Quantcast
First look at PS5 vs PS4 Pro performance test

Forums - Sony Discussion - First look at PS5 vs PS4 Pro performance test

Trumpstyle said:
vivster said:

So you're saying not using SSDs in a gaming machine is a bad thing? I agree.

No, you were saying that Consoles were holding back pc games loading times, when there's pc only games with loading times. And the PS5 doesn't have a small NAND cache, it has a 1TB NVMe drive that is faster than samsung evo 970 plus/pro.

No, I said that console manufacturers are holding consoles back. Not sure how you go to PC from there. PC always has the latest tech and if a consumer chooses not to benefit from new tech, like not using SSDs, it's their fault.

And the PS5 will not have a 1TB NVMe SSD because that would make up half the cost of the whole console. They will use an SSD cache and a normal HDD for storage because they like cheap things. We'll be lucky if the cache is 128GB in size.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network
vivster said:
Trumpstyle said:

No, you were saying that Consoles were holding back pc games loading times, when there's pc only games with loading times. And the PS5 doesn't have a small NAND cache, it has a 1TB NVMe drive that is faster than samsung evo 970 plus/pro.

No, I said that console manufacturers are holding consoles back. Not sure how you go to PC from there. PC always has the latest tech and if a consumer chooses not to benefit from new tech, like not using SSDs, it's their fault.

And the PS5 will not have a 1TB NVMe SSD because that would make up half the cost of the whole console. They will use an SSD cache and a normal HDD for storage because they like cheap things. We'll be lucky if the cache is 128GB in size.

Hehe this will be fun, u think it's a hybrid solution and I think it's a 1TB SSD faster than samsung evo 970 pro

I will beat you very easily :)



"Donald Trump is the greatest president that god has ever created" - Trumpstyle

6x master league achiever in starcraft2

Beaten Sigrun on God of war mode

Beaten DOOM ultra-nightmare with NO endless ammo-rune, 2x super shotgun and no decoys on ps4 pro.

1-0 against Grubby in Wc3 frozen throne ladder!!

Trumpstyle said:
vivster said:

No, I said that console manufacturers are holding consoles back. Not sure how you go to PC from there. PC always has the latest tech and if a consumer chooses not to benefit from new tech, like not using SSDs, it's their fault.

And the PS5 will not have a 1TB NVMe SSD because that would make up half the cost of the whole console. They will use an SSD cache and a normal HDD for storage because they like cheap things. We'll be lucky if the cache is 128GB in size.

Hehe this will be fun, u think it's a hybrid solution and I think it's a 1TB SSD faster than samsung evo 970 pro

I will beat you very easily :)

A 1TB SSD will not produce the results seen in that demo. It'll most likely be a semi custom solution with an accelerated cache, faster than regular consumer SSDs.

BTW an "evo 970 pro" does not exist. There is 970 EVO, which is the cheap consumer variant and 970 PRO which is slightly faster and more reliable using MLC instead of TLC.

Your prediction will only come true if you expect a minimum $600 console. But you probably don't expect or think anything, you're just saying words that sound cool in your head.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

I think Pemalite should more join PC threads  . 

Last edited by Oneeee-Chan!!! - on 27 May 2019

BraLoD said:
DonFerrari said:

I would bet that Sony will price it 400-450

You already did with me

Yes I did, still planning on winning.

Pemalite said:
DonFerrari said:

And for 20 years loading time have been high and in some cases dreadfull - looking at you GTA.

So a faster SSD instead of a slow HDD is a great improvement.

For Sony 1st parties they won't have any need to look at mechanical storage or PC from how what Cerny is pitching so far.

Not for me they haven't! To be fair... The disk drives in consoles for the last 10+ years have been dreadful.. Even the 8th generation tended to rely on extremely low-end, slow and cheap mechanical drives rather than faster 7200rpm variants.

I am not saying an SSD isn't going to be great improvement... People are just overhyping it to be something it's not, I have been using SSD's since they came out on the market and were based around SLC NAND, it's an old technology to me at this point.

You were talking about solutions outside of Hard Disk or even the CD/DVD/BD.

If the solutions were that good the problem wouldn't be the bad HDDs in the consoles.

Technology may be old, but if it wasn't used right for gaming development the right use may bring a lot of good improvements.

lansingone said:

This certainly could be just marketing fluff in top of nothing more than a regular SSD being put into the machine, but I will wait and see before calling it just that. What has me really curious here is that even though they did cherry pick a game that already has really quick load times so that they could achieve a load time less than a second, they did so by a 9X increase in speed. Out of curiosity I looked through several video comparisons of games loading on SSD, and while there were a few bad ones that only got a 1.5X boost, the best range was around a 3.5x boost. To me this says one of 2 things. Either there is some special hardware solution, or (this is sort of answering your question), this game was modified to run differently so that it could load faster.

Load times are here to stay.

The Switch even with solid state storage/ROM still has load times.

HollyGamer said:

Many games built based on mechanical drive, games like Assassin's Creed , GTA, Red Dead Redemption are obviously still using loading phase but it was hidden in the gameplay. Even game like The witcher 3 still has loading screen . I am using a Nvme  SSD but it still has 3 to 4 second on loading time. SSD is faster on loading startup screen on windows and PC OS , also for cinema bench and video editing,  but on gaming it's still the same and you obviously lie if you say no loading screen it still have loading time it' s just slightly faster.  Just look at this article https://www.pcgamer.com/how-do-ssds-affect-gaming-performance/

also read this https://techguided.com/ssd-vs-hdd-gaming/. That is the SSD for PC, PC gamer has been using SSD but none of the benefit of the SSD can be implemented on PC because all developer is just thinking like you, just for boating and caching . It will be different if all games are meant to be build using SSD. watch this video  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3AMz-xZ2VM

Btw blast processing on Sega is real actually and the cell also real, for the cloud it's also real but it was translated differently and it was not meant for graphic enhancement but for procedural and persistent physic. 

Not really telling me anything I don't know...

I am not saying Blast Processing, Cell or the Cloud wasn't "real". - They are all technologies that fundamentally exist.
The contention point is that people made those aspects to be something they aren't in order to try and assert their platform choice to be the superior technical choice... When in reality, those technologies didn't really give any particular platform such an edge that it was impossible to run on another platform with similar results.

PC also does benefit from an SSD, in-fact it's baked right into Windows, Game Engines and API's. - Need me to provide some examples?

Sorry but nothing Xbox 360 or Wii could do to similar level what Cell done. It in fact even covered for the inferiority of the GPU. So if Cell+Worse GPU of PS3 gives a greater result than X360 with better GPU, then the Cell was really giving an edge to PS3.

Similar to blast processing, depending on the game Genesis would perform much better than SNES on some specific areas (graphical aspect and sound were worse on Genesis, but framerate from what I remember was better).

About Windows, Engines and APIs. If the SDD is made as after though for the games then the benefits will be minimal, even more when they don't go and make SSD be a minimal standard to run that game because that would cut a lot of players.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network
HollyGamer said:
Pemalite said:

I am talking about actual games. Did you not read my post?

Than you are completely wrong, because none of games that has been released, utilizing the benefit of  SSD,  beside faster loading time. Which is implies it still have "loading moment ".  

False. I didn't think I needed to repeat myself. But you have Virtual Textures.
Games that rely heavily on streaming assets (Meshes, Textures and other objects) tend to benefit greatly from reduced pop-in.

It's not just faster loading times, I have been using SSD's since they came out. This isn't anything new.

vivster said:

No, I said that console manufacturers are holding consoles back. Not sure how you go to PC from there. PC always has the latest tech and if a consumer chooses not to benefit from new tech, like not using SSDs, it's their fault.

And the PS5 will not have a 1TB NVMe SSD because that would make up half the cost of the whole console. They will use an SSD cache and a normal HDD for storage because they like cheap things. We'll be lucky if the cache is 128GB in size.

Plus a cache drive can also be used for other storage devices like USB Flash Drives and Hard Drives.
It does mean it is very algorithm dependent, but I would assume Sony and Microsoft have the appropriate data points to see how people generally use their devices anyway and gear the caching algorithm to those use cases.

vivster said:
Trumpstyle said:

Hehe this will be fun, u think it's a hybrid solution and I think it's a 1TB SSD faster than samsung evo 970 pro

I will beat you very easily :)

A 1TB SSD will not produce the results seen in that demo. It'll most likely be a semi custom solution with an accelerated cache, faster than regular consumer SSDs.

BTW an "evo 970 pro" does not exist. There is 970 EVO, which is the cheap consumer variant and 970 PRO which is slightly faster and more reliable using MLC instead of TLC.

Your prediction will only come true if you expect a minimum $600 console. But you probably don't expect or think anything, you're just saying words that sound cool in your head.

We just don't have enough information either way.

For all we know it's actually using slow and cheap QLCD NAND... But has a secondary fixed function processor for decompression duties so it's able to quickly unpack data so it can get more bang-for-buck with transfers.

Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

I think Pemalite should more join PC threads  . 

I think Pemalite can join any thread he wants. ;)

DonFerrari said:

Sorry but nothing Xbox 360 or Wii could do to similar level what Cell done. It in fact even covered for the inferiority of the GPU. So if Cell+Worse GPU of PS3 gives a greater result than X360 with better GPU, then the Cell was really giving an edge to PS3.

Similar to blast processing, depending on the game Genesis would perform much better than SNES on some specific areas (graphical aspect and sound were worse on Genesis, but framerate from what I remember was better).

About Windows, Engines and APIs. If the SDD is made as after though for the games then the benefits will be minimal, even more when they don't go and make SSD be a minimal standard to run that game because that would cut a lot of players.

Again... I am not saying things like the Cell, Blast Processing or Cloud Computing didn't have literal technical merits, they certainly did.

But at the end of the day... There isn't a game on Playstation 3 that couldn't run on the Xbox 360, the games played the same, it was a similar experience, it will be the same with Solid State on consoles. (I mean, Nintendo has been using Solid State for decades anyway in one form or another and the experiences had on Nintendo's platforms haven't been anything ground breakingly new have they?)

Advantages are had with Solid State, don't get me wrong, people just love to overhype stuff. - Like the ACE units in the PS4.

Gaming PC's typically have an SSD, they are cheap, they are readily available, Windows, Engines, API's, Drivers have been leveraging that for awhile now, even low-end rigs.



Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

I think Pemalite should more join PC threads  . 

And XBOX



Oneeee-Chan!!! said:
Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

I think Pemalite should more join PC threads.

And XBOX

I will join whatever threads I desire. - I tend to gravitate towards technical discussions, regardless of manufacturer.

Why? Got an issue with it?



Pemalite said:
Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

And XBOX

I will join whatever threads I desire. - I tend to gravitate towards technical discussions, regardless of manufacturer.

Why? Got an issue with it?

Don't let me down.

I know you are clever but ...... not honest.



Oneeee-Chan!!! said:
Pemalite said:

I will join whatever threads I desire. - I tend to gravitate towards technical discussions, regardless of manufacturer.

Why? Got an issue with it?

Don't let me down.

I know you are clever but ...... not honest.

Not honest? Feel free to send me a message and tell me what I am not being honest about rather than being off-topic here because you don't agree with my opinions.

Otherwise, feel free keep it to yourself.

Last edited by Pemalite - on 28 May 2019