690°

Playstation 4 - Installing a new SSD

"Peter has replaced the original HDD Sony hard drive with a Samsung SSD. The video shows this trick step-by-step."

Read Full Story >>
gamespot.com
AlexanderNevermind3814d ago (Edited 3814d ago )

Although I won't be purchasing a SSD (I have the Seagate Hybrid), This video is good for those who want to replace it. Very Helpful

XB1_PS43814d ago

Looks easy, and quick. Awesome.

Why was the playstation wobbling though?

Grown Folks Talk3814d ago

It's built that way. The CM guy who got his early talked about it. There's some sort of lip on the edge that makes it slightly uneven.

Anarki3814d ago

I've been looking for information on this. I want to know what the max size is for the PS4, as I'm planning on getting the max size possible.

0ut1awed3814d ago (Edited 3814d ago )

@ Anarki

Well considering the only limitation is the hard drive itself...

http://gizmodo.com/5894934/...

Grown Folks Talk3814d ago

From their FAQ
"What type of hard drive does PS4 use?
PS4 is equipped with a 5400 RPM SATA II hard drive. Users can choose to install a new hard drive so long as it complies with these standards, is no thicker than 9.5mm, and is larger than 160GB."

GusHasGas3814d ago (Edited 3814d ago )

Does anyone know how big (in terms of megabytes) the flash drive has to be?

Please help/respond - I have little experience with swapping hard drives.

AlexanderNevermind3814d ago

@GusHasGas

Flash Drive should be no less than 1gb I presume. I doubt you could find a flash drive smaller.

The Recovery file is 850-900mb.

GusHasGas3814d ago

@Alexander

Thank you very much!!

pheature3814d ago

i agree i like the video i will eventually upgrade it at some point but not instantly.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3814d ago
decrypt3814d ago (Edited 3814d ago )

Pointless having a SSD on console. Reason being consoles cant store multiple HDs, niether can the console Trim.

With PC a user may use a cheap small SSD for the OS. Then get a huge HD for games.

With console you would need a super large SSD, which will cost a lot and with the size of next gen games the SSD would end up getting used very quickly. Just better to have a large HD for those 25gb+ installs.

XxGOWxX3814d ago

Yeh it seems pretty pointless until the consoles can manage them properly and SSD's are cheaper.

Nice to see for intrigues sake

0ut1awed3814d ago (Edited 3814d ago )

You make a good point but really the only issue is the price to performance cost on SSDs still. They are coming down quick though.

I plan on putting a 1TB SSD in my PS4 probably within the next 6 months. The performance gains are defiantly still there even without trim enabled.

Also while I do have multiple drives in my PC, I still stick most of my frequently played games on my SSD not my HDD. That would seem like a major waste of a investment to only use it so your OS boots up a little quicker (in a gaming PC at least)

LiQuiZoN3814d ago

I also want to point out that the PS4 has SATAII and not SATAIII, which means the newer SSD's would be wasted since the maximum throughput is only 300Gb/s, as opposed to SATAIII which is 600Gb/s.

Those new samsungs doing 540ish read, 520ish write. So the extra speed would be lost. Better to put an older SSD into the PS4 and the newer ones into a PC which has SATAIII.

GameSpawn3814d ago (Edited 3814d ago )

@LiQuiZoN

For what it is worth though, SATAIII SSDs have also been designed better to have longer lifespans via writes and rewrites. The older SATAII SSDs while cheaper per GB just aren't anywhere near as robust as SATAIII drives made within the last year.

Still though, unless you really want the performance gains over the capacity, conventional(up to 2TB in 2.5") or hybrid drives (up to 1TB+8GB in 2.5") are a far more enticing option for the PS4 than pure SSDs.

I'd love Crucial's 960GB SSD for my PS4, but it is just a little too pricy at around $0.60/GB. Seagate's 1TB+8GB Hybrid drive though is more interesting at $0.12/GB (calculated off the 1TB only & not +8GB as it is used as an SSD cache).

Omeganex99993813d ago

If in 3 or 4 years they get cheaper, I'm definitely gonna go for an SSD too. Right now I have one for the OS in my laptop and I really can't think of going back, it's really stepping into the future.

However, the PS4 is already really fast, I watched some streaming yesterday and it tooks like 30 seconds to install the part of the game you need to start playing. It looks different on the Xbox One, where I think you have to install the whole game before playing. That would definitely improve the Xbox perfomance (too bad you can't switch it).

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3813d ago
Capt-FuzzyPants3814d ago

Pretty sure he screwed it, no nailing involved.

Idba3814d ago

Wish i had enough money to spend on a 1TB SSD

bicfitness3814d ago

The 1TB Samsung is available for a massive discount on Amazon atm. But its basically the price of another PS4. Still a great deal for an SSD though. I am hoping they add TRIM support or that the natural garbage collection on the EVO series does a decent job when the system is shut down. I know that Linux based systems don't fragment as much as Windows ones, so there's that too. In another few years the prices won't be so prohibitive.

Honestly, I nabbed a 250 gig SSD years ago (over 2 now) and slapped it in my PS3 and the performance gains were noticeable. It hasn't suffered any visible degradation in performance either and has never been TRIMmed.

Mogwai3814d ago

man so do i hey but a hybrid is much cheaper so hopefully sometime soon we'll find out if they are worth buying for ps4, if it cuts load times at a decent enough rate im investing for sure.

1nsomniac3814d ago

I would imagine that with the constant cacheing of the PS4 an SSD would cause more negatives than positives.

Not only would I imagine you'll cause a lot of system stalls but also damage your SSD at twice the speed.

famoussasjohn3814d ago

I have yet to purchase an SSD, I've heard there are issues if you add data and remove data a lot that it may cause issues because the drive only has a certain amount of writes to the memory before it starts to die down. This wouldn't be very ideal considering data would be written and removed a lot, right?

1nsomniac3814d ago (Edited 3814d ago )

I use a Samsung 256gb SSD as my main OS drive in my PC, so only use it for windows & programs. Then I have 2 separate standard drives for games, music & films etc..

Although I absolutely love it & would never choose to go back to HDD. It is a massive pain at times.

As soon as it goes below 50% free space you start getting lock ups or screen artefacts. Exactly the same if your writing a lot of data to it all at one time.

Only way to fix it is a system restart & move data to another drive. For PC usage though the speed difference far outweighs the negatives just don't think it would work effectively long term in a console though.

famoussasjohn3814d ago

1nsomniac - Yeah that's what I was hearing too, I was looking at the Samsung SSD's just for gaming on PC but didn't want to deal with the possible issues though the speed increase would be welcomed. Thanks for the info though!

Are_The_MaDNess3814d ago

i really cant see a pure SSD working long time with a console.
that is if the console is making cache files and such on the drive under gameplay. witch i have heard the PS4 does. meaning it will take up space when you play a game and such. meaning alot more will be written with normal usage.
SSD's have a limit on how much that can be written on it.
if they somehow make an option in the OS to stop that and just use the pure performance of an SSD then it can work. aslong as you dont rewrite your hole drive like 100 times XD.

SSHD's are much better tho.
as a hybrid drive it will use the SSD part for the most used files, for example your most used game or the OS. meaning you will have faster performance with those files.
all the other files will load just as fast as an normal HDD.
+ its ALOT cheaper than a pure SSD aswell :D

Are_The_MaDNess3814d ago

also, you wont have diffrence in performance with an SSD if you have 90% free space or 1% free space. there is no difference. there is no movable parts.

your problem might be software/firmware related or a bad chip in the drive.

got two 240GB ssd's set in raid 0 here and i never see any problems when they have gotten full.

esemce3814d ago

Modern SSd's have a life span equal to standard hard drives, the early versions did not.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3814d ago
TomahawkX3814d ago

Wow a lot easier than I expected. If it improves speeds on disc based games I will promptly upgrade to SSHD.

impet253814d ago

With no trim support putting an ssd is pointless.

Show all comments (75)
60°

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.

60°

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
-Foxtrot10h 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.

RaidenBlack9h ago(Edited 8h 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

KyRo5h ago(Edited 5h 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

Duke195h ago(Edited 5h 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--2h ago(Edited 2h 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

Duke1955m ago(Edited 51m 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.

mandf2h 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.

Skuletor4h 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.

SimpleSlave2h 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?

Skuletor49m 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?

Duke1954m ago

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

isarai3h ago

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

Sciurus_vulgaris2h 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 (17)