2-3x bandwidth. So lets say 2.5x multiplied effect of an average of the 2.5Gb/s SSD. We're looking at around 6Gb/s I/O. Pretty nice stuff.
I may be mistaken, but it seems to me like MS is claiming:
- 2.4 GB/s (base SSD speed) x 2 (decompression)= 4.8 GB/s
- 2.5x effective I/O increase for textures (Sampler Feedback Streaming)= 12 GB/s
By comparison, Sony is claiming:
- 5.5 GB/s (base SSD speed)
- 8-9 GB/s decompression speed (PS5 has dedicated decompression hardware, same as XSX, so that CPU resources aren't wasted on decompression, though it seems like their decompression multiplier is less than the 2x that MS is claiming for XSX)
If the above is true, MS will have the advantage on texture streaming, assuming of course that Sampler Feedback Streaming works as advertised, and assuming that Sony doesn't have a similar technique in the works for only loading partial mipmaps into the RAM at just the right time (which they might). However, even if SFS works as advertised, it will only help with texture streaming, it won't help with load times. Sony will still have the load time advantage since their SSD is faster and they also have dedicated decompression hardware, PS5 will be able to load compressed game data from the drive at 8-9 GB/s, compared to 4.8 GB/s for XSX.Last edited by shikamaru317 - on 14 July 2020