-
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.
Digital Foundry: Spec Analysis: Sony's surprise PlayStation 5 tech reveal
- Thread starter Dimple
- Start date
If it has BC with all previous PS models, I could see them just calling it "The PlayStation"
That really seems like the most likely size, all things considered. If they can optimize the way games are downloaded and installed, that may alleviate some of the issues with managing HDD space.
I hope they don't do this. That would almost be as bad as the Xbox One.
It really shouldn't be a surprise that it has an SSD. I think prices have come down enough that it certainty should have it (as should the next Xbox). BC is great though. Hopefully they can extend it back to the PS3 too. That likely will require more work on their part, but Microsoft has been doing it with 360 games and that'll likely continue with the next Xbox.
I honestly don't see what else they're gonna call it.
We already know there's gonna be a PS9 afterall.
The information only came out today, that means editing the video as well as uploading it. IF they're making a video right away, I doubt It'll be up for a few hours or just tomorrow.
It's not going to be an SSD for regular game storage, it's a flash drive cache. you wont have access to it, but it'll be big enough to hold the entire game you're currently playing and then some. They'll be able to keep all of their encryption for the main storage and make transferring between the regular drive and this (and this and the ps5 itself) outrageously fast. Way, way faster than a regular storage based SSD would be.
I posted about this a long time ago in the speculation thread. it's a lot more complicated than slapping a samsung evo in there, but it's way more cost effective and provides significantly better performance.
Think about the end user based implications of an internal SSD as the main storage - they're not going to kill off user expandable storage in an era of 100gb+ games. External SSD's wont perform to the same standard. It's also completely unnecessary to allow them to get clogged up with the rest of the users files.
I posted about this a long time ago in the speculation thread. it's a lot more complicated than slapping a samsung evo in there, but it's way more cost effective and provides significantly better performance.
Think about the end user based implications of an internal SSD as the main storage - they're not going to kill off user expandable storage in an era of 100gb+ games. External SSD's wont perform to the same standard. It's also completely unnecessary to allow them to get clogged up with the rest of the users files.
Last edited:
Meh... they'll simply call it PS5
Do you guys remember when people claimed that the next PS isn't going to be called PS4... because the number four means death or something in Japan?
Do you guys remember when people claimed that the next PS isn't going to be called PS4... because the number four means death or something in Japan?
We saw an increase of 60fps games this gen compared to last gen despite the terrible CPU, bet next gen will see much more 60fps titles with a proper CPU this time
That sounds unlikely for at least 2 reasons.
1. How do you transfer "outrageously fast" from the HDD to the flash? That's physically impossible. With that solution you'd have an enormous wait time every time you'd want to play another installed game than the one in the flash storage.
2. I doubt they're going to put a hard limit to the max size a game can be = the flash storage size.
My money is on 100% SSD for the total storage size.
Hopefully they stick to Playstation 5, they really don't need a gimmicky name to sell systems.
This article is pure tech porn. So much cutting-edge stuff in there. Though my confidence in Sony PS hardware has been badly shaken by the PS4. So, I need to know it's functional, quiet, built solidly, not completely hideous etc before I can even think about potentially getting one.
If PS5 has SSD and Xbox doesn't, that'll be the determining factor for me.
The load times are too damned long!
The transfer would be outrageously fast because it would not be the whole game. Audio and animation data would not need to be on the cache, world geometry and textures would be. transferring in the background would make it invisible to the user outside of an an initial loading screen the first time you launch the game and if you launch it again after playing 20+ others and the data got bumped off.
What do you mean by #2. You doubt they will ever tell a game developer how big their game can be? whats that got to do with the flash storage size?
You do understand i'm talking about a 512GB cache/SSD?
It is a full SSD, but not user serviceable and only used for the parts of the games that benefit from it.
this is a thing already - https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...YAa5vH0Ysl339kPigEIaArWEEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds
Last edited:
Give me video discussion...
Honestly the things Cerny is saying makes the PS5 look really good. I just like ray tracing is "the future" and more games will take advantage of it on PC.
Will be interested to see what type of SSD is being used. If that 1TB drive isn't easily upgradable or costs a fortune that would be disappointing. If its some form of optane memory (to cut on load times) with regular ssd that would make more sense
Honestly the things Cerny is saying makes the PS5 look really good. I just like ray tracing is "the future" and more games will take advantage of it on PC.
Will be interested to see what type of SSD is being used. If that 1TB drive isn't easily upgradable or costs a fortune that would be disappointing. If its some form of optane memory (to cut on load times) with regular ssd that would make more sense
Its gonna all pointless, especially next gen sound, if yet another PlayStation will be this fucking loud. I wont hear Odin yelling through all these realms just because that fucking black jet under my tv.
Cerny, please, dont forget about your noise problem this time. I beg you.
Cerny, please, dont forget about your noise problem this time. I beg you.
I'm glad they announced backward compatibility so early on -- it sets a really nice precedent. In the post-smartphone age, I'm less into the idea of hitting reset on my software collection every time a new console iteration comes out.
They already do it now with playgo, it is cached to the HDD from the disc as the data is loaded for the first time, then runs ahead and caches when data in the background.
With downloads, the game is fully "cached" before boot which is why we get that really long installation time on download games.
It's fairly plausible that they can do the same to an internal ramdrive or other fast storage.
I can't imagine you are going to get 0.8second loads from the disc when you put the disc in or on first boot, but later in the game that benefit will be there for you.
For this to happen from a standard SSD drive, it will become cost prohibative. Not only would an SSD increase the overally cost per GB, but you are also talking about a super premium top end top performance SSD in order to faciliate this speed.
Your expanded explanation sounds even less suitable for user expansion of storage size and you argued that they will not remove such options.
Also no matter how many clever ways data is placed you're still physically limited by the slow read speed of the regular storage, which would introduce loading times and that's what Cerny said is a big focus point to reduce.
For #2 you said: "it'll be big enough to hold the entire game you're currently playing." - Thus putting a limit to the max size a game can be. I see that as a no go restriction.
Expect resolution and graphics bumps. 30FPS will still be the norm for console games.
The PlayGo is much simpler because the read speed of the disc is fairly similar to the read speed of the HDD.
That's thrown out the window when talking about a super high speed SSD waiting for a slow ass HDD to provide the necessary data.
So you think they'll have PS4-like loading times in, say, the first hour of playing the game and then they'll have the ~19x faster loading times only thereafter? That would be a very bad user experience and an unlikely solution.
i think you're being intentionally argumentative. How can you infer from 'it's going to be more than big enough to hold any full game' that what i actually said was 'games will now receive a max size limit'
What are you even trying to achieve.
This is a real thing that exists, there are articles and charts about the performance of it, it isn't something I just invented.
Normal SSD's dont have 0.8s loading times either.
They are likely just using NVMe SSD. Even SATA SSDs load games incredibly quick (like 3-5 seconds) so an NVMe would certainly be what they are using for less than 1 second fast travel time. Keep in mind fast travel loading is not the same as boot time loading as parts of the assets are already loaded in onto the memory, and as such it's quicker.
really curious if the new controllers are gonna have a more involved touch pad/screen on them now. PS5 sounds like it's gon be.... pretty damn good bois lets do thiiiiisssss
