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

Forums - Nintendo - Is Switch 2's 256gb on par or worse than PS5's 825 launch model?

 

256gb Switch 2...

On par with PS5's 667gb available space 10 22.22%
 
Worse than PS5's 667gb available space 26 57.78%
 
Better than PS5's 667gb available space 9 20.00%
 
Total:45
LegitHyperbole on 30 April 2025
SvennoJ said:
LegitHyperbole said:

Oh ffs. And it's different on the slim than the launch model too. Oh that's so aggravating, that's all so aggrevating. I seen from the article someone posted above that there were class actions about this, for good reason too. This is an issue where you standardise like USB and everyone gets on board for that standardisation, USB-c happened in an easy flash, this shouldn't be so hard to sort out, it's not their mistake but it's their mistake that they aren't fixing it for accurate numbers on the box. 

Edit: There is an "oother" section on the storage that seems to shift size, maybe that's it. Something that holds data from apps or when you install an app in reserves data in "other" or something like keeping a YouTube video buffered when the app is closed. 

And rest mode of course. Suspending a game means temporarily storing the contents in RAM to SSD, another 12-13 GB to reserve.


I disabled hibernation on my laptop to free up precious space on my system drive, which is only a 256 GB SSD. With 32GB RAM hibernation would take up over 10% of my system drive. (Hyberfil.sys)

There's still around 5GB in pagefile.sys, using the SSD for extra RAM (something consoles don't deal with) which I don't get why Windows still insists on needing when I rarely exceed 12GB RAM in use out of 32GB (I upgraded RAM for FS2020, now never use the extra 16GB) but there's still 1.3GB in the paged pool according to task manager.

Anyway Windows reports 4864 MB allocated for the pagefile, Total Commander reports pagefile.sys at 5,100,274,664 bytes = 4,864 MiB. So here Microsoft is using the computer version of MB, not the base 10 version.

Windows also says my SSD is 237 GB, which much be 237 GiB = 254,476,812,288 bytes.
Total Commander reports my drive as 248,882,172 k = 254,855,344,128 bytes. (close enough with rounding, this is 237.35 GiB)

For my 1TB storage drive Windows claims 931 GB, Total Commander 976,760,828 k (931.5 GiB / 1.000 TB)

So it seems Windows is using GiB and TiB. What does Series X use...


Maybe it's all in the 'correct' form on devices, it's just marketing that's using base 10.

Indeed but is the other section independant of the OS, I thinkn it might be which doesn't solve the problem of why the launch, slim and PRO all have a different OS sized chunk taken off the SSD, the PRO is understnadable but the slim and the launch model being off is strange. Still can't find concretely what a fresh PS5 OS is now or at any time in the past out of the box or whether it has increased in size through firmware which seems unlikely. Seems to be a Sony secret with people just making wild guesses.

And damn, stick an SSD in that PC, you can get 1TB so, so cheap now. 

Last edited by LegitHyperbole - on 30 April 2025

Games Beaten In 2025 | Games Beaten In 2024 | Games Beaten In 2023  | Top 50 Games of all Time. | My Rating Scale | Recommendation Thread | Trophy League 2025 | Best Video Game Music 2025 |

Around the Network
Darc Requiem on 30 April 2025
haxxiy said:
Darc Requiem said:

Yes and no. It's much slower than the PS5's 5.5GB/s SSD. It's slower than the Xbox Series SDD but not by near as much. 2.4GB/s vs. 2.1GB/s. The Xbox Series SSD has mid-tier PCIE 3.0 transfer speeds. A fast 3.0 SSD will give you over 3GB/s.

That's true for sequential read speeds, but regarding random IOPS and even sequential writes, UFS 3.1 storage is more comparable to a SATA SSD than even a modest NVMe like that Xbox Series one.

The NVMe standard consumes way more power than UFS, so yeah, no surprise in these results.

IIRC the write speed for UFS 3.1 is 1.2GB/s which is still about double SATA SSD speeds of 600MB/s. I'm curious how well the compression/de-compression hardware block on the Switch 2 performs. SD Express Cards only hit around 900MB/s which is slower than internal 256GB UFS memory of the platform. The load time tests for the UFS, SD Express, and Switch 2 cards will be interesting when the comparison eventually gets done.



Conina on 30 April 2025
SvennoJ said:

Yet for computers it was

1KB = 2^10 bytes
1MB = 2^10 KB or 2^20 bytes
1GB = 2^10 MB or 2^30 bytes
1TB =  2^10 GB or 2^40 bytes

Computers are base 2, not base 10.

It all went wrong with the internet though, as well as marketing for HDDs. Those are base 10 instead of base 2.

They shouldn't have used base-10-prefixes (kilo, mega, giga, tera, peta, exa...) for base 2 units in the first place.

It all went wrong when lazy programmers thought, 1024 is "close enough" to 1000.



SvennoJ on 30 April 2025
Conina said:
SvennoJ said:

Yet for computers it was

1KB = 2^10 bytes
1MB = 2^10 KB or 2^20 bytes
1GB = 2^10 MB or 2^30 bytes
1TB =  2^10 GB or 2^40 bytes

Computers are base 2, not base 10.

It all went wrong with the internet though, as well as marketing for HDDs. Those are base 10 instead of base 2.

They shouldn't have used base-10-prefixes (kilo, mega, giga, tera, peta, exa...) for base 2 units in the first place.

It all went wrong when lazy programmers thought, 1024 is "close enough" to 1000.

It's actually base 16 for anything to do with file / memory addressing

1 KiB = 1,024 bytes = 0x400 (4 * 16^2)
1 MiB = 1,048,576 bytes = 0x80000 (8 * 16^4)
1 GiB = 1,073,741,824 bytes = 0x40000000 (4 * 16^7)
1 TiB = 1,099,511,627,776 bytes = 0x10000000000 (1 * 16^10)

And in computer turns you have

Byte/Char 1 byte (0-15)
Short 2 bytes (0-255)
Int/Long 4 bytes (0-65,535) = 64 KB
Long Long/Double 8 bytes (0-4,294,967,296) = 4GB
Long Double 16 bytes (0-18,446,744,073,709,551,616) = 16 EB (Exa Bytes) or 16,384 PB (Peta Bytes)

Long Doubles are mostly used for floating point and hence computers didn't like drives over 4 GB at first, Long Long being the max to address file locations.

Lesson, don't let computer nerds make up names ;)

Yeah it's all just picking the numbers 'close enough' to the decimal system.