You're assuming the game wasn't already targeting the faster speed NVMEs possible on certain PCs?
The scalability and evolution of game engines *spawn*
- Thread starter ultragpu
- Start date
You're assuming the game wasn't already targeting the faster speed NVMEs possible on certain PCs?
Not so sure if the market share is high enough for that in the first 1-2 years
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
I'm wondering if it even matters given the Velocity Architecture in the XSX. SFS alone probably evens the field mostly there.
Is there reason to believe that ps5 doesn't support sampler feedback?
I would assume that's the larger part of the overall benefit of SFS.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
PS5 has SF, but not SFS as it's patented MS tech.
Look, if you want to know which console is better at something vs. the other just pay attention to what they DON'T talk about.
MS doesn't talk about raw SSD speed because the PS5 has faster raw drive speed.
Sony doesn't talk much about TF or SFS because MS has an advantage in those areas. Same for RT and VRS. Sony is at a disadvantage with this stuff so they don't talk about it.
Sony has a more innovative controller and a commitment to VR so they talk about this and MS doesn't.
Look, if you want to know which console is better at something vs. the other just pay attention to what they DON'T talk about.
MS doesn't talk about raw SSD speed because the PS5 has faster raw drive speed.
Sony doesn't talk much about TF or SFS because MS has an advantage in those areas. Same for RT and VRS. Sony is at a disadvantage with this stuff so they don't talk about it.
Sony has a more innovative controller and a commitment to VR so they talk about this and MS doesn't.
If there's hardware support then there's no reason to not expect it to be exposed via the api, if its not ready at the moment then in the very near future.
Which we don't know if that's the case or not, well i don't as I've not seen what's supported in their sdk
A lot of the discussion in the next gen threads is on whether 512GB / 825GB / 1TB is enough room for more than 3 or 4 large "AAA" titles. We know that current titles can include asset files with repeated textures to try and ensure locality on disk when loading (to reduce disk thrashing and seek times) so my questions are
- is there any sort of common wisdom for what proportion of the textures in a game are repeated?
- do game tools automatically duplicate textures for faster loading automatically or are devs manually selecting textures to do this with?
- is this a common technique or is it even possible to know this without the devs on an individual title saying "we did this" (ie if I open a "WAD" will I see 6 copies of gun.png?)
- is there any sort of common wisdom for what proportion of the textures in a game are repeated?
- do game tools automatically duplicate textures for faster loading automatically or are devs manually selecting textures to do this with?
- is this a common technique or is it even possible to know this without the devs on an individual title saying "we did this" (ie if I open a "WAD" will I see 6 copies of gun.png?)
I suppose games size will frow and being between 100 GB and 200 GB. The non deduplication of data and better compression will help but the assets quality will increase a lot too and at then end I think the upper limit will be 200 GB for a game.
EDIT: Some rare case will go higher.
EDIT: Some rare case will go higher.
cheapchips
Veteran
Games / engines that treat assets in the same way as the current gen probably will. EA and Squire Enix are the only big third publishers really showing engines so far? Frostbite/Luminous look pretty conventional?
We have a couple of rays of hope.
UE5 : For titles using Nanite a 1m poly object takes around the storage of a 4k texture (2-5Mb?). That's a lot of fidelity for an asset that can be placed and blended in an arbitrary way. Shame all the non-Nanite assets will have to keep pace!
Dreams: The visual fidelity .vs storage for their solution is nuts. Can't see any large title going that exotic?
I'm not sure that all assets will necessarily need to expand in the total number being provided even if the scope of the game worlds expand.
By that I mean it may be practical to obtain the texture variants at runtime and not at storage time. Instead of having 6 Dozen slightly different textures, you have 6 different base textures where all the other variants are procedurally generated using data packed elsewhere. With the large increase in CPU resources this may be doable on the CPU or it could remain on the GPU.
I don't know if the industry will go that route, but I hope something is done so game distribution sizes don't skyrocket to multiple UHD BluRays.
By that I mean it may be practical to obtain the texture variants at runtime and not at storage time. Instead of having 6 Dozen slightly different textures, you have 6 different base textures where all the other variants are procedurally generated using data packed elsewhere. With the large increase in CPU resources this may be doable on the CPU or it could remain on the GPU.
I don't know if the industry will go that route, but I hope something is done so game distribution sizes don't skyrocket to multiple UHD BluRays.
From Eurogamer on Doom Eternal
The geometry decal system which has been expanded to allow artists to direct place decals directly on models during asset creation. These decals can be moved around wherever the artist wants allowing for increased experimentation and efficiency. The key here is that artists can create all these different materials then simply paint over the surfaces to create the desired look.
So they use base textures then customise with decals, this seems a smart way to reduce artist time and texture storage required
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
The only PC game that spring to mind, based on what I've read anyway, is Star Citizen. This this has a fairly narrow target demographics, generally people who lots of money who don't mind giving it to Chris Roberts.
I imagine it's probably quite varied. Insomniac posted this for Spider-man:
cheapchips
Veteran
The only PC game that spring to mind, based on what I've read anyway, is Star Citizen. This this has a fairly narrow target demographics, generally people who lots of money who don't mind giving it to Chris Roberts.
I imagine it's probably quite varied. Insomniac posted this for Spider-man:
The gamesize for reference is around 46GB.
Thanks for the info! Interesting that suggests duped assets can account for up to 30% of a games size on disk, that's an impressive saving but as DSoup points out this is probably a per game number rather than generalisable. This suggests to me that de-dupe will help but ultimately these consoles will feel a bit pinched on disk, I have a 1TB SSD in my PS4 and it feels squeezed today especially when I had multiple MP shooters installed. Given that the trend is for big shooters to accumulate game modes and cosmetic junk the way a boat in harbour does barnacles I'm still going to be juggling with an external hdd
So that is just duplicate data, then we know all PS5 games have the option to use oodle for textures.
Blurb
Oodle Texture can make maximum quality BCN encodings that are 5-15% smaller after compression. With rate distortion optimization, Oodle Texture can make high visual quality encodings that are 20-50% smaller.
Bold was theirs, but it seems like we can then shave another 20% off the texture size on disk. I assume Microsoft's bcpack does something similar.
Definitely a factor but I have a sneaking suspicion that with the size inflation to "4K Quality" a lot of those Ooodle/BCPack savings will simply result in textures remaining more or less the same size overall, in some ways Spiderman will be a perfect test case for all this on PS5 when it launches
You can't calculate oodle into this. Oodle is already used on PS4/xb1. It works with many compression formats. It is just not a PS5 only thing. And it is not the only compression format that restructures a texture so it can get compressed more efficiently.
And not to forget, it is not a lossless compression format.
It is good, but not the holy grail of texture compression
You can't calculate oodle into this. Oodle is already used on PS4/xb1. It works with many compression formats. It is just not a PS5 only thing. And it is not the only compression format that restructures a texture so it can get compressed more efficiently.
And not to forget, it is not a lossless compression format.
It is good, but not the holy grail of texture compression
PS5 is the only hardware to have a hardware decompressor using Oodle Kraken and working well with a fast SSD without needing to use many cores of the CPU to decmpress tecture coming from the SSD. Oodle Texture is just RDO compression, like Binomial Crunch does it too but tuned on next generation games need with more attention with BC7 or BC6 texture format.
The bold part is not correct. PS5 has the hardware for kraken decompression, but oodle works with all common compression formats (like zlib). The result of "oodle" is nothing that must get decompressed.
Oddle never gets decompressed or something it is just a "simple" datarestructuring with a texture compression on top.
This also works on PS4 & xb1 (even on xb360 and PS3).
Yes, kraken might be a bit more efficient (up to ~10%), but you loose much of the efficiency the smaller the data is. And as you want to chunk the data as small as possible (because you don't want to load whole e.g. 4k textures at once if you have a ssd) more and more of this efficiency get lost.
Similar threads
