Despite bold claims, there is already a PC SSD that is way faster than the PS5 SSD
Sony and Epic Games have been describing the PS5 SSD as something that high-end SSDs cannot come close to. Well, apparently he was wrong as there is already an SSD that is way faster than the PS5 SSD.www.dsogaming.com
Shouldn't the thread title be XSX and PS5 SSD?
Nahh, you wouldn't do that, you disingenuous shill.
Both matter. People are ignoring the likely better ray tracing capabilities of the XSX due to more CUs and the CPU being steady, while the GPU is running at full clock speed too. People on the other side are ignoring the big SSD advantage and the ease of development for PS5.I like how fanboys are now trying to spin it around and sudenly ssd speed don't matter no more
Well of course XBSX gpu being 30% more capable is way more important than a little faster ssd.
Coming from the people who used to tell everyone to get a second job in order to afford PS3:
PS5 $10,000 confirmed1x SSD 825GB
PS5 up to 22GB, avg. 9GB per second
1x Raid Card for $200?
8x 4,000GB m2 a $1,000/ea = $8,200+
28GB/s divided by 8 = 3.5GB/s per m2
(the card has a price tag of $12,000 with the SSD i presume, see post below)
32,000GB harddrive space, 10+times more expensive, yet individually they're still slower, barely beating the SSD of the Xbox Series X.
Let's go one step further, and pretend that the ps5 also has a raid setup with 8x m2 each delivering 5.5GB to 9GB.
8 x 5.5 = 44GB per second
8 x 9.0 = 72GB per second
In other words the ps5 SSD is still faster, individually.
I honestly believe that ps5 having slightly faster ssd won't make any difference whatsoever. XBSX ssd is super fast as well btw.Both matter. People are ignoring the likely better ray tracing capabilities of the XSX due to more CUs and the CPU being steady, while the GPU is running at full clock speed too. People on the other side are ignoring the big SSD advantage and the ease of development for PS5.
both have their nice features and both are being downplayed.
OP is a shill, 100%. Not just a 'I don't agree with him so he's a shill, shill' but a proper mental case shill.People already know the PS5 SSD is faster. Who do you think here doesn’t know this? No need to do personal attacks against the OP.
I like how fanboys are now trying to spin it around and sudenly ssd speed don't matter no more
Well of course XBSX gpu being 30% more capable is way more important than a little faster ssd.
I honestly believe that ps5 having slightly faster ssd won't make any difference whatsoever. XBSX ssd is super fast as well btw.
On the other hand 30% or so more capable GPU performance can be easily shown in any multiplatform game, if developer would decide so. Simple example: in a game where it maxes ps5 gpu at 2560x1440 resolution, same game can be ran at full 3840x2160 or better yet same resolution but nicer more accurate raytrtacing or draw distance etc.
Someone told me Forza and sea of theives? Not required but listed as recommend. Again just what I've heard too lazy to fact checkSomeone correct me if I am wrong, but no. I think Star Citizen is the only game that requires SSD on PC right now. I would imagine that changes though, right? Next-gen consoles could push that bar higher for PC games as well?
Show me the receipts.weaker GPU is better for devs than a stronger GPU isn't?
How do you know better than a developer/engineer that the faster SSD won't may any difference? How do you know, that demo "Maxes out the PS5 GPU" where did we pull this quote from? How do you know this information? I would really like to read, or listen, to that interview with Epic where they state "we pushed the PS5's GPU to the max. That is the highest resolution/fps we could get" How do we know about how this demo will run "full 3840x2160 or BETTER." Cause if this is true this is a bid deal.I honestly believe that ps5 having slightly faster ssd won't make any difference whatsoever. XBSX ssd is super fast as well btw.
On the other hand 30% or so more capable GPU performance can be easily shown in any multiplatform game, if developer would decide so. Simple example: in a game where it maxes ps5 gpu at 2560x1440 resolution, same game can be ran at full 3840x2160 or better yet same resolution but nicer more accurate raytrtacing or draw distance etc.
Well, I mean, if this SSD is faster than the PS5's then it is obviously much faster than the XsX's as well. It's not like this news changes that. The article title is definitely meant to be jab, as kind of a "Sweeney was wrong" kinda thing, but this doesn't change the SSD difference between the two consoles.
I would hope so.
No, he stated his point very clearly. Don't listen to it with your brain pre-wired in defense mode.Was his point to be misleading?
"Bashing"? What LInus said isn't wrong. It is technically true that there are SSDs "on the market" that you can buy for "any amount of money"Because he contradicted himself, bashing Sweeney because some PC drives have a higher peak read speed,
but then eventually also mentioning that gains become CPU bound - the point of the IO complex
without ascribing that very point to the PS5 trying to work around that.
OP is a shill, 100%. Not just a 'I don't agree with him so he's a shill, shill' but a proper mental case shill.
Besides, who doesn't know that better parts can be bought than what's in a console costing £500?
I honestly believe that ps5 having slightly faster ssd won't make any difference whatsoever. XBSX ssd is super fast as well btw.
On the other hand 30% or so more capable GPU performance can be easily shown in any multiplatform game, if developer would decide so. Simple example: in a game where it maxes ps5 gpu at 2560x1440 resolution, same game can be ran at full 3840x2160 or better yet same resolution but nicer more accurate raytrtacing or draw distance etc.
The PS5 SSD doesn't do 9 GB/s. It can compress data up to 50 % and deliver that at 4.5 GB/s. It's 9 GB worth of data in a theoretical scenario, but the transfer rates never exceed 4.5 GB (same for XSX' 4.8 GB/s, it can only ever do 2.4 GB/s).
If your answer here is 64 Ryzen cores at 250 watts and $3990 for the CPU alone, that's a pretty great showing for the IO complex, isn't it? The higher core counts also come with lower per-core performance which is still important to gaming, and besides that almost no one in the addressable gaming market has that. If the answers here are blown up extreme examples of multi thousand dollar solutions for the CPU and SSD alone, that kind of tells me dedicated offload achieving this in a maybe 500 dollar console has some merit.
The fact that you can have an SSD ten times as fast as a HDD but only load a game twice as fast. In your own words, what causes that?
And now with your budget solution you're not offloading check in's, DMAs, compression, and so on, pushing the load back to a more budget CPU...Which is the whole point being worked around. Just like Linus, this is talking around it not being about peak read speed, but end utility.
If your answer here is 64 Ryzen cores at 250 watts and $3990 for the CPU alone
that's a pretty great showing for the IO complex, isn't it?
The higher core counts also come with lower per-core performance which is still important to gaming
If the answers here are blown up extreme examples of multi thousand dollar solutions for the CPU and SSD alone, that kind of tells me dedicated offload achieving this in a maybe 500 dollar console has some merit.
The fact that you can have an SSD ten times as fast as a HDD but only load a game twice as fast. In your own words, what causes that?
And now with your budget solution you're not offloading check in's, DMAs, compression, and so on, pushing the load back to a more budget CPU...Which is the whole point being worked around. Just like Linus, this is talking around it not being about peak read speed, but end utility.
that list reminded me of that southpark dick measurement episode1x SSD 825GB
PS5 up to 22GB, avg. 9GB per second
1x Raid Card for $200?
8x 4,000GB m2 a $1,000/ea = $8,200+
28GB/s divided by 8 = 3.5GB/s per m2
(the card has a price tag of $12,000 with the SSD i presume, see post below)
32,000GB harddrive space, 10+times more expensive, yet individually they're still slower, barely beating the SSD of the Xbox Series X.
Let's go one step further, and pretend that the ps5 also has a raid setup with 8x m2 each delivering 5.5GB to 9GB.
8 x 5.5 = 44GB per second
8 x 9.0 = 72GB per second
In other words the ps5 SSD is still faster, individually.
it won't match latency of what are likely asics in the ps5, and it won't match reliability either with raid setups.What makes you think CPU Bound is a problem on PC? that's where you case fails. I/O means nothing.
He showcased the fastest SSD solution on PC and that's raw uncompressed, he could slam that 64 ryzen to work to do 6x probably what kraken does + more.
About budgets etc, u can straight up just raid 2 of those 970 evo's of what 90 bucks? and get faster performance then the PS5? or just wait on the 980 to arrive and already be done with 1, which will release before PS5.
No amount of spinning makes the PS5 superior towards PC.
thisThen you need to actually watch the video since Linus is not even getting close to the claimed speeds and latency of the PS5 due to the I/O complex. He averages roughly 1.5GB/sec in the OP video with roughly 1,000ms latency....that is not even close.
and even this has massive latency 1 second of latency. compared to a few microseconds on ps5.People actually consider server-hardware part of their console wars now.
They really need to loosen up the lockdown....
Maybe u skipped the part where it absolutely dwarfs the PS5 not even a little bit but 6-7 times on performance. It's basically faster if all cores are used then the whole jump from jaguar to the PS5 imagine that
Then you need to actually watch the video since Linus is not even getting close to the claimed speeds and latency of the PS5 due to the I/O complex. He averages roughly 1.5GB/sec in the OP video with roughly 1,000ms latency....that is not even close.
Then you need to actually watch the video since Linus is not even getting close to the claimed speeds and latency of the PS5 due to the I/O complex. He averages roughly 1.5GB/sec in the OP video with roughly 1,000ms latency....that is not even close.
Timestamp? Where are you getting this observation from?this
On the other hand 30% or so more capable GPU performance can be easily shown in any multiplatform game, if developer would decide so. Simple example: in a game where it maxes ps5 gpu at 2560x1440 resolution, same game can be ran at full 3840x2160 or better yet same resolution but nicer more accurate raytrtacing or draw distance etc.
Both matter. People are ignoring the likely better ray tracing capabilities of the XSX due to more CUs and the CPU being steady, while the GPU is running at full clock speed too. People on the other side are ignoring the big SSD advantage and the base of development for PS5.
both have their nice features and both are being downplayed.
Of course it's not, this is a bullshit thread if your want to see it from that kiddy shit console wars side.This is just 8 M2 SSD's duckedtaped together with stipe (raid0) config.
So not exacly a fair comparison.
This hyper technical arms race is pretty pointless though. Yes, you can technically "run" the game on an HDD, but it doesn't matter because it is effectively unplayable. Just as the Honey Badger SSD is technically "faster" than the PS5's SSD but it doesn't matter because it's effectively unaffordable.
Of course it's not, this is a bullshit thread if your want to see it from that kiddy shit console wars side.
Also pretty much every component in modern systems is just a stack of something.
Maybe you should take that up with the thread starter then?Of course it's not, this is a bullshit thread if your want to see it from that kiddy shit console wars side.
Also pretty much every component in modern systems is just a stack of something.
Why Xbox fans are now hiding behind SSDs which are working in RAID? Prettx much Discord XboxERA members or from Xbox Discord are the same and with same purpose: spreading FUD
Same crap like AORUS SSD with 4 Phison controllers with RAID setup = 15 GB/s read speed.
No, it does matter. When you're comparing consumer grade hardware with other consumer grade hardware. Comparing consumer grade hardware to ridiculously unaffordable enterprise grade hardware doesn't matter for most realistic usage case scenarios (but it is interesting).But then the PS5's SSD being faster then a normal PC SSD doesn't matter?
Yes, I'm talking about the technicality too. The difference is that I'm trying to put it into context into what it means for the average consumer.Hate to break it to you: but all these performance threads are firmly in the "hyper technical arms race" territory. That's what everyone is doing. We're talking shop about our hobby. We're all about the technically.
Its not a "PC" part. its a server part. The machines you';re talking about are likely to have 2, or 4, 16 core 32 thread or better CPUs, 128-512gb of memory, and dual or quad 1000-2000 watt power supplies.Good to see PC continue to demolish PS5's weak specs.