Anyone know the sizes of texture when they are at 1080p, 1440p And 2160p?
I’m thinking of how the hardware team landed on the numbers for gpu/ram size and speed. 
ok, but where was the backlash to the work needed for making Stadia versions of their software? A platform that needs completely differen APIs and not just some adjustements to settings and lower resolution assets. I saw nobody complainig about that.
1 Like
True about XSS. Didn’t think of that but shoulda been obvious.
RAM on XSX might not be an issue of the rendering res for the dash as it displays on the screen. It might be about the RAM used to store the game states for quick resume.
Followed some of the discussions and comments of you @KageMaru
Maybe it was already discussed but the memory amount and speed of the Series S is exactly that what is required for 1440p gaming. From where we know that? From the memory spec and bandwidth of a PS4 Pro. And that is not considering the advancements the Series S will bring to the table like the Velocity architecture including SFS.
In my humble opinion the memory system is exactly what is needed for the resolution target but nothing more. We all tend to do the same mistake and always try to compare the console to the XSX in that regard. Instead we should compare it to a similar console which is the PS4 Pro.
1 Like
No, the PC min specs that most games are going to have to scale to for years is still going to be worse hardware than the Series S
1 Like
Keep in mind XVA won’t help with the concerns anyone is posing for next gen games, since the XSX version they are seeking to scale down would also use XVA’s feature set. The PS4 Pro isn’t playing next gen games, so not sure that’s a meaningful comparison there.
1 Like
I see a lot of talk on the memory of XSS and how it may bottleneck next gen games, however nobody comments on the availability or not of next gen features on Ps5, like VRS, ML and DLSS (all of them available on SS and SX). Wouldnt the absence of these features hold back next gen as well? But you know, God forbid ppl that questions Sony for anything! Now it is about Xbox? Let’s Fud all over the internet with concerned trolls!
Please tell me what increases requirements to memory size and bandwidth requirement compared to this generation other than size of textures and raytracing. Hopefully the speed requirements for raytracing are covered by the caches in the GPU and not by the GDDR6 because otherwise we can expect a bad experience there.
I personally not see any element that defines next gen that is constrained by memory size or bandwidth other than high quality assets.
So the comparison can be made.
I think what may be missing here is the different design philosophy between Sony and MS. Sony tends to give developers more control over the hardware, allowing them to “code to the metal” they say. It’s on the developers to scale their games to the specific hardware so likewise game performance tends to be locked to the specific hardware.
MS on the other hand has an abstraction layer of sorts and the system allocates the resources as needed. They ask developers to build scalable games and just let the Xbox give what it can. This is why MS has the backward compatibility it does.
The XSS shouldn’t hold back games because games aren’t supposed to be designed specifically for XSS hardware, they are supposed to be designed to scale.
IMHO, the lack of ML on PS5 will significantly hold back next gen gaming. Specifically things like physics and AI will, I suspect, get held back on multiplatform titles. Not sure about other ML uses being held back though (texture upscale at runtime, whole frame supersampling). VRS should be fine too since so many will use that on PC I think.
Yes, I agree with you as to whether XSS really holds back next gen (it shouldn’t). Wrt the XVA stuff ya mentioned as helping XSS be up to snuff, that won’t fly as the benchmark is to be made against XSX and not current gen (since it’s running XSX games, after all). Fortunately it doesn’t need to because of the other reasons you mentioned. The XSS is basically a 1080p box that got a bit of added GPU power as a bonus.
I’m not understanding what Pro has to do with anything here, unless you want to be comparing Pro/X1X to XSS/XSX scenario. Is that what you meant?
No, the Pro is the existing example that the memory specs are more than sufficient for 1440p gaming (including next gen).
This. The games are intended to get scaled down to XSS from a baseline of XSX (or PC/PS5). It’s odd that some devs understand this really basic context while others seem not to. I am pretty confident that the handful of complaints are based on that incorrect context like ya laid out here. It’s like they think they are being asked to scale down to get the XSS version to run on a 4k TV instead of a 1080p TV.
I think that is why devs seem hesitant to do Switch ports of many major 3rd party AAA games too, but when they do show up often they are a lot more impressive than ppl expected. Likely due to much lower res and the vastly smaller screen helping them out with IQ (since pixel density is much tighter on Switch compared to a TV).
Are ya saying that the 4k-designed assets in Pro versions of current gen titles might have more bandwidth and RAM needs than the 1080p-designed assets in XSS next gen games? Hmmmm.
I wouldn’t say it that way but if it helps you to understand it …
Excourse:
A texture has no “bandwidth”, it has a memory footprint. The number of assets needed for one scene, the frame rate and the spec of the GPU define together the memory bandwidth requirement. Because there are scenes that need to load more assets than others and a frame rate of 30 fps compared to 60 gives you double the time budget to load your stuff. That is why each level in a game has a budget for assets, effects and such. Those budgets (limitattion) are a way to represent the limits the hw can handle in a frame. Those budgets are not artificial they are a direct result of profiling a system and its behavior in all kind of situations.
1 Like
Yes, I’m aware of this, but next gen games will have to handle RT so bandwidth comparison is tricky. I’d say the Pro shows that XSS has the power and architecture to easily run current gen games at 4k inline with how Pro did, were it able to output that res. But next gen games have RT eating into bandwidth as well as different post processing and higher asset density. OTOH, it only targets 1080p TV’s vs 4k TV’s.
What kinda size reduction do textures typically see when the render output goes from 4k–>1080p? I’d assume that a 1080p version would typically only need around 1/4 the pixels, but I’ve no idea if that’s the case.
I’d like to see someone breakdown how UE5 might run next gen games on XSS too, since that is the the medium term will hinge on in many cases.
Just a remark here and then I will be silent 
MS did the same in prepararion they did for the One X. They profiled a lot of games and know how all the engines behave regarding CPU, GPU and memory. I would assume they considered their findings into the act of balancing the specs of the XSS.
3 Likes
Yes I def agree. I was a bit surprised wrt Pro vs X1X as I always felt Pro was frankly poorly designed. It pales in comparison to the details X1X considered in its design. MS really nailed not just the hardware but also how games would utilize it and ways to make sure it all popped on screen for end users. I’ve always felt Sony got WAY too much credit for their hardware design. PS4 was not some masterpiece in console architecture imho. X1X, however, was.
The PS4 was the better hardware design over the Xbox One. You can’t deny it. Situation changed with X1X vs PS4 Pro. And it will stay with PS5 vs. XSX.
3 Likes
That doesn’t make the PS4 anything to applaud in terms of design. The tables would have been flipped had Sony not gotten super lucky with the last minute RAM prices dropping. Nothing about PS4 was particularly ambitious on the hardware front. Compare it to XSX (for instance) and it’s a stark difference. MS brings in VRS, ML, mesh shading all on top of the XVA stuff. That’s all pretty big from a tech design and innovation pov. Stuff that really lets games move far beyond the raw spec. PS4 didn’t have much of that kinda innovation imho.
1 Like
The past, it is gone. Let’s embrace the future …
2 Likes