| Snoopy said: ORI dev confirmed what I said. Third parties aren't going to take full advantage of the faster SSD because they are not going to exclude Xbox One series x or PCs that are still using HDD. |
Bulk of PC's sold today, even low-end netbooks use SSD's.
Xbox Series X is also using an SSD.
Most devices today, including phones and tablets... You guessed it. Use an SSD.
Hynad said:
What makes you think they have a similar solution to PS5? Where has that ever been mentioned? |
That is a logical fallacy.
Microsoft has already demonstrated it has invested allot in what drives it's SSD.
And nor am I proclaiming the Playstation 5 doesn't have an advantage over the Xbox Series X in the SSD stakes.
...But verses the PC, the Playstation 5 still cannot match an Enthusiast/Workstation class rig, which is expected of course.
| RaptorChrist said: I haven't been on here much lately, and have been slow to find out about some of the gaming news, but reading about all of these comparisons really makes me wonder how much of this is "console war propaganda", how much is bias, and how much is the truth. I wish I had the ability to jump into a parallel universe where the specs were reversed to see if people latched onto some other aspect where their console was favorable. Do people really favor a faster SSD over faster GPU/CPU? I guess that is somewhat rhetorical, as I can't expect to get honest answers out of most people. But more importantly, how many actually understand the role the SSD plays? For an SSD, it's very fast, but that's 5.5GB per second. It's still only 1% the speed of the RAM, and far too slow to matter in the context of a single frame. With the PS5, data can be pulled in twice as quickly from the SSD and written onto RAM, but those speeds are mostly relevant for loading times. That means that looking at the raw specs of both consoles, the XSX will have "better gwafix". It's 2020, are people just now finding out about SSDs? Source: my dumb asss |
The next gen consoles are extremely memory limited, which will become more prevalent during the later half of the 9th gen... What an SSD will do in those scenarios is allow for a more effective use of limited Ram resources by holding more data on solid state storage until it's needed.
You are right though, the SSD doesn't do any processing... So just like a few forum users here years ago who said the WiiU was more powerful than the Xbox One/Playstation 4 due to it's eDRAM's bandwidth... Well, it's not a replacement for actual processing resources.
But don't kid yourself, there is tangible benefits for having super fast storage, just like there is tangible benefits to lots of processing power.
SSD's are only cool because that was the main demonstration in the tech reveals... So just like Cell, 8GB GDDR5, Cloud etc' people have latched onto the term and ran with a set narrative.
| 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. |
TLC is fine and is likely what both manufacturers are using, it offers the best price/performance, at the very least there might be a chunky Ram cache or SLC cache.
QLC won't be a thing, the drives aren't big enough for that to be economically used.
PCB layer increases could also be a thing.
| setsunatenshi said: Let's see what it means when it comes to the actual games then. |
Absolutely agreed.
shikamaru317 said:
Wait, are you telling me that PS5 doesn't have 2nd, empty internal SSD slot? I could have swore I read somewhere that it does. If it only has the one slot, that is even worse than I thought. It would mean that you will have to replace the 825 GB one it comes with with something larger in order to get more storage, which will be even more expensive. On XSX, you should be able to buy a 1 TB SSD cartridge to pop in the expansion slot on the back for about $150 (the price of a 1 TB NVMe SSD currently), doubling your maximum storage from 1 TB to 2 TB. On PS5 you would have to wait until SSD's as fast as the internal one are available off the shelf, and then buy a 2 TB one, which would likely cost $300+, if not $400+. |
I think it does have an nVME slot or a propriety approach like Xbox.
I don't think we can replace the 825Gb drive, but instead add to it.
DonFerrari said:
And here I thought that PS5`s Audio Tempest was a more powerful solution than on XSX. |
They might be based on the same AMD technology which could be an evolution of TrueAudio, because they seem to share allot of common design principles...
Which isn't a bad thing, because we haven't had a decent implementation of 3D positional audio since Aureal A3D/nVidia Soundstorm years ago... So having both platforms go down the same path will mean even multiplats will likely push boundaries on this front and that means us consumers win big time.
| Rafie said: So is the GPU and CPU of the Series X a minor advantage of PS5's? I'm genuinely asking. I hear a lot of PS fans say how big the SSD is over XBox's. I also hear Xbox fans say how much more vast the GPU/CPU is over. Won't the GPU/CPU of PS5 offer the same thing as Series X, but on a smaller scale? |
The Playstation 5 has a few GPU advantages over the Series X, namely MPixel fillrate and potentially geometry...
Reason for that is whilst the Xbox Series X has more CU's, it's running at a lower clock... So when you look at the Xbox Series X and Playstation 5, some parts of the GPU are identical like 64 ROPS, but due to the fact the PS5 runs at a higher clock, it's ROP throughput is actually superior on the GPU.
It's a case of that the raw numbers isn't telling an entire story.
But without a doubt the Playstation 5 has an advantage in I/O and the Xbox Series X has the overall advantage in CPU/GPU capabilities. - By how much? We need Big Navi to work that out.
And will it be relevant? We need the actual games to also work that out.
| shikamaru317 said: In Series S case, it seems to have been designed specifically to not hold back next gen development, if the rumors are true anyway. If the leaked specs for Lockhart are accurate, the only differences between Series S and Series X are the weaker GPU (4 tflop vs 12 tflop) and about 4 GB less RAM on Lockhart, the CPU and SSD are supposedly the same speed as the ones used in Series X, so that Series S won't be causing any CPU or storage bottlenecks next gen that hold back development. If that is true, developers should be able to simply reduce resolution from 4k to 1080p or from 1800p to 900p for Series S as examples, with no or few downgrades to other graphical settings like shadow quality, texture quality, character model quality, lighting, anti-aliasing, anisotropic filtering, etc. MS don't want to release a console that will hold back next-gen development. The reason that you can scale down for Series S if those leaked specs are true, instead of scaling up from Series S, is because the main difference is on the GPU, and GPU features are more scaleable, devs can simply lower resolution or turn down a few other graphical settings using PC presets. CPU, RAM, and storage are far more likely to cause bottlenecks than a GPU is. Of course we have to wait and see if those Series S specs leaks hold up. Supposedly MS was going to announce Series S this month, but recently delayed the announce to August. |
Honestly hope the Xbox Series S isn't a thing.
HollyGamer said:
also SSD is not just loading but streaming assets , texture, etc. it will be resulting on better quality assets , high texture resolution , more dense, more real life like and photo realistic. So in worst case scenario we will see 1400p on PS5 with 8k texture and large triangle account, while on Xbox SX we will see around 1500p with 4k texture and small triangle account. Both will have the same Frame Rates. with slightly better Ray Tracing on Xbox SX. |
Pretty bold assertions and rather redundant arbitrary numbers.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
