioned here but just assume they talked extensively to their development studios about where the biggest bottlenecks are right now and weighed that against other factors like the importance of backward compatibility, playability, pricing, and so on.
For instance for making games, something which Epic‘s whole UE premise is based on, the biggest costs of making games now is the art pipeline. So if they can provide a way to make that part cheaper and easier, that will be a huge selling point. This whole UE5 demo is demonstrating two important technological innovations that have a huge impact on how costly it will be to create high quality assets.
I will not go into the PS5 / Cerny stuff you mentioned here but just assume they talked extensively to their development studios about where the biggest bottlenecks are right now and weighed that against other factors like the importance of backward compatibility, playability, pricing, and so on.
Agreed. Let's see what first party can do.
i guess if Sony allowed Epic to show that demo on PS5, their first party showing for reveal must be at the very least as impressive.
I think it'll be mirroring when Sony let Epic show UE4 Elemental demo on PS4 first and then the subsequent first party games. Launch window games like Killzone Shadowfall, Infamous SS and The Order all looked well beyond that demo running on the PS4 so it should be a good sign indeed. Looking back on that demo again and compare it to God of War shows just how much better the latter looks.
A couple of caveats IMHO, firstly UE5 does not have to support previous gen/tech and second, the demo alone was roughly the size of a full game.
whilst these machines are clearly capable of amazing things we should align expectations that a game with this insane detail may not be possible for a full AAA 10 hour game for at least a few years unless there’s a magic work around with the space required.
Makes me excited for what Sony will show though...I’m sure you don’t show this and then have a showreel like MS had.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Deleted member 7537
- Games Industry
- Sticky