Load time improvements
We spent some time this weekend testing a few different drive configurations on the new PS4 to see if load times improve. Do they?
On Friday Sony released the PlayStation 4 onto the world. The first new console launch in 7 years, the PS4 has a lot to live up to, but our story today isn't going to attempt to weigh the value of the hardware or software ecosystem. Instead, after our PS4 teardown video from last week, we got quite a few requests for information on storage performance with the PS4 and what replacement hardware might offer gamers.
Hard Drive Replacement Process
Changing the hard drive in your PlayStation 4 is quite simple, a continuation of a policy Sony's policy with the PS3.
Installation starts with the one semi-transparent panel on the top of the unit, to the left of the light bar. Obviously make sure your PS4 is completely turned off and unplugged.
Simply slide it to the outside of the chassis and wiggle it up to release. There are no screws or anything to deal with yet.
Once inside you'll find a screw with the PS4 shapes logos on them; that is screw you need to remove to pull out the hard drive cage.
Sony even provided a little handle to pull the tray out so just slide it towards you and you'll see 2.5-in drive in all its glory.
Along either side of the tray you'll find four screws that need to be removed to take the hard drive out of the sled.
Installing the new hard drive is easy as you just take the same steps and reverse them. From a software perspective, if this isn't a brand new HDD you'll want to make sure to backup your save game data in order to restore it after the fact. Sony has put up a pretty good guide for that already, again showing their acceptance of the DIY user.
You will also need to configure a USB drive with the latest PS4 system software (1.50 as of this writing). You can find the instructions for downloading the OS files right here.
On the USB storage device, create folders for saving the update file.
Using a computer, create a folder named "PS4". Inside that folder, create another folder named "UPDATE".
Download the update file, and save it in the "UPDATE" folder you created in step 1.
Save the file with the file name "PS4UPDATE.PUP".
Turn off the power of your PS4 system completely.
Check that the power indicator is not lit. If the power indicator is lit up in orange, touch the power button on the PS4 system for at least 7 seconds (until the system beeps a second time).
Connect the USB storage device that the update file is saved on to your PS4™ system, and then touch the power button for at least 7 seconds.
The PS4 system starts in safe mode
Select [Initialize PS4 (Reinstall System Software)].
Follow the screens to complete the update.
The Drives Tested
Our testing will revolve around three different drives. The stock 500GB hard drive, a Seagate 1TB SSHD hybrid drive and a Corsair Force GS SSD. The PS4 accepts most 2.5-in drives including 7mm and 9mm units.
Our PS4 was shipped with an HGST (Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, now owned by Western Digital) 500GB 5400 RPM traditional spindle based hard drive. This drive currently sells for $50 or so on Amazon and is what I would generally consider a "slow" drive. It is a SATA 3.0 Gb/s drive (SATA II) though the PS4 chip likely does support SATA 6.0 Gb/s (SATA III) based on the platform specifications.
Next up is a Seagate hybrid hard drive that combines traditional spindle based technology with an SSD-based cache that is used to improve performance. The SSHD tested here has an 8GB MLC cache that the drive attempts to keep filled with "often used" files to improve performance for the user. Currently selling for $122 on Amazon.com, the Seagate drive has been shown in our previous review to provide tangible benefits for PC users. Will that carry over to the PS4?
Our third tested drive is an SSD from Corsair, the Force GS 240GB unit based on a SandForce controller. This drive is definitely the most expensive in a cost per GB reality, selling for $189 on Amazon.com as of this writing. But in terms of raw access times and transfer rates, neither of the hard drives above will likely compete. The real question of course will be how that translates into real world differences.
While I have mentioned cost, the cost per GB is also worth nothing on all three options.
- HGST 500GB 5400 RPM HDD – $50 – $0.10/GB
- Seagate 1TB Hybrid SSHD – $122 – $0.12/GB
- Corsair 240GB Force GS SSD – $189 – $0.78/GB
Both the stock HGST 500GB drive and the Corsair Force GS SSD are 7mm drives but the 1TB Seagate hybrid SSHD is a 9.5mm drive. Even though the 7mm drive ships with the PS4 clearly the larger 2.5-in size drives are capable of being installed.
The Testing Process
After installing the hard drives and running the software installation process, we began our testing and benchmarking of the three different options. The setup was pretty simple as we used a pair of PS4 games to test load times.
For NBA 2K14, I timed both the startup time of the game and the time it took to load a quick match. All tests were run three times and we are reporting the averages. Between each run we closed the application and restarted the PS4.
Assassin's Creed IV was timed for the loading of the first save game. Again, each test was run three times, averages reported, and the PS4 was restarted between each run.
Performance Results
Let's take a look at the first results.
For the NBA 2K14 startup test, the change from the stock hard drive, to the SSHD and to the SSD didn't change very much, possibly indicating that much of the 30 seconds is still drawing from the optical drive to verify the game can start up. The Corsair SSD is the fastest though by 11%.
NBA 2K14 quick game load times were affected more substantially. Going from the stock 500GB drive to the Seagate 1TB SSHD saw loads improve by 4.5 seconds or 12%. The Corsair Force GS SSD improves by 6.5 seconds, 18.5%
The most dramatic change was seen in the AC IV testing, where the drop from HDD to SSHD was 19% while the drop from HDD to SSD was an impressive 32%. Clearly the SSD is the best option but we saw some interesting results in the SSHD benchmarks.
After running three different loads of AC IV, I saw some interesting data and wanted to investigate further, so I ran some more tests. Clearly, a pattern is revealing itself with the Seagate 1TB SSHD. After the first load, which we EXPECT to be slower with a hybrid drive as it loads data for the first time, the times decrease a bit in Run 2 and Run 3, but INCREASE again in Run 4. Then drop again in Run 5. And so on.
It would appear that with only 8GB of flash on the hybrid drive we are seeing some "rolling" data changes, possibly because the load for AC IV plus the OS files are going over the 8GB point. This effect might not show up in other games going forward depending on the amount of data required, or might be common across most games going forward. We'll have to see how performance moves going forward but clearly the SSHD leaves some questions for us on performance.
Closing Thoughts
It appears that changing out the hard drive on the PS4 can indeed improve performance of the console load times. Our NBA 2K14 startup time didn't really change but the quick game load times did see some substantial change with both the SSHD and the SSD. Assassin's Creed IV saw a much more dramatic improvement in load times of saved games, loading 32% faster than the stock hard drive configuration.
The real question is whether or not these differences are worth the switch. While the Corsair Force GS SSD is clearly the fastest option, it is also 6-7x more expensive per GB than the SSHD or HDD. And with only 240GB you are going to be limited to just 3-5 games, or be forced to step up to the 480GB model which will run you $364. That nearly the cost of the console itself.
Seagate's 1TB SSHD might make more sense though as you are able to double the included system capacity while also improving performance modestly. Considering a traditional 1TB hard drive (without the SSD to make it a hybrid) will cost $82 or so, the up charge for the MLC flash is pretty minimal. Even with the performance questions and the possibility of the data rolling out of the cache when it is needed, I think the SSHD offers a worthwhile performance improvement.
- HGST 500GB 5400 RPM HDD – $50 – $0.10/GB
- Seagate 1TB Hybrid SSHD – $122 – $0.12/GB
- Corsair 240GB Force GS SSD – $189 – $0.78/GB
This is PART 1 of our testing on the PlayStation 4 storage systems, with the stock hard drive, an SSHD hybrid and an SSD. In PART 2 we take a look at the changes introduced with PSN downloaded games versus Blu-ray installed games as well as show boot time differences. Be sure you read PART 2, PlayStation 4 (PS4) Blu-ray and Download Storage Performance, Boot Times.
what about downloaded games?
what about downloaded games? it seems disk based games are still held back by the optical drive
All games have to be
All games have to be installed, regardless of delivery media.
yay they need to be installed
yay they need to be installed but thats not the whole game that it installs, the console still takes alot of data of the disk
I’m going download only, so I
I’m going download only, so I can’t confirm this first-hand, but I don’t believe that statement to be correct. It is installing the same game to drive, regardless of whether the source is download or disc. For example, (as confirmed by The Verge a couple days ago) Killzone requires 39gb, even when installed by disc.
Edit: Also, I see Ryan has stated the same thing, a few messages further down.
but the optical drive still
but the optical drive still slows down the initial load of the game as the optical drive authenticates the disc. So the initial load of the game will be different depending on whether its disc or download
i have this question, in PC
i have this question, in PC OS (both MAC and WIN) TRIM support is a big deal, how about the PS4? is the OS support TRIM? will this affect the SSD in long run?
It COULD but I don’t yet know
It COULD but I don't yet know if the OS supports it. I would think both vendors would be aware of that need though with these modern platforms.
“First console to launch in
“First console to launch in 7years”
Take that wii U
Yeah…oops. lol
Yeah…oops. lol
Any chance you could do the
Any chance you could do the same test with download games instead of disc based games? Just to get a fuller sorry.thx.
Also I think he means first “Sony” console in 7 years, not counting remodeled ps3 or vita (hand held as after all). Thx again
All games are installed
All games are installed locally, evene those that START on a disc. They only use the disc for startup verification.
Perhaps you are right, but
Perhaps you are right, but any chance you can test some large downloaded games (ie, Killzone) just to be sure? Perhaps the blu-ray verification is a larger bottle-neck than people realize.
Thank you for the reply Ryan
Thank you for the reply Ryan but Id still like to see a big and small download game. Ps4 disc games require an install even if you have a download of the same game sony says. That should be enough to warrant more test imo. It seems that there should be a difference I would think.
> Ps4 disc games require an
> Ps4 disc games require an install even if you have a download of the same game sony says.
On the PS3 there are titles that are sold both as retail and as PSN titles and you don’t need to buy the game twice to get the digital version of the game. Why would it be any different for the PS4?
Source: http://us.playstation.com/day-1-digital/
If I rent a game disc, and
If I rent a game disc, and then decide I want to buy it digitally, can I use the mandatory install to avoid downloading it and just activate my license?
No, in this example you would have to delete the disc install data and fully install the digital version of the game.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2013/10/30/ps4-the-ultimate-faq-north-america/
Honestly didn’t even think of
Honestly didn’t even think of renting games.
Out of curiosity, what
Out of curiosity, what happens when you eject the disc while playing a game?
You even said that most of
You even said that most of the time was possibly spent verifying the disc integrity, in reference to the NBA game, WTF dude.
I’m amused that there were so
I’m amused that there were so many pundits the past few months talking about how this next generation would see zero load times. The hardware just wouldn’t require it anymore. Of course, PCs still require it. And, what do you know? — PS4 has ridiculous load times (you spend a lot of time at loading screens in NFS:Rivals, for example).
Well currently the PS4
Well currently the PS4 doesn’t have the suspend/resume game feature yet. But when it’s implemented that will help a lot.
I would of liked to have seen
I would of liked to have seen the 1TB 7200rpm hitachi in this benchmark. That’s the hard drive i’m going with.
I didn’t have one handy but
I didn't have one handy but I'll see if I can get one sent my way this week to add to the list.
That would be great, Ryan. A
That would be great, Ryan. A lot of my friends are on the edge between the 1TB Seagate SSHD @ 5400RPM and the 1TB HGT Travelstar 7K1000 HDD @ 7200RPM.
From looking at the current
From looking at the current results, a 7200 RPM 2.5" drive will likely fall between the 5400 RPM HDD and the SSHD. I'd guess closer to the 5400 HDD if you're repeating loads of the same game.
I just find it hard to
I just find it hard to believe that a mere 8GB cache of flash memory will actually be helpful when we’re talking about 40GB per game? I mean…one map on Battlefield 4 alone is probably 2GB to load.
if i was going to buy a ps4
if i was going to buy a ps4 or xbone i would immediately replace the crappy 5400rpm hardrive with a hybrid or 7200rpm disk.
the hybrid drives benefits are nice, while still providing enough disk space at a reasonable cost per GB.
ps4 and xbone should of came with a hybrid solution in the first place, lack of innovation on their part. id gladly pay extra for it to be there in the first place.
Is there any way to make a
Is there any way to make a disk based “backup” image of the games for verifying instead of DVD?
givin’ its a console most
givin’ its a console most likely no. less its downloaded
I am surprised the SSD does
I am surprised the SSD does so little. What’s the PS4 doing if it’s not waiting for I/O from storage? Is it checking your facebook for updates between loading each file?
As a side note, the hybrid HDDs have, are, and always be terrible engineering combined with a complete waste of money. The tipping point at which they actually include enough flash storage to make them viable the flash becomes so large you might as well be running a standalone SSD + HDD.
Agreed. A 64-128GB SSD
Agreed. A 64-128GB SSD combined with a 1-2TB HDD would be great and under $300.
Combined with some type of predictive loading, perhaps from analyzing game loading patterns from thousands of users, would help make each the PS4 iPad quick.
How does that criticism even
How does that criticism even remotely apply to a system where a single hard disk is your only option, though?
You’re missing the boat
You’re missing the boat because the PS4 is limited to one drive, but you do bring up a good point. We need hybrid solutions with bigger nand cache sizes. 8GB is far too small, as evidenced by Ryan’s test. I’m not at all surprised by those results. This is why people have been screaming for more nand on hybrid drives since the first ones came out. Apples fusion drive proves the results are significantly better with a 120GB cache. A drive like that would be absolutely ideal for the ps4
I am really disappointing by
I am really disappointing by Sony’s decision to use SATA II, not very forward thinking.
Trim support could always be added later, but a few years from now when SSD’s are affordable, a great upgrade option (I hate loading) will be stifled by a $2 per console decision.
don’t worry about trim it a
don’t worry about trim it a dead topic of old ssd gen 1-2.we are on 7 now ssd have changed.
as for sata 3 it not that important really.depends on file size use and so on.
I have a evo and that can hit 1000 easy when the boost is on but it really don’t change the system use.
sony knows what there doing.
pumping 500 vs 275 might seem twice as fast but it depends on the file file and how sony formats the drive to start with.
a lot of things factor in that can make the sata 3 point silly.
think of how server hard drives are set up and how file cluster sizes are picked for certin server use.
a playstaion is nothing like a desktop and that is nothing like a work station.
people want easy numbers that say better.
even hard core tests done by anand tech show this don’t allways mean much it how the work load is done and it use as well as so many other things.
ssd design matters much more than sat 2 vs 3.
99% percent of people pick the wrong ssd that’s why there tons of drives from makers and and makers.
I wonder if you could hack in
I wonder if you could hack in a sata extension cable that routes out to a 3.5″ desktop drive. Those are a little bit cheaper, with 4TB ones going as low as $150 on sale. 4TB would be a bit overkill, but it would be neat.
Of course, they could always just patch in USB hard drive support if they wanted 🙁
That’s an interesting idea.
That's an interesting idea. The one issue might be the amount of power that the connector gives to the drive bay; might not be enough to power a full size 3.5-in HDD.
Hey, can you do a test with a
Hey, can you do a test with a downloaded version of AC4 or NBA?
I think a lot of people agree that we want to see it. I believe what you are saying about it installing to the HDD, but do we really know how much that it pulls off of the disk?
I would personally appreciate this,
thanks
The PS4 installs the full
The PS4 installs the full game off the disk onto the hard drive. The only difference is, is you can play after a certain percentage (depending on the game) is installed.
While loading a save file for
While loading a save file for AC4 on my downloaded copy, it takes 28.73 seconds to load (on average) actual times:(29.6, 28.1, 28.5)
This is a DOWNLOADED VERSION, not a disk version.
My tests indicate FASTER speeds with the stock HDD installed. So I ask again, can you please redo the test with at least one downloaded version?
If you need proof of my results I will gladly give it to you
You might be loading from a
You might be loading from a different point in the game that requires smaller textures or something. We can’t be sure unless Ryan clarifies the exact point in the game he’s loading. Even then, there’s potential for variability that would only be solved by proper 1:1 testing in Ryan’s end.
I believe you. I’ll try to
I believe you. I'll try to DL the AC IV game today.
I think this is a key point.
I think this is a key point. Aren’t we all making more of the speed gains than what’s really there? Not to discount the info, it’s all good, but frankly technology is improving regarding storage that the system won’t be able to keep up with the faster drive technology. Therefore, isn’t paying the least amount for the greatest extra storage the best option? I don’t see the WOW factor based on the test results.
I think this is a key point.
I think this is a key point. Aren’t we all making more of the speed gains than what’s really there? Not to discount the info, it’s all good, but frankly technology is improving regarding storage that the system won’t be able to keep up with the faster drive technology. Therefore, isn’t paying the least amount for the greatest extra storage the best option? I don’t see the WOW factor based on the test results.
How come you guys didn’t test
How come you guys didn’t test a 7200rpm drive?
Could you measure the power
Could you measure the power usage difference with the new drives? Thanks!
It should have no effect more
It should have no effect more than 1-2% on total system power draw.
Great info. I’ve heard a few
Great info. I’ve heard a few suggestions that people had issues with faster hard drives in their PS3 and causing overheating. I’m leery because of this fact. Why go sata III when Sony says sata II? I found this tutoria/faq http://www.ps4accessories.com/2013/11/increase-ps4-storage/ which essentially says the same thing. Speed is one thing, but storage is another. Do people want the speed or do they want the storage. If you want storage, stick with what Sony says. Let other people break their consoles first!
Sata II and Sata III are
Sata II and Sata III are interchangeable and the chips that limit it to the Sata II version (controller chips on the motherboard of the ps4) will determine the speed of data transfer.
Doesn’t matter if you have a Sata I, II, or III drive, the cables will work, the ports will work, and the drives will work.
That’s how it was designed.
Sony itself, specifically states: “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.”
Type doesn’t matter, thickness and minimum size do.
From wikipedia:
The issue with PS3 was due to
The issue with PS3 was due to failures of the cheap solder used on the motherboard, not the sata drive.
All original PS3’s and 360’s had the YLOD/RROD issue caused by this. Only one of them got sued.
Did the other drives affect
Did the other drives affect boot times? I would imagine that there would NOT be a lot of differences since the OS for consoles are very lean and designed for quick booting.
But it might be worth the 30 minutes to test each drive and graph.
As for the game load times… I think this is dependent on the type of game:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/battlefield-rift-ssd,3062-12.html
In the link, F1 2011 (driving simulator) has the least percentage of load time reduction from a SSD, but Rift (MMORPG)and BF3 (FPS) surely does. I think the type of game is the key for load times. Simulation games like F1 should require that all the textures and maps be loaded in full to prevent frequent disk access that could impact user experience (lag/stuttering). MMORPG or RPG’s in general don’t need to load a lot and this goes the same as FPS.
Ryan, I think if you get more games of different game types, I would not be surprised to see some increasing delta’s between the storage media. But, a counter to my hypothesis would be that consoles try to load as much as possible into memory for better user experience in-game at the expense of longer load times; regardless of game type.
Is there a reason why you
Is there a reason why you guys choose that specific ssd? Would a samsung pro perform better on the PS4?
You should include console
You should include console load times and not just game load times. You could also benchmark installation times from media to the SSD/HDD/Hybrid. I also agree with the original post about testing using only downloaded content as opposed to disk based (eliminate the optical drive as a bottleneck).
Would have liked to see the
Would have liked to see the stock drive, vs. a 7200 RPM equivalent, vs. the SSHD, vs. an SSD.
I know this was quick/dirty when you did it, but I’d love to see something more in-depth Even with a windows machine, I’d love to see the REAL difference of launching stuff and if it’s worth the dramatic loss in size over a 2-4 TB 7,200 RPM drive.
As for PS4, 5 games on disk, 5 games on digital, let it fall where they may. Can even use Demos if you don’t want to pay for the games, but still, would like to see more.
Thanks for this Ryan.