@Medic_Alert It's overkill, they should have paid more attention to the whole thing and not just the SSD. 825 GB is somewhere between launch PS4 and PS4 Pro and next-gen games are even bigger.
@BlueOcean Some media fanboys still claim these wild daydreams that the digital edition PS5 will come with a 2TB inbuilt ssd. It’s impossible considering how that thing will be priced.
PS5 lacks Machine Learning according to the engineer and would also lack Variable Rate Shading since Digital Foundry asked Sony and they never replied and Cerny has never mentioned it. Interesting...
@BlueOcean
It looks like he deleted his previous tweet, too. Interesting, indeed. I'm beginning to understand Phil's remarks regarding how he felt after watching the PS5 reveal. 😏
I recommend everybody to read the developer's explanation, you learn a lot about how games are rendered. Traditionally and including PS5, all mip maps are loaded but on Series X what is far away and doesn't require it, only the necessary mip maps are loaded (Sampler Feedback Streaming) and this saves a huge amount of data because in 3D games there are always assets and textures that are far away and textures are oversampled. If you want to know what Series X is about, have a look.
But why is Sampler Feedback Streaming so important? I/O throughput.
As it is know, PS5 is theoretically faster than Series X, speed is, actually, the only technical advantage of PS5, which features I/O throughput up to 5.5GB/s (raw) / 8.5GB/s (compressed) while Series X I/O throughput is 2.4GB/s (raw) / 4.8GB/s (compressed). Sampler Feedback Streaming results in approximately 2.5x the effective I/O throughput (SSD performance) and memory usage above and beyond the hardware capabilities on average. In other words, it gives a speed boost till 6GB/s (raw) / 12GB/s (compressed) on Series X which makes Series X faster than PS5 in practical terms.
According to Digital Foundry, PS5 would only feature hardware-accelerated ray tracing, unless Cerny totally forgot about the rest:
"Cerny (Sony) doesn't mention technologies such as Machine Learning support or Variable Rate Shading, PS5 does indeed deliver hardware-accelerated ray tracing".
@BlueOcean Interesting read. The technique itself isn’t actually new that’s how DirectX12 handles mip maps and it was used to great effect Doom Eternal. Hardware accelerating it will take work off the CPU which is important for next gen consoles because of the size of the textures they’re handling.
The greatest effect will be in preventing texture pop in as you move through the world in 3-D games that use mip maps rather than on initial loading times. Not all games use mip maps. The unreal engine five tech demo implied that Sony and Epics technology was moving more towards scaling hero assets than creating separate lower resolution 2-D textures.
Since third parties that use that technique will have to have a software solution for PC anyway. I can understand why Sony wouldn’t think it was important if that first party is moving in a different direction as they have the faster SSD anyway.
@gingataisen The PS5 has a custom GPU based on RDNA 2. Sony have both removed and added features so it won’t be the same as a RDNA 2 PC graphics card. At this stage they haven’t confirmed what they’ve removed.
We don’t know how the Xbox series X GPU will have customised RDNA 2 either.
@Ryall A crucial issue about the next gen games that further bolsters the need of Sampler Feedback Streaming is recently coming from another developer - https://gamingbolt.com/ps5-xbox-series-x-games-file-sizes-are...
Seems like Epic Games has talked about lot of next gen photorealism in UE5 demo PR success but left to address one key issue. Anyways the UE5 demo was running at 1440p30fps and could be run at 40fps on a 2080 laptop, it required megabytes level bandwidth as was confirmed by Epic China on the livestream that was taken down later.
@Ryall Modern engines use mip maps automatically according to that developer. On top of that, Variable Rate Shading on Series X optimises GPU usage according to Digital Foundry:
The RDNA "1.5" that uses PS5 according to Sony's engineer could be because of PS5 having PS4 and PS4 Pro modes built in. They have designed a current-gen and next-gen GPU-wise console (PS5) but with not all the next-gen features that Series X has. If Sony added features, they didn't tell Digital Foundry when they asked them.
I said before that MS will have its own method to offset the 'advantages' of overall throughput of data that Sony's PS5 have much like Sony can have its own method to offset any 'power' differential. Just because they haven't mentioned it is not an admission that they don't. As I keep saying, lets wait to see what transpires over the coming months. Neither has given us the 'full' breakdown of EVERYTHING these consoles can do.
What Sampler Feedback Streaming can also do is to stream in just 'part' of a texture. If an object is just using 256x256 of a 2048x2048 texture, they won't streaming in the full 2048x2048, just part of that texture that's actually needed. It 'samples' the texture and realises it doesn't need the 'full' texture and only streams in the part that is required - thus reduces the file size and amount of Data needed to stream in. Whether that all adds up enough to offset the advantage, time will tell. It could depend on the Developers, the way the game is made etc. We don't know for sure if Sony has their own version of that or whether they could add that via a Software update.
We know Sony's PS4 Pro has built in object tracking and why their own implementation of CB rendering methods have been superior to others. Some games may have some form of reconstruction built into the game engine but invariably, these have not been as 'clean' as Sony's own implementations. The Object tracking means that they can align frames much better to reconstruct a cleaner higher resolution image - as seen in H:ZD and God of War for example. They could be relying on something similar too to offset AI upscaling and VRS. It does seem that Sony have their own form of mesh shading too.
No doubt both MS and Sony have their own ideas about next generation. It seems that MS have opted to find solutions to get more 'efficiency' in streaming Data - ie Sampler Feedback Streaming where as Sony opted to bigger with its SSD and maybe have solutions to offset the GPU/CPU difference. It will depend on whether Devs utilise everything at their disposal or not. We don't know whether Sony's option for Audio will be an advantage or whether the money invested in Haptic feedback in its controller too will be a game changer. MS hasn't really changed the controller too much, brought in any 'new' game-play affecting additions.
As I said, we don't fully know yet what these consoles will be capable of delivering and what, if any, differences these make overall. Without considering the different methods each may have to offset raw specs, Sony's machine could load faster, have better audio and haptic feedback but a lower overall resolution with fewer rays compared to MS's slower loading, maybe some pop-in or lower quality LoDs (because it can't stream as much 'data'), but be higher resolution overall and/or better performance. However, until we get deep into the generation, when Devs are 'fully' utilising the hardware, taking advantage of whatever Sony and MS have designed into the APU, we may not know and/or care. If MS mitigate the SSD advantage completely and Sony's games look (doesn't mean they are the same under a microscope but look 'close' enough when running) and run the same despite having a weaker CPU/GPU, does it matter? Only to Fanboys...
Personally, I fully intend to pre-order the Series X and pick-up a PS5 sometime after at the moment. I know that I could play the vast majority of Xbox games on my XB1X and can't play the PS5 exclusives on my PS4 Pro, but I think that Xbox is more 'consumer' friendly and will offer the most at launch. The fact that the 'full' power will be available ALWAYS, even with XB1 and older games, means that I will have a 'bigger' library on day 1 with games that will run (if not look) better, a launch line up of new games I want to play and will work with my XB1 Elite controller with LOWER input Lag makes this the best choice for me on Day 1.
Whether the PS5 becomes just an 'exclusives' box for me or not, we will see. Audio and Haptic feedback could make it a difficult choice if the games look and run similarly enough but I don't think a second or two difference in loading times would make a difference to me at all. There will always be people that buy one or the other and ALWAYS stick with the same brand, defend that brand regardless and refuse to accept that certain aspects could be better. At the start of the last gen, PS4 had the 'power' and 'few' games and power mattered then to play AC, CoD, BF4 etc at higher Res and then it was Games that mattered when the X arrived - not saying that Xbox fanboys didn't change their tune either throughout the Gen. At the moment, CPU/GPU matters to Xbox fanboys and its all about the SSD and games to Sony fanboys without really knowing WHAT each will bring. We will have a clearer idea of what MS will bring for games on Thursday but again, only hindsight will tell us which really delivered this upcoming gen as Game output can dry up, new techniques in game development, new engines etc can make a difference etc.
In any case, I still think its 'premature' to speak of what perceived advantages/disadvantages each has and what 'features' each could be missing. Because MS didn't speak too much about dedicated Audio, rumble triggers etc, there were Sony fanboys who believed the CPU would be weaker because its handling Audio and not even 3D audio either, that Xbox doesn't offer any 'feedback' bar a basic rumble - it does offer some 'haptic' feedback through the triggers and of course the SSD will be a 'game changer' and make games so much better than Xbox can offer - even if they are 'lower' res. Point is, until these consoles are out and all the actual details are known, its best not to assume that one doesn't have features that the other talked about - they may not have chosen to reveal things 'yet'...
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@Ryall PS5 gpu is essentially a combination between RDNA 1 and some features of RDNA 2 like RT.
This was revealed recently by the Principal Graphics Engineer who worked on PS5 hardware team. Evidence #1 showing PS5 engineer confirming this -
This is the core reason why it doesn’t support things like mesh shading (which is an entire ground up redesign of pipeline from primitive shaders introduced in RDNA 1; watch the nvidia starship demo), Tier 2 VRS(unconfirmed) and also extra Machine Learning hardware support which has been already shown back in Feb running on Xbox Series X to be able to automatically upgrade real time original Xbox titles from non HDR period to HDR without any changes in coding using DirectML. Evidence #2 showing PS5 engineer confirming it doesn’t support machine learning -
It’s grossly hypocritical how Xbox Series X hardware breakdown was done by a neutral third party like Eurogamer and Digitalfoundry wayyy back in February but for PS5 we’re still supposed to rely on marketing stakeholders like Mark Cerny and Tim Sweeney. I recommend you check out the original well-detailed technical blog by Eurogamer on Xbox Series X hardware breakdown.
Even though Xbox Series X has a way faster 320-bit 560Gbps GDDR6 memory, RDNA 2 features like mesh shading, VRS will come as an extra optimisations on top sheer raw memory bandwidth performance delta that we have already seen between X1X and PS4 Pro where in huge photorealistic dynamic open world games like RDR2, X1X can push native 4k30 and PS4 Pro can only do checkerboard blurry 4k.
Evidence #3 showing Xbox Series X hardware engineer confirming even higher optimisations possible than what is claimed by the developer -
Sony's PS5 doesn't appear to support Mesh Shading - but does have its Geometry Engine. From Eurogamer after Sony's GDC breakdown...
A new block known as the Geometry Engine offers developers unparalleled control over triangles and other primitives, and easy optimisation for geometry culling. Functionality extends to the creation of 'primitive shaders' which sounds very similar to the mesh shaders found in Nvidia Turing and upcoming RDNA 2 GPUs.
Granted it may not have 'Mesh Shading' as such but this could just be Sony's own bespoke version that essentially does the same thing. To a degree, Nanite (Unreal 5) is doing something similar to Sony's Geometry Engine and Mesh Shading - point is, these are all variations on a theme that seem to be doing similar things but just called something different.
Unless you have an nVidia card, you won't get DLSS because that is nVidias own proprietary version of AI/Machine Learning upscaling. Sony too have their own Proprietary format of 3D Audio using its Tempest engine instead of going with Dolby Atmos for example. It appears to use a form of Ray tracing - but instead of tracing a ray of light bouncing from surfaces, its tracing the path of waves of sound bouncing around the environment. MS has something similar too but won't be called the same and I don't know how many sound points it can trace. Sony talked about individual drops of Rain for example....
This is why I think its not a great idea to speculate on what something may or may not have, may or may not be able to do etc. not everything is 'hardware' either and some can be done via software too. Ray Tracing doesn't need 'dedicated' cores or Hardware Acceleration to achieve it. It can make it easier to run graphically intensive games at a high resolution and frame rates but that doesn't mean that you have to have RDNA2 or nVidia Tensor cores to have ray tracing. Its just too intensive for the vast majority of modern games if you also want to get decent performance too! Point is, not everything has to be 'built in' at a hardware level and some things, like VRS, could be done via Software. Sony may have their own proprietary form of VRS too - through its Geometry Engine and called something different. On nVidia, VRS is called Content Adaptive Shading and AI upscaling is DLSS but these are called different things on AMD and MS - it depends on whether Sony/MS opt to use AMD's own form or have their own proprietary form of these. MS will be using DX12 RT for example but Sony seems to be opting to use AMD's format which can also use CPU cores too to increase the RT capability.
I am NOT saying Sony definitely will or will not have VRS, AI upscaling etc - just that we don't fully know one way or the other and just because they haven't said 'Mesh Shading' for example, doesn't mean that the PS5 won't have something similar under a different name. Both Sony and MS have kept things back, things they are not prepared to talk about yet so we really need to wait and see, wait for confirmation one way or the other. I guess you can say Sony's PS5 won't have 'Mesh Shading' because they have their own proprietary version in their Geometry Engine that essentially does a very similar thing...
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@BAMozzy Geometry Engine is basically using primitive shaders according to the Mark Cerny presentation but mesh shading is totally a groundbreaking different redesign of entire graphics processing pipeline, it’s basically a next generation of RDNA 1 primitive shaders. And Nanite is entirely a different cross platform technology that uses per pixel triangles for using ultra scale cinema quality assets. It comes with new challenges - https://gamingbolt.com/ps5-xbox-series-x-games-file-sizes-are...
But it will always be true that hardware accelerated BVH path tracers as seen in Minecraft RT Xbox SX demo will always provide way more superior performance than alternative software solutions just for the sheer fact that the Application Specific IC(ASIC) is inherently created just for that purpose. Similarly Nvidia GPU Tensor cores which is used by almost every Data Scientists for exponentially better performance than CPU, Microsoft can come up with it’s own AI model for a DLSS alternative since Azure Cloud and Microsoft Research already have the upper hand in big data resources and deep learning research field.
“I'm looking forward to seeing how MS tackle a DLSS 2.0 alternative too!“ - Team Blur Games’ design lead Gavin Stevens
@Z3u5000 That's right and thanks for all your insightful posts. This would also explain why The Road to PS5 was so ambiguous and full of excuses compared to the crystal-clear information provided by Microsoft this far, Sony talking about CPU and GPU variable clocks as a clever solution but in reality they drain power from a capped power pool, 825 GB as a magic figure for the console and enough for gamers and why they never answered Digital Foundry's questions, confirming only hardware-accelerated ray tracing.
@Z3u5000 I am not saying that all options are 'equal' in both quality and/or application. Not saying that Software too will be as good as hardware implementation at all. I was merely making the point though that its wrong to flat out state that one console has or does not have some format or their own bespoke alternative until ALL the information is available.
I wouldn't categorically state that Sony's PS5 for example has superior Audio and that games will inherently load faster, have better LoDs or less Pop-in because of its 'Superior' SSD bandwidth, many more channels and superior prioritising. The fact that its SSD and Hardware around that is 'Superior' and the fact that MS are perhaps far more efficient in what it streams and 'could' use Machine Learning to upscale 'lower' res textures to try and offset the fact that Sony can stream the High Res textures and/or can stream more data if/when required is irrelevant if the end user cannot see a difference in gaming. If you see an object in the distance that looks essentially the same whether that texture is a 'native' high res texture or a ML upscaled lower res texture, does it really matter?
If Sony's implementation of Shading is inferior, but in game-play, you can't really see it, does it matter? I don't think it matters if a console is running at native 4k, 1bn rays being traced etc and the other has to run at CB 4k with 800m rays being traced if both are also running at a locked frame rate and you can't tell if VRS or lower res ML upscaled textures are being used on one but not the other. To me it matters if Sony for example has to settle for significantly lower res and/or less stable, maybe lower frame rates. Chances are, if the difference is 'big' enough, it will end up being an 'exclusives' only box.
Its all well and good having features like VRS, super fast SSD's with more levels of Priority, Mesh Shading/Geometry engine or even having the Tempest Engine vs MS's Audio, but its up to developers to fully utilise these in the 'best' way for gamers. VRS is a 'degradation' of image quality in essence, reduce the quality in areas that are not obvious, not the focal point for gamers. Its essential rendering parts at 'different' resolutions - instead of every pixel being treated as an individual, blocking some together because they are in shadow, because they are blurred by motion, because you are not looking at the sky etc. The sky for example could be rendered in blocks of 4 pixels - essentially 1080p but would that be seen as a 'negative' because of the gains elsewhere. Like I said, is it a downside if MS uses AI upscaling of textures because it can't stream the high res versions in as fast as Sony's. Obviously to an Xbox fan, that's acceptable because the end result looks as good in games anyway. I would rather have CB 4k than Native 1440p and would be OK with CB 4k or DLSS 1080p but with higher quality visual settings and/or higher frame rates but for some the fact that its not 'native' - especially if the competition offers 'native' 4k is something to argue over even if the end result is difficult to see the difference.
Until we know the full story and what that actually means for us as gamers, its rather 'fanboyish' to make claims that one doesn't do this or that, and what it does do is somehow far superior in games. Even if something does transpire to be better under a microscope, if it doesn't have much (if any) impact on the experience, does it really matter? Does it matter if MS's Mesh Shading is superior right now? It only matters if games utilise it and as a result, the overall gaming experience is enhanced by it. As I said, I would be perfectly fine with VRS, ML upscaling and/or Temporal reconstruction if it enhances the overall impact of the gaming visuals - its better than having a 'lower' native resolution upscaled in the normal way and/or lower quality visual settings. Its all about utilising the hardware most efficiently to give the 'best' impression. Native 1440p with regular upscaling is softer, with lower finer detail than CB 4k so I would rather Devs use CB rendering and if it looks as good as another console running at 'native 4k' because of hardware object tracking (for example - and apart from the 'first' frame after a transition - which may only be displayed for up to 33ms). We really should wait to see what all of these things add up to, what aspects the console manufacturers have yet to divulge and ultimately what differences we will see in games.
I don't care if Sony's SSD and data throughput is superior - at least not until we can see exactly what that means for me as a gamer. What difference that makes in games and game design. If its just a second or 3 of time saved loading, I don't care. Its not a 'big enough' advantage to worry about. If it means that Xbox has more pop-in because it can't stream enough data across, if it means that there is more stutter in some games because its streaming in slower or objects have 'soupier' textures etc, these things could outweigh a 'higher' native resolution. Again not saying this will be the case but right now, we do not have any practical information regarding both consoles and what the choices Sony/MS have made will have on the impact of games. There was talk that the ESRAM in XB1 would offset the difference in RAM on the PS4 - but we know the reality now. Having a wider but slower GPU, despite the higher TF values, may not be advantageous in some areas, some game design where faster is better - theoretically, it can do more bounces for Ray Tracing because it has more cycles per frame (as its faster) but with fewer cores, it may have fewer Rays in total too but what difference that makes in the visual quality to the end user is not known and could vary on a game by game basis - depends on whether the game benefits by having more bounces or more rays for example.
Software too may not be the optimal solution either but that could still be better than nothing and help reduce the gap in some areas too. The point is we just don't know what all these different approaches will do for us, the gamer, and whether or not they end up being a 'big' advantage or mitigated by 'hardware/software' options. Even if its not mitigated entirely, it could still close the gap over not having these options entirely. MS have a solution to mitigate some/all of the SSD advantage but until we actually see games running on SSD, pushing the PS5 to its 'limit' on data streaming, we won't know whether MS's solution is robust enough to keep up. As I would on PushSquare though, I won't turn round and say MS's SSD implementation is terrible and that it will end up being its 'weak' link or MS's Audio will be so much worse because Sony's Tempest engine is much better. I won't slag off MS's decision to just add a Share button to its controller and games will ultimately be more immersive on PS5 as a result of the Audio and Haptic Feedback because until we get games, can actually play them and compare the visuals, the audio, the experience etc, all these 'features', what each console has built in at a hardware level and the impact of those are unknown. Also we don't yet know 'everything' about what's under the hood so there could yet be some 'surprise' to bring one closer to the other than it appears right now.
There is no secret that on paper, the Series X is the more powerful on raw specs and could translate into a big gap between it and the PS5 but right now, how much of a gap, is unknown and we can't say for definite that its implementation of the Geometry Engine or even software solutions won't negate some of that advantage and if so by how much. To say the PS5 can't do (some form of) mesh shading or VRS at this point is not accurate though.
Anyway, I would rather not be talking about what the PS5 does or does not have and rather talk about the Series X and what all the specs will mean for me as a gamer, what that means to the next generation of games and what developers will be able to achieve with the hardware. Talking about how much 'better' the Series X in some areas (especially without talking about the areas it seems (notice I said seems) weaker on) does come across as fanboy bashing. I hate that on PushSquare at the moment and as such, refusing to get involved in any discussion with the immaturity being displayed there. I know its an 'exciting' time with new hardware coming from both companies but constantly bashing one, their choices and strategies is ridiculous and immature - buy the console that suits your preference, delivers on what you want from games and/or new hardware the most and focus on the positives of your preferred platform, not the 'negatives' of the other to 'justify' your preference!!
A pessimist is just an optimist with experience!
Why can't life be like gaming? Why can't I restart from an earlier checkpoint??
Feel free to add me but please send a message so I know where you know me from...
@BAMozzy Likewise even though Xbox Series X loads 2.5 times less data when compared to Sony PS5, gamers will have the same visual experience on their screens. - https://mspoweruser.com/microsoft-xbox-series-x-i-o-throughpu...
“Both machines are incredible. BOTH. But while Sony put all their eggs in an SSD basket, MS divided the talent up for everything. The XSX SSD is a damn fine piece of kit with some impressive IO optimisations of its own that gets ignored, but now, coupled with SFS, it essentially levels the playing field somewhat. As I said, there is no denying the PS5 has the faster IO and raw speeds... OF COURSE. But that's not the end of the magic trick for MS.” - https://gamingbolt.com/xbox-series-xs-sampler-feedback-stream...
@Z3u5000 That's right, we're talking about, e.g., when a character takes 1 centimetre of a 60" TV, using the same example that the developer used. We're not talking about losing any kind of detail at all. He explains that even though all the textures and mip maps are loaded by current-gen consoles and PS5, not all of them are displayed. This is what Sampler Feedback Streaming is for and yes, Series X is actually faster in practical terms because it's saving 2.5x of data traffic on average.
Forums
Topic: General Xbox Series X|S Thread
Posts 121 to 140 of 1,549
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic