HollyGamer said:
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:
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.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
