Next Generation Hardware Speculation with a Technical Spin [pre E3 2019]

[BRiT]

There are no need to speculate about "reasonable ranges" when we know the actual ranges.
https://www.psdevwiki.com/ps4/Harddrive
PS4 HDD has random read speed of ~40MB/s [sequential is not that useful for games, since they load lots of small files], and devs even have to take in account that users can put crappier drive into the console.

Insomniac talked about Spidey storage streaming limitations at this years GDC [that 40MB/s limit really pushed them to re-configure a lot of their tech]. https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1026496/-Marvel-s-Spider-Man

This makes things even more interesting...

What is Known
Time taken for PS4 Fast Travel: 15 seconds
PS4 hard drive limits around 40 MB/s random reads with SpiderMan

40 MB/s * 15 seconds = 600 MB data read

6 GBit/s SATA interface = 750 MB/s * 0.8 seconds = 600 MB data read

And even more easily able to fit into any RAM cache.

EDIT: Of course there's likely to be additional overhead preventing SATA SSDs from hitting that theoretical speed. So the actual implimentation should have to be better than that.

 

[MrFox]

The statement about random read is wrong. There's work necessary to use it as sequentially as possible but it's not like this a database where you read randomly across the whole dataset.

 

[RDGoodla]

A hint from Cerny is when he said he could put an ssd in the ps4 that cost as much as the whole ps4 and it would be one third faster. Another hint is that everybody asking him for an ssd knew it was impossible. It implies he found a solution which didn't break the bank, it implies an ssd would cost too much. He mention the software stack and I/O techniques being the key. All of it is really pointing much more to a caching flash and not a full 2TB ssd.

https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console/

"Starting in the fall of 2015, when Cerny first began talking to developers about what they’d want from the next generation, he heard it time and time again: I know it’s impossible, but can we have an SSD?"

SSD was impossible in 2015 in the article. And SSD might be as expensive as PS4 pro 2 years ago, but today it's not the case.

In fact 500MB/s , 480 GB SSD already drops to 50 dollars. In late 2020 the 480 GB SSD will become very cheap, and even 1TB SSD is possible for consoles.

Therefore traditional HDD will not happen in next-gen. Depending on how much the price drops, we may have a relatively slow but large (1TB, 500MB/s) SSD combined with a super fast cache, or a single pool of super fast SSD (> 3 GB/s).

 

[BRiT]

Super Fast Cache makes more sense if they want to allow users to continue their use of external drives and not negatively impact the game experience.

 

[Malo]

Therefore traditional HDD will not happen in next-gen.

I still don't think it's a forgone conclusion. If they can solve in-game loading times and streaming with scratch cache then there's still a consideration for large storage (big games are pushing 60-120gb) with a mechanical drive to keep costs down. If they can save $30 on BoM for 4x the size, it's probably going to happen.

 

[Wynix]

A hint from Cerny is when he said he could put an ssd in the ps4 that cost as much as the whole ps4 and it would be one third faster. Another hint is that everybody asking him for an ssd knew it was impossible. It implies he found a solution which didn't break the bank, it implies an ssd would cost too much. He mention the software stack and I/O techniques being the key. All of it is really pointing much more to a caching flash and not a full 2TB ssd.

No, just that developers asked him about it but thought it would be too expensive.
2015 NAND storage prices are vastly different to 2020 NAND storage prices.
Sony buying bulk NAND direct in 2020 is very affordable.

 

[eastmen]

https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console/

"Starting in the fall of 2015, when Cerny first began talking to developers about what they’d want from the next generation, he heard it time and time again: I know it’s impossible, but can we have an SSD?"

SSD was impossible in 2015 in the article. And SSD might be as expensive as PS4 pro 2 years ago, but today it's not the case.

In fact 500MB/s , 480 GB SSD already drops to 50 dollars. In late 2020 the 480 GB SSD will become very cheap, and even 1TB SSD is possible for consoles.

Therefore traditional HDD will not happen in next-gen. Depending on how much the price drops, we may have a relatively slow but large (1TB, 500MB/s) SSD combined with a super fast cache, or a single pool of super fast SSD (> 3 GB/s).

I can buy a western digital black 1TB nvme ssd for $100-$120 depending on the sale. This has multiple layers of profit built in. I am sure Sony could buy it in bulk for much less than I can when they are buying in the millions of units. Infact NVME drivers are getting very close to 2.5 inch sata prices and m.2 prices in the 1TB size.

USB 3.2 is capable of 2.5GB/s transfer rates. So they can even allow people to use their own USB C drivers that meet the speed requirements.

 

[BRiT]

Just remember, if they can save $1 per console, that's a saving of at least $40 to $90 Million over its lifetime. Now some are talking about them spending an extra $30 per, translating to a cost of $1.2 Billion to $2.7 Billion. So the only way they'd do that is if the loss would be very short term, such as first 3 to 6 months only.

 

[anexanhume]

Just remember, if they can save $1 per console, that's a saving of at least $40 to $90 Million over its lifetime. Now some are talking about them spending an extra $30 per, translating to a cost of $1.2 Billion to $2.7 Billion. So the only way they'd do that is if the loss would be very short term, such as first 3 to 6 months only.

Because they understand what a compelling feature set is. They could have saved $40 to only go with 4GB GDDR5 in the PS4 but pushed internally to make it 8GB because they thought it was a compelling feature for the platform.

That box also contains promotional brochures and earbuds that almost no one uses or would miss if they were gone. They don’t nickel and dime every aspect ad nauseam.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

No, I'm skeptical of it as well considering Vega 7 boosts to 1750 MHz and is already using 7nm.

The PS4 @ 28nm HPM has 800 MHz GPU clock. Compared to that the PS4 PRO @ 16nm FF has 911 MHz GPU clock which is only an increase of 13%. The Xbox one clocks with 853 MHz @ 28nm HPM while the Xbox One X clocks with 1172 MHz @ 16nm FF, which is a increase of 37%.

The same desktop parts clocked higher then their closest console GPU counterparts and I doubt that changes with the next consoles. I expect 1500 MHz at most. In fact leaning more towards 1400 MHz. Unless Navi is AMDs Maxwell (efficiency) and Pascal (clocks). The 1060 boosts to 1709 MHz while keeping the power draw relatively low.

1060s boost quite a bit higher than the rated 1709. Typically out of the box they can boost over 1900Mhz and most can go over 2Ghz without too much of a sweat.

I agree that out of the blue 1.8Ghz for a console APU graphics sounds quite a lot, but I think there is reason to believe that Navi's architecture has been tailored to hit higher clock speeds and with the 7nm helping as well, I'm not willing to rule that speed out of the equation. It would mean that the desktop cards would have to hit +2Ghz easy though...

 

[Xbat]

Just remember, if they can save $1 per console, that's a saving of at least $40 to $90 Million over its lifetime. Now some are talking about them spending an extra $30 per, translating to a cost of $1.2 Billion to $2.7 Billion. So the only way they'd do that is if the loss would be very short term, such as first 3 to 6 months only.

Yes but if it guarantees the amount or grows the number of people that subscribe to your network those numbers are insignificant.

Doesn't NAND storage prices also have the potential to drop more than a mechanical drive over the lifespan of a next gen console? Sony or Microsoft would know the potential price of say 1 TB of NAND in 2021 or 2022 and what a waste it would be if a 2021 console has 1 TB NAND because it's cheaper but all your games can't fully utilize it because the launch machines used a mechanical drive.

 

[MrFox]

How is 1TB an acceptable size?

 

[Xbat]

How is 1TB an acceptable size?

How is it not? If I had a choice of 3TB mechanical or 1TB NVME I would take the faster storage every time.

Obviously I would want more but I can work with 1 TB. It would be nice if they will let you back up individual games to slower external drives so you don't have to download them again.

 

[Rootax]

Can an hybrid hdd be in the picture ? When things are in the nand section, this things can be very fast too. In a closed environment like a console, it can be easier to optimize the "cached" content too...

 

[turkey]

Super Fast Cache makes more sense if they want to allow users to continue their use of external drives and not negatively impact the game experience.

I think that's key, from the S to X you could take your games on an external HDD and they would just work.

I would think they will want that to happen again, the PR or buy an expensive console and then buy an external SSD to bring the games over sounds a tall order. Keeping folks in your ecosystem is key, so minimising the friction of a generation change seems quite important.

Also if they can pre load into fast cache from slower storage, the data centre they can keep game files on slower physical disk arrays, or further from the blades, or even just serve more blades from a single san device.

The usb external performance on the new system may well also be faster than it currently is, so copying the game data to a cache could be pretty quick at boot, and from there it is executed. They can call it "faster start"

 

[Xbat]

Problem is a cache system is going to be hit by a lot of writing, won't that effect lifespan a lot?

 

[Rootax]

Honestly, SSD even with mlc or tlc seems fine with lifespan, despite all the writing involved. I've no doubt It won't be a problem on a console...

 

[DieH@rd]

I think that even QLC would be OK, they can do 100GB+ writes per day for 5 years [Intel 660p QLC 1TB].

 

[Xbat]

Yeah that seems more than adequate.

That Intel drive lifespan is for a TB drive doesn't it go down for the smaller ones? What's the life expectancy on a 128GB or 256GB drive ?

 

[Deleted member 91098]

Regarding the SSD discussion: from what I have read current NAND prices are partially because of over supply just like we had with DRAM in the past. Could that work in favor of Sony and MS somehow due to their long contracts they likely will have with the NAND/SSD manufacturers?

1060s boost quite a bit higher than the rated 1709. Typically out of the box they can boost over 1900Mhz and most can go over 2Ghz without too much of a sweat.

I agree that out of the blue 1.8Ghz for a console APU graphics sounds quite a lot, but I think there is reason to believe that Navi's architecture has been tailored to hit higher clock speeds and with the 7nm helping as well, I'm not willing to rule that speed out of the equation. It would mean that the desktop cards would have to hit +2Ghz easy though...

Good points, and considering that AMD get's 70% yield on ~75mm² silicon I'm starting to put more believe in the high clock rumor. Especially when thinking about how bad the yield for the 331mm² Vega 20 must be. So if the consoles use APUs again I suspect they would need to keep the die size smaller and get their speed boost through clocks instead.