MasterCornholio
Member
What about 100mbs to 5.5 GB/s?
That's a massive improvement and will certainly have advantages over 2.5 GB/s.
-
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.
PS5's SSD is "far ahead" of those found in high-end PCs, according to Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney
- Thread starter DeepEnigma
- Start date
- News Hardware Platform
What about 100mbs to 5.5 GB/s?
That's a massive improvement and will certainly have advantages over 2.5 GB/s.
Jayjayhd34
Member
Pointless as wouldn't be standard. Can't design something around something people may have.
longdi
Banned
maybe their research shows the current drive is most optimal for the 7nm parts available.
Besides PS5 will have problem expanding on the 895gb because of their custom controllers.
Maybe Mark Sony got ahead of himself designing PS5 custom controller. It is very brave choice to focus on custom ssd. It happens when you get too focus on an area and you cannot back off without scrapping a lot of work.
longdi
Banned
Yes Series X design gives developers 25x the possibilities over last gen.
PS5 design gives developers another 2x the possibilities of Series X. It is small in comparison.
oldergamer
Member
On paper. Sony tends to always use peak in their numbers. We don't know what the sustained transfer rate is. We already know the numbers MS gave is sustained transfer.
Last edited:
FranXico
Member
So does MS. LOL
Ar¢tos
Member
If you can load double the data, you can have double the amount of detail or double the amount of objects on screen (or any other combination of detail/objects).
That is something that can be noticeable instantly in comparisons.
How much better it will make games is up to devs.
We don't even need a next-gen if the goal is solely to have better games.
geordiemp
Member
Er, last gen RAM allocation is ?
Last gen games should load in 1 second yes ?
took from 12 seconds to 23 seconds, thats about 5 GB RAM size for last gen games in 11 seconds.
Sustained slowness ?
Maybe choherency and fast IO is more than just the speed of the SSD/
And giving it fancy name does not make it go quicker/s
Facts are more important than marketing numbers...who would of thought ?
Maybe MS will get IO going quicker, but thats all we have for now (and lots of blurb)
Last edited:
ToadMan
Member
Perhaps so.
Epic chose to show their new tech that way - Sony may have agreed because it’s free marketing, but beyond that this isn’t Sony’s event.
MasterCornholio
Member
But compared to the Series X it's a lot greater than something like 10% so it is substantial in comparison. And that's something that will be noticeable.
Great Hair
Banned
Not just price, it´s RAID0. RAID 0 is contra productive especially with nvmes, as it increase the access time by up to 100%. Then you have extra latency (PCIexp.) and overhead ... and on AM4 you are limited to PCIexp. 4 = 16GT/s*4*(128b/130b) = 63.015 GBps =7.87GB/s.
Even TR40 3960/70X are "limited" to PCIe 4.0 8x (CPU><CHIPSET). Intel´s HEDT goes up to 28 lanes (pci3.0 only).
Desktop PC like AM4 CPU<>CHIPSET is limited to PCIe 4.0 4x
Threadripper X399 CPU<>CHIPSET is limited to PCIe 3.0 4x
Threadripper TR40 CPU<>CHIPSET is limited to PCIe 4.0 8x
Intel HEDT X299 CPU<>CHIPSET is limited to PCIe 3.0 ??
Sure enough lanes via cpu, but with 3x GPUs at 16x each + useless raid card you will saturate those 64 lanes pretty fast.
True, but even with 1TB drives at $100 to 150 would make this look bad. $200 for the raid card, 4x $150 = $600 instead of $1,200+ for the storage.
$800 roughly for 4TB RAID0 with shitty access&seek times or $1,400 roughly for the 8TB RAID0 setup.
Again for that price, get an U2 drive if space is your main concern. U2 drive with 8TB at up to 3GB/s with tight timings not much overhead is the better, cheaper option.
Do some benchmarking on non enterprise ssds, 10 to 20 loops and majority of the nvme will fail, throttle down (due overheating, terrible controller etc.). And you want to have a RAID0 8TB and read&write 50GB BD files back and forth ... yikes. Need a watercooler for that, bet they throttle down pretty fast.
Maybe he meant to say, "no singular SSD comparable" out there?
That raid0 card with decent to high m2 will reach 15GB/s as advertised, not 20GB. Also those 22GB/s form the PS5 are only when compressed extremelly well (high-kraken compr. at best and specific data), usually it will reach 10GB/s.
And so far there are no 10GB/s drives (singular) out there. And those coming fall 2020 will cost you $250 to 500 easily and will still be limited to pcie 4.0 4x speeds aka circa 7.8GB/s in one direction.
And if you use the 2nd&3rd nvme slot (each at 4x pcie 4.0, 5GB/s max), have an audio card, network card and some add. USB, SATA drives at 0.6GB/s per drive, all connected/all routed through the chipset ... these will saturate those pcie 4.0 8x (16GB/s) between TR40 CPU<>chipset easily.
Forget about AM4, never use all the devices at once (routed thru the chipset). In other words, YOU WILL NEVER see a 10GB/s drive routed/connected thru the chipset on an AM4 board (the speed you get is max 4x (8GB/s) between CPU><chipset.
Even the first, closest to the cpu, nvme m2 slot is physically limited to 4x on every platform. Again pcie 4.0 4x = roughly 8GB/s.
In other words :
you need a single nvme expansion card(pci4.0), that allows you to connect an m2 nvme drive at 8x or even at max pcie 16x specs on one of the 16x slots connection (usually meant for the GPU).
Get a board that has bifurcation support, those will allow 8x8x on 1x 16x slot (still need a riser card for that though with 2x connectors, 1x for the GPU at 8x, 1x for the exp. nvme card at 8x). But im unsure, if there are any expansion cards for nvme m2 drives that allow drives use the 16x to the fullest, or at least 8x speeds.
Until PCIe 5.0 arrives (greenlit around 2016?), your $500 nvme drive will be limited to pcie 4.0 4x speeds. They literally need to add 4x exta lanes on the newer boards, so far all nvme drives are restricted to 4x speeds (8GB/s).
Last edited:
LostDonkey
Member
What I'm saying is. Is there anything stopping them, down the line, releasing a faster drive, let's called it an Elite drive that's 2x as fast and you can swap it out. Or is it something other than the drive that dictates the peak speed?
You could theoretically just put a faster drive in then should you so wish.
It's not like a Hard Drive is final and fixed like a CPU or APU I and you can't touch it.
Or is it in this case? Can the internal be swapped?
You could theoretically just put a faster drive in then should you so wish.
It's not like a Hard Drive is final and fixed like a CPU or APU I and you can't touch it.
Or is it in this case? Can the internal be swapped?
Last edited:
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Member
We know one of the problems with horizon was that the hdd did not allow for flight.
The UE5 demo they had to do careful data layout organization for a fixed path flight on nvmes. Free flight at this level of detail likely requires higher bandwidth. We don't know if even the ps5 is fast enough for free flight. But it might be, in which case there'd be a gameplay difference unless quality was lowered.
Closer
Member
Only in USA. The rest of the world is MS needing the catch up.
Jayjayhd34
Member
Yes of cause they can, but there no point in doing so as you can't develop for game on the basis that a maybe few people have that drive.
LostDonkey
Member
I don't quite get what you mean.
The option has always been there to install a faster drive, and you're saying that option will remain. So how has that ever effected development before and how would it now? Engines are scalable.
Thirty7ven
Banned
If you slap the fastest SSD on the market in a Xbox One, what happens?
Consoles are closed systems for a reason. And it's not just the SSD, is the whole IO.
What will happen is that a Xbox Series X Pro Max Turbo will improve not just the CPU, GPU, RAM, it will also improve the IO. Bet the house on that.
Last edited:
Jayjayhd34
Member
Storage does not just dictate loading screens. Games have scenes baked in them like elevator rides for example. A faster drive allows the removal of these things what my point is games have to designed specifically around the lowest speeding drive.
If your asking why can't MS release PS5 Spec ssd and then company go on develop options that allow the game run at PS5 level. That comes down two things, one if you believe what TIM is saying if so then this might be impossible. If we disregard what tims says, then yes it's possible, but that's argument then becomes about whether devs should program for a potentially smaller amount of users. Very similar the argument about if developers should include fps modes resolutions in all games.
oldergamer
Member
Not this time. MS specifically said "Sustained" when talking about NVME drive performance
LostDonkey
Member
Not really fair. The Xbox one wasn't built with an SSD as standard. And if you do put a faster HDD in you do see improvements on loading and other graphical things like texture pop in etc. Unless you're on of the extemely lucky peeps with a fast 5400rpm drive.
Thirty7ven
Banned
And Sony said specifically they aimed for "at least 5GB/S" and ended up with 5.5GB/S.
You're setting yourself up for needless disappointment, nothing will change just because you will it so. Just accept it man, like you accept MS's word.
geordiemp
Member
What is sustained ?
The theoretical 2.4 GB/s or the well below 1 GB/s demonstrated on state of decay slow loading demo ?
Theoretical maximums or actual ?
Please explain ?
Last edited:
phil_t98
#SonyToo
yeah there will be downgrades on ps4 xbox one but the only quote we have direct of a pc downgrade will be with HDD. I expect ps5 and xbox series x to run identical
oldergamer
Member
That's still not saying "sustained". Sony has lied or simply omitted information too many times in the past for me to be skeptical when they put a number out there. I like many others got burned on what they said regarding PS2 & PS3 at launch. Excuse me for being more skeptical, but Sony has already used peak numbers when talking about tflops. In my opinion, you are setting yourself up for disappointment, I'll be fine thanks.
oldergamer
Member
I'm not sure what you are talking about, regarding state of decay. MS clearly stated 2.4GB/s sustained performance for the NVME drive they are using. They didn't state it as theoretical. For all we know, peak could be higher, but sustained performance is really what developers will be working with.
FranXico
Member
That's funny. I can say the exact same thing about Microsoft, but everybody holds on to their suspension of disbelief with any stats they throw out.
Last edited:
Jayjayhd34
Member
The conclusion here might be companies like to twist facts in favor of getting profits maybe
FranXico
Member
Aye, on that we agree mate. But some people are selectively cynical or gullible depending on who is doing the twistingThe conclusion here might be companies like to twist facts in favor of getting profits maybe
.
Last edited:
Omega Supreme Holopsicon
Member
I heard sustained clocks, you have a source for sustained ssd bandwitdh?
geordiemp
Member
So XSX loaded state of decay...., last gen game that used how much RAM, 5 GB on original xb1, 8 GB XB1X maybe ?
So 8 GB divided by 11 seconds is not 2.4 GB/s.....
Sustained slower is my point actual vs =theoretical
Last edited:
geordiemp
Member
Just the Microsoft demo of XSX loading state of decay in 11 seconds, and last gen RAM is 5-8 GB
Work out for yourself, divide 8 by 11.
For last gen games, if you can do a real world 2.4 GB/s, then games would load up in 2 seconds flat assuming not connecting to servers and other non loading stuff.
For a fast loading demo by MS themselves it did not meet their own spec.
Last edited:
iHaunter
Member
Here's what I expect and what most should.
PS5 - More shit on screen slightly lower textures - Targeting 4K/60 or 2k/60 depending on how demanding the game is.
XSX - Less shit on screen slightly higher textures - Targeting 4K/60 or 2k/60 depending on how demanding the game is.
BacklashWave534
Member
WTF is "sustained transfer"?
hyperbertha
Member
Nice FUD. The laptop was running a video file and this was confirmed. The translations are out of context.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
This is wonderful. Now the argument is shifting to “oh well, those must be synthetic benchmarks / theoretical peaks never achievable in real world scenario”... strangely so should be those 12.x TFLOPS in the green box then? Nope of course... Why? Don’t know...
.Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
How do you know Sony is not giving comparable numbers? How can you trust “final resolution is 1080p anyways / all games have a final output of 60 FPS” PR that much more than Sony’s one? How do we know that the 12 TFLOPS is achievable outside of very specific synthetic benchmarks and maybe in the real world it manages to only reach 10.1 TFLOPS?! Concern concern concern...
ToadMan
Member
The meaning is that games are designed based on the hardware available. A game designed with compromises to accommodate a slower storage transfer won’t gain a lot from just having faster storage added after the game is complete.
Even if 10% of owners were to upgrade their systems to comparable to Sony speeds, game designers would have to target their design to the slower spec.
hyperbertha
Member
So 17% >>>>>> 127%. I'd like you to be my math instructor.
ToadMan
Member
Not just because of HDD on PC. PCs have specs that are all over the place so epic will try and build an engine that can accommodate a wide range of hardware specs.
The HDD part though will influence game design choices - the speed difference between the SSD closed system of PS5 and Xsex and anything with a HDD in the storage channel will just be too great to overcome using reduced asset complexity.
So for any multiplat game targeting a broad range of PCs - specifically those with HDDs which is the majority today - that game will have to be designed with the pc transfer rate constraint in mind.
Closer
Member
A math instructor would tell you that if the unit of measurement is not the same, they are not comparable.
hyperbertha
Member
Like you have a clue how SSD speeds affect graphics. Another random poster with zero clue how ANY of this works. 127%>>>>>>>17% .
Closer
Member
Last edited:
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
You shouldn't post numbers if you don't understand the context in what they reference and how the things they reference actually play into the overall system architecture design and performance
Exodia
Banned
So by your logic PS5 should load an un-edited, un-optimized PS4 version of RDR2 in under 1 seconds on release day. Right? Infact it has to load EVERY SINGLE PS4 game under 1 seconds.
Last edited:
hyperbertha
Member
Oh i fully understand how it works and I know for a fact that 5.5 gbs of transfer will cause a significantly more noticeable impact of IQ than a 17 percent TFLOPS difference. Other poster is obviously one of a million 'posters' here on gaf who probably still thinks SSD is 'for loading times'. Don't try to get educational on me.You shouldn't post numbers if you don't understand the context in what they reference and how the things they reference actually play into the overall system architecture design and performance
Jayjayhd34
Member
That's only if they stick to HDD's. The only reason no progress has been made in this department has because of lack necessity. PC has change from different storage medium in the past heck hard drives where not standard at first, PC's will not be stuck with HDD's as the lowest denominator for ever.
Last edited:
DarkMage619
$MSFT
We should be careful accepting the impact of SSD speeds on performance. 2x the possibilities? What impact does the XSX own IO solution in addition to its faster bus speeds, increased performance of its GPU, locked clock speeds, and faster CPU play in this? It sounds like SONY had already convinced its biggest fans that their design is superior. 3rd party titles will be the only apples to apples comparison. Show me 3rd party multiplatform games running better on PS5 than XSX and I will buy that their design was the way to go.
ToadMan
Member
That right they won’t, but they also aren’t going to switch to the kind of high speed SSDs we’re talking about overnight either.
If Cerny is right, and SSDs in console result in a different game design paradigm, PCs won’t be coming on that ride because companies will just keep making games the way they’re making them now - compromising the game design, and tweaking the storage to match the hardware capability.
Whether Sony 1st party can actually capitalise on the capability they now have to make something that stands out from previous game design remains to be seen too.
I guess if Sony come up with something that is a major revolution in game design and/or graphical fidelity and it turns out their SSD solution enables that, then of course people will try to copy that success to other platforms. But it’s a big if...