nowhat
Member
Yes, because *drum roll* the games were never designed around certain seek/transfer times. Funny, that.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
SSDs are cool, but...
- Thread starter Artistic
- Start date
jshackles
Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
This is from 2014, and even though 11 minutes was abnormal, most people chiming in saying 3-5 minutes is what to expect. It's insane to think that anyone in the era of Tiktok would wait that long for anything.
Last edited:
falconhoof
Member
nowhat
Member
Oh not only that, but you maybe had to adjust the tape heads as well.
...but you know what also doesn't work that well from a C-cassette? A modern game! What gives!
Artistic
Member
If it's still playable, nothing should limit it in my opinion.
I don't remember even 3 mins on 360 GTA V, but so much time has passed so I digress.
This is from 2014, and even though 11 minutes was abnormal, most people chiming in saying 3-5 minutes is what to expect. It's insane to think that anyone in the era of Tiktok would wait that long for anything.
Before my time.
I guess you weren't around for the ~10 minute loading times of yesteryear then.
nowhat
Member
Also, your opinion is stupid. Your definition of "playable" may entail looking at a 3D world with nothing in it.
Ass of Can Whooping
Member
Don't understand what you mean? You can't keep games stored on your RAM
nkarafo
Member
There are at least two reasons.
One is that the code gets more and more bloated after every update and the faster speeds can cover for the crappy devs.
Another is that with every update, more stuff and assets gets added that needs to be loaded and the HDDs were already at their limit before that.
I'm not saying to keep a game in RAM, i'm saying to pre-load the whole game in RAM so no streaming/loading is needed while playing.
Last edited:
jshackles
Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
That's why PC is great, because you can even decide to make dumb choices like playing your games on a USB-connected mechanical hard drive.
On console, you get what you get. That's the whole point - everything is pre-configured for you so that everyone has the same experience.
Artistic
Member
Artistic
Member
Fair point.
Gamer_By_Proxy
About to beat off
The SSD I bought December 21st for $320 on sale. Is now $480 on sale . . .
Artistic
Member
Interesting.
Unknown Soldier
Member
In a general sense, loading of data is constrained by CPU performance not storage performance. This is easily seen by the relative lack of any improvement in game loading speeds going from PCIe 3.0 to 4.0 to 5.0 SSD's. This is why putting the whole game on a RAM disk doesn't net dramatic performance improvements in game loading speed. For awhile there, some workstation video cards were coming with SSD slots on them to speed loading for professional work and that just didn't net meaningful enough improvements in performance for this to become generally implemented or available
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
MS's shitty software installed Forza Horizon 5 to my HDD instead of my SSD. It was a fucking mess, the entire world would disappear if you drove too fast.
Artistic
Member
On PC right?
falconhoof
Member
I first played GTA 3 on a PS2 test kit which had been very abused. The DVD drive was so fucked that I struggled to get around unless I drove at the speed limit or would outrun the map streaming in.
Faster storage sure is nice.
Topher
Identifies as young
Where do you think the games are going to run off of? Disc? Has to be installed. I mean....what year is it?
But yes, hopefully Microsoft won't make the proprietary storage mistake again.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
SATA will be good for awhile I think just because there is only so much memory to stream in to - and that isnt increasing at a massive rate and the AI debacle is likely to slow that progression to larger RAM/VRAM.
Crayon
Member
Cold blooded.
StereoVsn
Gold Member
Yep, MS is the issue while the problem doesn't really exist on PS5 (or PS4 before).
Before the AI stupidity you could get 4TB for not much more than $200.
nowhat
Member
I have a habit, and I'm not alone in this (it takes a "special" kind), of directly translating English idioms to my native language. For the benefit of a few, and confusion of many. So when my daughter was a toddler, and would ask for all kinds of ridiculous things, I'd reply with "yeah, and I want a pony".
So this one day, I'm picking her up from daycare, and she's absolutely livid, about a friend of hers that gets everything she wants. I try to assure her "surely she does not", but she keeps raving "yes she does!". To which I say, "very well, that may be, but you don't get everything you want. I don't get everything I want". To which she's suddenly quite contemplative, and then says "I guess you're right, you don't still have that pony".
LordCBH
Member
That's the thing though. Not everything is playable. Take Starfield for instance. Yeah you can run the game from an HDD on PC, but it's a horrific experience, a not just from the load screens. You have terrain that just doesn't load in, among other serious problems.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Your problem is with Microsoft's stupid overpriced proprietary implementation, not with SSDs themselves.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Unfortunately NVMe has been more or less required for some time now, some games are noticeably worse if they don't have NVMe streaming speeds like Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart which requires the PS5 SSD speed or better or gameplay is severely impacted
nkarafo
Member
Ratchet and Clank is the only game i know of that makes use of the extra speed. What other games require it?
If what you say is true, then Sata SSDs will become the shortest lived medium of all time. They dethroned a 3 decade old HDD dynasty only to give it to NVMes after what, 5 years?
Last edited:
vodka-bull
Member
And what's the problem with Xboxes proprietary solution? It's not that much of a price difference.
I'd rather have an SSD than a disc drive thats noisy all the time. And all mechanical parts will eventually break, disc drives haven't been reliavle in the past with consoles, an exchangable SSD is.
Durin
Member
Both Sony & Microsoft did at least a decent job of letting you have the flexibility of using external hdd/ssds to backup games, and even play last-gen games off them because the bandwidth over that connection can still work with how those games were coded.
Only thing I wish PS5 would let me do is backup games to via my home network over a NFS/SMB share or via USB to my NAS. I just built a new NAS, and have 48TB of storage I could be using, while I already had to delete some games off my PS5 because the default storage was getting full. I'd hate if it was my main platform, because I'd need to buy a specific external drive just to have my library without re-downloading games again.
Only thing I wish PS5 would let me do is backup games to via my home network over a NFS/SMB share or via USB to my NAS. I just built a new NAS, and have 48TB of storage I could be using, while I already had to delete some games off my PS5 because the default storage was getting full. I'd hate if it was my main platform, because I'd need to buy a specific external drive just to have my library without re-downloading games again.
Last edited:
DoktorCoktor
Member
HDDs
SSDs
HDDs are the best option for use cases that require access to cheap mass storage(media servers, non-intensive games, older games, system image backups), so they're definitely still widely appreciated. SSDs are for lightning quick OS boot times and much faster software operational performance. This is just stating the obvious though.
SSDs
HDDs are the best option for use cases that require access to cheap mass storage(media servers, non-intensive games, older games, system image backups), so they're definitely still widely appreciated. SSDs are for lightning quick OS boot times and much faster software operational performance. This is just stating the obvious though.
flying_sq
Member
I modded my 360 HDD, you had to use very specific models, but you could swap out the drive for a bigger one and have no issues. Not sure how many people did it, but it was significantly cheaper.
Unknown Soldier
Member
It's not that weird. GAF went through a Sony-hating phase during the 360 and PS3/Vita eraArtistic MS did yall a favor with proprietary ssd because you guys don't know how to use a screwdriver.
Isn't it weird how nobody complains about the 360 and series proprietary ssd yet we had tons of complaints about the vitas proprietary cards?
The only thing that GAF consistently hates on through the years is Nintendo otherwise they seem to transfer hate from place to place every new generation
I'm glad most of GAF aren't aware mobile exists (it's >50% of the gaming market) because that would result in constant endless rioting here
You chose the home console that has the most restrictive storage upgrade options of any console since the Xbox 360. You made a poor purchase decision.
Why should developers compromise on their games because you want to use storage that's not fast enough for modern games?
Many games on PC tell you to use an SSD and will often have streaming or stuttering issues when played from a mechanical drive. Just because you CAN use an HDD, doesn't mean you should.
It's not just longer load times. You have to redesign your entire data streaming and asset duplication strategies if you want the game to work well on an HDD.
I've added storage to every console I've owned going back to the Xbox 360. If you don't want to add storage to your system, then delete games you're not playing. Every console contains plenty of space for games you're playing at the time.
Yes, Xbox uses proprietary storage that is much more expensive than the options available for Nintendo and Sony platforms. This is an Xbox problem that you chose to deal with when you bought the console.
Just did a quick Google search. This isn't relatively cheap in my opinion. I bought a 2TB HDD for the Xbox One brand new for $60 that I still use to this day.
It's already a paperweight.
Again, developers aren't going to compromise just because you want to use an HDD.
Again, this doesn't mean you should.
You're not forced to do anything. Just delete some games.
You clearly don't.
Last edited:
Nydius
Member
No thank you. I don't even use mechanical HDDs as my cold storage/backwards compatibility drives anymore. I bought Samsung EVO 870 2.5" SATA SSDs and put them into enclosures for both my XSX and PS5. Swapping to external SSDs made load times and texture load times significantly better for older games.
I get it, the memory market playing games is making it all expensive again but even with the increased cost I can't see a reason why I would ever want to go back to slow ass HDD load and seek times, even for backcompat titles.
I get it, the memory market playing games is making it all expensive again but even with the increased cost I can't see a reason why I would ever want to go back to slow ass HDD load and seek times, even for backcompat titles.
I put all my PS4 games on a cheap SATA SSD when I got my PS5. Such a nice upgrade. I also swapped out the mechanical drives in my Xbox One X and modded 360. Everything got faster and more responsive.
normalguy09x
Member
Damn
CamHostage
Member
R&C Rift Apart was one of the few games to foreground the use of the SSD as an element if the gameplay ( unfortunately, very few have tried to use that leap in feed speed for anything significant and prominent in the gameplay, and even with Ratchet and sort of Spidey 2 using it in signature sequences, Insomniac's SSD tricks were seen as more of a cool gimmick than an actual gameplay breakthrough.)
In the background, most big games now uses the capabilities of SSD to enable content access and delivery not possible with slower drives. It's not just a loadtime you can wait for; as mentioned, whole chunks of levels or textures or lighting systems are dependent on instant access, rapid input, and indiscriminate purging on the assumption that access and input can be done again just as immediately upon future request.
We were definitely promised more than we feel we've gotten, way back when the revolutionary features of these new-gen consoles were being unveiled with pricey features sure to sweep away all the shackles of previous tech. (Every gen has its hype and then truth, but simple things like massive reductions in download size and patching seemed like an easy gift from SSDs that have only paid off soso.) Still, when you understand the tech, it's clear that newer drives (including the faster cards used on Switch 2) are doing their job to enable current-gen games.
Last edited:
bitbydeath
Member
It is revolutionary, or have you already forgotten last gens load times?