Top
220°

IGN: PlayStation 3 Hard Drive Speed Test

When your PlayStation 3 is brimming with downloadable games, massive game saves, music, and HD video content, IGN showed you that you could easily swap out your existing hard drive with a new one with our DIY: PS3 Hard Drive Update Feature. With little more than a set of screwdrivers and a standard notebook hard drive, you can boost your PlayStation 3's data capacity to 250GBs and beyond. By swapping out the PlayStation 3's stock hard drive with a larger capacity 2.5" notebook drive, users can squeeze a tremendous amount of media and game data on a single drive.

But in addition to simply expanding the total data capacity of their PlayStation 3 by replacing the internal hard drive, users could potentially improve the system's performance by the type of drive they choose.

Read Full Story >>
gear.ign.com
The story is too old to be commented.
villevalorox3134d ago

hmm. interesting, so does my launch 60 gb ps3 have hdd or solid state? what is the difference?

Major_Tom3134d ago

It's standard. SSD is pretty fast but the new harddrives being released by Western Digital are pretty comparable and a third the price for ten times the storage.

Maddens Raiders3134d ago (Edited 3134d ago )

having a choice to such extents, rules.

SL1M DADDY3134d ago

Having the freedom to upgrade your HDD without having to pay for an over-priced peripheral makes the PS3 the best in terms of long term savings. Once you start downloading and playing games, you just can't live without more HDD space. With the PS3, it's just so inexpensive to upgrade and there's no limit to how much you can upgrade it in terms of HDD space.

SaiyanFury3134d ago (Edited 3134d ago )

Well it's not debatable that SSDs have faster access/write speeds than a standard 2.5" form factor laptop drive. Unfortunately, that performance comes with a heavy price. My main 60GB model PS3 was upgraded with a 500GB Samsung SpinPoint drive for 100 dollars. Sure it's not as fast as an SSD equivalent, but considering the price of a similar SSD drive that I found on Newegg was much more expensive, I'll stick with regular HDDs. The comparable capacity drive I found on Newegg was a SuperTalent 2.5" 512GB, it's price was 1575 dollars. Considering that my main PS3's drive was a hundred bucks, I think I'll go with my own HDD. SSDs do offer performance benefits, but cost versus performance simply isn't there.

Christopher3134d ago

and that is resulting level of heat output. You're going to be working your PS3 fans much more with a SDD than a standard HDD. The same is said if you install a 7200 RPM HDD instead of the standard 5400 HDD.

Honestly, you'll be shaving off at most 5-10% with a 7200 RPM HDD or SDD that it's really negligible at this time. I'd stick with the cheaper, cooler 5400 RPM 2.5" HDDs.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3134d ago
FantasyStar3134d ago (Edited 3134d ago )

1. Game Disc tests invalidate SSDs.
-The data rate from BR-Drive to SSD is too small to really take advantage of the massive read/write speeds of SSD. You'd think the Install-happy MGS4 would see benefits, but no. The BR Drive isn't feeding enough data to the SSD to truly see the benefits of SSD. That's why MGS4 didn't see such a improvement because the main assets are still being loaded from the disc, and the disc drive is slow compared to the SSD.

If BR Drives are transferring at 2x speed: that' about 9MB a second. SSDs are capable of reading up to 200MB/s and writing up to 120MB/s. For every 9MB that gets transferred to the SSD for work: that's over 100+ MB/s that's being wasted per cycle. How can we gauge the usefullness of SSDs when over 93.5% of the SSD's power isn't being used?

2. SSDs can only be gauged when games are loaded from the SSD itself.
-The reason games like Bionic Commando: Rearmed see massive improvements because the game itself is installed on the SSD and being read off the SSD instead of game disc and HDD like most PS3 games. With PSN games only, there's no bottleneck between SSD to Controller to CBE+RSX. The RAMBUS I/O controller that connects the SSD to the processing elements can feed enough data to truly flesh out the SSD's latent abilities and thus the results are shown. Anyone here with a decent amount of PS3 developing will know that the 5+ GB/s transfer rate is more than enough to supplement up to 20+ SSDs and keep them all happy, so long as the CBE can handle it.

*Why do game journalists tend to dive into the PC tech world and have no knowledge of bottlenecks, controllers, and the things in between before hand? It misleads readers and only creates trouble for those that really do know what's going on.

Heres' the better version: If you mostly game using game discs, stick with HDDs. If you mostly game using the HDD, then use SSDs. To put it in prospective, if Xbox 360s got the ability to use SSDs, then games installed on the SSD via NXE will load much MUCH faster beyond what we've seen. Anything that loads directly off the SSD will load much faster by comparison.

Finalfantasykid3134d ago (Edited 3134d ago )

I was going to say the exact same thing about the speed of the Blu Ray Drive was the bottleneck with the MGS4 install.

Bubbles++;

EDIT: I wonder how Linux would perform on the PS3 with the SSD.

IdleLeeSiuLung3134d ago

Well said! Who is the idiot dumb enough to disagree with such a logical statement?

phosphor1123134d ago

Communication between an optical drive and a storage device will always cause some sort of bottleneck. That's why PC games are always full install. Transferring data from HDD to RAM > Optical to HDD to RAM...it makes sense lol.

Create3134d ago

Too bad SSD's cost aroun 600 bucks or id be all over this. A few extra minutes of waiting isnt worth 600 bucks, hahah.

But once it becomes more widely produced, i may think about it XD

bozebo3134d ago

SSD technology is not yet capable of the longlevity of standard drives. The data will "corrupt itself" within a vastly shorter life span.

Neo6043134d ago

I think my 320gig ps3 is well perform.

deshon093134d ago (Edited 3134d ago )

i just got a bigger hdd 500 gigs i only spent 80 bucks amazon .com deal

Show all comments (22)
The story is too old to be commented.