Support NeoGAF

[SlimySnake]

No. I'd say that PS5's SSD will be a 1 TB drive. 1000 GB, not 1024 which it should be but drive manufacturers started cheating on consumers decades ago with marketing and this is what we get. Then you have to reserve at least 10%, maybe 15% for the filesystem. There's a copy of the OS on the drive too. So 825 GB is quite reasonable portion left for the user. Cerny used an exact number because he's a tech guy and doesn't do PR talk. On the box of the console, it'll be "1 TB SSD" and it won't be a lie. Any drive you buy nowadays doesn't give you full capacity because of the above reasons (okay, you don't need to have an OS on every drive), still you never get 1000 GB on a 1 TB drive, it's impossible.

It's just an example of many interesting things he said that forum troll have no idea about so they just use them as "arguments" for their agenda. But it's nice to see who is who

lol you are just as clueless as the internet forum trolls you lament.

its 825gb total, not whats left for the user. its the exact number based on the number of chips on the ssd. the actual number is somewhere around 750 gb.

on the box, it will say 825gb because thats what it is.

 

[scie]

Personally, I do not see the pro system coming. There's no reason for it at this point.

Of course they will do it in 3 years, because it provides options:

• give "hardcore" fans a new option to buy a better tear
• costs and prices will go down by time, a new pro will up those
• gives customers choice of having 2 skus a cheaper PS5 and a normal or higher cost PS5 pro to choose from

 

[LittleBigGamer]

seems like a fanboy himself tbh

Αnd probably his is


he used ''Dictator's'' quote.

 

[Andodalf]

When I see "only 825 GB of storage" I know that the person who wrote it has no idea how storage and filesystems work.

when I see this I cringe becuse cerny explicitly said it was 825, and admitted it was a non standard size that they went for as a part of their custom solution. He said it had something to do with there being 12 channels. No one ever markets their products on actual available space. Ps5 will have something in the neighborhood of 700 available for consumers

 

[ResilientBanana]

Of course they will do it in 3 years, because it provides options:

• give "hardcore" fans a new option to buy a better tear
• costs and prices will go down by time, a new pro will up those
• gives customers choice of having 2 skus a cheaper PS5 and a normal or higher cost PS5 pro to choose from

Still makes no sense. There is not a lack of power for both systems. Sure, I could see a Slim, but if anything they would make a cheaper model to battle the XSS, not a more expensive one.

 

[scie]

Still makes no sense. There is not a lack of power for both systems. Sure, I could see a Slim, but if anything they would make a cheaper model to battle the XSS, not a more expensive one.

I am with you on that both don´t lack of power, but PS4 pro had 3 years later the same price as the normal PS4. And I think it depends on whether there will be a XSS (Lockhart) and how much it´ll sell. In my opinion ff there won´t be a XSS than PS5 and XSX could become the entry SKUs in 3 years.

 

[eastwood333]

Αnd probably his is


he used ''Dictator's'' quote.

Those kind of improvements happened without needing the SSD. It's called learning new techniques through out a consoles lifespan. Look at how much expansive Batman Arkham City vs Batman Arkham Asylum, SSD can theoretically have some tangible benefits in terms of " data management" for quicker,easier,more effecient game development. XSX will also have these benefits if they even exist.

However, SSD is NOT going to make the PS5 any faster. XSX is more powerful where it counts 12.1 gpu,cpu,bandwidth at a SUSTAINED clock speed at all times vs a 10.2tf with variable clocks.

 

[thelastword]

None of the DF guys have made any games, most of the times they just regurgitate docs/pdf's given to them by the devs……..Remember when they simply used The Coalition's PR fluff for Gears 5 and pretended it was an analysis.? That was discovered by KingThrash Gaming....

Dictator has always preferred PC and XBOX, in that order, he is a Star Citizen apologist and he loves Crytek, that's all you need to know.....Tbh, beyond Leadbetter's FF13 meltdown, I'm really cool with the guy.....I think the younger DF staff try to push the wars more than they pretend they do.....Just listen to Dictator and John at the beginning of the Gears of War 5 on Series X video, and in many of their videos even between John and Leadbetter they always take a snipe at PS3 or PS4 and they go giggling, they know what they are doing......And when people complain, they go extremely defensive.....

I think Thomas Morgan is extremely biased to XBOX too, I've seen the guy mention XBOX a million times in a PS video and he is always talking about how patches and launch code will improve XBOX performance when it rarely does.......

So would you rather listen to them or devs…...The same guys who said Square Enix were lazy on FF13 on 360, but when Capcom made an inferior Resident Evil Revelation 2 port on PS4 with an excess of 20 frames on XBONES at the same 1080p resolution, they hardly complained or batted an eye.....These things are generally too clear not to be noticed....

 

[CJY]

XSX and PS5 SSDs, using the figures MS and Sony provide.

I believe the speed difference will be noticeable (loading, fast travel), but I don't believe it will allow for "entirely different looking open world games ". Not at all.

For one thing the raw speed difference probably isn't big enough. For another the frame to frame change in data required cannot typically be large relative to SSD speed, given the constraints on actually authoring assets, storing them, and that movement through the world is typically speed limited by gameplay.

Ah, still comparing both consoles I see. What's a lot more interesting to me is what is made possible moving from ~50MB/s to ~5.5GB/s. A 100X increase in IO throughput. There is a lot more this than meets the eyes here. Raw IO throughput isn't necessarily the game changer, it's the custom silicon for coherency (scrubber), mapping, file I/O, decompression (all of which is handled by the custom IO block) that makes the data coming from the SSD usable without reprocessing by the CPU. Without addressing these bottlenecks, the C/GPU would be locked up waiting/processing the data and you would see significant performance penalties when zipping data around at lightning fast speeds. In the end, you might end up with actual real-world raw throughput of ~2GB/s of the 5.5GB/s. (I'm making up that figure). Cerny has addressed all these bottlenecks and then some and the SSD has been central to his focus in designing the system and eliminating every conceivable bottleneck.

OK sure, XSX has a lot of these things too. Velocity engine, "Virtual Memory" (i.e. DirectStorage), hardware decompression... fine. I still think Cerny has architected a far more robust, efficient and effective system that is far more likely to reach its theoretical IO bandwidth limits. Yes, PS5 IO is on-paper 129-367% the speed of XSX's IO, this is a fact, but for me, it's not at all the main bone of contention.

The main bone of contention is which set of 1st party developers are more likely to take advantage of the faster IO on their respective systems:

The system in which the whole system was engineered around this custom, super fast IO and the devs who have proven track records of handling exotic architectures (PS3 - CELL) and making them sing (PS4 - GPU Compute) and the whole wealth of development resources (SWWS) targetting just this one specific platform? (PS5)

or

The system that had an SSD dropped in at the last minute with a development infrastructure that also needs to support Xbox One, One S, One X, Lockhart, PC and xCloud, based on last-gen technology (PCIe 3.0) and pixiedust concepts lifted wholesale from their PC background. (Virtual RAM - LOL)


My biases are clear, and my opinion on which is the far superior system is clear, and I'm not even saying the XSX isn't capable of what the PS5 is capable of - it is, with the necessary sacrifices. All I'm saying is if one wants to experience what truly exploiting a super fast SSD in next generation game design actually feels, looks and plays like, beyond just faster loading... You're only going to get that on PS5. Take that to the bank.

 

[eastwood333]

None of the DF guys have made any games, most of the times they just regurgitate docs/pdf's given to them by the devs……..Remember when they simply used The Coalition's PR fluff for Gears 5 and pretended it was an analysis.? That was discovered by KingThrash Gaming....

Dictator has always preferred PC and XBOX, in that order, he is a Star Citizen apologist and he loves Crytek, that's all you need to know.....Tbh, beyond Leadbetter's FF13 meltdown, I'm really cool with the guy.....I think the younger DF staff try to push the wars more than they pretend they do.....Just listen to Dictator and John at the beginning of the Gears of War 5 on Series X video, and in many of their videos even between John and Leadbetter they always take a snipe at PS3 or PS4 and they go giggling, they know what they are doing......And when people complain, they go extremely defensive.....

I think Thomas Morgan is extremely biased to XBOX too, I've seen the guy mention XBOX a million times in a PS video and he is always talking about how patches and launch code will improve XBOX performance when it rarely does.......

So would you rather listen to them or devs…...The same guys who said Square Enix were lazy on FF13 on 360, but when Capcom made an inferior Resident Evil Revelation 2 port on PS4 with an excess of 20 frames on XBONES at the same 1080p resolution, they hardly complained or batted an eye.....These things are generally too clear not to be noticed....

Basically ANY technical person stating XSX is more powerful (mathematical fact) or stating that the SSD is NOT going to make the PS5 any faster and is more for loading content(duh) are fanboys. We should only listen to sony devs hyping up sony hardware and the Jason Shreier. Gottcha. This gen is going to be brutal when all the DF head to head analysis come in.

 

[eastwood333]

Ah, still comparing both consoles I see. What's a lot more interesting to me is what is made possible moving from ~50MB/s to ~5.5GB/s. A 100X increase in IO throughput. There is a lot more this than meets the eyes here. Raw IO throughput isn't necessarily the game changer, it's the custom silicon for coherency (scrubber), mapping, file I/O, decompression (all of which is handled by the custom IO block) that makes the data coming from the SSD usable without reprocessing by the CPU. Without addressing these bottlenecks, the C/GPU would be locked up waiting/processing the data and you would see significant performance penalties when zipping data around at lightning fast speeds. In the end, you might end up with actual real-world raw throughput of ~2GB/s of the 5.5GB/s. (I'm making up that figure). Cerny has addressed all these bottlenecks and then some and the SSD has been central to his focus in designing the system and eliminating every conceivable bottleneck.

OK sure, XSX has a lot of these things too. Velocity engine, "Virtual Memory" (i.e. DirectStorage), hardware decompression... fine. I still think Cerny has architected a far more robust, efficient and effective system that is far more likely to reach its theoretical IO bandwidth limits. Yes, PS5 IO is on-paper 129-367% the speed of XSX's IO, this is a fact, but for me, it's not at all the main bone of contention.

The main bone of contention is which set of 1st party developers are more likely to take advantage of the faster IO on their respective systems:

The system in which the whole system was engineered around this custom, super fast IO and the devs who have proven track records of handling exotic architectures (PS3 - CELL) and making them sing (PS4 - GPU Compute) and the whole wealth of development resources (SWWS) targetting just this one specific platform? (PS5)

or

The system that had an SSD dropped in at the last minute with a development infrastructure that also needs to support Xbox One, One S, One X, Lockhart, PC and xCloud, based on last-gen technology (PCIe 3.0) and pixiedust concepts lifted wholesale from their PC background. (Virtual RAM - LOL)


My biases are clear, and my opinion on which is the far superior system is clear, and I'm not even saying the XSX isn't capable of what the PS5 is capable of - it is with the necessary sacrifices. All I'm saying is if one wants to experience what truly exploiting a super fast SSD in next generation game design actually feels, looks and plays like, beyond just faster loading... You're only going to get that on PS5. Take that to the bank.

The only thing to take to the bank is that you're an unhinged raging sony fanboy who is struggling to cope with the fact XSX has the power advantage.

 

[CJY]

The only thing to take to the bank is that you're an unhinged raging sony fanboy who is struggling to cope with the fact XSX has the power advantage.

Flops

 

[eastwood333]

Flops

GPU,CPU,Bandwidth at SUSTAINED clocks AT ALL TIMES. Yes, where it counts the most! SSD do not replace this. Keep setting your fanboy emotions up for huge disappointment to your hearts content.

 

[Genx3]

XSX has a dedicated audio block just like the XB1 and XB1X did.
Why are people pretending it doesn't?
In the case of the XB1 the dedicated audio processor didn't even come close to closing the gap between the PS4 and OGXB1. That was a mere half of Tera Flop difference. No way it closes a 2 - 3 TF difference even if there was no audio block on the XSX.

 

[Great Hair]

(timestamped)


Was linked earlier already, but this talk was a lot better than I expected. They discuss SDD, games engines, game design, VR, 3D Audio and more

I´m sorry but HHG is hard listen to.
YOOOOOO!! Hip OP! IN DA HAUS! KONTINIIIUUUU BRO .... WAAAAAH! KREIZI!! HMMMMMM!! AHHHH!!!? HMMMMMM, HMMMMMM, HMMMMMM ---

Spoiler

 

[LittleBigGamer]

Those kind of improvements happened without needing the SSD. It's called learning new techniques through out a consoles lifespan. Look at how much expansive Batman Arkham City vs Batman Arkham Asylum, SSD can theoretically have some tangible benefits in terms of " data management" for quicker,easier,more effecient game development. XSX will also have these benefits if they even exist.

However, SSD is NOT going to make the PS5 any faster. XSX is more powerful where it counts 12.1 gpu,cpu,bandwidth at a SUSTAINED clock speed at all times vs a 10.2tf with variable clocks.

That was not my point.

 

[CJY]

GPU,CPU,Bandwidth at SUSTAINED clocks AT ALL TIMES. Yes, where it counts the most! SSD do not replace this. Keep setting your fanboy emotions up for huge disappointment to your hearts content.

If those are things you care about, go build a PC mang. You can even get an SSD even faster the PS5's. But wait, that'd be pointless too cos no games will take advantage of it. Oh damn, guess you're stuck with the inferior system then.

 

[ResilientBanana]

I am with you on that both don´t lack of power, but PS4 pro had 3 years later the same price as the normal PS4. And I think it depends on whether there will be a XSS (Lockhart) and how much it´ll sell. In my opinion ff there won´t be a XSS than PS5 and XSX could become the entry SKUs in 3 years.

Personally, I think the only reason both the Pro / X arrived was for 2 reasons. Microsoft didn't want to lose the power war and wanted to make a name for the Xbox as the power king. Sony caught wind of it and made the Pro. Secondly, 4K arrived in the middle of the generation. I dont think something like that will happen again. The new consoles are very powerful and they will not want to lose footing for the generation after with a smaller leap in technology.

If those are things you care about, go build a PC mang. You can even get an SSD even faster the PS5's. But wait, that'd be pointless too cos no games will take advantage of it. Oh damn, guess you're stuck with the inferior system then.

I don't have huge load times as it is with my SATA SSD, PC will never be inferior. We're talking about single digit seconds here, why is this even an argument, fanboy? Why are Sony fans so proud of their fast loading games when the games they play wont look as good? That's a simple fact. I'm not saying they won't look good, I'm just saying they won't look as good as the XSX/PC.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

The main bone of contention is which set of 1st party developers are more likely to take advantage of the faster IO on their respective systems:

The system in which the whole system was engineered around this custom, super fast IO and the devs who have proven track records of handling exotic architectures (PS3 - CELL) and making them sing (PS4 - GPU Compute) and the whole wealth of development resources (SWWS) targetting just this one specific platform? (PS5)

or

The system that had an SSD dropped in at the last minute with a development infrastructure that also needs to support Xbox One, One S, One X, Lockhart, PC and xCloud, based on last-gen technology (PCIe 3.0) and pixiedust concepts lifted wholesale from their PC background. (Virtual RAM - LOL)

You have to be fair here, then. If PS5 has those advantages, and has the SSD edge, then you have to agree that the XSX has the GP Compute lead. It has more physical CU cores, and it's likely those CU cores include certain RDNA2 features PS5's CU cores have cut (for whatever reason).

Simplifying XSX's SSD being a last-minute addition is disingenuous, just like the people who say PS5's GPU clock was a last-minute upclock to try closing some of the TF gap. Yes, we can trace a probable time period when the upclock from 2.0 GHz < 2.23 GHz occurred (sometime between June of 2019 and the Oberon C0/E0 revision, dated December 2019; it's possible the upclock came in a smaller period of time, too, and that window shifted closer to more recent months), but it's apparent Sony aimed for a fast clock a long time ago because they purposefully chose a 36 CU GPU chip. Therefore if you're being fair, why not surmise MS had a target for SSD performance in their system decided a good while ago, and maybe chose to prioritize their budget differently?

It's also a bit disingenuous to label their virtual RAM as a pixiedust concept; what do you think the PS5's approach is? It's essentially the same idea: rather than using a platter drive limited by RPM to virtualize a partition of pseudo-RAM, the tech's just switched over to NAND silicon chips. Same concept, different technology. Whatever customizations Sony and MS have made to address limitations of this technique (no matter how much those have been done, neither system will be able to use the memory-mapped v-cache NAND partition as if it were literally RAM, because of limitations in the very nature of NAND technology and the limits to which flash memory controllers can operate with it), it won't magically make their NAND act like RAM.

Sony's approach might provide more throughput but the nature in how the operations will behave is still dictated by the properties of NAND-based technologies. If they decide not to call it virtual RAM then that's well and good (virtual RAM is mainly a marketing term anyway, it dates back to the late 1980s). But it doesn't change that at a fundamental level, the approaches between the two are mostly the same and governed by similar limitations.

C'mon CJY, you can be a bit more fair & balanced than this

 

[VanSiriusGabriel]

If those are things you care about, go build a PC mang. You can even get an SSD even faster the PS5's. But wait, that'd be pointless too cos no games will take advantage of it. Oh damn, guess you're stuck with the inferior system then.

 

[eastwood333]

If those are things you care about, go build a PC mang. You can even get an SSD even faster the PS5's. But wait, that'd be pointless too cos no games will take advantage of it. Oh damn, guess you're stuck with the inferior system then.

I'm more than happy just having the most powerful next gen console at probably 500 dollar price range.
Perhaps sony fans should go PC given the weaker spec PS5 and the fact they're so upset that they have to use a SSD to be the savior. Many PS4 exclusives are now hitting PC.
What advantage are we talking here? Are you suggesting the SSD will do GPU intensive work? Are u suggesting SSD will make the PS5 faster? The SSD is limited by what the the GPU/CPU can muster

 

[CJY]

I don't have huge load times as it is with my SATA SSD, PC will never be inferior. We're talking about single digit seconds here, why is this even an argument, fanboy?

Load time isn't what it this is about. I admit, my fanboyism has gone overboard... but to paint the difference in approaches between the two systems as "one will have faster loading times than the other" is disingenuous too. We won't know the true veracity of the claims on either side, so it's definitely gonna have to be a wait and see approach, but system wars are fun too in the meantime.

 

[CJY]

I'm more than happy just having the most powerful next gen console at at probably 500 dollar price range.
Perhaps sony fans should go PC given the weaker spec PS5 and the fact many PS4 exclusives are now hitting PC.
What advantage are we talking here? Are you suggesting the SSD will do GPU intensive work? Are u suggesting SSD will make the PS5 faster?

No, the SSD won't make the PS5 faster, but the higher clock speeds of the GPU will make certain workloads faster for sure.
SSD won't do any GPU work, but the work the PS5 GPU does will be amazing, being fed by the superior SSD which the devs will actually use to create new and interesting experiences. Not just Gears, Halo, Gears, Halo, Gears, Forza, Gears.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Imho, ray tracing is overrated (not saying it's not cool but overrated) it's demanding tech on the hardware, imo next gen should have held on this tech, until it becomes common & more GPU's can handle it properly.

They can choose how aggressive to use it, so it's still possible with mild performance penalty.

 

[VanSiriusGabriel]

They can choose how aggressive to use it, so it's still possible with mild performance penalty.

At this point RT will be the biggest graphical difference between the two consoles, also because RT is the graphical feature that less suffers from diminishing returns.
If on SeX one game has much more detailed textures, it will be very difficult to notice anyway, and as a dev said before we are reaching the "critical mass" of what a team can do, before reaching the limit of what an hardware can do. You need a lot of people to "draw" details on a model, if you want to go to micro levels you need A LOT of people.
But if RT is much better, that can be a true advantage. Maybe it will not be as noticeable in all games, it depends by the surfaces used, but you never know.

 

[ResilientBanana]

No, the SSD won't make the PS5 faster, but the higher clock speeds of the GPU will make certain workloads faster for sure.
SSD won't do any GPU work, but the work the PS5 GPU does will be amazing, being fed by the superior SSD which the devs will actually use to create new and interesting experiences. Not just Gears, Halo, Gears, Halo, Gears, Forza, Gears.

Wierd, I didn't realize the, now 16 studios, Microsoft has was going to only produce Gears, Halo and Forza.

 

[Rolling_Start]

Ah, still comparing both consoles I see. What's a lot more interesting to me is what is made possible moving from ~50MB/s to ~5.5GB/s. A 100X increase in IO throughput. There is a lot more this than meets the eyes here. Raw IO throughput isn't necessarily the game changer, it's the custom silicon for coherency (scrubber), mapping, file I/O, decompression (all of which is handled by the custom IO block) that makes the data coming from the SSD usable without reprocessing by the CPU. Without addressing these bottlenecks, the C/GPU would be locked up waiting/processing the data and you would see significant performance penalties when zipping data around at lightning fast speeds. In the end, you might end up with actual real-world raw throughput of ~2GB/s of the 5.5GB/s. (I'm making up that figure). Cerny has addressed all these bottlenecks and then some and the SSD has been central to his focus in designing the system and eliminating every conceivable bottleneck.

Oh yeah for sure, it's the 100X jump that's the real eye opener. That absolutely does allow for entirely different looking (and playing games) than we've been used to. And Star Citizen aside, nothing on the PC has been able to use multi-GB sustained throughput as a base for game building.

Both can do pretty similar things, it's just that one's better.

OK sure, XSX has a lot of these things too. Velocity engine, "Virtual Memory" (i.e. DirectStorage), hardware decompression... fine. I still think Cerny has architected a far more robust, efficient and effective system that is far more likely to reach its theoretical IO bandwidth limits. Yes, PS5 IO is on-paper 129-367% the speed of XSX's IO, this is a fact, but for me, it's not at all the main bone of contention.

"Velocity architecture" looks cool, but PS5 is faster likely across all use cases as far as I can see. SFS might help a bit on X1X if PS5 doesn't have a similar hardware feature.

The most exciting thing about XSX storage for me is what it can also bring to PC. Those 7GB/s PCIe SSDs, that we'll be paying out the arse for next year, might actually have a chance of coming out swinging once Direct Storage is adopted!

The main bone of contention is which set of 1st party developers are more likely to take advantage of the faster IO on their respective systems:

The system in which the whole system was engineered around this custom, super fast IO and the devs who have proven track records of handling exotic architectures (PS3 - CELL) and making them sing (PS4 - GPU Compute) and the whole wealth of development resources (SWWS) targetting just this one specific platform? (PS5)

or

The system that had an SSD dropped in at the last minute with a development infrastructure that also needs to support Xbox One, One S, One X, Lockhart, PC and xCloud, based on last-gen technology (PCIe 3.0) and pixiedust concepts lifted wholesale from their PC background. (Virtual RAM - LOL)

I think an SSD was always planned for XSX. "Velocity architecture" was also developed with a mind for what technologies it might be possible to leverage on the PC also in the coming years I think. Thanks a key thing for MS.

I think both will be well utilised by developers, but Sony first parties will obviously be able to push streaming further. But even in games that push the PS5 solution, I don't think the SSD will be streaming high numbers of GB/s all the time.

PS5 will be excellent at handling moments of high demand well, and not showing lod pops, black screens between radically different scenes, etc.

My biases are clear, and my opinion on which is the far superior system is clear, and I'm not even saying the XSX isn't capable of what the PS5 is capable of - it is, with the necessary sacrifices. All I'm saying is if one wants to experience what truly exploiting a super fast SSD in next generation game design actually feels, looks and plays like, beyond just faster loading... You're only going to get that on PS5. Take that to the bank.

Yeah I'd agree with that. There are times when the PS5 could operate seamlessly that you'd need to cut corners systems with lesser SSD performance.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Not my opinion but facts. And I don't feel the unfavorite poster vibe. I haven't been trolled ever since the PS5 specs came out and the announcement of Horizon: Zero Dawn for PC.

I may be despised by some for not saying things people want to hear but that's OK.

I just don't like seeing language from people who act like they work right beside the people making decisions. If you were to say "my thoughts are.." or "I hope that Sony..." etc.. that would be OK. It's just annoying to make statements that I know are blatantly false.

 

[VanSiriusGabriel]

All these "facts" being spit like it's Far West, damn.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Sata SSD is capped at 0.5GB/s. That was NVMe m.2 and it was the fastest in the market last year. Just saying.

Yes but at least in game loading and maybe in games like star citizen tbe difference aint tangible. Could be lack of optimizations or could be bottlenecks.

 

[prinz_valium]

when I see this I cringe becuse cerny explicitly said it was 825, and admitted it was a non standard size that they went for as a part of their custom solution. He said it had something to do with there being 12 channels. No one ever markets their products on actual available space. Ps5 will have something in the neighborhood of 700 available for consumers

Ps5 will have 768GB of space (768*1024³ Byte)
Usable space depends on the OS size and reserved space.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Yes but at least in game loading and maybe in games like star citizen tbe difference aint tangible. Could be lack of optimizations or could be bottlenecks.

PC's are shit, Period. Long Live Consoles!

 

[Genx3]

At this point RT will be the biggest graphical difference between the two consoles, also because RT is the graphical feature that less suffers from diminishing returns.
If on SeX one game has much more detailed textures, it will be very difficult to notice anyway, and as a dev said before we are reaching the "critical mass" of what a team can do, before reaching the limit of what an hardware can do. You need a lot of people to "draw" details on a model, if you want to go to micro levels you need A LOT of people.
But if RT is much better, that can be a true advantage. Maybe it will not be as noticeable in all games, it depends by the surfaces used, but you never know.

This is my sentiment at this point. XSX will likely be more aggressive with its RT implementation while the games look similar.

 

[VanSiriusGabriel]

Yes but at least in game loading and maybe in games like star citizen tbe difference aint tangible. Could be lack of optimizations or could be bottlenecks.

Probably because it's just much heavier than a normal game.

Star Citizen with HDD: like what, one minute? Two? Even more, don't remember.
With SSD: 20 seconds.

Normal game with HDD: 5-10 sec.
With SSD: 2-3 sec.

This is exactly what dimishing returns are.

 

[prinz_valium]

Probably because it's just much heavier than a normal game.

Star Citizen with HDD: like what, one minute? Two? Even more, don't remember.
With SSD: 20 seconds.

Normal game with HDD: 5-10 sec.
With SSD: 2-3 sec.

This is exactly what dimishing returns are.

You wish.
Maybe Minesweeper.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Hence the term "some time".

If a fundamental gameplay mechanic requires the SSD speed of the PS5 at a given visual fidelity their options on PC are mandate an SSD of equal effective performance, reduce scene complexity to potato levels or ideally allow some level of scalability in between. It all depends on how much of the integrity of their creation they're willing to allow users to forgo for lower specs.

PS5 Exclusives will not work on 99.99% of PC's until late 2021 or early 2022, and after that it'll be 99.1%. Developers start from the lowest, not a super tiny market. And PS5 Exclusives will not touch PC if they're 1st party games.

 

[VanSiriusGabriel]

You wish.
Maybe Minesweeper.

It vary a lot depending on the setup, even with HDDs. But yeah whatever, the idea is there.

 

[FeiRR]

when I see this I cringe becuse cerny explicitly said it was 825, and admitted it was a non standard size that they went for as a part of their custom solution. He said it had something to do with there being 12 channels. No one ever markets their products on actual available space. Ps5 will have something in the neighborhood of 700 available for consumers

He said 825 is the total capacity before formatting? Then it'd be about 700 available, you're right. But that's quite bad.

 

[VanSiriusGabriel]

He said 825 is the total capacity before formatting? Then it'd be about 700 available, you're right. But that's quite bad.

Hoping at the very least there is a 2x storage model at D1. Even if we don't know how much games gonna weight with this SSDs.

 

[Farrell55]

How much data do you think the PS5 can handle AFTER it gets into RAM? Let's say being conservative you have 12G of RAM total to run a game, load textures and any other datasets you want stored in main memory. What is the realworld case of needing to use the full potential of an SSD drive's speed? Let's look at the PS exclusives and assume sequels:

1) God of War 2 - not needed. Easily able to put very detailed shading and lighting with assets into an entire level.
2) Uncharted 5/TLoU2 enhanced - not needed. Again, streaming is not required.
3) Ghost of Toshima - not needed.
4) Spiderman 2 - yep, perhaps. We'll say open world with large map that can't be totally residing in local memory even though it will use several instances of the same buildings.
5) H:ZD 2 - ok.. definitely a possibility
6) DriveClub 2 - nope. Not open world
7) Bloodborne 2 - nope.. linear game as well.

So there's only 2 games that fit the bill for increased I/O bandwidth due to streaming an open world. The rest of the games can easily migrate to the PC with no issues.



I'd love to bet on that.

stop lying around here so much Desperate Amateur

 

[Gamernyc78]

I´m sorry but HHG is hard listen to.
YOOOOOO!! Hip OP! IN DA HAUS! KONTINIIIUUUU BRO .... WAAAAAH! KREIZI!! HMMMMMM!! AHHHH!!!? HMMMMMM, HMMMMMM, HMMMMMM ---

Spoiler

I fucks with him Brody. Chill Wit da discrimination before I get aggy and violate deadass

Mind you I talk hood, when I'm in the hood, around my hood ppls but turn tht shit right off when I'm in the office lol

 

[Metroiddarks]

So looks like also God of War will be in PC ... ok fucked both consoles bring me the rtx 3080

 

[LordOfChaos]

So looks like also God of War will be in PC ... ok fucked both consoles bring me the rtx 3080

And HZD...But the sequels?

The start of a new generation seems like a good time to give more gamers a taste of the previous games in the series, then the PS5 launches with the next GoW and HZD2 as exclusives, is my bet.

 

[ethomaz]

I'm following all of this, and I think peoples' minds here are stuck with the HDD, with all due respect. If your SSD sends 22GB in one second, and the 448GB/s picks it in one go, why do I care for 560GB/s that can barely send 6GB/s? Most likely Sony saw no need for that anyway, so can anyone explain further? And of course, your ram at best is 15GB or 10GB on XSX, so you'd transfer than in 0.5-0.7sec.

Well people say they because you need to do that at least 30 times per second... that is why devs uses a lot of duplicated data in their games (same texture for examolr) because there is no time to go on disc to get a different one.

Of course in a ideal world you can refresh the RAM dozen of times per second but that is actually impossible with actual tech.

So you refresh with new data the RAM the max the HDD/SSD allow you.

No dev in the world will not be happy with a faster SSD because when you design a game you already take in consideration which amount of data you will refresh on RAM at render time.

More SSD speed = more new data you carry from SSD to RAM to be used by GPU.

 

[SSfox]

This tweet that make you realize that some people really didn't get the real deal of the SSD in next gen



Yes, booting games is gonna be fast, yes loading are gonna be super fast, Cerny as well talked about it in the presentation, and yes both those aspects are a huge deal, absolutely without the doubt, but the real game changer is in the game design, mostly because of the new streaming capacity of the SSD, and mostly PS5 SSD that is by far the fastest SSD that will be availble on any console.

 

[Metroiddarks]

And HZD...But the sequels?

The start of a new generation seems like a good time to give more gamers a taste of the previous games in the series, then the PS5 launches with the next GoW and HZD2 as exclusives, is my bet.

For Horizon make senses as his sequel could be close to be announce but God of War ? The next part will be released in many years.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Well people say they because you need to do that at least 30 times per second... that is why devs uses a lot of duplicated data in their games (same texture for examolr) because there is no time to go on disc to get a different one.

Of course in a ideal world you can refresh the RAM dozen of times per second but that is actually impossible with actual tech.

So you refresh with new data the RAM the max the HDD/SSD allow you.

No dev in the world will not be happy with a faster SSD.

So you didn't watch it? He literally said that now devs don't need duplicates and everything will be picked on the fly directly from the SSD. At this point we should talk about unconfirmed matters, my friend. Watch it, even for an amateur like me, you'll learn A LOT.

 

[Evilms]

Funny how the tides turn. They've been accused of shilling for both Sony and Microsoft. Just shows that they are neutral. At least they are a lot more trustworthy than Cerny or Phil or any random youtuber.

Even between them, they contradict each other if you don't see what the problem is, I can't do anything more for you

 

[Ascend]

It doesn't matter. That's the point. We comparing next-gen systems. Not the generational leaps they made from last gen.

So you're refusing to answer. Most likely you know you'll lose the argument in the end, so you don't engage. I guess we're done here then.

I expected better from you.

 

[VanSiriusGabriel]

Even between them, they contradict each other if you don't see what the problem is, I can't do anything more for you

Well, I guess they have the right to disagree, or your point is another?