adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
We don't. If we're being optimistic, it could be an SSHD. Guess we're gonna have to wait for the teardowns and DF analysis post-release for that.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Get your SSDs ready, PS4 Pro supports SATA3
- Thread starter MagicWithEarvin
- Start date
We don't. If we're being optimistic, it could be an SSHD. Guess we're gonna have to wait for the teardowns and DF analysis post-release for that.
Devilinthiscity
Member
Selling my og PS4 and using that money to help get either one of these. Crucial seems like the more affordable option. Not by much, I know, but they pretty much preform about the same right?
ethomaz
Banned
No end-user (not enterprise) SSD performs like Samsumg in the market... they are really way ahead in the tech and got that they are close to twice expensive.
But for Pro the others could be enough... need wait tests.
ethomaz
Banned
How so if only the PC SSD will cost the same??? SSD is a gamer changer in PC even more than on consoles.
Well already have years I can't use notebook or desktop without SSDs.
Really don't get the mass ignorance on this issue. SataIII makes no difference in practical terms over SataII. Sure in synthetic benchmarks where you have billions of tiny reads or writes it seems like there is a great benefit for SataIII, but that benefit won't be there pulling game data (and decompressing it on the fly) from an archive on PS4/Pro.
Devilinthiscity
Member
Okay, kinda figured they were they were the best option. Yeah, at this point i'll probably wait for DF for the whole run down of speeds and performance.
For roughly about the same price as that 4tb Samsung SSD that someone posted about getting a couple of pages ago, you can build a pretty decent PC.
Granted the build comes with a 480gb SSD but you could always upgrade I guess.
$1300 Gaming PC Build/PCpartpicker
Interesting. Do you have some sources on this?
ethomaz
Banned
Well but with that SSD you won't have enough games to play... he wants 4TB put more games in without redowloads so the same size is needed for PC. And for PC this 850 EVO is already slow... you will need to go with 950 Pro with NVMe.
In resume if you want a PC you will need to spend the same or more with with SSD.
PS. The SSD in your link performs way below the 850 EVO.
I imagine the type of people looking at dropping that money on an ssd are a) not buying $500 4k tvs and b) are like me in that they go "I see a thing, I want a thing, I own a thing".
To you it is more money than sense, to others it's spending it on whatever they want because they can. I already have a pc that has a £500 gpu, a £800 monitor and a full custom water loop etc.
There are people who smoke 20 a day, drink 2 Starbucks a day, buy breakfast and lunch at work. To me that's a waste, but it's their money.
ethomaz
Banned
I find weird when you are buying a expensive thing and somebody complains with the same value you can buy a lot of others things.
Looks like they live in a world where Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Porsches, etc doesn't exists lol
PS. I used a car reference but it can be any product... I have friends that waste over $5000 in a bike... hell yes a bike but he like to use it every single day after work because he likes it... so if you like something every single money wasted is worthy... hobby is a god thing.
Like if I will buy a cheaper SSD for my PC
The reason it has changed is because the PS4P supports SATA3.
No, you don't. Stop giving bad advice.
Most people just have a 500gb midtier SSD as their boot drive with a larger HDD for most games and other stuff. The majority of games load fast enough on HDDs on PC. I've got tons of games that load instantly on my HDD. Why would I put them on an SSD?
Big SSDs are a massive waste of money. Just like paying more for high performance SSDs. Unlike what you think there's no difference between an 850 evo and a 950 PRO in real life performance. Boot times and load times will be almost the same between these two or any other midtier SSD.
I find weird when you are buying a expensive thing and somebody complains with the same value you can buy a lot of others things.
Looks like they live in a world where Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Porsches, etc doesn't exists lol
PS. I used a car reference but it can be any product... I have friends that waste over $5000 in a bike... hell yes a bike but he like to use it every single day after work because he likes it... so if you like something every single money wasted is worthy... hobby is a god thing.
Like if I will buy a cheaper SSD for my PC
Quite. I'd love to have the money to get a Tesla but I don't have that kind of money.
It is, and not yet. We'll know within a couple of days of launch though as there are plenty of people that will try it.
£270ish to more than halve loading times in some situations isn't that outrageous an outlay. You'll be able to pop the drive out and put it into the PS5 when that comes out too. I don't know if I will bother (will wait for benchmarks) but it's small potatoes compared to what some spend on other hobbies.
ethomaz
Banned
Cool I guess but that didn't chance what I said in any way... why the guy buying a 4TB SSD to games will get something lower on PC??? He of course will build a PC with the same or better SSD.
950 Pro is a night to day over 850 EVO... there is not even comparison sorry.
I will buy an 850 EVO with 1TB or 2TB for Pro... same or better if I will buy a PC for games.
I agree with you about going from a "slow" SSD to a "faster" SSD. You don't notice much difference other than in benchmarks and/or you do lots of writes, like video editing.
But, for SSD vs HDD, many games do load much faster on a SSD. For example Rise of the Tomb Raider, I finished it on a SSD and moved it to a raid 0 HDDs for storage. With the recent update, tried playing it again. Now, it seems to take forever to load. Need move it back to my game SSD.
ethomaz
Banned
OS and Apps in general including games needs to be in SSD if you want performance.
HDD is just for media or archiving stuffs like images, videos, music, documents, etc.
Each game uses 20-50GB of space... so the biggest size in your computer needs to be the SSD if you build it for gaming.
500GB is really low for games... over 1TB is recommended and even that is considered low.
I'm glad there are up to 4TB SSD options in the market now.
Like you, I'll be waiting for the benchmarks before deciding...but it will be hard to resist if SSD really halves the loading time.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
If the loading times are decreased significantly AND also reduces stutter/improves texture streaming in open world games then I will bite the bullet.
Leithkorias
Member
Im just glad to have a rear usb port to use for the playstation vr. You have to run a micro usb cable to the rear of the psvr control box from the front of the ps4. Its aestheticly terrible.
Skel1ingt0n
I can't *believe* these lazy developers keep making file sizes so damn large. Btw, how does technology work?
Maybe this will lead to a faux Pro upgrade to Bloodborne.
MiketheBSG
Member
Does the PS4 still have issues with hard drives over 2 TB without having to turn off sleep mode? I'm buying a PS4 Pro and wanted to know what's the largest HD possible without losing features for the PS4.
PS4 supports 4TB now without any issues.
So if Digital Foundry does testing and the SSD benefit is legit I have an SSD in mind. I'd love to buy a Samsung 850 Pro or Evo at the 1TB storage tier and up. But they are really expensive still. I don't want to compromise on storage space though. As Pro purchasers I imagine a lot of us are really invested in the Playstation ecosystem and we have some pretty big libraries so I am not looking at anything under 1 TB.
Anyways, I came across the Sandisk X400 and the review I read makes it really sound like a legit alternative. This passage comes from a review on Anandtech.com
It really sounds like a no compromise drive just a step below the Samsung 850. I spotted one on Rakuten for a comparatively cheap $236. Click Here.
With prices marching north of $300 on these comparative large storage SSDs I think this one might be a great choice. Anyone else tried this model or has some insight? Again, this is assuming that the SSD will be worth putting in the Pro. If not, I think the 2 TB Seagate Firecuda is a very cost effective choice when it releases. The Seagate 1 TB SSHD has been my go to since last gen and I have one inside my PS3 and a regular Samsung / Seagate 2 TB HDD was in my original PS4 before I sold it.
Anyways, I came across the Sandisk X400 and the review I read makes it really sound like a legit alternative. This passage comes from a review on Anandtech.com
It really sounds like a no compromise drive just a step below the Samsung 850. I spotted one on Rakuten for a comparatively cheap $236. Click Here.
With prices marching north of $300 on these comparative large storage SSDs I think this one might be a great choice. Anyone else tried this model or has some insight? Again, this is assuming that the SSD will be worth putting in the Pro. If not, I think the 2 TB Seagate Firecuda is a very cost effective choice when it releases. The Seagate 1 TB SSHD has been my go to since last gen and I have one inside my PS3 and a regular Samsung / Seagate 2 TB HDD was in my original PS4 before I sold it.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-upgrade-sata-3gbps,3469-13.html
Start reading from there.
The conclusion:
"Our real-world metrics demonstrate that those theoretical differences aren't always practical, though. In most cases, a SATA 3Gb/s-attached Samsung 840 Pro is almost as fast as the same drive connected to a 6 Gb/s link"
And it's worth remembering that those tests are with desktop CPUs and with generic software. On consoles we have software designed with stock limitations in mind and other considerations.
It was always the case that sataII was enough and this still remains the case today. Jumping on the SSD bandwagon now because of SataIII is just idiocy, you would have gotten the same performance either way.
Shit, hit quote instead of edit...
You are full of it. The extra CPU grunt in patched games might make a load time difference, it won't be the sata spec.
You are full of it. The extra CPU grunt in patched games might make a load time difference, it won't be the sata spec.
Lol I thought I was taking crazy pills reading this thread
I said the same thing before but looks like people are treating going from sata 2 to 3 as a game changer when it's anything but that
I can understand being excited going from a hdd to any SSD but from a sata 2 ssd to sata 3? Really???
StereoVsn
Member
This is a good post and folks should read it. I have been buying Sandisk and Crucial for myself and friends and from real world performance, it's 99% as good as Samsung for all intends and purposes (except for special applications that don't matter to vast majority of GAF).
You will be able to get Sandisk 1TB for under $200 during BF (I bought 1TB model last year for that much). Depending on how PS4 Pro handles SATA3 and data streaming, an SSD could be a great help much the same as on modern PCs.
Especially open world games with constant terrain/texture streaming benefit tremendously from SSDs, not to mention load/save times on games. Personally I think 2TB is a bit too high right now but will come down in 2H 2017 to more reasonable levels. We'll likely see a 2TB under $500, maybe around $450 this BF, but no less.
For SATA3 vs SATA2, on a PC, there is a large difference even with basic Crucial or Sandisk SSD, not to mention faster Samsung (or other) options. SSD will easily saturate SATA2 interface. For HDDs, there is mostly no difference though. PS4 OG routed everything through USB bus so even SATA2 speeds was deficient there.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Also remember that PS4 doesn't even have true SATA II speeds. This should still be a MAJOR upgrade unless they used the same USB connection bullshit again, which I think is unlikely.
In the end it will most probably turn out to be way faster and people will think it's because of the SATA 3 now being included. But that's not really the reason.
And the reason is?
Ps4 support only supported Sata 2, this supports 3 wich will make better gains possible.
Thank you for the kind words. I myself have spend years attempting to buy Samung SSDs for various computers but their high price and the comparative cost / performance / and storage size comparison had me buying a Crucial or Kingston drives three times before I bought my first Samsung M.2 SSD and I saved several hundred dollars doing so. The Kingston 120 GB boot drive was forgettable but Micron's Crucial line has done right by me. I have a 1 TB 2.5" SSD in my main PC and a 250 GB M.2 drive in my laptop right now. So if Sandisk has comparative quality I think I will wait until Black Friday and snatch up this baby and save myself a tidy sum off the Samsung 850. Unless there is a deal that makes the latter more palatable on my wallet.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
is that 5400 or 7200 RPM ? Doesn't seem to mention on the page.
edit: is that the 2TB SSHD ?
holy crap that's a great price.
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
is that 5400 or 7200 RPM ? Doesn't seem to mention on the page.
edit: is that the 2TB SSHD ?
5400.
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
is that 5400 or 7200 RPM ? Doesn't seem to mention on the page.
edit: is that the 2TB SSHD ?
I'm just waiting on the 2tb firecuda to come in stock. The 1tb is already up.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I have a stupid question.
What's the difference between the baracuda and firecuda types of HDD ?
DJ Lushious
Member
The FireCuda has more NAND cache, right?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178996
edit
ps,i didn't see that this is 3.5 inch SSHD,sorry.i think the firecuda is 7200rpm but with 64MB cache
So, is the FireCuda the best way to go speed wise for somebody wanting 2TB but not wanting to pay the price of a proper SSD? It seems to be what everybody who wants a SSHD is getting and they're available for delivery by Monday on Amazon.co.uk.
EDIT:
Ah no, I've just noticed the one that's in stock is the 3.5 drive. The 2.5 will take a bit longer.
EDIT:
Ah no, I've just noticed the one that's in stock is the 3.5 drive. The 2.5 will take a bit longer.
Firecuda is an sshd with 8gb flash added.
Baracuda is purely hdd, with more storage capacity, but also higher (15mm). So that one will definitely not fit in a PS4 and most likely not in a PS4Pro.