Maybe it needs to be repeated until the thread is locked but the claim in the OP is debunked by DF's recent PS5 analysis.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
DF: PS5’s Variable Clocks Will Force Devs to Make Choices; Only 1st Party Will Truly Utilize SSD’s Speed (wccftech)
- Thread starter lunanto
- Start date
Maybe it needs to be repeated until the thread is locked but the claim in the OP is debunked by DF's recent PS5 analysis.
This. It doesn't only have to be used to finish the same job faster than the slower one, you could also load more within a set amount of time allowing for more density especially with that much more speed. The DF video also talked heavily about the potential of this.
Last edited:
You make it sound like Jesus traveled the Earth...
Don't you think that MS did the same thing?
MS gave the devs a fast SSD.
SONY gave the devs a super fast SSD.
MS also gave the devs a faster GPU, CPU, and RAM. Perhaps some devs asked for that also.
Who knows? I can't wait to see what games Sony and MS give us
I'm getting into this topic console warz going on, but just quoting what you said, I would pay top dollar if that would work on Windows PCs. Even with a powerful rig (e.g.: I have a 3900x, DDR4 at 3200, nvm pci-3), you would still struggle with loading speeds.
As I'm sure you know, every member of a gaming forum is an expert!
I don't like the design for variability in the "power". Not saying it's not "fine" for developers but it does put more work on them that I would rather not be there...to me, it's not a good design decision when thinking long term into the following generation with backwards compatibility. They can still design around it...but that's what I don't like from a design point of view, consistency in performance is always better but I understand that they have their reasoning for designing it the way that they do.
Everything else shows that it's a good console, which is what I expected.
Everything else shows that it's a good console, which is what I expected.
I mean, in some situations (open world games basically) those "loading times" basically mean you can move faster through more complex worlds. Maybe that means devs don't have to work nearly as hard to optimize the games, so maybe you'll see smaller shops making some open world games?
But... they're both really fast. I doubt the Sony drive will seem much different outside some random essentially tech demo games. We'll probably see lots of "Yeah, it doesn't run at 4k60, but this game starts 10 seconds faster on the PS5" reviews.
As a PC gamer and having MS say they're big releases will launch day and date between Xbox and PC, I couldn't be happier.
Yeah... we are coming from storage devices that capped out at like 30MB/s and look at the games we achieved. Now even XSX has 1000x that speed. We'll see.
What? When did I ever bring up MS or XSX in my comment? What a strange response.
They will be available at the end of the year and start of next year, but be prepared to pay for them as they will be very expensive.
Also not to call you out, but there are plenty of videos comparing loading times for games on maxed settings with all different drives and most the games load in the mid teens seconds wise with your occasional games loading in at 30 seconds so a theoretical improvement of 40% on that cuts loading by about 6-12 seconds and that just doesn't seem that mind blowing when I could load the game in 15-30 seconds. You are getting pretty close to the point of diminishing returns.
Yeah people don't seem to be understating that just jumping from 5400RPM HDD's to NVME SSD's is huge generational leap to the forefront of storage drives and taking it half a step further diminished wow factor since NVME is already absurdly fast. But each to their own, we will see real life results once it releases.
So first party will do some amazing stuff but that's to he expected. As for third party I bet there won't be too much different, just like this gen.
A problem with Sony's SSD drive is that it's going to be very expensive which will add to the BOM and it maybe hard to get because of what is going on in the world today for obvious reasons.
So, it could either delay the launch of the PS5 or make it extremely limited to buy. Remember the Blu-ray problems with the PS3 which made it scarce at first?
This could happen again.
So, it could either delay the launch of the PS5 or make it extremely limited to buy. Remember the Blu-ray problems with the PS3 which made it scarce at first?
This could happen again.
I think it's pretty obvious that static performance is better than variable performance. My understanding was the variable speeds were mostly going to be capped out or pretty close. Is that wrong? If the PS5 is running at 90-95% is the much of a choice for developers?
Maybe I just have an entirely wrong conception of the system.
Maybe I just have an entirely wrong conception of the system.
There are allready tons of consumer PCI-E 4.0 NVMe who can read at 5GB and write at 4.5GB.
If they could run capped out most of the time they may as well have capped it. Personally I wouldn't bet on that being true and it's probably variable due to heat issues. It's sort of a moot point anyway, we're going to run into issues just from being clocked lower overall for multi platform games.
I get what you're saying, I'm just going by what Cerny said. There is the normal idea of boosting/overclocking where as long as it doesn't overheat you can increase the frequency. The PS5 seems to be working backwards which is a paradigm shift where the max setting accounts for an acceptable "boost" and that would be the norm but at times it would need to slight reduction. But if it really is 2-3% as has been posited I'm not sure how much of a concession or alteration in design strategy devs will have to make.
Obviously the XSX not even having these questions or concerns is a boon, I just don't know to what extent these questions are overstated for the PS5 or if it will turn out to be a fundamental flaw in the console at some point during the next generation.
And they are still slower than XSX implementation because of bottlenecks... it's that simple.
See, this is what concerns me. I was initially concerned with the pricing for the Series X SSD cards.
Now, I'm terrified at what some of the prices will look like for the PCIE NVME SSDs that will work with the PS5 that won't even be out until later this year. We're going to be looking at $~300 for a 1 TB drive. And it doesn't sound like these are easily swappable like the Series X SSDs.
Extra storage would certainly be my concern right now on the PS5. It may not matter in 2025 when a 3 TB drive will be $150 or so. But I worry about the prices for the next few years. It could be a problem for a lot of people.
what is the duty cycle of 'boost clocks'? Anyone have a rule of thumb? I've only had overcompensated cooling solutions on my PC to run boost clock all the time but PS4 is known for this ... what Cerny calls 'balance between cost and performance' (a cheap cooling solution just that's just enough).
So I don't know what the anticipated uptime is for boost clocks because AFAIK its usually been based on cooling overhead and the company usually design that into the system
So I don't know what the anticipated uptime is for boost clocks because AFAIK its usually been based on cooling overhead and the company usually design that into the system
for third party I can see it both being often just an advantage in load times (and performance, in the sense of reducing stutters or pop in/streaming issues)
but I can see them also using it to push higher detail than PC/Xbox, but not in a drastic way, think of some settings on PC on ultra as opposed to high (or medium), it costs a lot of hardware to get it but it's not always obvious for the player.
I do think that, this advantage for the PS5 could make a larger impact than the "20%" (not really, it's complicated) faster CPU/GPU ram speed advantage of the Xbox.
but with the apparent lack of Sony focus in RT, maybe the Xbox has much better ray tracing performance/solution? that could be a even more significant thing!!?
for the PC, I think it's safe to assume people playing the next gen games in 2021 should have an SSD, the problem is, a much slower one, even the 2.4GB/s of the Xbox is not a safe to assume speed on the PC at all...
but then we still have many games at the same time targeting the old consoles with their 5400RPM drive as multiplatforms, so who knows...
it sure could lead to some bad experiences, like 5 minutes of load times in those and instant load transitions on the new boxes, with much higher quality.
but I can see them also using it to push higher detail than PC/Xbox, but not in a drastic way, think of some settings on PC on ultra as opposed to high (or medium), it costs a lot of hardware to get it but it's not always obvious for the player.
I do think that, this advantage for the PS5 could make a larger impact than the "20%" (not really, it's complicated) faster CPU/GPU ram speed advantage of the Xbox.
but with the apparent lack of Sony focus in RT, maybe the Xbox has much better ray tracing performance/solution? that could be a even more significant thing!!?
for the PC, I think it's safe to assume people playing the next gen games in 2021 should have an SSD, the problem is, a much slower one, even the 2.4GB/s of the Xbox is not a safe to assume speed on the PC at all...
but then we still have many games at the same time targeting the old consoles with their 5400RPM drive as multiplatforms, so who knows...
it sure could lead to some bad experiences, like 5 minutes of load times in those and instant load transitions on the new boxes, with much higher quality.
My understsnding of the cerny vid is this:
consoles are constantly loadig information about the game world, to hide this loading, devs disguise it using level design. so a game might put a wall infront of yiu to walk around, loasing whats behind the wall as you walk.
the sdd means the loading is so fast, devs dont need to do this. no walls.
It's weird. I mentioned in another thread that when we got away from "bits" it all became over my head and I stopped caring to try to truly understand it all. I enjoy reading the stuff and these threads but the arguments over some of the details make me scratch my head a bit. To me none of it truly matters.
Gaming has always been about what developers can do. And we simply don't know what they can do with the PS5 and the Series yet. And the system that has the best games are always going to be the ones the most people want. While I cannot wait to dive into a next gen console (leaning PS5 because of exclusives but will continue to read more before the time comes) all this stuff is great but to me none of it really matters.
Most people buy a console (at least I do) to play the best games. All the talk about which one will be "better" from all the theory standpoint of number crunching miss that point. The strongest console out now is the Xbox One. The second is the PS4 pro. Then the Nintendo Switch. And lately the best sales have been the opposite. Ultimately my decision isn't going to come down to who convinces me they have the strongest possible performance under the right scenario.
To me I'm thrilled in the sense that it seems like we're getting two new consoles that can pack a wallop! And now I really want a switch "pro" upgrade!
Exclusives are the only console games I really care about. Everything else will is played on PC.
Yeah that's my take as well, similar to how Sony 1st party really shined compared to everyone else on PS3.
I'm not worried for the platform, Sony will still dominate, but no doubt will I go with Xbox Series X or PC (or GFN) for multiplatform games.
That's only true if the SSD is fast enough. That's sort of the issue with Sony's insistence on focusing on SSD performance. A lot of people criticizing the point of view that "only first-party studios will use this" are being overly obtuse. Yes, any dev will benefit from the performance improvements SSDs have over HDDs, but no third-party studio that has to release a game on platforms with slower storage will build a game around this. I think we'll probably see faster loading times on PlayStation 5 in many (if not most) cases compared to Xbox Series X, but the design and layout of the in-game world will ultimately have to be based around the capabilities of the lower-end systems. Keep in mind that we'll probably be seeing a lot of cross-gen games, so we'll still be dealing with games built on technology that's based around having to stream data off of hard drives.
Like investing several billion $ to get custom silicon that didn't give them the edge they wanted?
If anything the PS5 is a rather conservative design with a clear focus on SSD and Audio which almost certainly did not take hundreds of millions to develop.
You make it sound like the PS5 is worse than the Wii. Jesus, both consoles are powerful, but the Xbox Series X is more. If we are talking just about teraflops, people still play on a GTX 1080 nowadays and it's not the end of the world.
I have a feeling the new console is going to look sleek like an Apple TV in shape but just a little more of a rectangle and twice the height. Almost GameCube in shape but very simplistic in design like Apple TV or even Xbox series x where you only have the disc slot in front and rest empty
All this new game conception is pure PR.
All the games except a few exclusives are going to be the same actual games again and again, nothing will change except some visual improvements, resolution/fps.
The vast majority of new games/IPs will be the same thing, even the open world games.
I mean, PS5 has worse weapons for the majority of games. No matter how they try to picture it.
And of course the devs are happy, it's just simply a lot lot better than PS4 and they even can't squeeze PS4 in most of the cases...
All the games except a few exclusives are going to be the same actual games again and again, nothing will change except some visual improvements, resolution/fps.
The vast majority of new games/IPs will be the same thing, even the open world games.
I mean, PS5 has worse weapons for the majority of games. No matter how they try to picture it.
And of course the devs are happy, it's just simply a lot lot better than PS4 and they even can't squeeze PS4 in most of the cases...
Yes they are true... how are you trying to spin this?
The faster SSD is great and things will load faster on PS5, but, honestly, I can't image a game use case (ATM) where that faster SSD will make a significant difference. You would have to stream *massive* amounts of data to really notice. Even Star Citizen on PC doesn't come close to that Sony SSD in loads.
Also I am worried about the price difference when buying one of these plug in SSDs. I hope Sony knows what they are doing.
Maybe they did focus too much on that SSD, it is almost a side project by itself. But who knows, maybe if they build their first party stuff around this, they might be able to show some stuff that is not possible on XSX. Then again XSX will easily be able to do the same, having higher specs on most other aspects.
Last edited:
Isn't it the way PC GPUs work for a long time? my 1070 had variable clocks, so does 2080. I wouldn't know until I was investigating the behavior of a faulty 1070. And I am not talking 0-1 situation with 10% of max rate for 2d desktop amx max for games, , but 5-6 levels of clocks depending how taxing the game was.
I don't think so... I think it is more a case of MS having an overall more aggressive plan and, since they control their OS much better, a few more options to hardware optimize certain aspects of consoles.
