Bofferbrauer2 said:
Depends on the kind of chips they use. Unless that has been specified before and I missed it, the next part will explain why I think it will be more expensive. For such a fast connection, I don't see Sony using TLC or QLC chips, but rather the more expensive MLC or even SLC or 3D XPoint. Microsoft on the other hand, could use TLC for their chips, which are much cheaper to produce than MLC, SLC or XPoint. There's also the (longshot) possibility that they use NOR memory instead of NAND, since that one is much faster than NAND on read and has a longer MTBF, but is much more expensive (2-3 times as much), less densely packed (50-80% extra size for the same capacity) and is somewhat slower at writing tasks. Finally, the way it's connected and intertwined with the rest of the hardware could need a thicker PCB with more layers to work out correctly, and that can quickly drive up the prices. |
Storage benefits more from parallel work than from better chips. More chips in parallel transfer more data than a faster single chip. Sonys solution might as well be a bunch of cheaper chips in parallel or fewer faster more expensive, we dont know. But we know the performance gain from the rchiter=cture is not speed alone as cerny said himself thaat its speed alone does not equate performance, there are many other factors boottlenecking the transfer and sony has removed thouse to. From the xbox side, we have not heard of such bottlenecks being removed, just that thanks to velocity archetecture they can comprese and decomprese textures more eficiently and that is the bigest chunk of data that needs to be streamed. So while ps5 read could maybe be sustained at 5.5gbs until MS clarifies, the xbox canot sustain that 2.4 gbs read.
It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.