Be willing to have a machine that's more expensive than your competitor

sony's entire strategy hinges on what is likely to be around 5 total games throughout the entire generation. especially post tlou2 I'd be worried that it may not work out.

>SSD highers framerate and resolution!
No it's not. It's a fucking storage.

Probably.

>Kraken compression ends up only shaving roughly 2.5gb off of an otherwise 50gb game
Thanks Sony for all that custom IOPs hardware.

>You don't even notice the difference between SATA and NVMe SSD in games desu
Because no games are built with it in mind. They still want to preload near everything before running the game so 5400rpm drives can still operate it. If you played a game with an NVMe in mind you can forego a lot of that and just do it on the fly, assuming your CPU isn't shit at processing the load.

He's wrong. PS5 has 875gb internal storage plus an extra slot for adding a NVMe SSD. You could add in pic related if you wanted.

It's the Xbox that is forcing proprietary storage cards.

Attached: 20-147-692-V21[1].jpg (640x480, 24.06K)

>assuming your CPU isn't shit at processing the load.
So the PS5 doing it is out of the question.

>be willing to have a machine that's more expensive than your competitor
sauce?

No games will be built with anything past what the XSX offers next gen, either.

If the specs are to be believed, the PS5 has decompression hardware to do the majority of the work for it, leaving the CPU free to operate on it immediately.

Games don't load directly from the disk to the CPU. They load their assets into the RAM and from there it's accessed. This won't change with the new consoles. They will still load things into RAM first. When the game no longer needs something in memory, data is dumped and replaced with what the game does need. So the same structure of loading a level or "cell" and all assets pertaining to it will be used next gen.

It's more the 16gb of RAM that is allowing for seamless loading than the SSD itself, although both play a part. PC should be more than able to keep up with anything the consoles are doing by having 32gb of ram, assuming devs make their game use more RAM on PC versions.

Only real perk the console has over PC is the shared memory allowing some tricks more easily, and direct dumping to the same space the GPU is using for VRAM. Most PC games still don't use nVidia's DirectGPU for achieving the same thing, and whatever AMD's equivalent is called, so it gets loaded into system memory first, then passed off to the GPU.

Next gen consoles will also have hardware accelerated decompression, which means CPU overhead will be a lot lower for loading compressed assets from storage.

Sony better hope it means that an equivalent PS4 game would be half the size on PS5, or that 875gb of storage (and I assume that's before the 10%'ish that the OS+table format takes) is going to look awful slim.

It's already bad enough that on multi-plats with identical assets, the PS4 version tends to be a larger filesize than it is on PC.

How much does that beast cost?

>875gb of storage (and I assume that's before the 10%'ish that the OS+table format takes)

It's probably a 1tb SSD with 125gb reserved for the OS, as well as some breathing room for wear leveling. The OS itself will be something like 40gb, but the OS will need 125gb because of the way updating the OS requires you have double the space of the download.

Attached: 1592842522658.jpg (1440x1080, 221.52K)

When was the last time a console advertised its drive as "You actually get to use this amount" and not the capacity of the drive in shitty GiB amounts?

Yeah, for only a thoudand dollars and a couple organs

Depends on wear you buy it from and the discounts you can get. Never buy something for MSRP.

Did they even learn anything from PSVita where proprietary memory cards killed the system?

Proprietary memory cards and lack of first party games killed it. So no, they haven't learned absolutely anything.

Vita memory had fuck-ll for storage, and slow as shit to boot. I'd be agreeing with you if the PS5 launched with 500gb of space for some fucking reason.

We've never had a console with SSDs before. I'm basing my info off the fact that there are some SSD manufacturers that make drives which they label 960gb instead of 1tb. The drives themselves do have 1tb of capacity, but the manufacturer chooses to reserve 40gb on the drive specifically for wear leveling.

I suspect the ps5 will actually have 875gb purely for game storage, while the Xbox is the one that will show less than 1tb available when you check it in settings. It will probably be 920gb actual usable space or something close to it.

>We're talking 2-5GB/s read speed.
Games don't use sequential read/write speeds, fuck off.

Even the Xbone reserves a lot of space on its HDD. I'm talking 100+GB.

Beyond me why they went with M.2 instead of 2.5” SATA. The latter is cheaper yet still offers a giant performance boost for games that utilize it.

Yes, they did learn. That's why it doesn't use propriety memory cards. It uses NVMe. Sony will approve of certain SSDs for people who want to make sure they get the right one, but it's most likely going to be a case of any NVMe being compatible.

$350 burgerinos, I bought one last week for my new build.

>but it's most likely going to be a case of any NVMe being compatible.
Long as they meet Sony's min spec, which is higher than your average consumer-accessible NVMe that fits that profile.

>propitiatory storage
Not this shit again. The consoles weren't supposed to have this problem.

M.2 is just formfactor and can still be SATA3. The difference is between using PCIe lanes or SATA.

so its like a computer now where you can swap out parts?

It's not cheaper anymore, actually. I can get a bottom of the barrel NVMe SDD for the same price as a regular SATA SSD. Even though the NVMe is "slow" compared to other NVMe's, it still BTFOs any SATA SSD by 5 times. And the price gap for decent NVMe SSDs is shrinking constantly. SATA SSDs are actually on the way out now, as NVMe is growing really hard. The new consoles using them will in itself accelerate the process.

Attached: eSSD-units-shipped-by-interface[1].jpg (592x458, 55.21K)

M.2 SATA is more expensive than 2.5” SATA, that’s the point. M.2 NVME is even more expensive. Consoles have always been a generation behind PCs to cut costs and seeing as the latest systems will be between 499 and 599 I’m wondering why they went with NVME.