By: wumpus (lost.delete@this.in.a.cave), April 17, 2019 9:24 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
NoSpammer (no.delete@this.spam.com) on April 17, 2019 3:50 am wrote:
> sleep (sleep.delete@this.sogetthis.com) on April 16, 2019 11:04 pm wrote:
> > https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console/
> >
> > PR blitz from Sony. Confirms Navi, Zen 2 and an SSD that "has
> > a raw bandwidth higher than any SSD available for PCs".
> >
> > I'm surprised at how hard they are selling faster storage. Are they actually planning on putting
> > a fast, high-capacity SSD in every console? Wouldn't that money be better spent on GPU power or
> > more/faster memory? Maybe someone who actually knows anything about games could chime in.
>
> I don't think you need to know much about games to figure out the reason.
>
> Fastest mainstream 7200 RPM hard disks nowadays give you around 150 MB/s. PS5 will likely have
> 12GB+ of RAM. So that's 80 seconds to load game assets. This is truly 8-bit age loading time. Replace
> with SSD on SATA - faster, but still way too slow. Consider that down the road say in 3 years (or
> even sooner) gaming experience will be compared to a new PC with a fast NVMe SSD. If you want to
> sell the "ultimate" gaming device for a long time you want to be prepared for that.
>
> So it makes perfect sense to include 256-512 GB of really fast SSD storage using the fastest available interface,
> and even for secondary storage extension option it is more future proof to have NVMe instead of SATA.
The flip side of that is that multiple levels of 12GB+ will eat up storage. From what I've heard, current PS4 owners go straight to the 2TB storage limit. Assuming that they are dealing with ~20 second load times [sounds slightly high], that implies that they will want at least 8TB of storage in a PS5.
I'd go so far as to claim that as long as you have that 256-512 sufficiently high speed SSD (for loading assets of recently played games), 8TB of spinning storage is *more* "future proof" than 2TB of arbitrarily fast SSD. On the other hand, plenty of PS5 buyers are too young to think ahead and 2TB of SSD might sell better.
- no idea if/how developers will optimize game layout after it becomes a maze of patches. Presumably assets won't often be patched, but I've seen some disasters on more heavily updated games (even before they could reasonably expect players to have SSDs).
> sleep (sleep.delete@this.sogetthis.com) on April 16, 2019 11:04 pm wrote:
> > https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console/
> >
> > PR blitz from Sony. Confirms Navi, Zen 2 and an SSD that "has
> > a raw bandwidth higher than any SSD available for PCs".
> >
> > I'm surprised at how hard they are selling faster storage. Are they actually planning on putting
> > a fast, high-capacity SSD in every console? Wouldn't that money be better spent on GPU power or
> > more/faster memory? Maybe someone who actually knows anything about games could chime in.
>
> I don't think you need to know much about games to figure out the reason.
>
> Fastest mainstream 7200 RPM hard disks nowadays give you around 150 MB/s. PS5 will likely have
> 12GB+ of RAM. So that's 80 seconds to load game assets. This is truly 8-bit age loading time. Replace
> with SSD on SATA - faster, but still way too slow. Consider that down the road say in 3 years (or
> even sooner) gaming experience will be compared to a new PC with a fast NVMe SSD. If you want to
> sell the "ultimate" gaming device for a long time you want to be prepared for that.
>
> So it makes perfect sense to include 256-512 GB of really fast SSD storage using the fastest available interface,
> and even for secondary storage extension option it is more future proof to have NVMe instead of SATA.
The flip side of that is that multiple levels of 12GB+ will eat up storage. From what I've heard, current PS4 owners go straight to the 2TB storage limit. Assuming that they are dealing with ~20 second load times [sounds slightly high], that implies that they will want at least 8TB of storage in a PS5.
I'd go so far as to claim that as long as you have that 256-512 sufficiently high speed SSD (for loading assets of recently played games), 8TB of spinning storage is *more* "future proof" than 2TB of arbitrarily fast SSD. On the other hand, plenty of PS5 buyers are too young to think ahead and 2TB of SSD might sell better.
- no idea if/how developers will optimize game layout after it becomes a maze of patches. Presumably assets won't often be patched, but I've seen some disasters on more heavily updated games (even before they could reasonably expect players to have SSDs).
