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

Forums - Sony - PS4pro supports SATA 3.0

Intrinsic said:
walsufnir said:

Yep, it's absolutely something I don't understand. But people are what they are. Not everybody understands tech, apparently.

Whats here not to understnd?

 

  • SaTA 2: Theoretical peak performance 375MB/s. Realworld performance is determined by a number of factors. Drive technology being used and what other things the HDD is doing. Bottom line is that you end up with a average transfer speed of around 70-150MB/s based on if you are using a 5400/7200/10000rpm disc drive and around 250-290MB/s if you are using an SSD.
  • SaTA 3: Theoretical peak performance of 750MB/s. Real world average is at around 500-575MB/s. Only way to hit that over a SATA 3 interface is with an SSD not a HDD.
Why is this complicated? Unless you are intentionally making it complicated?
Now there are tons of other factors that affect how any drive performs. But this factors are always fixed. This part is more complicated and what I've been avoiding getting into cause I was trying to keep this topic as simple as possible. 
Simply put, you will get the best performance you can get from a drive interface combo on a PS4pro when using an Sata 3 based SSD in the PS4pro than you would any other solution available.
Now let's not even look at transfer speeds as we don't really know what system overheads contribute to the PS4/PS4pro performance. Because if a certian amount of transfer bandwith is tued up by the OS thst amount will be constant regardless of ehat drive you out in there. So let's just look at the tech employed instead. 
If A HDD (5400/7200/SSHD) over a Sata 2 interface gives you (60/52/48secs) loading times respectively then using a Sata 3 drive (7200rpmHDD/SSD) will give you around (42/20-30secs) respectively.

 

It is not complicated at all. The problem is that the maximum what can be achieved is close to meaningless

What I was trying to say is that SSDs are fast because they are SSDs - not because of the interface they are connected to.

For example, take a random shot from the internet:

What you see here is that SSDs can saturate a SATA link only in certain cases but the bandwidth itself is not the reason they are fast. The benefit is that access times are way faster.

I have one computer which still has a SATA2 interface and a EVO 840 connected to it. The computer is amazingly fast from everything I want from it, in terms of IO Wait.

Yes, the wrong interface can limit the maximum throughput of a drive but that doesn't mean it runs circles around any mechanical drive out there. It actually does.

Also perhaps you might read this, too:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-upgrade-sata-3gbps,3469-16.html

"Almost No Advantages for SATA 6 Gb/s On A Typical Desktop"

That doesn't mean this applies to the pro, too, though. It all depends on how the data is present on the disk, if there is any compression involved or if there are other limits to the system like the usb routing in the old PS4 but just looking at the interface speed where the drive is attached isn't even telling half of the story.



Around the Network
numberwang said:
External HDD is USB3? Can you run games from the external HDD?

Sony is a little backwards on that, so no.

They should make it happen then you will never run out of hdd space, just swap externals when gaming.



 

 

So I can shave off 10-15% from loading times, but no UHD discs. I'd still take the disc support any day...



What I get from this thread?

Sata 3 = pointless. It's a wonder they even bothered creating it.



l <---- Do you mean this glitch Gribble?  If not, I'll keep looking.  

 

 

 

 

I am on the other side of my sig....am I warm or cold?  

Marco....

Lrdfancypants said:
What I get from this thread?

Sata 3 = pointless. It's a wonder they even bothered creating it.

Then you got something wrong.



Around the Network
walsufnir said:
Lrdfancypants said:
What I get from this thread?

Sata 3 = pointless. It's a wonder they even bothered creating it.

Then you got something wrong.

Sata 2 is where it's at!  Creating sata 3 was a waste of resources!



l <---- Do you mean this glitch Gribble?  If not, I'll keep looking.  

 

 

 

 

I am on the other side of my sig....am I warm or cold?  

Marco....

Lrdfancypants said:
walsufnir said:

Then you got something wrong.

Sata 2 is where it's at!  Creating sata 3 was a waste of resources!

Only thinking in extremes is what this thread never deserved and when unneeded discussion started.

But I see you want to stick to that behavior, have fun.



walsufnir said:
Lrdfancypants said:

Sata 2 is where it's at!  Creating sata 3 was a waste of resources!

Only thinking in extremes is what this thread never deserved and when unneeded discussion started.

But I see you want to stick to that behavior, have fun.

I'll miss our delightful banter. Toodles.



l <---- Do you mean this glitch Gribble?  If not, I'll keep looking.  

 

 

 

 

I am on the other side of my sig....am I warm or cold?  

Marco....

Lrdfancypants said:
What I get from this thread?

Sata 3 = pointless. It's a wonder they even bothered creating it.

Sata 3 isn't pointless. People claiming it's some big revelation/secret sauce feature is where it is pointless. :P

It's just that it's biggest benefit is only going to be seen in MLC and SLC based SSD's.
In many cases zero benefit in Multiplayer and no benefit to install times (As you are limited by the BD-Rom drive anyway).





www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Welp, first "update" from Digital Foundry:

Update 1:
Leadbetter says not to get your hopes up regarding SATA III due to the "copying bandwidth" being really low. If SATA II is getting hobbled like that (20 mb/sec), then he would expect SATA III to be hobbled as well.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=222921571&postcount=803