Sony Drops PS4 Price At TGS, Unveils Long List of Games Coming To PS4, PS3, Vita

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
MS also needs to do a slight update to XBONE, maybe it is too early to do a slim version now but i'd like to see an XBOX with an SSD at this point, and hopefully reduce the size of the power brick.

I love my XBONE, but if you disconnect the power cable after you play and power it on again it takes a minute or so for the system to boot up and be ready, maybe a nice M.2 or an SSD would speed things up.

Maybe when the system came out you could reasonably say that very few would upgrade a 500GB HDD for a 1 TB SSD on the XBONE due to cost, but few years later have passed and now you can find a 1TB SSD for a mere $200, a year or two from now we will be able to get those for like $50 and since the life cycle of the XBOX is around 8 years MS should sort of look into the future.
 
Even $300 is a lot for a console that really only has Bloodborne going for it. But I suppose it could be worse. People still have X-Bones for no reason at all.
Click to expand...

Bro, i have XBONE and love it, clearly you do not so please refrain from giving an expert opinion on something you have no experience with.

Yesterday i played Forza 6, it was great, my nephews love Lego games, i am using Xbox as an entertainment hub of the entire living room. Halo is a great shooter, Gears of War is an amazing franchise, people who buy XBONE love it.

Do you know why?

Because we are adults and realize that only 13 year old boys play THAT game you are playing.
 

I doubt there will be a 'slim' version of either console until the PS4/XBO SoCs get a 16nm die-shrink.

As for the SSD, that won't happen until you can get a 500+GB SSD for well under $100. If you really want an SSD in your console now, you can always spend $200+ out of your own pocket to replace the HDD with one.
 

I doubt there will be a 'slim' version of either console until the PS4/XBO SoCs get a 16nm die-shrink.

As for the SSD, that won't happen until you can get a 500+GB SSD for well under $100. If you really want an SSD in your console now, you can always spend $200+ out of your own pocket to replace the HDD with one.
Click to expand...


I may F something up, it's a bit complex and kills the warranty. I saw how to do it on YouTube.

I am riding the SSD high right now, i had a PC and a laptop that i hated, popped an SSD into them and they became amazing. Super fast, i mean laptop boots in like 5 seconds, PC went from 2+ minutes to like 20 seconds.
 


Assetto Corsa, Project: Cars, etc > Forza (by a wide margin). Lego games are on PC. First-person shooters ALWAYS play better on PC. Gears of War is coming to PC.

I'm sorry, but the X-Bone just doesn't have the exclusives. And an Amazon Fire Stick makes a much better media hub than a console, and only costs $40.
 
xbox one will be getting an 1tb HDD hybrid model even though it's not an 1tb SSD that should help a little with load times over a traditional HDD. not like it matters much since the xbox one only uses sata II for some god knows reason, so you will never get the actual speed that modern sata III ssd's can reach..
 

The main benefit of SSDs is much quicker random access time and this would be obvious even with SATA-I. With SATA-II, the SSD probably already loads game data faster than the CPU can process it.
 

I can say that on a PS3, a SSD doesn't do much good ( and I believe that's on SATA I ). Playing off the disc means the OD drive is the bottleneck. Even when playing games completely on the hard drive you don't see a whole lot of improvement. I've got a 500GB hybrid drive in my PS3 right now and I've seen it shave a few seconds off long load times ( MGS 4 and GT5 are the most obvious ), but it's still not a big deal. Arkham City, Borderlands 2, XCOM, I still see texture pops and wait a while for levels to load. Of course, I have no idea if games are enforcing long loading screens a la Mass Effect 2 on PC.

Now with the shift to newer architecture, that all may change. But first I'd want to make sure the console supports Trim and other SSD specific commands.
 


Pretty much. 16nm or 14nm. I would assume 14nm since that is what AMD plans for their other products, via GloFlo.

I do think that Microsoft is ahead of Sony in innovation though. There is set to be a new OS for the XB1 that will give benefits in many ways plus the Elite controller looks pretty nice, I would be interested in picking one up for my PC to replace my aging F310.

Sony pulls out covers but meh.
 
I can say that on a PS3, a SSD doesn't do much good ( and I believe that's on SATA I ). Playing off the disc means the OD drive is the bottleneck. Even when playing games completely on the hard drive you don't see a whole lot of improvement. I still see texture pops and wait a while for levels to load.
Click to expand...

GTA V runs better when run off the optical disc on PS3 than the digital version off the HDD. I bought the digital version day one and I got out sniped by everyone who had a disc version only because the game would draw them as far. They would seem invisible to me. Maybe if you're using just the digital copies and not physical copies this could be your problem with pop in on those particular games. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlyyDuXO1DQ
 
A price drop in the rest of the world would be the final nail in the coffin for xbox. (especially in Europe) Only die hard fans of the exclusives would buy it.
 
Click to expand...
 

I've also tried an SSD. Like I said, it's not a big deal on most games. Admittedly last time I tried this was a few years ago, so it's very possible some newer games can take more advantage of faster drives.

The problem with a lot of comparisons I see is that they compare a SSD to the OEM 5400 rpm drive ( which is extremely slow ). What they should compare is a SSD against hybrid and 7200 rpm drives. A 7200 drive alone is a notable improvement over the stock drive. Yes, it's impressive that a SSD will load GTA5 12 seconds faster than the stock drive ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jrcde4hyRY0 ). However a 7200 rpm can beat the stock drive by 7 sec ( only 5s behind the SSD ). The biggest benefit I've seen ( through others' videos ) is FF XIV, though again, that was between a SSD and the OEM drive.

I'm not saying a SSD doesn't make a difference on a PS3. I'm saying it's not worth it compared to a good 7200 or hybrid drive that offers a lot more room for a lot less money. You still deal with initial loading screens that either can't be skipped or have a set time on them even though a SSD already has the game loaded. All this combined greatly diminishes the feeling of fast drive speeds that you see on a PC. It's not like a PC that can zone in Guild Wars 2 in 7 sec instead of 25 using a SSD. A few games will take good advantage of the faster drive, but for the most part you're talking about shaving a few seconds here and there, not dropping load times by orders of magnitude like happens on the PC.
 
MS also needs to do a slight update to XBONE, maybe it is too early to do a slim version now but i'd like to see an XBOX with an SSD at this point, and hopefully reduce the size of the power brick.

I love my XBONE, but if you disconnect the power cable after you play and power it on again it takes a minute or so for the system to boot up and be ready, maybe a nice M.2 or an SSD would speed things up.

Maybe when the system came out you could reasonably say that very few would upgrade a 500GB HDD for a 1 TB SSD on the XBONE due to cost, but few years later have passed and now you can find a 1TB SSD for a mere $200, a year or two from now we will be able to get those for like $50 and since the life cycle of the XBOX is around 8 years MS should sort of look into the future.
Click to expand...

Simply not going to happen until such time as cheap desktop and laptop PCs are shipping with SSDs. The gap between SSD and hard drive cost per gigabyte remains quite large. A console maker's net revenue is driven by how much software they can sell to the installed base. Whenever the choice is between performance and capacity, capacity is going to win every time. MS and Sony will ship with multi-TB drives before they offer a model with the minimum of capacity using an SSD, especially when the machines aren't currently designed to make full use of SATA-3 speed. Microsoft has already admitted a drive connected via USB can outperform the internal unit shipping with the console. It's not a problem for Microsoft if the consumer chooses to use the fastest USB 3.0 option, so long as Microsoft isn't in the position of advertising a significantly higher price to a public that often doesn't appreciate the difference in value.

Anything like an M.2 interface is pretty much off the table until they're prepared to treat a new model as also being a new platform that happens to be backward compatible. A major upgrade in storage performance is going to affect how developers design games and thus causes a schism that is a big no-no in the console world. There are some other upgrades Sony and Microsoft could pursue the wouldn't affect developers, such as adding 4K support to the video subsection of the APU during a die shrink. This would be primarily for enabling 4K video playback and not for native 4K in games. Games would be upscaled for 4K output but be identical from a developer's perspective. The question is whether Blu-ray UHD will see enough interest to make such an upgrade a worthwhile investment or whether 4K should be ignored until it's new platform time.
 

The main benefit of SSDs is much quicker random access time and this would be obvious even with SATA-I. With SATA-II, the SSD probably already loads game data faster than the CPU can process it.
Click to expand...

Not really. I've done a few SSD installs on older laptops. The owners were sure it would work a miracle and paid to have it done despite my warnings. The results were completely meh. You could point to some improved numbers on a benchmark but the results in actual usage were completely imperceptible after spending more on the SSD than the laptop was worth.

It would likely be a little better on the PS4 or Xbox One because the system is better able to respond but you'd have to be really hard up for performance gains to opt for this over upgrading capacity. The nature of consoles is such that this isn't going to improve much until they're ready for a new platform generation that allows developers to treat that performance level as standard. By 2020 we may see consoles with big blocks of Optane memory connected directly to the system bus. The engineers have another three years or so before they need to get serious about such a design spec and some stuff can come down to the wire, like the amount of RAM in the previous generation.
 
It would be interesting to see an xbox or ps4 version with an ssd even if you argue that ssds are still to expensive manufacturers are trying to bring prices down fast!, one things that brings down price is volume production, imagine if
Sony started a trade in program that you could upgrade your existing console for a few bucks extra not only would hardcore gamer be happy they have that option but Sony benefits from its existing market share of about 15 to 20 million ps4 sold.

new consoles only sold directly from Sony instead of stores that way there's no extra inventory waiting to be sold so there's less risk involve and extra money could be made since selling directly skips the middle man, a man can dream, i game pc only but im interested in seeing what happens after this gen, u know when amd may or may not be around? consoles with intel?ibm back in the game? ssd mainstream and defult on all consoles, disckless? 4k support?(dont think so) but who knows ,microsoft upgradable consoles?ahemm steam machines lol cool idea i guess
instead of releasing new consoles bring out new modules and keepp the bones of the sistem,( form factor, dick drive OS ect anyways good stuff
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom