710°

PlayStation 4 New Details: Console And Controller Weight Compared To PS3 And HDD Data Speed

How does the PS4 compare to the PS3? Find out here.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
Kayant3840d ago

New stuff ---> The hard disk speed is also revealed to be capable of speeds in the range of 80 to 100 MB per second.

darthv723840d ago

Isnt that the norm for SATA drives? I mean even ATA100 and 133 were capable of such speeds.

XB1_PS43840d ago (Edited 3840d ago )

Yeah, 80-100 is around average. Would've liked 120+ to cut loading times, but this'll do.

Anything faster would require a SSD or RAID array.. That's a bit too expensive for this gen atleast.

Codey473840d ago

@XB1_PS4

a hybrid SSD will suffice...works wonders in my PS3.

blackmagic3840d ago

80-100 is typical for a laptop drive
175-200 is typical for a desktop drive
500-525 is typical for an ssd

spoonard3840d ago

Theoretical speeds of ATA drives were 100MB/sec and 133MB/sec. There was never any circumstance in which those drives could actually attain those speeds.

JunioRS1013840d ago

I don't think so... I learned about SATA a few weeks ago.

SATA 1 = 1.5 Gbps (Gigabits Per Second)
SATA 2 = 3.0 Gbps
SATA 3 = 6.0 Gbps

1 Gb = 128 MB

1.5 Gb = 172 MB
3.0 Gb = 344 MB
6.0 Gb = 688 MB

Hope this clears things up.

vigilante_man3839d ago

Sorry to all you guys above me in this thread but I have never heard such nonsense in my life.

The 80-100 MBps for read speeds is very fast for a 2.5 5,400 drive. Very fast!

I have tested over 20 sata 2.5 drives and even 3.5 HDDs and the average speed of the good laptop drives is 60-65 MBps. Most older drives have average read speeds of 35-40 MBps.

I have tested PS3 drives, new laptop 7,200 drives and more. So please, before quoting theoretical speeds you need to understand real-world speeds. What seems to make a difference with newer sata 2.5 drives is the drive cache size.

Drive cache of 8MB is small whilst some of the newer hybrid 5,400 drives have cache size of 64MB which will increase speed no end. Plus of course their are good quality drives and the cheaper ones.

So for 5,400 drives real world read speeds of 80-100 MBps is fast. Faster than the standard 7,200 laptop drives of the past few years. Thank You!!!

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3839d ago
AsianOnRoute693840d ago

I'm assuming that is the speed of the 500gb hard drive and not the sata throughput in the ps4?

JunioRS1013840d ago

HDD speed is measured in RPM, not per second's.

The HDD probably spins at either 5400 or 7200 RPM.

Therefor, this IS likely the throughput speed of the HDD interface.

80-100 MBps is not fast, though, considering even old SATA 1 tech was 1.5 Gbps (gigabits, not bytes) which is about 172 MB.

The HDD is most likely an IDE or proprietary interface, for cost's sake.

Wintersun6163839d ago

@JunioRS101,

RPM has very little to do with the hard drives write/read speeds, it's only the speed at which the HDD spins at. Two different hard drives with the same RPM can have a massive difference in data write and read speeds.

AsianOnRoute69's assumption is correct.

Are_The_MaDNess3839d ago

you guys need to remember there is ALOT of factors that come too readspeeds of a HDD.

Allocation unit size
RPM
Buffer Size
Bus Speeds
CPU Speed

there isnt just always up to the HDD or the sata standard its using...... really guys. learn some tech before speaking.

RevXM3840d ago

yeah, not too impressive in my opinion.
FCC documents say the console is very cool so Ill be uppgrading the drive shortly after I get it, if not the same day.

Something along the line of a momentus xt hybrid should be awesome. got that in my ps3 and all the downloaded games are a noticably faster compared to what they were on the original drive.
Just wonder wich Sata version ps4 has, I would think it uses the newest. wich would make it super fast once I can afford a SSD of a desirable size. 550-ish MB R/W will short down the occasional loading screens by quite a significant margin, but Im not that rich yet so ittl have to wait a couple more years I guess.

KingKevo3840d ago

Yeah, when you consider doing it, do it on the first day, because from that point on you'll start to put data (games, etc.) on the HDD that you'd have to transfer to the new HDD then (and I'm pretty sure we don't know how that'll work, probably like the PS3, even though I hope the PS4 will suport NTFS drives), so setting it up with a new HDD is smart and I might do that as well.

ShwankyShpanky3840d ago (Edited 3840d ago )

I was gonna do the same, but I figure that when I fill the 500GB in 6mos-1yr, faster/larger drives will be that much cheaper.

The harder task will be keeping myself from upgrading my 500 & 250GB PS3s.

Damn you PS+!

I know it's a pain to do the data transfer upgrade, but w/e... it's just one evening of downtime. Or start before bed and swap before work.

I'd be interested in hearing from someone knowledgeable about how the Unix/FreeBSD file system avoids the need for defragging (Sony claims PS3 doesn't need defragging), because it seems like things have loaded/installed/"prepare d for saving" a bit faster every time I've done an upgrade... feels like it's done a bit of defrag.

rainslacker3840d ago (Edited 3840d ago )

Not sure if possible, but can't you use some sort of disc imaging program to make a mirror image of the drive in a regular PC? Something like Norton ghost?

I thought of doing this when I upgraded my drive in the PS3 a while back, but it was only the 60GB original and I had all my saves on the cloud.

@Shwanky

From what I understand of the file system being used, it does not require defragging. However, I know that whatever Sony does with it's PS3 operating system there are sometimes remnants left on the disc which cause the file table system to get bloated. This is particularly true of bad installs or downloads, or deleting files. Over time it builds up, and is reported to hinder performance.

I only read this in cursory form while trying to fix a corrupted file system on my disc once, so I may be off in the details.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3840d ago
Rikuson13840d ago

By any chance do you or anyone know how fast the default hard disk speed to be in the Ps3?

ProjectVulcan3840d ago (Edited 3840d ago )

There is no real 'default'. Different drives have different speeds and PS3 came with anything from 20Gb up to the 500gb of today- as well as flash memory as the main storage! Smaller drives are typically slower because they are older- they have lower platter densities and cache sizes, inferior seek times.

The older drives are slowest from the original machines, the newer ones will be faster. We are talking maybe 50mb/s sequential read speed for the oldest 20-60Gb drives and nearly double it for the newer machines.

The difference on games would be pretty minimal to be honest.

JKelloggs3840d ago (Edited 3840d ago )

5400 RPM In the debug console

hesido3839d ago

Yes, it's typical SATA, but the information is valuable in the sense that PS3 was probably bottlenecked at the encoding decoding data phase so it didn't make much use of faster speeds (only reduced seek times could help to some extent.)

PS4 seems to be fast in that regard, but whether it will make use of a 500MB/sec ssd drive in its full throughput is still a mistery and deserves benchmarking.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3839d ago
TheEnigma3133840d ago

Does anyone know if the PS4 will be able to take SSDs?

Codey473840d ago

Yes as long as it will fit in the rack...I've heard up to 12.5mm

porkChop3840d ago

I think you mean 2.5", which is the standard size for laptop drives and SSDs.

badz1493840d ago

@porkChop

he was talking about the thickness of the HDD which tends to be thicker for some >500GB 2.5" from different makers.

Lulz_Boat3840d ago

SSDs works on PS3, why it shouldn't on PS4?

TheEnigma3133840d ago

Really? I didn't know if the ps3 would support it. That's good news.

CaulkSlap3840d ago

Do they improve load times or is it limited by the OS or something?

Lulz_Boat3840d ago

yeah, you can see lot of videos on youtube.
it depends by the game. if on BD, it depends on how much it use the HDD. if 100% on HDD yeah, you can see lot of improvements, especially on games with texture pop-up / texture loading times problems such Skyrim and Rage. it totally eliminate the problem.

porkChop3840d ago

Any 2.5" (standard size) SSD will work.

ZoyosJD3840d ago

You also have to check the height of the drive which was the 12.5 mm that codey47 mentioned.

Are_The_MaDNess3839d ago

most of the SDD's out there right now are smaller than that.
(the 12.5mm height)

SnakeCQC3840d ago (Edited 3840d ago )

in what world are people living in when they expect an ssd in every ps4 which would effectively double the console price

Codey473840d ago

We're not expecting it...Well, I'm not at least

But some of us are expecting to upgrade to SSD or a Hybrid SSD.

theXtReMe13839d ago

If you read through the posts, you would see that nobody was expecting it. They are thinking about upgrading to it.

AllroundGamer3840d ago

I will definitely get an 256gb SSD drive for the PS4, cause i'm already used to those hyperspeeds on my PC where something with normal HDD would load about 30 seconds on SSD it loads in just 5 seconds. And of course they make no noise and don't produce such heat.

TheEnigma3133840d ago

I've been dying to put an ssd in my pc. Is it really worth the price?

AllroundGamer3840d ago

To me it's the best investment since many years. I've got 2x 128gb SSDs in my PC, one for Windows and one for games. Booting up Windows and running software never been faster, also transfering files etc. You just can't go wrong with a SSD (of course you should read some reviews before you buy a certain one), and SSDs are difinitely the future, normal HDDs will bite the dust soon.

TheEnigma3133840d ago

I've just been waiting on the price to drop a bit. I want at least a 500gb but it's very pricey.

AllroundGamer3840d ago

the price difference between 256gb and 500gb is quite big now, so you will have to wait a bit for a price drop (i would say at least a year...). But if you are only a gamer the 256gb should suffice.

dakunclear3840d ago

I've been to cheap meh oh well, I'll stick to my 1TB 7200rpm with 64mb cache harddrive in my computer lol

rainslacker3840d ago

If you can afford it, and your MB supports it, put 2-4 SSD drives in a RAID array. The performance gain is shocking compared to a standard hard drive. Most things load up before you have time to move the mouse to where you know you'll need to use it.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3840d ago
jay23840d ago

Erm, whats new? not a lot.

sAVAge_bEaST3840d ago (Edited 3840d ago )

The controller Definitely is. Greatness Awaits, takes on a whole new meaning, after you have held it.

(side note- if you use FireFox, use Adblock., to block annoying ad's from gamerbolt, and other web-sites.)

Show all comments (53)
70°

Disney Dreamlight Valley teases part two of paid expansion

Disney Dreamlight Valley devs have officially teased the second part of the paid expansion titled The Spark of Imagination.

70°

Best Stardew Valley Farm Names – 100 Funny, Nerdy, Cute Ideas and More

Starting out a new farm, but need help choosing a name? Check out this article for a 100 farm name ides for Stardew Valley.

180°

Bethesda Needs to Reduce the Gaps Between New Fallout and Elder Scrolls Releases

Waiting a decade for new instalments in franchises as massive as Fallout and Elder Scrolls feels like a waste.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
-Foxtrot12h ago

Microsoft have Obsidian but I feel it's Bethesda who just don't want to play ball as they've always said they want to do it themselves.

Once MS bought Zenimax in 2020 they should have put the Outer Worlds 2 on the back burner, allow Bethesda to finish off its own Space RPG with Starfield (despite totally different tone why have two in your first party portfolio with two developers who's gameplay is a tad similar) and got Obsidian for one of their projects to make a spiritual successor to New Vegas.

When the Elder Scrolls VI is finished Bethesda can then onto the main numbered Fallout 5 themselves.

The Outer Worlds 2 started development in 2019 so putting it on the back burner wouldn't have been the end of the world, they'd have always come back to it once Fallout was done and it would have been nicely spaced out from Starfields release once they had most likely stopped supporting it and all the expansions were released.

If they did this back in 2020 when they bought Zenimax and the game had a good, steady 4 - 5 years development, you might have seen it release in 2025.

We are literally going to be waiting until 2030 at the very earliest for Fallout 5 and all they seem bothered about is pushing Fallout 76.

RaidenBlack10h ago(Edited 10h ago)

Its not just only Todd not playing ball.
Obsidian have made a name for themselves in delivering stellar RPGs, but most famous once have always been sequels/spin-offs to borrowed IPs like KOTOR 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Stick of Truth etc.
Obsidian wants to invest more in their own original IPs like Outer Worlds or Pillars of Eternity with Avowed.
Similar to what Bluepoint & inXile wants to do or Kojima is doing (i.e not involving anymore in Konami's IPs).
So yea, even if New Vegas has the most votes from 3D Fallout fans, Obsidian just wants to do their own thing, like any aspiring dev studio and MS is likely currently respecting that.
But a future Fallout game from Obsidian will surely happen. Founder Feargus Urquhart has already stated an year ago that they're eager to make a new Fallout game with Bethesda, New Vegas 2 or otherwise. Urquhart was the director of the very first 1995's Fallout game after all.
And don't forget Brian Fargo and his studio inXile, as Brian Fargo was the director of Fallout's 1988 predecessor: Wasteland

KyRo6h ago(Edited 6h ago)

Obsidian should take over the FO IP. They're do far better with it than Bethesda who hasn't made a great game for almost 15 years

RaidenBlack34m ago(Edited 33m ago)

@KyRo
So, by 15 years, you mean Fallout 3 was the last great game Bethesda made?
You don't consider Skyrim a good game, which came out 13 years ago?
I'd consider Fallout 4 a pretty decent game as well. It's Story & RPG elements were a bit downgrade from New Vegas but the exploration and shooting on the other hand, were upgrades.
FO76 was disappointing and Starfield could've been better at launch I'll agree.

Duke196h ago(Edited 6h ago)

I disagree. Part of these games is the support for the mod community. If they move to releasing a "next game" every 2 or 3 years, the modding support plummets and the franchises turn into just another run of the mill RPG.

Make the games good enough to withstand the test of time, to keep people coming back to them and expanding on them with mod support.

--Onilink--3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

I dont think anyone is saying they need to come out every 2 years (not to mention almost no game is released that quickly anymore)

By the time Fallout 5 comes out, it will be more than 15 years since Fallout 4 came out (same with ES6 coming out 15 years after Skyrim). Even if you want to use F76 as the metric for the most recent release, that one came out in 2018. It will be a miracle if F5 comes out before 2030

The point is that for a studio that doesnt seem to operate with multiple teams doing several projects at once, that their projects normally take 4-5 years as a minimum, and that now they even added Starfield to the rotation, it becomes a 15+ years waiting period between releases for each series, which doesnt make sense. Imagine that Nintendo only released a mainline Mario or Zelda game every 15 years…

They either need to start developing more than 1 project at a time, let someone else take a crack at one of the IPs or significantly reduce their development times

Duke192h ago(Edited 2h ago)

Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs? Look at what happened to Final Fantasy as a recent example - there is pretty clear FF fatigue setting in because they are now pumping out titles in the franchise every few years. Pumping out more games faster doesn't always make a series better.

There are plenty of options to make new games, not just create more titles in the same universe at a faster pace.

mandf3h ago

Yeah I’m going to say it, who cares about the modding community when making a game? Half the time developers only tolerate modders because they fix there game for them.

Skuletor5h ago

Yeah, let's all advocate for smaller gaps between series' releases, then we'll probably get headlines about how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven. Let them cook.

SimpleSlave4h ago

"how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven" So every Bethesda game then? Got it.

Listen, I would agree if this was about From Software or something, but Bethesda?

🤣

C'mon now. What timeline are you from?

Skuletor1h ago

Think about it, they're already bug filled messes on their current schedule, can you imagine how much worse it would be if they rushed things?

Duke192h ago

I mean you aren't wrong. People are going to complain about anything

isarai4h ago

Hows about you focus on quality, just a thought 🤷‍♂️

Sciurus_vulgaris3h ago

Bethesda [or Microsoft] would have to reallocate internal and external studios towards fallout and elder scrolls titles. Bethesda has the issue of developing 2 big IPs that are large RPGs on rotation. If you want more Fallout and Elder Scrolls, development will have to be outsourced.

Show all comments (19)