By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - PS4pro supports SATA 3.0

vivster on 13 October 2016
Radek said:

You can buy Samsung 850 Evo 500GB for around 150$ / € and many people do.
Might seem like a lot, but I'd buy one and install in my PS4, except it has SATA II so there's no point.

The speed difference from an SSD comes mostly from its random access speed and not sequential read. That means that even on SATA2 an SSD is unbelievably faster than any HDD. Unless the game is constantly loading huge files, there will not be a lot of diffrence in overall time savings between SATA 2 and 3. The difference to HDDs will always be huge though.



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

Around the Network
COKTOE on 13 October 2016

Cool news. Too bad it doesn't come with the Pro by default....



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."

Intrinsic on 13 October 2016
RenCutypoison said:
Would an hybrid SSHD be any good ? I am considering getting one with PS4pro.

No. SSHDs work by keeping the most frequently accessed data stored in nand flash while the bulk of the data is on disc platters. What this means in a game console is that your OS front-end is probably what gets stored there so things within the OS UI front-end (friends lists or trophies...etc) could load faster. 

Raistline said:

Just a minor correction to your comment here.  M.2 does not give you 2K+ MB/s speed by default. M.2 is just a small form factor connection for SSD's that was orignally designed to be used for ultra compact laptops and tablets. Even today most M.2 capable PC's still run use the SATA 3.0 bus for data transfers.

A PC needs to have the NVMe protocol and needs to have the SSD run along the PCIe 3.0 bus at at least 4X speeds to be able to acheive the the 2K+ MB/s speeds. There are 3 different conneciton types that can handle teh 4X PCIe speeds. This includes direct PCIe drives, Drives using the M.2 conneciton, Drives using the SATA Express conneciton, and finally the  SFF-8639 (now named U.2). In fact teh SFF-8639 (U.2) can actually exceed the max speed of both M.2 and SATA Express.

But in the end the key factor for speeds above 550MB/s is a combination of NVMe and using the PCIe 4X bus.

*Edit: There are also M.2 SSD's that don't support the NVMe protocol and thus cannot run over the PCIe bus and are limited to SATA 3.0's max bandwitth of around 550MB/s

Yh I know all that, I was just trying to keep the OP as light as possible. Thanks for the info tho, it will sure help those that that know about that stuff. 

vivster said:
Radek said:

You can buy Samsung 850 Evo 500GB for around 150$ / € and many people do.
Might seem like a lot, but I'd buy one and install in my PS4, except it has SATA II so there's no point.

The speed difference from an SSD comes mostly from its random access speed and not sequential read. That means that even on SATA2 an SSD is unbelievably faster than any HDD. Unless the game is constantly loading huge files, there will not be a lot of diffrence in overall time savings between SATA 2 and 3. The difference to HDDs will always be huge though.

True but also not really the case. For games like bloodborne, Just cause 3...etc or any other game that employs a system where chunks of the game are loaded at a time and what you are looking at is a loading screen, SATA 3 support and with an SSD will make a world of difference. Almost cut such load times down to about half. for games that stream data in mostly, the best this may yield is less pop in but that's another matter. 

COKTOE said:
Cool news. Too bad it doesn't come with the Pro by default....

Lol, you want them to put in an SSD in the pro? A 1TB SSD probably costs about half the cost of the Pro as it stands. 



vivster on 13 October 2016
Intrinsic said:

vivster said:

The speed difference from an SSD comes mostly from its random access speed and not sequential read. That means that even on SATA2 an SSD is unbelievably faster than any HDD. Unless the game is constantly loading huge files, there will not be a lot of diffrence in overall time savings between SATA 2 and 3. The difference to HDDs will always be huge though.

True but also not really the case. For games like bloodborne, Just cause 3...etc or any other game that employs a system where chunks of the game are loaded at a time and what you are looking at is a loading screen, SATA 3 support and with an SSD will make a world of difference. Almost cut such load times down to about half. for games that stream data in mostly, the best this may yield is less pop in but that's another matter. 

But how big are those chunks? If they're anything less than 1GB it will not make a world of difference.



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

Ganoncrotch on 13 October 2016
Barozi said:
Radek said:

You can buy Samsung 850 Evo 500GB for around 150$ / € and many people do.
Might seem like a lot, but I'd buy one and install in my PS4, except it has SATA II so there's no point.

I would never dream of buying a 500GB SSD for a current gen console. Way too small. The SSD part doesn't make that any better.

Yeah when you look at games like The Witcher which can take upwards of 70GB and the fact that the PS4 system files consume about 20-40GB of the drive... ontop of the fact that in a 500GB SSD you're actually going to have 465GB since the number writen on the box is always based in Bytes and it's 1024 of those per KB and 1024 of those per MB and another 1024 of those per GB so yeah I mean you're looking at being able to install maybe 7-10 AAA games on a 500GB drive or closer to 5 games like The Witcher.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Around the Network
walsufnir on 13 October 2016

"In theory, the increase in bandwidth throughput could boost install and loading times on Sony’s enhanced PS4 console."

Not for install times as these are limited by the bluray drive which is way slower, even than HDDs.

An SSD would also be beneficial to the PS4 as access times are especially better, not throughput.



COKTOE on 13 October 2016

COKTOE said:
Cool news. Too bad it doesn't come with the Pro by default....

 

Lol, you want them to put in an SSD in the pro? A 1TB SSD probably costs about half the cost of the Pro as it stands. 

Err. Nevermind. This is why I should wake up a bit more, and avoid making a comment first thing in the morning.



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."

walsufnir on 13 October 2016
vivster said:
Intrinsic said:

True but also not really the case. For games like bloodborne, Just cause 3...etc or any other game that employs a system where chunks of the game are loaded at a time and what you are looking at is a loading screen, SATA 3 support and with an SSD will make a world of difference. Almost cut such load times down to about half. for games that stream data in mostly, the best this may yield is less pop in but that's another matter. 

But how big are those chunks? If they're anything less than 1GB it will not make a world of difference.

It's hard to discuss these topics on gaming forums because only a few people understand the tech.

Apparently they only go by the high numbers and expect half the time that the ps4 has with an ssd because of the sata2 interface. 

Mind, it could be better because

1. Strangely the SATA on ps4 was routed through USB

2. The faster CPU could mean that the work on the data that gets transferred to the CPU is getting processed faster.



Intrinsic on 13 October 2016

 

vivster said:

But how big are those chunks? If they're anything less than 1GB it will not make a world of difference.

Idk, but this much is certian. In situations where you sre looking at a load sfreen in game whivh lasts for however lomg said screen lasts, you will see improvements with the right kimda drive. 

If it takes a game 40 seconds to load a level (keepong you starung at a well designed load screen for 40secs) Wuth sata 3 support and an SSD this can drop that wait timw down to at least 20 secs. 

While that may be the only beneficial use scenario it also happens to be the most important and most easily noticed one.

 

BraLoD said:
Will that help Bloodborne load times?

Unless FS wrote code to ensure the load times last that long, there isn't any reason why not. 



vivster on 13 October 2016
Intrinsic said:

 

vivster said:

But how big are those chunks? If they're anything less than 1GB it will not make a world of difference.

Idk, but this much is certian. In situations where you sre looking at a load sfreen in game whivh lasts for however lomg said screen lasts, you will see improvements with the right kimda drive. 

If it takes a game 40 seconds to load a level (keepong you starung at a well designed load screen for 40secs) Wuth sata 3 support and an SSD this can drop that wait timw down to at least 20 secs. 

While that may be the only beneficial use scenario it also happens to be the most important and most easily noticed one.

Not necessarily. As I said loading times are not necessarily bound by raw serial throughput but are also dependant on random access read. If it was just about sequential reading then 40 seconds of loading would mean 10GB of data, which is unlikely. A more likely Scenario would be:

HDD: 40s
SSD (SATA2): 15-20s
SSD (SATA3): 10-15s

That's not a world. And that is only if the CPU can keep up.



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