|
|
|
|
|
by simne
1536 days ago
|
|
> During play, loading should be considerably faster as the GPU could just load the data from storage into graphics memory, without touching the main system at all. This could not affect performance much, because pcie speed far surpass speed of best ssd/nvme. Currently only problem, that for all transactions ssd<->gpu, involved main cpu, so it have much load only for accept transactions.
But this is already solved by new technology, which appear recently and allows gpu to access ssd directly, unfortunately not much details known. As for size I'm not sure, because gpu hardware is too special for deal with filesystems, so I think, there will be special fs.
Also possible that this part of disk system will be read only for gpu (all writes and maintenance will do host cpu), to simplify gpu software part. |
|
Ah, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for the info.
I would think there could still be some speed advantage if the GPU does not have to share storage with CPU, coordinate access, etc.
> As for size I'm not sure, because gpu hardware is too special for deal with filesystems, so I think, there will be special fs. Also possible that this part of disk system will be read only for gpu (all writes and maintenance will do host cpu), to simplify gpu software part.
That was sort of what I meant. In that scenario, a game would take up less space in the "ordinary" filesystem, i.e. storage of the main system - because part of the game data would be moved to GPU storage instead. Hence appear to be smaller: If you added the space taken up in main storage and GPU storage back together, you'd arrive back at the old size. It's more a sleight of hand, not an actual reduction in size.