The PlayStation 5's compression tech can drastically reduce game file sizes

[defaultluser]

It still amazes me that ten years after Sandforce, we have finallly figure-out real-time SSd compression!

Of course, the extra silicon needed for that PS5 miracle probably isn't worth it on PC's more compressed data.

 

[Irata]

On another note, I don't think we should be dismissive about previous gen titles running properly. Consoles have released for over 6 months now, and I doubt people have been playing the 2, 3 exclusive or nextgen titles on their new hw. And it's where the SSDs actually matter the most, imho. With new consoles, a load time delta of less than 10s is very little compared to 30s to entire minutes apart on games with lots of loadings.

One of the reasons why I want - and will eventually get - a series X is exactly because of its great backwards compatibility. Already own a bunch of games (on disc) for the One S and being able to play the titles I already own with much better performance and quality is a plus.

 

[GamerNerves]

Yes, this is good. This is exactly what we have needed for some time now, since wasting expensive SSD space and straining internet bandwith is such an unnecessary practice, when it's totally possible to compress files if people want to. If you compress extremely strongly, then it will take some processing power to uncompress the files, but that is okay since the consoles and modern desktop CPUs are so powerful compared to what they cost. I so much want more compressed games on PC too. Even if you would have a slower CPU, the time it takes you to install the game will be much lesser anyway than downloading those huge files.

 

[Kosmoz]

@Rule110 : You can believe or not, but that's how I talk face to face to people. I start normal, polite and I can go as far as I need to depending on how ignorant or worse, the person in front of me is. I give praise to those that deserve it and the opposite to those that deserve that. All my harsh words were towards those that spoke stupid/untrue things in this topic. Also none were directed to you, just stating. So far I have no issues to the way you write/talk, so there is not need for me to use those kind of words towards you, yet (one never knows what the future holds). I'm a very straight to your face, what I say is what I think, kind of guy.

Still amazing to see people don't know it has similar hardware decompression engines tuned for BCPack and Zlib, instead of Kraken and Zlib.. or similar coprocessors alltogether everywhere else.


I don't agree, the SSD throughput is what limits the max throughput of the on-die hw decomp. The SSD controller is nowhere as good and has less R/W channels, and then goes through 2 gen 4 PCIe lanes instead of 4.

Then when talking texture compression, BCPack already does a better job at it than Kraken, but at the same time efficiency ratios don't take into account the fact that they fetch partial textures, and less of them everytime because they also reduce the VRAM impact with SFS.

When loading, not especially compressed assets or textures, I don't think there is such a large gap.



The 22GB/s I don't think is a realistic expectation, unlike the 8-9 and 14GB/s max mentionned in the initial talks.
Why ? Because that's literally 100% compressed assets transfers at 4x average compression ratios, also at peak sequential write speeds.
I.e. it's a hw/api unit test of fetching compressed assets of a test data sets and not an actual gameplay scenario.

That's not a considerable size difference, unlike Control, given that they have 130GB less from the start on the SSD. And we don't know if specific optimizations were applied equally to both, MS is late to the party with the SDK as confirmed by Remedy.


I think there can be an advantage in GB/s when completely swapping memory in the mercenaries mode for instance, but it's interesting that the PS5 runs a different codepath for loading times there than story mode.

It doesn't in the story mode - there is a 5-2s load time initially, then no more loadings after it. And of course you can quick resume to the story mode in 2s too.

1. I don't know exactly what you don't agree about the SSD throughput and what I said, but you got some things/facts wrong (intentionally or unintentionally).

2. PS5's SSD is a custom PCIe gen 4.0 nvme with a 12-channel memory controller. Xbox and PC's (even latest pro consumer ones that have higher raw speed) have 4 channels only and they don't have the decompressor chip. Only server side ones are matching it or surpassing it and it will take some time until PC's get comsumer SSDs as fast/good.

3. The part about Kraken being worse is not true. Here's a quote: "According to Oodle, the previous 8-9GB/s IO bandwidth figure was provided by Sony by multiplying the 5.5GB/s peak bandwidth of the PS5 SSD for the standard compression ratio of 1.45/1 or 1.64/1. However, when factoring in both Oodle Kraken and Oodle Texture, the developers of the technology have seen an impressive compression ratio of 3.16/1 for a texture set in a recent game; this would translate into an IO bandwidth peak of 17.38GB/s." And yes the 21-22GB/s is theoretical max peak, that's taken from a different source.
Even so, if the UE5 PS5 demo and Ratchet & Clank Rift Apart showed anything is that it is more than enough to stream worlds of assets in less than 1 second or at high speed running/flying, as in UE5 demo.

4. I'll say again for all the doubters or haters (they know who they are), let's see how long it takes for the 1st game using this new tech that PS5 games have (again see Ratchet & Clank Rift Apart, coming next month, June 2021) to come to Xbox and PC.
If it comes this year then yes, PS5's SSD+IO+Kraken is nothing special, if it takes years to come, then this is the benchmark, that it took that long for the rest of them to catch up to this PS5 feature.
There is no debate here, time will determine the nature of a win or a loss/tie on this aspect only, I'm not talking about other things.

5. Diminishing the importance of compression and how the same game has a much lower disk size on PS5 vs other mediums while highlighting that Xbox has a bigger SSD size, as more important is really low. If we are to be fair, one has better compression and one has a bigger SSD (until now). And it's not one game only, but quite a few and probably more to come. I have nothing more to say about this because for me it's obvious.

I'm not sorry for liking the innovations that Sony brought with the PS5 more than those that MS brought with XSX. Those who have a problem with this, it's their problem and theirs alone.

 

[AMN3S1AC]

As with most console exclusive gimmicks, it will be relegated to only being used with first-party titles, as multi-platform developers will not want to waste time, effort, and money configuring their games to work with the tech. Sony's exclusive 1st party titles are the only real selling point of the console, as I doubt most kids are at home salivating over the prospect of a faster ssd. They already lost the popular vote thanks to Microsoft's Netflix style approach to this generation.

 

[TheDestroyer]

... because it's not total GB of compression but PERCENTAGE OF COMPRESSION that actually matters. The examples cited show between around 25% to 60% compression so, theoretically, a 150 GB game could be compressed to somewhere between approx. 65 GB to 113 GB, which is a substantial overall size deduction for a AAA game.

Who care ? we talk about a 14Gb game compressed to 5 Gb , only 9 Gb less ....

Why they don't show their magic on 150 Gb game.

looks like a pro sony post !
No word on microsoft who have the exact same tech (bcpack)

 

[TheDestroyer]

Not sure how becoming the fastest selling console of all time is "losing the popular vote" but, OK...

As with most console exclusive gimmicks, it will be relegated to only being used with first-party titles, as multi-platform developers will not want to waste time, effort, and money configuring their games to work with the tech. Sony's exclusive 1st party titles are the only real selling point of the console, as I doubt most kids are at home salivating over the prospect of a faster ssd. They already lost the popular vote thanks to Microsoft's Netflix style approach to this generation.

 

[Hardware Geek]

One of the reasons why I want - and will eventually get - a series X is exactly because of its great backwards compatibility. Already own a bunch of games (on disc) for the One S and being able to play the titles I already own with much better performance and quality is a plus.

I have a PS5 but with series X having backward compatibility all the way to the OG Xbox, I will be buying one. I still have my old Xbox, 360, and the One X, and being able to play most of my old games on the same console is a very compelling reason for me to get one.

 

[Kosmoz]

As with most console exclusive gimmicks, it will be relegated to only being used with first-party titles, as multi-platform developers will not want to waste time, effort, and money configuring their games to work with the tech. Sony's exclusive 1st party titles are the only real selling point of the console, as I doubt most kids are at home salivating over the prospect of a faster ssd. They already lost the popular vote thanks to Microsoft's Netflix style approach to this generation.

Yes, 1st party exclusives is their main (not only) and most important selling point and it's a very good and strong point that will still be valid this generation too - 25 upcoming PS5 games (in the near future) with half of them being new IPs - a lot of exclusives there for sure.

But you know what? Xbox as a console is even less enticing to buy for all the people who also have a PC, so for me and lot's with PCs the best combo as it was last gen and the gen before last will also be again PC + PS.
That makes Xbox as a console a non-factor, only their services (GP) and their new games (let's see when those come, still waiting for years for them) interest me... and I'm sure the sentiment is shared by many others too.
There is no need to have a PC+XSX/S because it's redundant, but PC+PS5 makes all the sense in world. So another L for MS on this part and why they will never sell more consoles than Sony.

Also think about this for a moment: you say it's a gimmick that only 1st party devs will use (I guess you're referring to all the best bits of tech PS5 has, as in 100% of it's potential, ok, but those are quite a few bits), but what would you say if in a few years not only more 3rd party devs will also use those extra PS5 features, but also MS will add them to it's next Series X (it's called a series, which means there will be newer iterations coming) upgrades that will match what PS5 already has now, like: an equivalent fast SSD+IO, like all the new features that are in the DualSense will be in the Xbox controller too? What are you and those like you gonna say then?

I'm almost 100% sure the next Series X/Z or whatever the (stupid) name will have is gonna mimic/match what PS5 already has now. I expect that to happen by the time PS5 Pro will come, so about 2023-2024-ish. Also I'm expecting PCs+PCsoftware+PCgames to catch up to PS5's advantage sooner, maybe by the time RDNA3 and Ampere Next comes. But the fact that it takes even 2 years to happen, to catch up, means PS5 was/is ahead until then.

XSX came with upgrades, PS5 came with upgrades+innovations. So it can't be more easy for me to like PS5 more than XSX, for that reason alone only, but then there is also the 1st party exclusives reason, which is a game over factor. I rather play only 10 great exclusives on PS5, than play 1000 mediocre games on Game Pass.

 

[Irata]

Yes, 1st party exclusives is their main (not only) and most important selling point and it's a very good and strong point that will still be valid this generation too - 25 upcoming PS5 games (in the near future) with half of them being new IPs - a lot of exclusives there for sure.

But you know what? Xbox as a console is even less enticing to buy for all the people who also have a PC, so for me and lot's with PCs the best combo as it was last gen and the gen before last will also be again PC + PS.
That makes Xbox as a console a non-factor, only their services (GP) and their new games (let's see when those come, still waiting for years for them) interest me... and I'm sure the sentiment is shared by many others too.
There is no need to have a PC+XSX/S because it's redundant, but PC+PS5 makes all the sense in world. So another L for MS on this part and why they will never sell more consoles than Sony.

If you prefer Playstation, go for it but stop trying to convert infidels. Same goes for XBox die hards.
This is getting so tiring. They are freaking consoles and not religions.

Both are great gaming platforms that allow people to do something they enjoy for a low price of entry compared to a gaming PC (just look at the useless crap OEM are selling in the $ 1,000 range or even for more).

The only thing I wish for is better mouse+keyboard support (I.e. as standard option). That would be a buying criterium for me but others‘ mileage differs.

 

[AMN3S1AC]

But you know what? Xbox as a console is even less enticing to buy for all the people who also have a PC, so for me and lot's with PCs the best combo as it was last gen and the gen before last will also be again PC + PS.
That makes Xbox as a console a non-factor, only their services (GP) and their new games (let's see when those come, still waiting for years for them) interest me... and I'm sure the sentiment is shared by many others too.
There is no need to have a PC+XSX/S because it's redundant, but PC+PS5 makes all the sense in world. So another L for MS on this part and why they will never sell more consoles than Sony.

Sure, that's why I have PC and PS5. I love the Xbox Gamepass, and the fact that I have instant access to every First Party game released, plus a whole load from other developers who put their games on the service.

Also think about this for a moment: you say it's a gimmick that only 1st party devs will use (I guess you're referring to all the best bits of tech PS5 has, as in 100% of it's potential, ok, but those are quite a few bits), but what would you say if in a few years not only more 3rd party devs will also use those extra PS5 features, but also MS will add them to it's next Series X (it's called a series, which means there will be newer iterations coming) upgrades that will match what PS5 already has now, like: an equivalent fast SSD+IO, like all the new features that are in the DualSense will be in the Xbox controller too? What are you and those like you gonna say then?

I'm almost 100% sure the next Series X/Z or whatever the (stupid) name will have is gonna mimic/match what PS5 already has now.

The opposite has happened so far. Sony has been caught out with gamepass, and they have been scrambling like crazy to cobble together a compelling online service that can match it. Sony knows they have to make their system seem more compelling and attract new users to get them locked into their ecosystem, which is why they released Horizon and Days Gone onto PC. Microsoft seem content with what they have provided consumers with, while Sony seem to be regretting their initial approach this generation, almost a complete reversal of the last gen.

 

[mattferg]

We see it with Control as mentioned, it's a big drop in file size for PS5. Anything like this is a notable advantage when SSD space is at a premium.

Certainly makes PS5 digital look much more attractive especially compared to Series S which has 300GB less storage available.

I get why Series S exists, it's a games pass machine, a secondary console only. But aspects like this show why it's not actually that great value for the hardware itself. Not when PS5 Digital manages more storage AND the full next gen chipset under the hood.

We'll just have to wait and see what SSDs end up approved for use in expansion for Sony's consoles. At the moment even with high end PCIe 4.0 SSD prices like the WD Black SN850 and Sabrent Rocket 4.0 Plus it still looks to slightly undercut Microsoft's (slower) proprietary drive.....

1. Series S games are smaller anyway as they don’t download the full textures
2. MS’s drive isn’t proprietary, it’s CFexpress

 

[Rule110]

1. I don't know exactly what you don't agree about the SSD throughput and what I said, but you got some things/facts wrong (intentionally or unintentionally).

I would like for you to quote those bits, given you're literally saying the same things I said in my post above (above the one you read).
The BCPack compression is equivalent or better to what Kraken does, because it's specialized for texture compression, while Kraken isn't.

Based on this, it's wrong to estimate compression is worse because throughput from the SSD is higher. Stick to that layer of the pipeline.

2. PS5's SSD is a custom PCIe gen 4.0 nvme with a 12-channel memory controller. Xbox and PC's (even latest pro consumer ones that have higher raw speed) have 4 channels only and they don't have the decompressor chip. Only server side ones are matching it or surpassing it and it will take some time until PC's get comsumer SSDs as fast/good.

12 R/W channels to NAND ICs, yes, but that's not the only way to get proper performance on the SSD. You could at the release time of the consoles and now get 6/8 channel controllers today that output higher sequential performance. The NVMe custom controller is mostly here to add finer grain priorities over standard NVMe (3 weighted priorities against 6 with their approach). https://nvmexpress.org/wp-content/uploads/NVM-Express-1_4-2019.06.10-Ratified.pdf (see pages 91-93).

The decompressor chip isn't on the controller though, and general purpose hardware can definitely get the same results with BCn data using XPU cores, not mentionning the extra pools of DRAM that massively reduce the overhead. It's been the approach for a very long time, similarly on consoles for texture decompression.

Using ASTC Texture Compression for Game Assets

developer.nvidia.com

The new units designed to work on SSD data on the fly, are new though.
The hardware on PC isn't constrained by price, thermals of memory capacity, so there is more than enough spare performance to enable this.

3. The part about Kraken being worse is not true. Here's a quote: "According to Oodle, the previous 8-9GB/s IO bandwidth figure was provided by Sony by multiplying the 5.5GB/s peak bandwidth of the PS5 SSD for the standard compression ratio of 1.45/1 or 1.64/1. However, when factoring in both Oodle Kraken and Oodle Texture, the developers of the technology have seen an impressive compression ratio of 3.16/1 for a texture set in a recent game; this would translate into an IO bandwidth peak of 17.38GB/s." And yes the 21-22GB/s is theoretical max peak, that's taken from a different source.

Oodle isn't Kraken. For textures, BCPack is superior, since it is directly reusing the same BCn texture data as Oodle, simply rearranged differently to fit their approach. It's not unusual, Microsoft already claimed higher compression ratios: https://www.anandtech.com/show/15848/storage-matters-xbox-ps5-new-era-of-gaming/2
At least with 2.4GB/s going above 6GB/s, and presented during their HC32 presentation as well.
Kraken + Oodle, that's perhaps equivalent, since its own creator described it as a 3.16:1 ratio here: https://cbloomrants.blogspot.com/2020/09/how-oodle-kraken-and-oodle-texture.html
and they themselves don't take into account their big ratio outliers listed here http://www.radgametools.com/oodlekraken.htm

let's see how long it takes for the 1st game using this new tech that PS5 games have (again see Ratchet & Clank Rift Apart, coming next month, June 2021) to come to Xbox and PC.
If it comes this year then yes, PS5's SSD+IO+Kraken is nothing special, if it takes years to come, then this is the benchmark, that it took that long for the rest of them to catch up to this PS5 feature.

I don't see the point, PS games haven't come to PC for a dozen years at least, this doesn't tie to any hw limitations. As for the UE engine demo, everybody at Epic said they would be identical experiences regardless of the platform..

Sony purposedly imposes 6 months to 1 year exclusives to most of their studios, and they only recently started the PC releases because they see most of the japanese customers and worldwide boost in PC sales, and they also revealed some of their partnerships were conditioned on them delivering PC versions of their games (at least on the EGS).

Funnily enough, Steam and Sony have ported their controller support to PC, so you get full features in games like Metro Exodus. Pretty cool.

There is no debate here, time will determine the nature of a win or a loss/tie on this aspect only, I'm not talking about other things.

The fact that you're looking for a win/loss here is worrying, I think. We're having a technical discussion, not looking to say one or the other is in the wrong.
99% of the posts I've seen online on new console hw makes me sick to my stomach as a hardware engineer. Some people stumbled on the Cerny talk and watched a very light description of their console. When it's the first time many people looked at a technical presentation, it's bound to cause issues.

I've seen people saying the PS5 is better because it has a DMA controller and the other doesn't (real quote). Cerny was also misleading about features we know now, all consoles have (audio, decomp, coherency) and the usual lack of transparency in Sony's hw reinforces this. I think his bit on GPU performance was appaling.

In the end, all it's used for is saying "we're the only ones who can do such things" when we all know it's not the case. So people please, stop acting like that.

5. Diminishing the importance of compression and how the same game has a much lower disk size on PS5 vs other mediums while highlighting that Xbox has a bigger SSD size, as more important is really low. If we are to be fair, one has better compression and one has a bigger SSD (until now). And it's not one game only, but quite a few and probably more to come. I have nothing more to say about this because for me it's obvious.

Nobody diminished the importance of compression, but you do get my point though ? Saying there's more storage space because compression shows some games are slightly smaller on a smaller SSD is not really true. Multiple games show opposite results and the overall picture is not really clear, especially looking at recent titles.
I don't think the kraken+oodle addition over bcpack grants any groundbreaking gains "over competition" there.

We've been quoting so many figures for throughput, it's almost random.
- Sony has a 5,5GB/s part, with max theoretical ratios of 4:1 in Kraken, which leads them to quote a unit test result with a dataset that scales well, offering 22GB/s (100% compressed data, 4:1 ideal ratios). It's not a realistic figure because it's 100% SSD utilization, only textures, and at an outlier ratio performance, as you can see on the RAD Kraken site.

- MS guarantees 2GB/s throughput per game, announced average rates at 2,4GB/s, which turns into 4.8GB/s and >6GB/s with >3:1 compression ratios. Add on top the 2.5x of SFS that fetches partial texture data and reduces the overhead by allowing to fit as much more into VRAM, and I don't see any particular disadvantages over texture data. The same isn't true for uncompressed assets, so there you go.

The best bit is both companies say average usage is lower, like the 8-9GB/s for the PS5, but they didn't put forward a figure or showcase real time access to the drive. Performance is bound to be worse because in game access isn't fully sequential.

 

[Vulcanproject]

1. Series S games are smaller anyway as they don’t download the full textures
2. MS’s drive isn’t proprietary, it’s CFexpress

Some are smaller compared to Series X. First party titles are. A short list indeed. Most currently are not. Even the smaller ones certainly aren't averaging out anywhere close to 50 percent smaller than on Series X.

Why 50 percent? Well if all titles DID actually shrink that is the rough disparity in available storage space between PS5 Digital and Series S. This is also ignoring the point PS5's file size can also be somewhat smaller than Series X in the first place.

So PS5 Digital's storage is still clearly much larger on both a theoretical and practical level right now.

Microsoft's drive is proprietary. The interface may be based on CFexpress but if you can't fit a suitable CFexpress card in there and have it work exactly the same as their Seagate licensed solution then it's by no means widely standardised. Microsoft have not indicated in the slightest they would open it to CFexpress expansion, and that form factor is ridiculously expensive anyway. Even if you could they likely have slathered the interface with their own custom security and the drive itself with a unique file structure.

PS5's expansion will be open season and thus quite obviously cheaper even if the initial list of compatibles is quite short. it'll inevitably be a lot longer in a couple years and more competitive.

 

[Kosmoz]

The opposite has happened so far. Sony has been caught out with gamepass, and they have been scrambling like crazy to cobble together a compelling online service that can match it. Sony knows they have to make their system seem more compelling and attract new users to get them locked into their ecosystem, which is why they released Horizon and Days Gone onto PC. Microsoft seem content with what they have provided consumers with, while Sony seem to be regretting their initial approach this generation, almost a complete reversal of the last gen.

Not even close to what you are saying. Yes it's true GP is good for MS and a good jab to Sony, but (mark my words) Sony is not threatened by MS nor will it change completely their strategy, also they have no regrets.

You need to rememeber or understand that Sony was for 8 years in the position of power of dominance and MS had to do something to respond to Sony, not vice-versa. MS did manage eventually to do something good with GP, but is nowhere near as all the xbots or click bait shill articles claim, the end on Sony and PS. They (MS) still have an uphill battle and Sony is still ahead, a lot.

What Sony is doing is even smarter and this is their strategy:
- double down on their best assets = great exclusives, which they are already doing and will do even better and more (new IPs)
- bring some key PS exclusives to PC, not all, not even 50/50, but only some that are strategically picked after they had run their sale course on PS to entice and catch new sales and new fans, for future iterations that will be timed (for years) exclusives no PS.

They don't need a GP copy on PS (even though they will also streghten their services - PSnow and PSplus, etc - but not to the same level of GP, because they don't need to), they need to bring more and better exclusives to strengthen what they already have as a strong point, that's what they are doing. And except some 3rd party exclusives that are timed (for months to 1 year) all their 1st party exclusives are timed for years, not merely months.

That's a difference people don't notice and don't understand. It's in the details... I have no worries about Sony and PS, I know they'll do good and they will bring more quality games. I also have no worries for Xbox, because MS is that big, to not have worries, but I'll always prefer quality over quantity (great AAA exclusives over 1000 GP mediocre games).

The thing is, this generation there won't be a roflstomp again by Sony, so the fight will be more even, but I still think overall PS will come on top, even if by a smaller degree. What I want from MS is new and better 1st party AAA games. And no way Xbox will destroy PS either...

 

[hahahanoobs]

This would have been a bigger selling point to me over an nVME drive and wack storage expansion requirements if I were buying a console. I wanna see just how far they go with it in future/current titles.

 

[Kosmoz]

Some are smaller compared to Series X. First party titles are. A short list indeed. Most currently are not. Even the smaller ones certainly aren't averaging out anywhere close to 50 percent smaller than on Series X.

Why 50 percent? Well if all titles DID actually shrink that is the rough disparity in available storage space between PS5 Digital and Series S. This is also ignoring the point PS5's file size can also be somewhat smaller than Series X in the first place.

So PS5 Digital's storage is still clearly much larger on both a theoretical and practical level right now.

Microsoft's drive is proprietary. The interface may be based on CFexpress but if you can't fit a suitable CFexpress card in there and have it work exactly the same as their Seagate licensed solution then it's by no means widely standardised. Microsoft have not indicated in the slightest they would open it to CFexpress expansion, and that form factor is ridiculously expensive anyway. Even if you could they likely have slathered the interface with their own custom security and the drive itself with a unique file structure.

PS5's expansion will be open season and thus quite obviously cheaper even if the initial list of compatibles is quite short. it'll inevitably be a lot longer in a couple years and more competitive.

Ok, I mostly agree with your arguments. And for the sake of this discussion not dragging on til the end of times, I'll only say that even if both parties have their share of PR exaggerations, at least for me Sony already delivered some of the claims which turned out to be true and soon or very soon more will come (Ratchet & Clank RA) that will prove it's not just smoke and mirrors, but actual concrete working games having those features. When will MS have their 1st new game that will bring new features/innovations? That's the question. So I'll believe that part about compression and throughput when I see it working on a new MS game, the same way it works in R&C RA.

The part with the win or lose thing is mainly aimed, not at you, but those ignorant fanboys that feel the need to spew lies or FUD about PS5, when in fact their Xbox is the one that needs to prove more and catch up more, because, no GP is not enough to beat PS. Sony still is in the position of dominance and MS needs to impress more and do more... that's what they don't get, and some of them think they already won and Sony is on the ropes. Far from that...

So yeah, I don't like half truths, misinformation or straight up lies, and towards those are aimed some of my words, again not directly at you. Anyway I've said enough about this subject. We actually agree more than we disagree, at least that's how I see it.

 

[pildorman321]

I didn't know the ps5 was just a ssd.

 

[gamerk2]

At the end of the day, graphically intensive games won't make much use of compression. even if you dedicate an entire CPU core, the time to decompress a 4k texture (let alone a whole boatload of them) is simply too slow.

Let's be clear: Game executable sizes top out at about a hundred meg or so; it's textures and other assets that are driving up install sizes.

 

[Kosmoz]

At the end of the day, graphically intensive games won't make much use of compression. even if you dedicate an entire CPU core, the time to decompress a 4k texture (let alone a whole boatload of them) is simply too slow.

Let's be clear: Game executable sizes top out at about a hundred meg or so; it's textures and other assets that are driving up install sizes.

Taken alone sure (it's game dependent how efficient it is), but compression + world streaming (that PS5 proved can do with UE5 and R&C RA) means it can have a lot smaller game size than it would have been in the past, not to mention almost instant loading and world switching on the fly.

The streaming part makes it that games don't need multiple duplicates, like Insomniac showed for Spiderman games on PS5 (only), they don't need 1000 trash bins, road signs, etc - all the clutter and other stuff to be duplicated to infinity just so it can cover the entire city/map - as was done up until now.

So yeah, it's a 1+1=2 case. Compression + assets streaming, both thanks to the SSD+IO and Kraken+Ooodle. I would say together are really something noticeable, so not as trivial as some think.