Support NeoGAF

[Shmunter]

As a PC user with 2 SSD's, i have to say some of the SSD talk from console gamers over the last year or so, has made me chuckle quite a bit. I think a lot of you are in for a shock when next gen consoles launch and we still get sizeable load times.

Do we know if the console ssd will have direct access to ram bypassing the cpu to copy/write data?

This could be a point of difference. No idea if feasible

 

[MeatSafeMurderer]

If you ignore that the speed jump is 30-50x, we are not talking about double speed.

30-50x...sequential read speeds. Shame that games require a lot of random reads...and they perform significantly worse. Real world? You're talking cutting loading times down by atleast 50%, in some rare cases more like 80-90%. It's not going to be a warp drive I'm afraid.

If you ignore that a console is not a pc, where you can very easily get a reading optimized file system (unlike the balanced pc file systems), custom reading optimized drive firmware is not far fetched, since all consoles will ship with the same ssd, and maybe a bit more far fetched but still possible, a custom read optimized controller (that Sony has a patent for already).

So you can spend even longer installing your games than you have to with a HDD. Perfect! And lets be real here...it's just going to be an off the shelf NVME SSD, likely QLC (I.E...slow and with relatively low write endurance), and a small capacity, 1TB maybe. Even if they do use a customized SSD...well lets just say that you really don't want them to do that, it's going to die and then you're going to be left with a paperweight that only Sony / Microsoft can fix...and they'll rape your wallet for the privilege.

 

[Shifty]

Your 10 years of game programming isn't going to make next gens ssd faster or bend physics whether you've programmed for 10 years or 1000 computers will always be slower when overloaded with alot of data so your programming experience doesn't mean anything!

You've yet to actually back up this vague 'more data means slower computer' claim that you're treating as absolute truth, whereas I've put in the effort to actually explain where I'm coming from.
So I guess I'll just sit back and be entertained as you spool out more rope and make it painfully obvious that you get your computer knowledge from a tabloid rag

Fucking console warriors, man.

Do we know if the console ssd will have direct access to ram bypassing the cpu to copy/write data?

This could be a point of difference. No idea if feasible

I don't think anyone outside of Sony knows for definite at this point.
It's not impossible, but even then you still have to consider that loading isn't all disk I/O- even if the PS5's SSD were meshed with its RAM for fast interoperation, you have to process the loaded data on the CPU in order to actually make use of it.

In some cases (textures, for example) that processing is trivial, so you would see an enormous gain from a theoretical hybrid SSD/RAM system.
Other things (like game object instances) take time to instantiate after loading depending on the complexity of their structure and logic, so they'd still require a loading time after disk I/O brings them into memory.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Freedom Gate, is that you?
Doesn't seem to be elaborate/technical enough for Freedom Gate, but you can never be sure...

 

[psorcerer]

Other things (like game object instances) take time to instantiate after loading

Why exactly?
What are you instantiating?

 

[Fbh]

Makes sense.
Every bold claim about new consoles always comes with a big "*" next to it.

Higher framerates!!! *
*if developers focus on that and don't push the graphics and/or physics too much

No loading times!!!*
*if developers prioritize that

Up to 8K resolution!!!*
*upsacaled 8k...on some Ps3 remasters and 2D indie games

 

[Javthusiast]

I wish a lot of gamers and developers would stop being graphic whores and compromise by putting 60fps first and scale down graphics to it. I mean it's not like the games will be looking garbage, especially on the next gen consoles. It all looks good enough and if it then runs smoothly it will be even better.

 

[SlimySnake]

None of this makes any sense whatsoever. This isn't like 30 fps vs 60 fps where the cpu and gpu simply don't have enough resources to do current gen graphics at double the framerate. Loading screens mask the time it takes to load assets from the hdd to the ram or vram in consoles. With the ssd speeds approaching 5GB/s it will take a little more than 3 seconds to fill up the ram with the game world.

The cpu will still need to initialize everything like npc simulations and other game world events but that stuff shouldn't take too long either. Most of it is done on the fly anyway.

We are talking about fast travel loading anyway which means the initialization of cpu tasks has already happened on game boot up And all that data is already cached.

Fast travel in Spiderman ps5 is only 0.8 seconds. That makes sense considering the fact that only 5gb of the 8gb of ram is used for games. 6gb on the pro. 0.8 means we are looking at something over 5-6gbps. Which means even a 24 gb console should have a 4-5 seconds loading for fast travel max.

Initial bootup might take 5-10 seconds max.

I suspect plenty of games next gen will use inception like layering of different worlds that can you can switch to in an instant.

 

[Xenon]

Mo bandwidth mo problems

 

[DeepEnigma]

As a PC user with 2 SSD's, i have to say some of the SSD talk from console gamers over the last year or so, has made me chuckle quite a bit. I think a lot of you are in for a shock when next gen consoles launch and we still get sizeable load times.

What games on PCs are built with SSDs in mind and still not those 5400rpm anchors?

Star Citizen is the first to experiment and go ahead with SSD functionality, and it is showing major leaps that mechanicals can’t keep up with.

Not to mention how the i/o stack will be in the consoles versus PC. They won’t be using SATA, nor are there any PCs besides AMD boards that use the new PCIe4.0 spec, which is also not fully taken advantage of yet.

This is apples to oranges comparison right now. Besides Star Citizen, only productivity takes advantage of the SSD setups, not games. Be thankful, your SSD setup will now improve since the console baseline will be SSD equipped for all games going forward next gen.

 

[ResilientBanana]

How about you quote the full thing instead of taking it out of context for clickbait purposes?

This is the important bit to note that came before the quote in the OP:

However, since more data can be now used there can also be cases where production might be cheaper and faster when not optimizing content, which will lead into having to load much more data, leading back into a situation where you have about the same loading times as today."

This scenario will most likely be the case for 95% of 3rd parties unless they get the money-hat treatment from one of the big 2.

 

[Polygonal_Sprite]

I don't get it. According to Gaf's tech experts even current gen consoles can't do 60fps?

Lel what a pleb

Games run at whatever framerate the developer targets. Nintendo for instance targets 60fps in games such as Mario Odyssey, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Smash Bros Ultimate and Splatoon 2 and that’s on a console with a mobile chipset that’s roughly 5x weaker than a standard PS4.

The next gen consoles will have a 500-600% increase in CPU computational power over the Jaguar CPU’s in even the Xbox One X. The new console will also benefit greatly from insanely fast memory, insanely fast storage and increadibly powerful GPU‘S.

A lot of people seem to ignore that there are also a lot of 60fps games (or at least offer a 60fps target) on current gen or Pro / X.

Stunning looking AAA games like Devil May Cry V, Battlefront 2, Forza Horizon 3+4, Resident Evil 2 Remake, Battlefield 4, Gears of War 4+5, Gran Turismo Sport and God of War to name a few all operate, target or offer a 60fps experience and that’s with those god awful Jaguar CPU’s. There’s going to be a ton of 60fps console games next gen even if it’s an option which lowers others settings to get there.

I see like clockwork PC only players are getting rather defensive and talking down the potential of next gen console hardware (probably because they’ve now lost the resolution war with the Pro/X and now their bastion of 60fps is now under threat from the next gen consoles). Don’t worry you can just move he goalposts to 1080/144fps lol.

It’s the same every single generation

 

[VulcanRaven]

60fps is great but I think 30fps with better graphics is better.

 

[Afro Republican]

Those damn Bluray drives fucking up our gaming consoles for the last time!!! *Shakes fist*

 

[CuteFaceJay]

Exactly

don't many games still have those silly intro startup's with all the logos n shit?

60fps is great but I think 30fps with better graphics is better.

Why not have both as an option like in ForzaH4

 

[mckmas8808]

He's outlining the problem in his statement. The common expectation is that things look/sound better which means maxing out the hardware for as much visual spectacle as possible at the expense of performance.

Why can't the expectation be that things look slightly better but at the same time perform VASTLY better than the previous generation.

I don't want another 8 years of 30FPS. Give me 8 years of games performing faster than ever before.

Because MOST of us DONT want that! We want games that look waaaay better like below but still play at a constant 30 fps

 

[diffusionx]

I see like clockwork PC only players are getting rather defensive and talking down the potential of next gen console hardware (probably because they’ve now lost the resolution war with the Pro/X and now their bastion of 60fps is now under threat from the next gen consoles). Don’t worry you can just move he goalposts to 1080/144fps lol.

It’s the same every single generation

Haha what? What resolution war was lost? I play my PC games at a higher resolution than the One X, and a lot of people play their PC games at a higher framerate than 60. That's the whole point of the PC, and one that a fixed console can never do.

If anything is the same every single generation, it is people hyping consoles to do everything only for reality to hit them in the face when the things come out. I'll never forget being super excited to see what BF4 looked like on PS4 only to find out it looked and played far worse than BF3 did on my midrange, old PC did a year earlier.

 

[mckmas8808]

instant load will not happen for the same reason why the PS4 doesn't have instant load in there games.

No amount of SSD speed will change this.

Which also makes all those topics about insane SSD speed that sony is going to push on exotic hardware solutions completely ridiculous.

So basically what they are saying is SSD is an improvement but won't be something magical thanks to devs who will work on better details rather than loading time issues. Looks like it's just a marketing scheme of selling the next-gen.
[/QUOTE]

Mark Cerny doesn't work in the Marketing department. He's an Engineer.

As a PC user with 2 SSD's, i have to say some of the SSD talk from console gamers over the last year or so, has made me chuckle quite a bit. I think a lot of you are in for a shock when next gen consoles launch and we still get sizeable load times.

It's very apparent to me that some people here have ZERO clue as to what Mark Cerny has been talking about when it comes to putting their SSD solution into the PS5. You guys honestly think it's just a normal SSD don't you? WOW!

 

[KlickKlack]

'll never forget being super excited to see what BF4 looked like on PS4 only to find out it looked and played far worse than BF3 did on my midrange, old PC did a year earlier.

what a f#€king liar....

99% of the PC players play, no matter how good the pc are, MP shooter in low/mid settings. for better fps and visibility.... and its looks like garbage

 

[diffusionx]

what a f#€king liar....

99% of the PC players play, no matter how good the pc are, MP shooter in low/mid settings. for better fps and visibility.

I'm not a liar, and I don't care what 99% of the PC players play. The whole point of the platform is you make the experience you want.

BF3 on my old nothing special PC blew away BF4 on PS4.

 

[Shangounchained]

don't many games still have those silly intro startup's with all the logos n shit?



Why not have both as an option like in ForzaH4

You can't have both even if this was the year 4000 pc or console it's a simple computer disease

 

[Shangounchained]

I'm not a liar, and I don't care what 99% of the PC players play. The whole point of the platform is you make the experience you want.

BF3 on my old nothing special PC blew away BF4 on PS4.

Most people don't know this but when u sat pc you mean and I repeat mean western pc gamers that's 20 percent of worldwide gamers, nobody in Africa or whatever can afford a gaming pc that beats a console, I'm saying from hardcore experience

 

[Ar¢tos]

An insider said on Era that the ps5 ssd is very customized and fast. Meaning some things don't even need to be copied to RAM, the Cpu/GPU can read them directly from the SSD (small/medium textures for example), that can influence loading times a lot.

 

[Shangounchained]

An insider said on Era that the ps5 ssd is very customized and fast. Meaning some things don't even need to be copied to RAM, the Cpu/GPU can read them directly from the SSD (small/medium textures for example), that can influence loading times a lot.

Remember it's 25-30fps on minimum that's gigabytes of data 30 frames a second if that's alright then we're good to go!

 

[bilderberg]

I wish a lot of gamers and developers would stop being graphic whores and compromise by putting 60fps first and scale down graphics to it. I mean it's not like the games will be looking garbage, especially on the next gen consoles. It all looks good enough and if it then runs smoothly it will be even better.

give me 30fps. I want better graphics, i want better physics, more believable worlds, better a.i.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Remember it's 25-30fps on minimum that's gigabytes of data 30 frames a second if that's alright then we're good to go!

*sigh*
A game is not constantly flushing and refilling the full ram for every frame. Once a texture is loaded it can be utilized for several frames as long as it is needed. Tons of textures in a game scene are exactly the same for several seconds/minutes of gameplay, you only need to load new ones and dump no longer used ones.
Collision data, render targets, etc are the things that need to be refreshed every frame.

 

[Ballthyrm]

The only way 60 Fps is going to happen on next is Sony and MS making it part of their TRCs.
Same with 4K.

Now, I don't see MS or Sony doing that. So bye-bye, 60 fps on big AAA.

 

[JimboJones]

I see like clockwork PC only players are getting rather defensive and talking down the potential of next gen console hardware (probably because they’ve now lost the resolution war with the Pro/X and now their bastion of 60fps is now under threat from the next gen consoles). Don’t worry you can just move he goalposts to 1080/144fps lol.

This gave me a hearty good laugh.

 

[Shangounchained]

*sigh*
A game is not constantly flushing and refilling the full ram for every frame. Once a texture is loaded it can be utilized for several frames as long as it is needed. Tons of textures in a game scene are exactly the same for several seconds/minutes of gameplay, you only need to load new ones and dump no longer used ones.
Collision data, render targets, etc are the things that need to be refreshed every frame.

People aren't stuck in one scene look at Spiderman someone will be slinging constantly look at just cause aswell

 

[Shangounchained]

The only way 60 Fps is going to happen on next is Sony and MS making it part of their TRCs.
Same with 4K.

Now, I don't see MS or Sony doing that. So bye-bye, 60 fps on big AAA.

That is a silly unimaginable completely useless TRC I can bet the only TRC given is 20-30 FPS 720 - 1080p minimum standard because it's playable and 80 percent of gamers don't own a 4k TV and 90 percent of console gamers don't even know what a framerate is?

 

[Shangounchained]

give me 30fps. I want better graphics, i want better physics, more believable worlds, better a.i.

People saying games already look good enough are idiots

 

[Shangounchained]

This gave me a hearty good laugh.

O can't wait for god of war ps5 they'll commit suicide after seeing it on e3

 

[Ar¢tos]

People aren't stuck in one scene look at Spiderman someone will be slinging constantly look at just cause aswell

Within 30 frames (1 sec) there is very little variation in the scene. A character doesn't move from a tropical jungle to a snowy mountain within 30 frames.
The amount of data that needs to be copied to RAM from the SSD within 30 frames is much much smaller than what you think.

 

[Rolling_Start]

Within 30 frames (1 sec) there is very little variation in the scene. A character doesn't move from a tropical jungle to a snowy mountain within 30 frames.
The amount of data that needs to be copied to RAM from the SSD within 30 frames is much much smaller than what you think.

Plus depending on how you're managing your streaming of data, or caching of data accessed from flash memory, frame rate may have little or even no impact on how much (or how often) you access data from the SSD /HDD!

 

[Shangounchained]

Within 30 frames (1 sec) there is very little variation in the scene. A character doesn't move from a tropical jungle to a snowy mountain within 30 frames.
The amount of data that needs to be copied to RAM from the SSD within 30 frames is much much smaller than what you think.

Remember we're talking about ps5 here not PS4 or Xbox 360, it's next gen and nextgen consoles come with next gen assets rumoured to be 24-32gb of ram feeding this amount isn't easy, imagine a just cause game or a gta6 somebody on a jet flying from point a to b

 

[Shangounchained]

Plus depending on how you're managing your streaming of data, or caching of data accessed from flash memory, frame rate may have little or even no impact on how much (or how often) you access data from the SSD /HDD!

You saw the ps5 Spiderman ssd demo whereby the ps4 was stuck waiting to load assets when they speed up the game... Framerate isn't just a processing issue it's majorly a bandwidth issue from storage to ram to processing

 

[Shangounchained]

Can't wait to see the ram capacity but this is usually the last thing they'll say, they'll talk about everything else but never about ram even if it's playstation 10

 

[Ar¢tos]

Remember we're talking about ps5 here not PS4 or Xbox 360, it's next gen and nextgen consoles come with next gen assets rumoured to be 24-32gb of ram feeding this amount isn't easy, imagine a just cause game or a gta6 somebody on a jet flying from point a to b

Even at 12k resolution you won't need even 1gb of new textures within 30 frames!

 

[Katsura]

Honestly, if you believed the marketing nonsense behind this 'no loading time' shit, it's on you. There was never any doubt that any potential gains would be squandered by lazy developers and poor middleware solutions. That's been happening for years

 

[bhunachicken]

I'll be happy for more performance (60fps) and resolution (30fps) modes in games.

Since I'll be sticking at 1080p for the foreseeable future, I should get 60fps on most titles (other than those who choose to lock at 30fps due to excessive bling).

 

[Rolling_Start]

You saw the ps5 Spiderman ssd demo whereby the ps4 was stuck waiting to load assets when they speed up the game... Framerate isn't just a processing issue it's majorly a bandwidth issue from storage to ram to processing

This demo is designed to push the game to breaking point on PS4, to highlight the speed of the new SSD solution.

The entire game has stopped, just like a loading screen. In effect the game is 'paused' at that point.

In principle, the game demo could continue rendering at the same number of fps even at this point, just so long as it's only using data currently resident in dram.

You would normally expect this kind of "broken flow" to be avoided by limiting speed of movement thought the game, or lowering asset lod to relieve pressure on the storage system (e.g. Rage, Gears of War, GTA etc) or a combination of both. If you ever did get to a position where the game flow was stuttering due to an overburdened storage system, and the system is within recommended specs and operating correctly, it's because either the engine or the level design is sub-optimal.

Interesting addendum: if you don't cap or otherwise limit processing used to load / decompress / initialise data coming from storage, it's possible that faster storage could actually make frame rate worse by taking processing resources away simulation or rendering.

 

[Jigsaah]

I don't know why people demand 60fps like a religious cult, I never cared of playing metal gear or splinter cell at 60fps y can't people understand it's a design thing, racing games feel good at 60fps ninja garden feels good at 60 fps but it doesn't mean everything should be 60 this is a fetish and a silly habit!

I...definitely want 60fps in every game. When I play on PC I usually play at 144 fps...120fps minimum. The difference is night and day. If I'm spending another 500 bucks on a game, I feel at the very least 60fps should be standard for everything but the most graphically intense games. On those games there should be options to lower graphic fidelity in order to achieve a solid 60 fps experience.

 

[bilderberg]

I...definitely want 60fps in every game. When I play on PC I usually play at 144 fps...120fps minimum. The difference is night and day. If I'm spending another 500 bucks on a game, I feel at the very least 60fps should be standard for everything but the most graphically intense games. On those games there should be options to lower graphic fidelity in order to achieve a solid 60 fps experience.

Lower graphic fidelity? Consoles aren't pc's. It isn't like you just turn the shadows to medium and "voila" here's your 60 fps. Engines are built to be 30 or 60fps, physics, a.i. simulations..it's much more complicated than just lowering graphics. And I don't think pc gamers can fairly say how they want consoles to perform. Your $1,000+ pc capable of playing anything at 120fps minimum isn't constrained by the same compromises of developing on fixed hardware.

 

[Jigsaah]

Lower graphic fidelity? Consoles aren't pc's. It isn't like you just turn the shadows to medium and "voila" here's your 60 fps. Engines are built to be 30 or 60fps, physics, a.i. simulations..it's much more complicated than just lowering graphics. And I don't think pc gamers can fairly say how they want consoles to perform. Your $1,000+ pc capable of playing anything at 120fps minimum isn't constrained by the same compromises of developing on fixed hardware.

Have you met the Xbox One X?

I'm not saying you need sliders...just an option.

 

[bilderberg]

Have you met the Xbox One X?

I'm not saying you need sliders...just an option.

Is their one game on the X that gives you a locked 60fps option? I don't mean 40-60 avg, but a locked 60 fps when otherwise it's a 30 fps game?

 

[Kenpachii]

So basically what they are saying is SSD is an improvement but won't be something magical thanks to devs who will work on better details rather than loading time issues. Looks like it's just a marketing scheme of selling the next-gen.


Mark Cerny doesn't work in the Marketing department. He's an Engineer.



It's very apparent to me that some people here have ZERO clue as to what Mark Cerny has been talking about when it comes to putting their SSD solution into the PS5. You guys honestly think it's just a normal SSD don't you? WOW!

Sadly a lot of people do know what they talk about as they have pc's and experience with different types of hardware. And nothing in the PS5 showcased has been seen as something impressive even remotely. It just seems like people underestimate on how fast SSD sata 3 drives are.

Want to see how shit a 5400 rpm drive is that the PS4 and PS4 pro uses? and how it weights up against PC's?

Well here you go, u also need to keep into account that harddrives are far slower by the fact that it also has to deal with the following which ssd don't have to deal with.

1) It has to start spinning to even be able to do stuff which adds a lot of downtime with it 4-10 seconds.
2) it gets slower and slower the more is on it to the point it can even run at half the speed.

Here's your PS4 and pro harddrive:

40 bucks price as of today as consumer for me

Now here's a Sata 3 SSD at max speed available.

Price ~70-50 bucks, depends on the speed u go for.

Here's a nvme drive that i bought a few months ago for 120 bucks.

Maximum gainable through Pci-e 4.0 = 5000/5000 from what i read, don't think any is available at that speed. mine SSD was the fastest a few months ago for sure.
PCI-3 = 4000/4000 ( i could be wrong here and its 3500/3500, but who cares )
Sata 3 = 2009 tech that does 600/600
Sata 2 = 2004 tech that does 300/300 ( ps4 featured )
Sata 1 = 2000 tech that does 150/150 read and write
Ps4 = 60/60 and thats rounded up what it pushes out.

Maybe this give you a idea on how utter and utter shit the PS4 storage is even against a base sata 3 ssd. They only went towards sata 2 because sata 1 wasn't a thing anymore that was ps2 area tech basically.

Now look at the spiderman demo.

So lets say that's 10 times the increase won't you say over the PS4?

Now look at that sata 3 ssd and compare it to the PS4 pro drive. that's 10x the increase, but that sata 3 ssd would be way more faster anyway because no wait for spinning up which can take up anywhere from 4 to 10 seconds depend on the age of that drive i guess. And instant access towards the data.

For some reason they didn't push that clearly into that demonstration, because they probably wanted raw performance difference when it's already spinning or maybe the PS4 pro has that thing spin 24/7 anyway when its on. Unless it goes into standby. So yea that could be reason for it.

Why sata 3 ssd tech even more?

- Cheap, money can be spend elsewhere.
- Gigantic performance increase already.
- Easy to upgrade for people as it has a laptop hdd design and shell
- Allows for USB storage drives that people are used towards to extend the space on the PS4 = less cost for sony as they can drop a lower sized drive into the box and give people the option to upgrade

Nvme makes no sense.

To give you a idea how less of a sense it makes, i got these drives in my PC.

1x 5400 rpm drive whatever size ( dunno why its still in there but oh well )
4x 2-3tb each 7200 rpm drives ( backup data for games etc )
2x 512gb sata 3 ssd's evo samsungs 860 and the one above it whatever they are
1x 256 gb ssd evo samsung sata 3 ( that ran on my old setup on sata 2 controller so half speed )
1x 128gb ssd sata 3 evo, holds my windows.
1x nvme 512gb pci-e 3 3500/3xxx evo 970 plus

So basically i got a lot of experience with harddrives myself.

The difference from 7200 rpm > sata 2 ( 300/300 ) ssd was day and night, speed was practically massive increase wise.
sata 2 ( 300/300 ) > sata 3 ( 550/550 ) didn't notice much until games started to hickup on even sata 2, bdo for example. Less microstutters and more smooth
sata 3 ( 550/550 ) > pci-3 ( 3500/3xxx ) didn't notice much difference, its there but not much of a improvement really, mostly hammered by hardware and connections wait time.

So yea.

Unless they announce something with actually data to support there claim and proof with it, that its going to be faster then anything PC has. Because that could also be complete and utter PR talk by saying we load stuff in differently way that's more optimized like what they did with the SOC bullshit and there PS4.

Cerny has a history of this PR talk nonsense and game devs like the witcher 3 can join him on that front which ended up facepalming pretty hard reality showed up.

Sony aren't idiots they like there PR nonsense, it drives there buyers base, that's why they came out with a interview that was full of garbage like 8k 120fps and his funny act about PC with SSD's where so slow it takes 15 seconds to load a excel or word sheet, while my entire pc boots faster then that.

But that's for another day or else this never ends.

 

[Rolling_Start]

Sadly a lot of people do know what they talk about as they have pc's and experience with different types of hardware. And nothing in the PS5 showcased has been seen as something impressive even remotely. It just seems like people underestimate on how fast SSD sata 3 drives are.

Want to see how shit a 5400 rpm drive is that the PS4 and PS4 pro uses? and how it weights up against PC's?

Well here you go, u also need to keep into account that harddrives are far slower by the fact that it also has to deal with the following which ssd don't have to deal with.

1) It has to start spinning to even be able to do stuff which adds a lot of downtime with it 4-10 seconds.
2) it gets slower and slower the more is on it to the point it can even run at half the speed.

Here's your PS4 and pro harddrive:

40 bucks price as of today as consumer for me

Now here's a Sata 3 SSD at max speed available.

Price ~70-50 bucks, depends on the speed u go for.

Here's a nvme drive that i bought a few months ago for 120 bucks.

Maximum gainable through Pci-e 4.0 = 5000/5000 from what i read, don't think any is available at that speed. mine SSD was the fastest a few months ago for sure.
PCI-3 = 4000/4000 ( i could be wrong here and its 3500/3500, but who cares )
Sata 3 = 2009 tech that does 600/600
Sata 2 = 2004 tech that does 300/300 ( ps4 featured )
Sata 1 = 2000 tech that does 150/150 read and write
Ps4 = 60/60 and thats rounded up what it pushes out.

Maybe this give you a idea on how utter and utter shit the PS4 storage is even against a base sata 3 ssd. They only went towards sata 2 because sata 1 wasn't a thing anymore that was ps2 area tech basically.

Now look at the spiderman demo.

So lets say that's 10 times the increase won't you say over the PS4?

Now look at that sata 3 ssd and compare it to the PS4 pro drive. that's 10x the increase, but that sata 3 ssd would be way more faster anyway because no wait for spinning up which can take up anywhere from 4 to 10 seconds depend on the age of that drive i guess.

For some reason they didn't push that clearly into that demonstration, because they probably wanted raw performance difference when it's already spinning or maybe the PS4 pro has that thing spin 24/7 anyway when its on. Unless it goes into standby. So yea that could be reason for it.

Why sata 3 ssd tech even more?

- Cheap, money can be spend elsewhere.
- Gigantic performance increase already.
- Easy to upgrade for people as it has a laptop hdd design and shell
- Allows for USB storage drives that people are used towards to extend the space on the PS4 = less cost for sony as they can drop a lower sized drive into the box and give people the option to upgrade

Nvme makes no sense.

To give you a idea how less of a sense it makes, i got these drives in my PC.

1x 5400 rpm drive whatever size ( dunno why its still in there but oh well )
4x 2-3tb each 7200 rpm drives ( backup data for games etc )
2x 512gb sata 3 ssd's evo samsungs 860 and the one above it whatever they are
1x 256 gb ssd evo samsung sata 3 ( that ran on my old setup on sata 2 controller so half speed )
1x 128gb ssd sata 3 evo, holds my windows.
1x nvme 512gb pci-e 3 3500/3xxx evo 970 plus

So basically i got a lot of experience with harddrives myself.

The difference from 7200 rpm > sata 2 ( 300/300 ) ssd was day and night, speed was practically massive increase wise.
sata 2 ( 300/300 ) > sata 3 ( 550/550 ) didn't notice much until games started to hickup on even sata 2, bdo for example. Less microstutters and more smooth
sata 3 ( 550/550 ) > pci-3 ( 3500/3xxx ) didn't notice much difference, its there but not much of a improvement really, mostly hammered by hardware now instead of disc speed and connections.

So yea.

Unless they announce something with actually data to support there claim and proof with it, that its going to be faster then anything PC has. Because that could also be complete and utter PR talk by saying we load stuff in differently way that's more optimized like what they did with the SOC bullshit and there PS4.

Cerny has a history of this PR talk nonsense and game devs with it like witcher 3 devs yet that got debunked pretty fast when reality showed up. Sony aren't idiots they like there PR nonsense it drives there buyers base, that's why they came out with a interview that was full of garbage like 8k 120fps and his funny on PC with SSD's excel and word can take up to 15 seconds to load, yet my PC boots faster then that.

But that's for another day or else this never ends.

You seem personally invested in the idea that the PC as it stands today has the fastest access to a storage device that's possible.

PS5 may be in-line with PCIe 4 NVMe device, or it may be faster still in practice.

Btw, what are your results for comparing installs on ssd vs data retrieved from machine code compatible virtual memory?

 

[Ar¢tos]

Sadly a lot of people do know what they talk about as they have pc's and experience with different types of hardware. And nothing in the PS5 showcased has been seen as something impressive even remotely. It just seems like people underestimate on how fast SSD sata 3 drives are.

Want to see how shit a 5400 rpm drive is that the PS4 and PS4 pro uses? and how it weights up against PC's?

Well here you go, u also need to keep into account that harddrives are far slower by the fact that it also has to deal with the following which ssd don't have to deal with.

1) It has to start spinning to even be able to do stuff which adds a lot of downtime with it 4-10 seconds.
2) it gets slower and slower the more is on it to the point it can even run at half the speed.

Here's your PS4 and pro harddrive:

40 bucks price as of today as consumer for me

Now here's a Sata 3 SSD at max speed available.

Price ~70-50 bucks, depends on the speed u go for.

Here's a nvme drive that i bought a few months ago for 120 bucks.

Maximum gainable through Pci-e 4.0 = 5000/5000 from what i read, don't think any is available at that speed. mine SSD was the fastest a few months ago for sure.
PCI-3 = 4000/4000 ( i could be wrong here and its 3500/3500, but who cares )
Sata 3 = 2009 tech that does 600/600
Sata 2 = 2004 tech that does 300/300 ( ps4 featured )
Sata 1 = 2000 tech that does 150/150 read and write
Ps4 = 60/60 and thats rounded up what it pushes out.

Maybe this give you a idea on how utter and utter shit the PS4 storage is even against a base sata 3 ssd. They only went towards sata 2 because sata 1 wasn't a thing anymore that was ps2 area tech basically.

Now look at the spiderman demo.

So lets say that's 10 times the increase won't you say over the PS4?

Now look at that sata 3 ssd and compare it to the PS4 pro drive. that's 10x the increase, but that sata 3 ssd would be way more faster anyway because no wait for spinning up which can take up anywhere from 4 to 10 seconds depend on the age of that drive i guess.

For some reason they didn't push that clearly into that demonstration, because they probably wanted raw performance difference when it's already spinning or maybe the PS4 pro has that thing spin 24/7 anyway when its on. Unless it goes into standby. So yea that could be reason for it.

Why sata 3 ssd tech even more?

- Cheap, money can be spend elsewhere.
- Gigantic performance increase already.
- Easy to upgrade for people as it has a laptop hdd design and shell
- Allows for USB storage drives that people are used towards to extend the space on the PS4 = less cost for sony as they can drop a lower sized drive into the box and give people the option to upgrade

Nvme makes no sense.

To give you a idea how less of a sense it makes, i got these drives in my PC.

1x 5400 rpm drive whatever size ( dunno why its still in there but oh well )
4x 2-3tb each 7200 rpm drives ( backup data for games etc )
2x 512gb sata 3 ssd's evo samsungs 860 and the one above it whatever they are
1x 256 gb ssd evo samsung sata 3 ( that ran on my old setup on sata 2 controller so half speed )
1x 128gb ssd sata 3 evo, holds my windows.
1x nvme 512gb pci-e 3 3500/3xxx evo 970 plus

So basically i got a lot of experience with harddrives myself.

The difference from 7200 rpm > sata 2 ( 300/300 ) ssd was day and night, speed was practically massive increase wise.
sata 2 ( 300/300 ) > sata 3 ( 550/550 ) didn't notice much until games started to hickup on even sata 2, bdo for example. Less microstutters and more smooth
sata 3 ( 550/550 ) > pci-3 ( 3500/3xxx ) didn't notice much difference, its there but not much of a improvement really, mostly hammered by hardware now instead of disc speed and connections.

So yea.

Unless they announce something with actually data to support there claim and proof with it, that its going to be faster then anything PC has. Because that could also be complete and utter PR talk by saying we load stuff in differently way that's more optimized like what they did with the SOC bullshit and there PS4.

Cerny has a history of this PR talk nonsense and game devs with it like witcher 3 devs yet that got debunked pretty fast when reality showed up. Sony aren't idiots they like there PR nonsense it drives there buyers base, that's why they came out with a interview that was full of garbage like 8k 120fps and his funny on PC with SSD's excel and word can take up to 15 seconds to load, yet my PC boots faster then that.

But that's for another day or else this never ends.

You are thinking like a single person that buys a SSD for his computer, not like a company that needs a SSD solution for millions of consoles.
Buying nvme chips in bulk and soldering them directly to the board is a lot lot cheaper and allows greater customization, since they can use RAM chips directly as SSD cache and use custom controllers, and read optimized file systems.
I'm not saying that there will be no loadings anywhere (although with SSD speeds loadings can be cleverly hidden), but comparisons with pc solutions might not be realistic.
(An insider already confirmed that ps5 ssd is a customized solution).

 

[Shifty]

Why exactly?
What are you instantiating?

Because you have to allocate memory for the object in question and run any pre-spawn setup code that it requires. Game objects aren't ready-to-go as soon as you fetch their binary representation from disk.

What exactly gets instantiated and initialized depends on the object. It could be something simple like a crate with rigidbody physics that has to register its collision component with the physics sim and fetch asset references for its visual element, or something more complex like a player character with a deeply-nested internal hierarchy. Mesh, camera rig, attached objects like weapons, all their associated variable settings, etc.

Since that stuff isn't free, lot of games 'pool' a pre-set amount of common instances in memory (ex. bullet projectiles) and reset their internal state instead of deleting and re-allocating them. That still costs time, but you can hide it in an initial loading screen and keep the objects outside the map (or outside the sim entirely, depending on the engine) until they're needed.

 

[Rolling_Start]

And sometimes you have to make it happen so that garbage collection doesn't make the whole thing collapse for a few seconds!