• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Info DirectStorage 1.1 benchmark

More info:

www.techspot.com

DirectStorage benchmark shows massive transfer speed improvements

Tests from PC Games Hardware show that Microsoft's DirectStorage API can help NVMe SSDs load assets significantly faster than SATA SSDs. They also offer the enormous advantages...
www.techspot.com www.techspot.com

Github download:
github.com

DirectStorage/Samples/BulkLoadDemo/README.md at main · microsoft/DirectStorage

DirectStorage for Windows is an API that allows game developers to unlock the full potential of high speed NVMe drives for loading game assets. - microsoft/DirectStorage
github.com github.com

Video by the guys who I think did the google drive link:

 
Ranulf said:
More info:

www.techspot.com

DirectStorage benchmark shows massive transfer speed improvements

Tests from PC Games Hardware show that Microsoft's DirectStorage API can help NVMe SSDs load assets significantly faster than SATA SSDs. They also offer the enormous advantages...
www.techspot.com www.techspot.com

Github download:
github.com

DirectStorage/Samples/BulkLoadDemo/README.md at main · microsoft/DirectStorage

DirectStorage for Windows is an API that allows game developers to unlock the full potential of high speed NVMe drives for loading game assets. - microsoft/DirectStorage
github.com github.com

Video by the guys who I think did the google drive link:

Click to expand...

you are correct that youtube video is where I got the google drive link.
 
The inclusion of this technology on the PS5 was probably the most interesting thing about the console. Glad to see this come to PC as well because loading screens suck.
 
Ran it from my System/OS drive which is a Rocket 4. Got 0.52 second load.

Moved it to my 24TB RAID-0 array of three 8TB Rocket Q drives and got this:

1673927881900.png

Edit: Specs
Ryzen 7950X
RTX 4090
1TB Rocket 4
24TB RAID-0 of three 8TB Rocket Q
Win11 latest
 
Last edited:
Win 10 22H2
i5-12400F
RX 6700 XT PCI e 4.0
Adrenalin 22.11.1
AData XPG1 Gammix S70 Blade 1TB (PCIE-4.0x4)

Bulk-Load-Demo.png




Win 10 22H2
i5-12400F
RX 6700 XT PCI e 4.0
Adrenalin 22.11.1
Samsung 850 EVO 256GB SATA

Bulk-Load-Demo-SATA.png
 
Last edited:
what games leverage this? benchmarking DS on its own is pretty meaningless. how does it improve game performance or loading times?
 
Leeea said:
it will massively improves loading times
Click to expand...
If loading data is the only bottleneck while loading.

On one of the TES benchmarks threads in CPU (I think the Oblivion one), a post speculated that there's a lot more going on that storage speed and having lots of memory - as CPUs made a huge difference there.

I know, an ancient game using an engine which was barely fit for purpose even when it came out (and Bethesda repeated that part with Skyrim and FO4 so will be interesting what the engine in Starfield will be like), but the point might still be valid: there's a lot more to loading a game than storage performance even if getting rid of that bottleneck will be nice.
 
KompuKare said:
If loading data is the only bottleneck while loading.

On one of the TES benchmarks threads in CPU (I think the Oblivion one), a post speculated that there's a lot more going on that storage speed and having lots of memory - as CPUs made a huge difference there.

I know, an ancient game using an engine which was barely fit for purpose even when it came out (and Bethesda repeated that part with Skyrim and FO4 so will be interesting what the engine in Starfield will be like), but the point might still be valid: there's a lot more to loading a game than storage performance even if getting rid of that bottleneck will be nice.
Click to expand...
The bottleneck is almost always decompressing speed related and how the data is structured etc. This aims to solve the compression bottleneck and ensures that you can make use of that bandwidth (actually even improves speed because decompression is so fast).
 
I wonder if this tech will enable a PC equivalent of consoles' game quick suspend/resume features. I wouldn't mind setting aside 100gb of SSD space if i could suspend a game in a second or two and pick it up just as quickly hours later. That would be one of those small friction reducers that I think would result in people playing games more.

KompuKare said:
If loading data is the only bottleneck while loading.

On one of the TES benchmarks threads in CPU (I think the Oblivion one), a post speculated that there's a lot more going on that storage speed and having lots of memory - as CPUs made a huge difference there.

I know, an ancient game using an engine which was barely fit for purpose even when it came out (and Bethesda repeated that part with Skyrim and FO4 so will be interesting what the engine in Starfield will be like), but the point might still be valid: there's a lot more to loading a game than storage performance even if getting rid of that bottleneck will be nice.
Click to expand...

The fact that other stuff happens during load times doesn't mean storage isn't a significant or primary bottleneck, it could just mean developers were smart enough to use that time to also do other stuff.

And it's not just load times, games should require fewer compromises if the developers don't have to worry about fetching data seconds/minutes in advance of its use. Story cutscenes could easily jump between very different locations without special planning. Gimmicks like gates/doors with long opening animations could go away, tight squeezes between areas could go away, pointless elevator rides could go away.

A lot of the impacts will probably be subtle, but I bet games will feel increasingly "slick" as this matures.
 
Guys, if I am not mistaken, copying the folder elsewhere and running the .exe, runs the bench from THAT drive, right?

If so, here are my two runs, on my 8600k+GTX 1070, on the Gammix S11 1TB (placed on a pcie card) and my old SSD EVO 850 512MB.





I was running msi afterburner osd while running the bench and I noticed the gpu usage really did jump to 100% for a second or so. I wonder if it will run on my GTX 970 and Radeon 7950.
 
Borealis7 said:
what games leverage this? benchmarking DS on its own is pretty meaningless. how does it improve game performance or loading times?
Click to expand...
Exactly right. Until we see real games tested with and without, showing reduction in load times, it's absolutely useless.

I remember when NVMe drives came out and people were showing game IOPS to be thousands of times higher than regular SSDs, but it actually didn't make any difference with loading.

Even today, unless you copy files all day or have some kind of niche I/O workload, in almost every situation there isn't a lick of difference between the fastest NVMe and an Intel X18.
 
Last edited:
Taking the work of asset decompression and streaming off the CPU isn't a bad thing. Spiderman Remastered on PC, with max RT, is too much for a 11400 or Ryzen 3600 to hold 60fps. Even with "optimized RT" as Digital Foundry calls it, they can drop below when swinging around and in heavy action. They could handle it, if the CPU wasn't forced to do what the Series X and PS5 have dedicated hardware for.

Perhaps it is just me that thinks those CPUs shouldn't be on the struggle bus already because of console ports?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top