By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - How inFAMOUS: Second Son Used the PS4's Power

Tagged games:

Conegamer on 03 April 2014
leyendax69 said:
Conegamer said:
Oh dear. Not again...

But actually, this thread looks more well put-together. So let's see how it goes. I've just finished inFamous today, an excellent game if short, so its nice to see the breakdown!

If you liked the first game you are gonna love the second one! my favorite game of 7th gen. And off topic: I like your dog.

Thanks! I've actually played all of them, and I was referring to Second Son, but yeah they're all awesome. 



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Around the Network
ethomaz on 03 April 2014
walsufnir said:
Already posted and believe me, the other thread was a mess! It is locked now...

What was the issue with the other thread?

Forget my question



Conegamer on 03 April 2014
walsufnir said:

Yeah, you don't want... Actually it was centered around PS4 having "only" 4.5 gb ram which many of us knew before.

Indeed. This one at least has a bit more content, so let's see how it goes this time.



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Azhraell on 03 April 2014
Conegamer said:

Thanks! I've actually played all of them, and I was referring to Second Son, but yeah they're all awesome. 

Ah ok, I think some time ago I read you saying you weren't buying ps4 till the better games release, that is why I thought you refer to the first game!



ethomaz on 03 April 2014

I guess the 290MB Render Target is heavily unoptimized because well they have a lot of RAM to store it.

Ryse for example uses a 24MB Render Target if I'm not wrong... heavily optimized due the 32MB eSRAM to store it.



Around the Network
fatslob-:O on 03 April 2014
Scoobes said:
Interesting stuff. This game is pretty impressive visually. A little surprised to read about the I/O struggles but I suppose it's a title that is constantly streaming data.

Not that it matters now but I wonder if a solid state drive would have made this easier or if the problems were more to do with the connectors between the drive and CPU?

To answer your question yes the I/O performance would have being solved by adding an SSD and I'm not sure if SATA 2 interface is the issue. 



Scoobes on 03 April 2014
fatslob-:O said:
Scoobes said:
Interesting stuff. This game is pretty impressive visually. A little surprised to read about the I/O struggles but I suppose it's a title that is constantly streaming data.

Not that it matters now but I wonder if a solid state drive would have made this easier or if the problems were more to do with the connectors between the drive and CPU?

To answer your question yes the I/O performance would have being solved by adding an SSD and I'm not sure if SATA 2 interface is the issue. 

Thanks for answering. The reason I ask is that Toms did a comparison of SSD, hybrid and the normal HDD but saw only minimal improvements with the SSD and hybrid drives (actually, the hybrid and SSD both reduced load times by the same amount). I forgot they use SATA 2 so I guess that can't help SSD performance. 




Get your Portable ID!

walsufnir on 03 April 2014
ethomaz said:

I guess the 290MB Render Target is heavily unoptimized because well they have a lot of RAM to store it.

Ryse for example uses a 24MB Render Target if I'm not wrong... heavily optimized due the 32MB eSRAM to store it.


Well, give devs a small finger and they occupy your whole arm ;) Surely,  why heavily compress if you don't need to? Devs have plenty of ram available so they use it, of course ;) I would like to see such detailed info on an Xbone game!



ethomaz on 03 April 2014

Scoobes said:

Thanks for answering. The reason I ask is that Toms did a comparison of SSD, hybrid and the normal HDD but saw only minimal improvements with the SSD and hybrid drives (actually, the hybrid and SSD both reduced load times by the same amount). I forgot they use SATA 2 so I guess that can't help SSD performance.

You need SSD in RAID to really need SATA 3... SATA 2 transfer rate is 300 MB/s (no single SSD reached that yet).



walsufnir on 03 April 2014
Scoobes said:
fatslob-:O said:
Scoobes said:
Interesting stuff. This game is pretty impressive visually. A little surprised to read about the I/O struggles but I suppose it's a title that is constantly streaming data.

Not that it matters now but I wonder if a solid state drive would have made this easier or if the problems were more to do with the connectors between the drive and CPU?

To answer your question yes the I/O performance would have being solved by adding an SSD and I'm not sure if SATA 2 interface is the issue.

Thanks for answering. The reason I ask is that Toms did a comparison of SSD, hybrid and the normal HDD but saw only minimal improvements with the SSD and hybrid drives (actually, the hybrid and SSD both reduced load times by the same amount). I forgot they use SATA 2 so I guess that can't help SSD performance. 


That's not a big issue. The most advantage you get from SSD is not transfer rate but access time to data which is *way* faster.