-
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.
Next-gen PS5 and next Xbox speculation launch thread |OT7| - nm
- Thread starter Mecha Meister
- Start date
- Status
Hmm,i don't think so? Who can "confirm" minimal storage capacity at this point?
The thing is that casual CoD/FIFA/GTA crowd that buys ~2 games a year would be fine with 512GB SSD. Era type core gamers, who buy lots of games,will buy those custom,expensive,external SSDs in large numbers anyway :)
Expectable. We already presumed their solution to eliminate the loading times heavily involved a sort of SSD customisation and lot of people started to ask if was possible to increase the storage space when SSD probably wouldn't have been replaceable for such reason. Now we have the answer. Let's hope the prices will be acceptable because could be a double edge sword at launch and not a good perspective for the customer.
Last edited:
Seems to be just how they want to organize data so it can be read in a linear and continues read, which would be faster than the random access used on PC. That was a given.This is exactly what they into the patent, they describe a SSD which can read only games (special filesystem format) faster than a PC SSD.
PS5 - a patent dive into what might be the tech behind Sony's SSD customisations (technical!)
This will be one for people interested in some potentially more technical speculation. I posted in the next-gen speculation thread, but was encouraged to spin it off into its own thread. I did some patent diving to see if I could dig up any likely candidates for what Sony's SSD solution might...www.resetera.com
A 1TB SSD Nvme can be find at 100 dollars at retail with all the profit made. It is probably half the price for the cost. If they wanna push a PS5 they will not go with 2 TB SSD and lost more money than on PS4 for one or two years.
There is some hardware part replace RAM for table conversion with SRAM, custom controller optimize for reading faster than write, custom firmware, use the ARM CPU for doing all the dirty SSD management and some hardware decompressor for uncompressed file archive game files.
Oh, no doubt they can get 1TB SSD in late 2020 for a very good price.APU will be cheaper se well by then-mature 7nm node,Zen2 won't be new anymore(AMD will have Zen3 by then),GDDR6 will be probably cheaper etc.
1TB SSD sounds realistic but i'm just saying i wouldn't be surprised at all if Sony goes with smaller internal SSD to cut the overall price,like they did with Pro which didn't have 4K blu ray drive despite all the PR talk about 4K,4K,4K...
512 GB is not enough they will have 4k BR in PS5 because they don't want any negative PR going with the PS5 after the BR player will probably be a downloadable part and be downloaded only if someone uses a BR 4k like this they don't need to pay something for all PS5 knowing only few peoples will use the PS5 as 4k blu ray player.
Per the suggestions in that patent, it would dovetail with custom firmware and perhaps even custom hardware and sram, for address lookups that assume a certain blocksize etc. (that may be favourable for typical read-heavy game data, but not general applications). There's a variety of stuff described in those patent applications, but it wasn't limited only to things that might assume they'd do on the OS side with standard parts.
That's not to say there definitely is heavy customisation on the hardware/controller/memory-lookup side... but there might be. And I think almost certainly on the controller firmware side.
If Sony really did create some ultra fast custom SSD I dont see any other way for them to expand storage. Other way is not to have expandable storage at all or design software around slower SSDs.
They can have a software solution to move stuff from slower external storage to the faster internal stuff, but you definitely won't be able to play from external storage.
I guess it's possible but I don't know if they will bother with it. This can sound confusing for some users.
And how much time would it take to move a whole game from external storage
I agree, 2TB is a great starting point. I almost filled one up, hard drive was dropped too many times and broke, and I haven't redownload everything and I have alot of space right now.
That's one thing that cartridge, storage patent should cover, being more durable than a regular external hard drive.
That would depend on how fast is your external storage and the bus used. But you woldn't necessarily need to see it happening - might be something like a "normal" loading to fill the RAM with data, say some 20 seconds, game starts as normal and it moves the rest of the data needed in the background while you play.
But that goes against everything they've said so far. They're really pushing near instant access to the game. Having a 2 minute copying time before goes directly against it.
And if its like the current ps4 what should take minutes will be half an hour or so.
At the turn of the year production costs were expected to be around 8 cents per GB, and that thanks to continued oversupply we would see SSD prices near their production cost. And that turned out to be pretty much correct, we have seen some offer pricing around those levels.
Of course all it takes is a few companies to turn off the tap and up the prices go.
It would be nice to know production costs of previous years to get a sense of their decline. My gut says it isn't steep enough to make 2TB for $100 achievable. Perhaps something like $130 for a holiday 2020 product. Let's also not forget that they may have a custom solution, in which case production costs may be higher.
I can easily the PS5 having an expansion slot for proprietary drives that you buy from Sony to expand the storage, similar to the Vita memory cards.
I just can't wrap my head around that RDNA 10 tf baseline. Combined with that enormous CPU upgrade...that's just..mind boggling. Imagine what late generation games are going to look like.. or better yet, what VR games designed with foveated rendering could look like.
One of the understated benefits of going with a crazy fast storage solution is that it streaming data this much faster will allow for vastly denser and more varied environments. Just imagine your average AAA scene, but now with 4x the number of different assets, be them 3D models or textures or whatever. It's going to be crazy.
I really don't think it's a great idea to use 'VRS flops' in comparisons as it makes an already sketchy metric completely meaningless. It's not really unlike the whole DLSS "resolution" nonsense.
Not trying to downplay VRS benefits here(of which I suspect many are still to be discovered as people really start working with it) - but like FP16 double rate it's nothing that comes for 'free', involving code, pipeline and art - and benefits are highly context sensitive so dumbing them down to a single number is obfuscating things a bit too much.
The way I imagine it, they could fill up each scene with whatever they want, at any point in time, right? Let's say you're Spider-Man in New York, then suddenly you're in some other universe seamlessly. It should be wild.
Don't trust the man
From the end of the trailer:
Drake house from Uncharted 4's epilogue, but everywhere ;) Likely even denser than that.
Time to start being disappointed again that consoles are using zen 2 instead of zen 3
Don't worry the PS5+/PS5 Pro that will come few months after the PS5 will use it. :p
They both use Navi-based GPUs and are more powerful and feature rich than a 5700xt
No GCN Teraflop conversion qualifiers needed.
I'll be interested to see how pure of a Zen 2 implementation we get. In a timeline sense, Zen 3 is further ahead than RDNA 2.0, so if consoles can have RT and VRS, there's no reason they can't have Zen 3 features too.
Is it possible that both devkit are over 10tf but final specs will be little downclocked ?
Man, you must have some steely resolve to keep confirming and reconfirming stuff over and over. I envy you.
And always with the goods, too.
Last edited:
Kleegamefan - Next Gen APUs have VRS
Historically, PlayStation SDKs have more memory but the same performance as retail units. I don't expect Prospero to be any different.
With Microsoft it's a little bit more guesswork. Scorpio SDK was 6.6TF(they had 44 CUs IIRC) but even so, I don't expect major differences there either.
BTW, both APUs have variable rate shading, I don't remember if I mentioned that before. I checked the Threadmark and I didn't see it anywhere 🤷♂️
Last edited:
Ps4 devkits up until reveal had less ram than retail unit, in 2011 there were only 2gb gddr5 in the devkits, in 2012 up until janiary 2013 there were 4gb.
Unless he is in the senior manger loop he will not know. Probably educated guess work. No different from us really
Wow, so your dev source confirmed VRS for both? That's awesome news. These really are supercharged Navi.
And yes Scorpio is 6.6TF with all 44CUs enabled. Confirmed by Albert Penello himself.
This is not a bad thing at all. So every multiplatform game won't be held back by the weakest console and every game will have same features.
Last edited:
IMHO they aren't small Navi and they aren't big Navi either
They are the "just right" Navi twins hahaha
To be clear, I have no more information on Big Navi than anyone else, but if it's better than Prospero GPU, then Holy Shit.
Yea i was referring to the memory comment.
The GPU performance of the PS4 was accurate at least since june 2012
it's literally been three months. IIRC, he made his first comments way back in august. I have no idea why so many people here are so attached to this idea of 8 tflops consoles or why their minds cant comprehend a 10.00+ GPU. It is so bizarre.
Console makers have always gone wide and slow. The GPUs were always going to be 50+ CUs. If they were able to hit higher clocks due to cooling, HBM2, smaller die due to reduced cache, it came later. Just like how MS was able to increase the clocks right before launch.
It should be common sense that no one is charging $499 for an 8-9 tflops console. Or a 10.01 console for that matter.
The best thing about Sony and MS being in an arms race is that no one is going to settle for a 10 or 11 tflops console. they will both try to match each other. I've been saying this forever and Phil literally confirmed as much the other day. If Sony does have a 13-14 tflops console, MS isnt going to settle for 10.01 tflops. or an 11 tflops GPU.
The Xbox One to Xbox One S comparison is apt because X1 was 1.3 tflops and X1S is 1.4 tflops. So 13 tflops vs 14 tflops. or 12-13 tflops. 1 tflops difference max.
no offense but that game looks current gen as fuck. the lighting feels baked. the animations are current gen. there is zero destruction whatsoever. the asset quality including foliage is better than most current gen games but still far from the photorealistic megascans we have expect from next gen. next gen is going to have photorealistic environments with character models approaching CGi quality. I was watching a cutscene with Mads in Death Stranding and it looked so photorealistic, my mind got all confused because it couldnt reconcile if it was playing a game or watching a movie. it was trippy.
and that game was designed on a 1.8 tflops GPU. The PS5 GPU should be 10x more powerful with all the arch improvements. it will be glorious.
- Status