Direct Storage is typical of Microsoft. Half baked, not well implemented or thought out. In Ratchet and Clank, the game actually runs smoother and loads faster without it. I have tried on a 7900xtx and a 4090 with a 12700K and now a 14900KF. Direct storage introduces some strange camera jitter especially noticeable on controller.
I was honestly kinda shocked Starfield didn't have any of this tech, being owned by Microsoft you would think that would be the big game you would put that tech into since I believe they are the ones who made it... instead it has more loading screens then I have brain cells that want to play more of it. BGS Fan here too. Makes Sonic 06 Blush...
I guess the lack of Direct Storage on Starfield could be attributed to Bethesda lagging behind in Starfield's development when MS bought it, the game got delayed and still came out with alot of issues. Their Creation engine is also quite limited and cant even handle seemingly basic things like automobiles well, despite automobiles being present lore wise in Interplay's Fallouts (Fallout 2 and Fallout Tactic and the cancelled Vanburen project) yet the lack of drivable automobiles in Fallout 3,4, New Vegas, F76, Starfield, and even modders have difficulty bringing drivable automobiles to any of those games.
It was already years in production when direct storage came out, my guess adding it would have take a lot of time for Bethesda and they were already way behind schedule.
@@sacb0y My thing is at least for ES6, if there is 1000 loading screens. I worry it will be laughed out of business with both Larians next big RPG and the Witcher 4 all set to come out around the same time which will have vastly up to date systems.
Because its garbage or the way its implemented in the like 3 games that use it. Witcher 3 was promised to get it but it never did for some reason we were never told.
Does Witcher 3 even need it? It's far from a load screen simulator, I played it with an HDD with no issues. I know some MMORPG's that would greatly benefit, BDO for example is extremely taxing on the SSD, has texture pop-in issues and you can actually outrun the terrain loading on a horse if you have the game on an HDD.
@@anon_y_mousse DirectStorage readily available if you're a Game Developer on XBox Series X or PlayStation 5 DevKit. Since both consoles are technically the same Technology under the hood, designed by AMD. In other words you should be questioning Microsoft why they make DirectStorage API so difficult to obtain by Game Developers for desktop PC, but making it very easily accessible to Xbox and PlayStation
I did wonder with PC say you had 64gb or 128gb if you had so much available RAM if games while running could copy part of the installation to the available RAM to speed it up
This is possible by setting up a RAM disk but have never seen this automated for games. Interesting idea but most people would not have enough ram for modern games.
Most games rely on CPU heavy decompression that quickly get bottlenecked with anything above 500mb/s (on CPU process) so even if you go out of your way to do a RAMDisk you won't see any meaningful benefit from it
@@Navhkrinthis is something people perpetually refuse to acknowledge. Games barely benefit from drive speed in practice... There's a big jump from slow HDD to fast HDD to SATA SSD, but beyond that the gains are marginal or non-existent due to the bottleneck on decompression.
@@Micromation PS5 has a dedicated decompression chip to handle that task. I'm waiting for either AMD or Intel to make that part of their motherboard designs in the future.
@@BasedPajeetidk about LG owning any game studios but there's plenty great games coming out this year alone already. Im hyped about the new Life is Strange game for one!
The win11 optimized storage stack and sata ssd is blazing fast! But yeah few titles have direct storage. Speed tests for direct storage games show nvme vs sata ssd isnt that huge. I played cyberpunk expansion with nvme and it was great!!
Tbh, as a PC Gamer, it was mind opening to buy a PS5 Slim for Me (Even with PS4 Titles)... Just using My ROG Strix Latop for everything but not gaming anymore and sold also My Series X.
I completely agree with Alex here. Consoles are pretty weak on the CPU side and it makes sense to have a decompression hardware there, but as for PC, not only your CPU is powerful enough to handle decompression without hurting gaming performance, but you also got a few CPU cores that, in the majority of the games, aren't doing much anyway and can be used for whatever is needed. I would just not bet that much on hardware decompression inside GPUs as the limitations of fixed function pipelines are well known (and the restrictions too). The idea is probably to alleviate the traffic between CPU and GPU, because CPUs are already extremely fast at decompression. As for why the adoption is so slow, well, in this industry (that I'm part of) adoption is unlikely to happen when the technology is solving a problem that is not really a big of a deal. You can always work around it and there are far bigger problems to deal with, I/O latency is not one of them on PC.
I wish that the current ssd's and video games were instantaneous with no loading screens like the era of the super nintendo and n64 that used game cartridges while still retaining the same powerful hardware. I liked that certain games were stored on the game cartridges and the games would open instantaneous when the files were found on the game cartridges. I wish that the modern era would still have no loading screens for games and be instantaneous like it used to be. It's why I even went back to playing my n64 since there is no loading screen plus the older games were full of classic games. Nowadays we are dealing with crap like micro transactions, needing an internet connection, games that needs to be downloaded, patch fixes and even subscriptions. I miss when the games we played just happened right away with no waiting times with no loading screens, literally plug. When we play the games we just press the button on and when we are done playing we just turn off the consoles and games were instant with the press of a button. The way it is now, you have to make sure things don't get interrupted like downloading the full game files or downloading the necessary patches and if some kind of interruptions happens than it ruins it because the same process would have to start all over all. Basically, when it comes to playing video games I was so used to having instant gratification since it has been around for so many years before things changed with newer technology. With newer technology, we have to make sure things are working properly so they don't get interrupted at all or something might end up going wrong that we don't expect that we have to trouble shoot or and it takes multiple steps to do basic stuff compared to the older generations. Back in the day, there was not much of a learning curve that we did not have to deal with because less things changed and with more stuff coming out we have to adjust and try to make things work since the older ways of doing were changed for the worse when something was not broken. It was not necessary to fix something just for the sake of changing. Not all changes are good since the more changes there are, the more something has more risk of having issues when there should be no issues from the get go. The only necessary changes need to be done is by doing something similar but improve on it whatever it may be if something was difficult but make the changes very similar but easier and more reliable for the long term if the changes needed to be done. I have been told to work smarter not harder.
One of the main reasons is apparently it requires foundational engine changes to be truly beneficial. This unity staff member likened it to going from DX11 to DX12 support in the engine. It's a big undertaking and I guess unlikely until it makes sense to implement on the engine side. I'd link to the forum post of the unity staff explaining it but this reply would get nuked :P
That's mansplaining for lack of a better way to describe it. PC clearly didn't plan not develop for it, hence Alex's statement that devs haven't looked at it. That plus PC gamers are pretty much content with SATA or Gen 3 speeds, thus holding back development. Surprisingly, this is the gen where the current PC gamers are holding back development and growth
That’s when most people buy a low capacity NVME for their PC to only install Windows and Office on it, but the games are still on a SATA SSD or HDD. Addendum: Before the next wise guy shows up telling me that SATA drives and NVME cost the same, take a closer look. NVMEs themselves are not identical either. The best 4.0s with the highest read speeds still cost more than a SATA, albeit not that much. Maybe 50%. Thus buying SATAs these days is not worth it, unless your PC is old as hell, or you using it for a PS4. And Flash is not Flash, either. SATA max bandwith: 6 Gbit/s. NVME 4.0 max bandwidth: 64 Gbit/s.
Sata and nvme drives cost essentially the same. They both need flash and controller that makes up the 99% of the cost. And big 1-2tb drives are very affordable. And let's not even talk about the horrible experience you'd have games on an hdd. I think it's just the bloatware of win11 that makes people not want to upgrade (which you need for full direct storage support). devs being slow to adopt as always is also the case. Unless you live in like Philippines or India i just don't see how your comment is true.
@@GFClocked Last time I checked SATA SSDs were cheaper. And even if equally priced SATAs are at a disadvantage, since SATA itself is a bottleneck compared to PCIe, not to mention all the stuff that still applies, like overhead, file decompression, etc. SATA 3’s max bandwidth is 6Gbit per seconds. Bits, not bytes. PCIe 4.0 max bandwidth afaik is 64 Gbits per second.
@@muhammadnuman3985 Yeah, for the cheap ones with less than 3,5 Gbyte per second data transfer rate. Last time I checked cards like an EVO 970 with 7 Gbyte per second were at around 160 USD. But neither does help, if you don‘t have the hardware to fully utilize those speeds. And thus the game developers don‘t bank on it either.
@@GFClocked Oh, you can find plenty of PC gamers with antiquated hardware in Europe as well. Also, having an SSD is one thing. Having the hardware to use it‘s full potential is another. Most I/O controllers on PC still suck, no dedicated hardware for getting rid of all the bottlenecks.
It's almost like... DirectStorage is complex and likely not to increase performance enough to warrant it's use. Especially if you have to account for it on many systems -- and a lot of systems only have a quad core cpu, and lately 2 cores in a 6core system are efficiency cores....
The series x has its own decompression processor, enabling it on pc would add cpu overhead right? Im not sure I see the point in using it on pc that has potentially way more access to both system memory and video memory.
Direct Storage seems the kind of thing that doesn't make sense on a graphics API, and thus, graphics programmers don't use it. It should be something transparent to users and unrelated to directX.
Because i probably couldn't afford it, and there's no amazing demostration or practical use for Direct Storage in gaming so far since typical SSDs (500MB/s) still do a good job for a lot of people.
NVME and SATA drives as long as thry are 4TB and under are practically identical in price. On Amazon I can pick up a well known brand 2TB NVMe or 2TB SATA for the same price.
No a lot of games have serious loading issues on PC (like traversal stutters) or it's the reason why PC versions of games are much larger than PS5 versions.
my guess its a skill issue and technology awareness. most game devs dont understand hardware enough to really take advantage of the hardware. honestly that's on Microsoft. they should be more committed to helping out studios optimize for the hardware. programming is complicated enough as it is so I know its difficult to figure out these things
Because DirectStorage is not magic. It's a collection of libraries for loading and decompressing assets that can be better implemented by the devs on a per game basis.
because while on Xbox developers are forced to use it but in Windows 11 this thing is not there yet Microsoft does not force developers to use their technologies for these reasons there are still directx 11 games in 2024. for example there has been HDR support for many years many games still don't have it they don't even have the auto HDR function or they have problems that are colors completely washed out only Nvidia has found a fantastic solution that almost always works well with its rtx HDR. Microsoft and Steam should enforce quality standards for PC games otherwise they are not allowed to publish on their stores. if there is direct storage technology they must be forced to support it otherwise they cannot sell their games on game pass or
Linus got embarrassed becuase of this argument Problem is not the ssd Or dedicated Api The problem is cpu bottleneck Watch digital foundry video on this Also original unreal engine 5 video That demo isn't possible without direct storage
Because the 6 people that have Direct Storage compatible PC hardware aren't the target audience. Hell, what percentage of people are even running games off an SSD?
Maybe I am missing something, what is Direct Storage? do newer games do something different? I thought all games play off a HDD/SSD unless it is cloud gaming
I've got it, so it is faster loading basically, through software on newer SSD's (not SATA). But games will still play on an older, slower Hard Drive. I keep mine externally, so when it said 'Direct' I assumed it meant games like Tomb Raider - that won't work properly on external drives (Tomb Raider in particular won't save as it doesn't allow permission to the save folder). I've gathered that 'Direct Storage' is the brand name of software from Microsoft, not a meaning for 'internal drive'
When games access data on a drive, they have to do so through Windows APIs. DirectStorage is a new set of disk access APIs streamlined for gaming (think "Direct" as in "part of the DirectX family"). They are designed for "disk streaming" scenarios (nothing to do with the cloud here, but it's the same principle - the GPU doesn't "download" all textures at once, it "streams" them as-needed, discarding and reloading constantly). By making a better connection (read: interface/API) between the drive and the GPU, you could lower VRAM and CPU load because requests are fast enough that they don't take resources and the GPU can clear more memory knowing that it can reload fast when needed. It's also tied to data compression/decompression which, according to the video, isn't very good anyway. It was also announced that it would be exclusive to Windows 11, but Microsoft backtracked on that. So a lot of developers are probably figuring out better solutions on their own - for example, keeping data on RAM avoids the need to stream constantly, so if the user has enough RAM, you won't benefit as much. As for games that won't run on External Drives, do remember you can mount drives on local folders inside C:\ if you want - this is usually enough to trick some software to run. This can be done from Disk Manager (Win + X > Disk Management).
@AltieresRohr Had to be careful reading, and re-reading so I understood it but seriously brilliant answer, thanks for taking the time to write that. Best thing I have read on it, should be pinned for anyone like me who was confused. Rewatching the video (a few times) makes a lot more sense and all the comments. Thanks! I've subbed to you in case you make any more videos as a thank you. As for the Tomb Raider solution: that is genius, I've just quickly looked it up and gone through disk management. I didn't know you could do that. (I haven't seen it mentioned on any forum with people with the same issue, not even suggested, so I'm naturally sceptical because of how much of a struggle last time was in trying to make it save externally (I'm on a netbook, hence low space), but I will find another USB, format to NTFS, redownload and try. If it works, that will be a lot easier for me than what the old forums said to do with a virtual hdd & old Win 10 instruction) 👍👍
I know the DF guys are real fans of Microsoft, but let me just say this: the company SUCKS BIGTIME creating API and libraries. There is a real reason DirectX (or 3D) did not killed OpenGL and even was kicked by Vulkan in a lot of areas. Or that SDL is used by Valve to handle things as input, timers, threads and sound in multiplatform, including Windows. Anyone that really worked with their VBRUN or VCRun libs, or tried using unicode in Windows, or digged into adding those things SDL handle so beautifuly, knows what I am talking about. Microsoft is there, and DirectX is widely used, because Windows is a monopoly, not because is that better solution for all cases. Just see what happens in different markets like servers and handhelds were Linux rains absolute (Android is Linux, do not forget this). Heck, most emulation devices from China nowadays runs Linux, even SteacmDeck does. Windows is still there just because inertia.
The ps5 Titania 2 SSD controller is better than direct storage and RTX IO combined. RTX IO is still pretty good though I've seen. Far better performance with RTX IO rather than direct storage alone
It’s because they don’t care. I mean that’s it. They see PC as a pirating heavy platform so they prioritize platforms and kinda just give it a Hail Mary toss to pc later on if they even do at all.
The croudstrike incident that affected a small % of Windows machines proved the world runs on Windows, sorry to the Linux evangelists but enterprise is mostly Windows and so is Gaming.
![Gucci Mane & Sexyy Red - You Don't Love Me [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/j7IBqyFKT4c/mqdefault.jpg)
Direct Storage is typical of Microsoft. Half baked, not well implemented or thought out. In Ratchet and Clank, the game actually runs smoother and loads faster without it. I have tried on a 7900xtx and a 4090 with a 12700K and now a 14900KF. Direct storage introduces some strange camera jitter especially noticeable on controller.
I was honestly kinda shocked Starfield didn't have any of this tech, being owned by Microsoft you would think that would be the big game you would put that tech into since I believe they are the ones who made it... instead it has more loading screens then I have brain cells that want to play more of it. BGS Fan here too. Makes Sonic 06 Blush...
I guess the lack of Direct Storage on Starfield could be attributed to Bethesda lagging behind in Starfield's development when MS bought it, the game got delayed and still came out with alot of issues. Their Creation engine is also quite limited and cant even handle seemingly basic things like automobiles well, despite automobiles being present lore wise in Interplay's Fallouts (Fallout 2 and Fallout Tactic and the cancelled Vanburen project) yet the lack of drivable automobiles in Fallout 3,4, New Vegas, F76, Starfield, and even modders have difficulty bringing drivable automobiles to any of those games.
I convinced myself pre-release that Starfield would be the showcase title for DS
It was already years in production when direct storage came out, my guess adding it would have take a lot of time for Bethesda and they were already way behind schedule.
From what i've heard it requires a foundational change in the engine, and bethesda is just not going to do that.
@@sacb0y My thing is at least for ES6, if there is 1000 loading screens. I worry it will be laughed out of business with both Larians next big RPG and the Witcher 4 all set to come out around the same time which will have vastly up to date systems.
Because its garbage or the way its implemented in the like 3 games that use it.
Witcher 3 was promised to get it but it never did for some reason we were never told.
Does Witcher 3 even need it? It's far from a load screen simulator, I played it with an HDD with no issues.
I know some MMORPG's that would greatly benefit, BDO for example is extremely taxing on the SSD, has texture pop-in issues and you can actually outrun the terrain loading on a horse if you have the game on an HDD.
You mean the “next gen edition”?
Pixel art games should use it. I see no excuse
Direct storage minesweeper mod
I remember removing Direct Storage on Ratchet and Clank on pc and the game was running smoother.
Sounds like a skill issue
True of nearly all newer tech. It takes a while for programmers to catch up, especially in the current day because most programmers are garbage now.
@@anon_y_mousse DirectStorage readily available if you're a Game Developer on XBox Series X or PlayStation 5 DevKit.
Since both consoles are technically the same Technology under the hood, designed by AMD.
In other words you should be questioning Microsoft why they make DirectStorage API so difficult to obtain by Game Developers for desktop PC, but making it very easily accessible to Xbox and PlayStation
I did wonder with PC say you had 64gb or 128gb if you had so much available RAM if games while running could copy part of the installation to the available RAM to speed it up
This is possible by setting up a RAM disk but have never seen this automated for games. Interesting idea but most people would not have enough ram for modern games.
with a modern m2 ssd load times are decently short already arent they? bit of an overkill solution with the ram imo
Most games rely on CPU heavy decompression that quickly get bottlenecked with anything above 500mb/s (on CPU process) so even if you go out of your way to do a RAMDisk you won't see any meaningful benefit from it
@@Navhkrinthis is something people perpetually refuse to acknowledge. Games barely benefit from drive speed in practice... There's a big jump from slow HDD to fast HDD to SATA SSD, but beyond that the gains are marginal or non-existent due to the bottleneck on decompression.
@@Micromation PS5 has a dedicated decompression chip to handle that task. I'm waiting for either AMD or Intel to make that part of their motherboard designs in the future.
Where are the games never mind the Direct Storage .
I am sure the hard working LGHD ppl will come up with a hit game any day now
@@BasedPajeetidk about LG owning any game studios but there's plenty great games coming out this year alone already.
Im hyped about the new Life is Strange game for one!
The win11 optimized storage stack and sata ssd is blazing fast! But yeah few titles have direct storage. Speed tests for direct storage games show nvme vs sata ssd isnt that huge. I played cyberpunk expansion with nvme and it was great!!
Tbh, as a PC Gamer, it was mind opening to buy a PS5 Slim for Me (Even with PS4 Titles)... Just using My ROG Strix Latop for everything but not gaming anymore and sold also My Series X.
Inevitable tech
But people haven't utilized it yet
I completely agree with Alex here. Consoles are pretty weak on the CPU side and it makes sense to have a decompression hardware there, but as for PC, not only your CPU is powerful enough to handle decompression without hurting gaming performance, but you also got a few CPU cores that, in the majority of the games, aren't doing much anyway and can be used for whatever is needed.
I would just not bet that much on hardware decompression inside GPUs as the limitations of fixed function pipelines are well known (and the restrictions too). The idea is probably to alleviate the traffic between CPU and GPU, because CPUs are already extremely fast at decompression.
As for why the adoption is so slow, well, in this industry (that I'm part of) adoption is unlikely to happen when the technology is solving a problem that is not really a big of a deal. You can always work around it and there are far bigger problems to deal with, I/O latency is not one of them on PC.
I wish that the current ssd's and video games were instantaneous with no loading screens like the era of the super nintendo and n64 that used game cartridges while still retaining the same powerful hardware. I liked that certain games were stored on the game cartridges and the games would open instantaneous when the files were found on the game cartridges. I wish that the modern era would still have no loading screens for games and be instantaneous like it used to be. It's why I even went back to playing my n64 since there is no loading screen plus the older games were full of classic games. Nowadays we are dealing with crap like micro transactions, needing an internet connection, games that needs to be downloaded, patch fixes and even subscriptions. I miss when the games we played just happened right away with no waiting times with no loading screens, literally plug. When we play the games we just press the button on and when we are done playing we just turn off the consoles and games were instant with the press of a button. The way it is now, you have to make sure things don't get interrupted like downloading the full game files or downloading the necessary patches and if some kind of interruptions happens than it ruins it because the same process would have to start all over all. Basically, when it comes to playing video games I was so used to having instant gratification since it has been around for so many years before things changed with newer technology. With newer technology, we have to make sure things are working properly so they don't get interrupted at all or something might end up going wrong that we don't expect that we have to trouble shoot or and it takes multiple steps to do basic stuff compared to the older generations. Back in the day, there was not much of a learning curve that we did not have to deal with because less things changed and with more stuff coming out we have to adjust and try to make things work since the older ways of doing were changed for the worse when something was not broken. It was not necessary to fix something just for the sake of changing. Not all changes are good since the more changes there are, the more something has more risk of having issues when there should be no issues from the get go. The only necessary changes need to be done is by doing something similar but improve on it whatever it may be if something was difficult but make the changes very similar but easier and more reliable for the long term if the changes needed to be done. I have been told to work smarter not harder.
One of the main reasons is apparently it requires foundational engine changes to be truly beneficial. This unity staff member likened it to going from DX11 to DX12 support in the engine. It's a big undertaking and I guess unlikely until it makes sense to implement on the engine side.
I'd link to the forum post of the unity staff explaining it but this reply would get nuked :P
That's mansplaining for lack of a better way to describe it. PC clearly didn't plan not develop for it, hence Alex's statement that devs haven't looked at it. That plus PC gamers are pretty much content with SATA or Gen 3 speeds, thus holding back development. Surprisingly, this is the gen where the current PC gamers are holding back development and growth
I blame the gamers and sympathize with the corporate executives
so brave 🤝
I love corporate executives 🥰
So full of pride and accomplishment.
Alex Jones
Clearly we're not paying the top executives enough in this industry! Won't somebody think the of the starving elites?
Didnt even put a pci 5 in the slot and just kept my pci 4. Shame id have loved to see it becoming a thing.
That’s when most people buy a low capacity NVME for their PC to only install Windows and Office on it, but the games are still on a SATA SSD or HDD.
Addendum: Before the next wise guy shows up telling me that SATA drives and NVME cost the same, take a closer look. NVMEs themselves are not identical either. The best 4.0s with the highest read speeds still cost more than a SATA, albeit not that much. Maybe 50%. Thus buying SATAs these days is not worth it, unless your PC is old as hell, or you using it for a PS4.
And Flash is not Flash, either. SATA max bandwith: 6 Gbit/s. NVME 4.0 max bandwidth: 64 Gbit/s.
Sata and nvme drives cost essentially the same. They both need flash and controller that makes up the 99% of the cost. And big 1-2tb drives are very affordable. And let's not even talk about the horrible experience you'd have games on an hdd. I think it's just the bloatware of win11 that makes people not want to upgrade (which you need for full direct storage support). devs being slow to adopt as always is also the case. Unless you live in like Philippines or India i just don't see how your comment is true.
@@GFClocked Last time I checked SATA SSDs were cheaper. And even if equally priced SATAs are at a disadvantage, since SATA itself is a bottleneck compared to PCIe, not to mention all the stuff that still applies, like overhead, file decompression, etc. SATA 3’s max bandwidth is 6Gbit per seconds. Bits, not bytes. PCIe 4.0 max bandwidth afaik is 64 Gbits per second.
@@sunnyssundries$2 to $3 difference at 1tb, pretty much same price
@@muhammadnuman3985 Yeah, for the cheap ones with less than 3,5 Gbyte per second data transfer rate. Last time I checked cards like an EVO 970 with 7 Gbyte per second were at around 160 USD.
But neither does help, if you don‘t have the hardware to fully utilize those speeds. And thus the game developers don‘t bank on it either.
@@GFClocked Oh, you can find plenty of PC gamers with antiquated hardware in Europe as well. Also, having an SSD is one thing. Having the hardware to use it‘s full potential is another. Most I/O controllers on PC still suck, no dedicated hardware for getting
rid of all the bottlenecks.
It's almost like... DirectStorage is complex and likely not to increase performance enough to warrant it's use.
Especially if you have to account for it on many systems -- and a lot of systems only have a quad core cpu, and lately 2 cores in a 6core system are efficiency cores....
The series x has its own decompression processor, enabling it on pc would add cpu overhead right? Im not sure I see the point in using it on pc that has potentially way more access to both system memory and video memory.
Direct Storage seems the kind of thing that doesn't make sense on a graphics API, and thus, graphics programmers don't use it. It should be something transparent to users and unrelated to directX.
Don’t think it really doesn’t do much of a difference
A superman type game isn't possible without it
Where you are moving through map at very fast speeds
No loading screen and so on
@@Ghost-pb4ts It's tototally doable with NVMe and such.
Because i probably couldn't afford it, and there's no amazing demostration or practical use for Direct Storage in gaming so far since typical SSDs (500MB/s) still do a good job for a lot of people.
NVME and SATA drives as long as thry are 4TB and under are practically identical in price. On Amazon I can pick up a well known brand 2TB NVMe or 2TB SATA for the same price.
@@richard-davies huh, fair enough
Still an expensive luxury unless needed for either work or you have extra money laying around.
No a lot of games have serious loading issues on PC (like traversal stutters) or it's the reason why PC versions of games are much larger than PS5 versions.
In my country nvme and sata ssd barely different in price unless that nvme is like high tier speedy nvme
my guess its a skill issue and technology awareness. most game devs dont understand hardware enough to really take advantage of the hardware. honestly that's on Microsoft. they should be more committed to helping out studios optimize for the hardware. programming is complicated enough as it is so I know its difficult to figure out these things
Because DirectStorage is not magic. It's a collection of libraries for loading and decompressing assets that can be better implemented by the devs on a per game basis.
because while on Xbox developers are forced to use it but in Windows 11 this thing is not there yet
Microsoft does not force developers to use their technologies for these reasons there are still directx 11 games in 2024. for example there has been HDR support for many years many games still don't have it they don't even have the auto HDR function or they have problems that are colors completely washed out only Nvidia has found a fantastic solution that almost always works well with its rtx HDR.
Microsoft and Steam should enforce quality standards for PC games otherwise they are not allowed to publish on their stores. if there is direct storage technology they must be forced to support it otherwise they cannot sell their games on game pass or
Horizon Forbidden West has direct storage. I can load a save in 2-4secs.
Because there is no need for it. SSDs are great, but data loading is already fast enough without dedicated APIs.
Linus got embarrassed becuase of this argument
Problem is not the ssd
Or dedicated Api
The problem is cpu bottleneck
Watch digital foundry video on this
Also original unreal engine 5 video
That demo isn't possible without direct storage
For the same reason most are still playing on edge lit IPS monitors with no or terrible HDR suppport
Because the 6 people that have Direct Storage compatible PC hardware aren't the target audience.
Hell, what percentage of people are even running games off an SSD?
There are millions that have the required hardware.
@@formulaic78 Any many millions more that don't.
@@Melsharpe95obviously
@@Melsharpe95 That still does not mean 6 people.
Who still has their games on HDD?
I wish more developers used Vulkan, DX12 is a flop and Microsoft have done noting to improve it except add more half baked features.
Maybe I am missing something, what is Direct Storage? do newer games do something different? I thought all games play off a HDD/SSD unless it is cloud gaming
Do some googling and make yourself informed
@@adjo6792 I tried that, something about going through the GPU. I'm not an expert with computers, was asking a genuine question. Thanks for the help
I've got it, so it is faster loading basically, through software on newer SSD's (not SATA). But games will still play on an older, slower Hard Drive. I keep mine externally, so when it said 'Direct' I assumed it meant games like Tomb Raider - that won't work properly on external drives (Tomb Raider in particular won't save as it doesn't allow permission to the save folder). I've gathered that 'Direct Storage' is the brand name of software from Microsoft, not a meaning for 'internal drive'
When games access data on a drive, they have to do so through Windows APIs. DirectStorage is a new set of disk access APIs streamlined for gaming (think "Direct" as in "part of the DirectX family"). They are designed for "disk streaming" scenarios (nothing to do with the cloud here, but it's the same principle - the GPU doesn't "download" all textures at once, it "streams" them as-needed, discarding and reloading constantly). By making a better connection (read: interface/API) between the drive and the GPU, you could lower VRAM and CPU load because requests are fast enough that they don't take resources and the GPU can clear more memory knowing that it can reload fast when needed. It's also tied to data compression/decompression which, according to the video, isn't very good anyway. It was also announced that it would be exclusive to Windows 11, but Microsoft backtracked on that. So a lot of developers are probably figuring out better solutions on their own - for example, keeping data on RAM avoids the need to stream constantly, so if the user has enough RAM, you won't benefit as much.
As for games that won't run on External Drives, do remember you can mount drives on local folders inside C:\ if you want - this is usually enough to trick some software to run. This can be done from Disk Manager (Win + X > Disk Management).
@AltieresRohr Had to be careful reading, and re-reading so I understood it but seriously brilliant answer, thanks for taking the time to write that. Best thing I have read on it, should be pinned for anyone like me who was confused. Rewatching the video (a few times) makes a lot more sense and all the comments. Thanks! I've subbed to you in case you make any more videos as a thank you.
As for the Tomb Raider solution: that is genius, I've just quickly looked it up and gone through disk management. I didn't know you could do that. (I haven't seen it mentioned on any forum with people with the same issue, not even suggested, so I'm naturally sceptical because of how much of a struggle last time was in trying to make it save externally (I'm on a netbook, hence low space), but I will find another USB, format to NTFS, redownload and try. If it works, that will be a lot easier for me than what the old forums said to do with a virtual hdd & old Win 10 instruction) 👍👍
Well i had to turn it off on ratchet and clank rift in time cuz it made the game stutter every 2 secs
I know the DF guys are real fans of Microsoft, but let me just say this: the company SUCKS BIGTIME creating API and libraries. There is a real reason DirectX (or 3D) did not killed OpenGL and even was kicked by Vulkan in a lot of areas. Or that SDL is used by Valve to handle things as input, timers, threads and sound in multiplatform, including Windows. Anyone that really worked with their VBRUN or VCRun libs, or tried using unicode in Windows, or digged into adding those things SDL handle so beautifuly, knows what I am talking about.
Microsoft is there, and DirectX is widely used, because Windows is a monopoly, not because is that better solution for all cases. Just see what happens in different markets like servers and handhelds were Linux rains absolute (Android is Linux, do not forget this). Heck, most emulation devices from China nowadays runs Linux, even SteacmDeck does. Windows is still there just because inertia.
Because it is totally irrelevant.
Not even on consoles the tech is relevant
The ps5 Titania 2 SSD controller is better than direct storage and RTX IO combined. RTX IO is still pretty good though I've seen. Far better performance with RTX IO rather than direct storage alone
Its how quick resume works on xbox
It's why most console games don't have traversal stutter issues.
My man is a Windows hater and Linux fanboy. 😢
With the on going enshitificaton of windows, I can't blame him.
Like every educated person should be.
Microsoft Windows is complete garbage
Useless
It’s because they don’t care. I mean that’s it. They see PC as a pirating heavy platform so they prioritize platforms and kinda just give it a Hail Mary toss to pc later on if they even do at all.
Is that why all their games are all on pc?
@@MaxIronsThird when I say they I meant other developers. Insomniac has been doing pretty good work from what I’ve seen. It’s just not a priority.
@@startthebengine what developers? Every game nowadays comes to PC
@@MaxIronsThird almost every game comes to pc as a flaming, unoptimized wreck. Yes.
The tech does not make huge strides on consoles too, most developers does not use the technology
Hi Everyone !
Microsoft tech are a dead end. The world runs on Unix, not CPM.
based, fuck windows.
Not gaming, no.
@@happygofishing Windows is a DEI product. Linux is a white men (and a Jewish King -> Stallman) software.
The croudstrike incident that affected a small % of Windows machines proved the world runs on Windows, sorry to the Linux evangelists but enterprise is mostly Windows and so is Gaming.
@@TheFPSPower Windows only dominates gaming because of DirectX.
Because they have no games
What?
Bait used to be believable
REAL THERE ARE NO MORE GAMES
PS5 HAS NO GAMES
XBOX HAS NO GAMES
NINTENDO HAS NO GAMES
PC HAS NO GAMES
@Joshda039 trolling used to be clever and believable for sure. I think this comment is just being too hyperbolic though.
Pc has more games then all other platforms combined