By: anon (spam.delete.delete.delete@this.this.this.spam.com), April 18, 2019 7:46 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Aaron Spink (aaronspink.delete@this.notearthlink.net) on April 17, 2019 11:48 am wrote:
> anon (spam.delete.delete.delete@this.this.this.spam.com) on April 17, 2019 9:44 am wrote:
> > I'd look at this from a different perspective. There will at the very least be 1 TB version
> > or it would be a downgrade. I think it's safe to assume that there will b a 2 TB version.
> > Think about what a 2 TB NVMe SSD that's actually faster than a SATA SSD (so not just a shitty 300 MB/s
> > 20k IOPS SSD with NVMe tacked on) costs. You can't spend >200$ on storage for a 400$ console.
> > Similarly I don't think it'll be 8 TB HDD + SSD.
> >
> Um, realistically a NVMe drive doesn't really cost anymore than a SATA SSD. They are *sold*
> for more, but that's a different issue. Its really just the cost of the raw NAND.
>
See my answer to Doug S.
It's not about the interface but what NAND and performance you want.
> > I'm not sure how 20 second load times imply 8 TB capacity are needed, mind
> > explaining that part again? I'm pretty sure I'm missing something.
> >
> > Either way I'd guess 256 GB SSD (maybe 512, but that's a big maybe) + 2/4 TB HDD.
> >
> Doubt they'll go for a dual solution. The cost differential for adding nand is pretty minimal esp
> using QLC which for the application makes perfect sense. A HDD has a minimal cost of about $35.
> 512 GB of flash is running ~$36 currently for 8x512Gb TLC. They are probably banking on QLC which
> would put the price in the range of $40 for 1TB at their volume levels and time frame or less.
At the very least we can agree that an 8 TB SSD like wumpus suggested would be insane. Unless the NAND prices crash that's 300$.
2 TB is definitely possible depending on what their performance goal is.
4 TB is debatable.
You have to think about the future as well. I'm pretty sure 2 TB has to happen. It's supposed to be an upgrade from the PS4 Pro so I'm not sure if they could even get away with 1 TB, but at the very least there must be a 2 TB option even if the basic model gets only 1 TB.
Now where do you go from there? Do you bet everything on NAND getting cheaper and 6/8 TB becoming cheap enough? Or do you go hybrid right from the start and make it purely a matter of putting in a different HDD as before? That would also simplify manufacturing. Same board for all versions.
I just think that's more likely. I won't deny that 2 TB SSD only is an option, it's only a question of how they'll try to keep costs down. SSD only with the cheapest NAND available or hybrid with a bit more room for better NAND though less of it and an easier way to configure/expand storage capacity down the line.
> anon (spam.delete.delete.delete@this.this.this.spam.com) on April 17, 2019 9:44 am wrote:
> > I'd look at this from a different perspective. There will at the very least be 1 TB version
> > or it would be a downgrade. I think it's safe to assume that there will b a 2 TB version.
> > Think about what a 2 TB NVMe SSD that's actually faster than a SATA SSD (so not just a shitty 300 MB/s
> > 20k IOPS SSD with NVMe tacked on) costs. You can't spend >200$ on storage for a 400$ console.
> > Similarly I don't think it'll be 8 TB HDD + SSD.
> >
> Um, realistically a NVMe drive doesn't really cost anymore than a SATA SSD. They are *sold*
> for more, but that's a different issue. Its really just the cost of the raw NAND.
>
See my answer to Doug S.
It's not about the interface but what NAND and performance you want.
> > I'm not sure how 20 second load times imply 8 TB capacity are needed, mind
> > explaining that part again? I'm pretty sure I'm missing something.
> >
> > Either way I'd guess 256 GB SSD (maybe 512, but that's a big maybe) + 2/4 TB HDD.
> >
> Doubt they'll go for a dual solution. The cost differential for adding nand is pretty minimal esp
> using QLC which for the application makes perfect sense. A HDD has a minimal cost of about $35.
> 512 GB of flash is running ~$36 currently for 8x512Gb TLC. They are probably banking on QLC which
> would put the price in the range of $40 for 1TB at their volume levels and time frame or less.
At the very least we can agree that an 8 TB SSD like wumpus suggested would be insane. Unless the NAND prices crash that's 300$.
2 TB is definitely possible depending on what their performance goal is.
4 TB is debatable.
You have to think about the future as well. I'm pretty sure 2 TB has to happen. It's supposed to be an upgrade from the PS4 Pro so I'm not sure if they could even get away with 1 TB, but at the very least there must be a 2 TB option even if the basic model gets only 1 TB.
Now where do you go from there? Do you bet everything on NAND getting cheaper and 6/8 TB becoming cheap enough? Or do you go hybrid right from the start and make it purely a matter of putting in a different HDD as before? That would also simplify manufacturing. Same board for all versions.
I just think that's more likely. I won't deny that 2 TB SSD only is an option, it's only a question of how they'll try to keep costs down. SSD only with the cheapest NAND available or hybrid with a bit more room for better NAND though less of it and an easier way to configure/expand storage capacity down the line.