PS5 vs PC vs XBOX SX


Steam deck
Mobile PC gaming isn't a new thing but finally we are starting to see some decent hardware

Unfortunately the screen is just 60hz (constant lag) and 1280 x 800, that's not good. There also isn't any option with more than 512 GB of NVME storage (not enough).

Due to massive pre-order interest if you secure one now (costs 5$) your expected delivery will be Q2 2022, by then there will hopefully be better options available. Actually GPD win 3 is already better in several ways




PS5 has better memory latency?
This is potentially part of the reason why PS5 has better performance/TFLOP

The guy that made that video has however made false claims previously such as claiming that PS5 would have something similar to infinity cache, he also falsely claimed PS5 would have unified L3 cache for the CPU (false).

Here is the tweet he used as source

Here is latancy for desktop GPU graphic cards


NVME drives now working with the PS5 beta
While sony does recommend a heatsink that does not actually seem to be needed. Turns out samsung 980 pro works just fine if you have access to the beta

One option with better performance on paper is the seagate firecuda 530, it also has better warranty than the 980 pro (2550 TBW vs 1200 TBW) but we need to see actual tests showing the firecuda 530 to actually be faster in the real world.

Despite only having 2 priority levels it's very likely that samsung 980 pro will be faster.

It's likely that sony will release their own NVME for PS5 as well, they do not even have to make one themselves, they can just put their brand on a third party solution.



The built-in PS5 SSD isn't super-great
The raw-performance is of course inferiour to top of the line PC SSD drives. A reddit user found out that the "time to move" (time it takes to move the game to that drive) is much shorter when moving to an NVME which isn't surprising.

DanCTapirson wrote:

Got invited to the Beta! I'm getting a Samsung 980 Pro Tomorrow. Also got a heatsink and infrared thermometer for measuring how hot it gets with and without a heatsink.

TL;DR at the bottom

Ok guys this was very interesting. I decided I would reformat the Samsung 980 Pro to see if the PS5 gave me another number on the benchmark it runs. Lo and behold it did! I don't know how this benchmark works, but it's definitely not consistent. I ran it 4 more times and these are the numbers I got:
  • 6072.967 MB/s
  • 5069.494 MB/s
  • 5973.731 MB/s
  • 6213.344 MB/s

SSD: Samsung 980 Pro 250 GB
  • Tested and works with PS5
  • Read speed: 5751.242 MB/s according to PS5. (I got different results here as mentioned above)
  • Games played with no issue or difference in speed, loading times, performance: Ratchet and Clank, Returnal, Rainbow Six Siege
Temperatures were taken in weather of 25°c (77°f), with infrared gun pointing directly at the hottest part of SSD as close as possible. I know the PS5 uses negative airflow to cool the SSD partition, so the enclosure plate was always on, except when I took temperatures and I removed it:

Without Heatsink
  • Idle Temperature: 55°c - 59°c
  • Highest Writing Temperature while transferring 5 games: 74°c
  • Highest temperature while playing Ratchet and Clank and Returnal: 72°c
With Heatsink
This is the one I got. It comes with a Rubber mount and a screw mount. Just use the screw mount if you get this:
IMPORTANT: Before going into the results, I've noticed the 2 'holes' Sony mentioned to allow for negative airflow are located on the higher part of the SSD partition to the side of the fan. Image 1, Image 2 As you can see, I took these photos after installing the heatsink. Seems that adding a heatsink makes the heat get closer to these holes, allowing for the air to suck it out of the partition faster. If there's no heatsink installed, the SSD is probably not being "cooled" as efficiently. Just what I think. Now for the results:
Note: The heatsink is spreading out the heat from the hottest area of the SSD to a bigger surface area. I highly recommend getting a heatsink.
  • Idle Temperature: 43°c - 45°c
  • Highest Writing Temperature while transferring 5 games: 50°c
  • Highest temperature while playing Ratchet and Clank and Returnal: 50°c
Samsung rates the 980 pro at operational between 0-70°c and non operational at -40°c/85°c. I guess it will throttle if it goes higher than 70°c? Not sure as I was measuring ~72°c while playing and experimented no issues.

ok so I timed some speeds on Ratchet and Clank and Returnal. Games load and perform identical as far as I can tell, but what I found interesting is the difference in time it take to move the games to the main SSD or to the Samsung Pro 980.
I don't know why, but moving to Samsung SSD was faster than moving back to main SSD. Does this mean the main SSD is reading faster, or that the Samsung SSD is writing faster? Or both? The games are loading almost identical, so I'm guessing both are reading equally fast. I guess DF will provide more insight into this.

Ps5 main SSD:
  • Time to game 13.45s
  • Time to move 4min 4s
Samsung 980 Pro:
  • Time to game 13.37s
  • Time to move 2m 3s
Ratchet and Clank
Ps5 Main SSD:
  • Time to menu 7.51s
  • Time to game 1.79s
  • Time to move 2m33s
  • Time to menu 7.55s
  • Time to game 1.86s
  • Time to move 1m4s
TL;DR: Samsung Pro 980 works perfect with ps5. M.2 nvme SSDs run HOT! Get a heatsink to help dissipate the heat from the chips and maintain temperatures at around 50°c.



XSX performs 10% better in Resident Evil Village but has 5 times the loading times
Of course the longer XSX loading times will be far more noticeable for most people and there isn't any way to fix that since XSX doesn't have an NVME port, you end up having to buy their overpriced seagate expansion card.

PS5: 1.57 seconds
XSX: 8.47 seconds


While the XSX/XSS solution is easy to install it's limited to 1TB and the performance you get out of it is very bad for the price.

I do not even think the xbox solution is more convenient, i do not see what would be convenient in being limited to just 1TB when it comes to storage upgrades, it's a lot easier to just use a single 4TB drive.
I have not seen any evidence that that the seagate expansion card can even reach 2400 MiB/s, in this test it only reached 738.4 MiB/s (could be flawed test but i didn't find anything better):

Of course the PS5 solution is far from ideal, it would be better to have more than one slot for example (this is common on PC) but 1 NVME slot is still far better than 0 NVME slots.

One issue on PS5 is that several heatsinks will not fit with the default SSD door, not sure if you can use it without closing that, will probably be fine.
Right now the best option for PS5 is probably to install a third party heatsink yourself since SN850 and 980 pro can both be bought for cheap without heatsink, it's actually cheaper than the xbox solution (at least here in Sweden) and you get one of the fastest SSD drives on the market.
SN850 has a version that comes with a heatsink but it tends to be pretty expensive.

Gigabyte 7000s does come with a heatsink and it will fit in the PS5, the issue is that the drive us using the phison-E18 controller and may thus be prone to termal throtteling despite the heatsink (sabrent rocket 4 plus will throttle at just 70° C).

You probably do not even need to install a heatsink with 980 pro but it's only like 10$ + tax.



PS5 has more effective storage than XSX
Thanks to kraken you actually get more effective storage with the PS5

u/pmartinez527 wrote:

Howdy all, I posted this earlier today as a comment on the Ratchet & Clank Rift Apart post and it was suggested I make a new thread for it. So far, every native PS5 game has been smaller in size than its PS4 counterpart, but I also noticed these same games were significantly smaller than their Series X counterparts, potentially negating any difference in storage capacity between the two systems. The file sizes are listed below:

Control: 25.7 vs 43.6

Hitman 3: 61.9 vs 77.8

Subnautica: 3.8 vs 8.3

Crash 4: 20.0 vs 28.0

Tony Hawk: 23.3 vs 31.9

Marvel’s Avengers: 74.1 vs 116.6

AC Valhalla: 41.8 vs 72.5

Watch Dogs Legion: 50.6 vs 61.1

Immortals Fenyx Rising: 22.3 vs 32.9

Borderlands 3: 51.1 vs 63.8

Dirt 5: 50.9 vs 63.3

Mortal Shell: 4.6 vs 8.6

What I found interesting to note was, if you were to install all of these games on both consoles (Total 430.1 vs 608.4) you’d have 236.9GB remaining on PS5 and only 193.6GB remaining on Series X.


The PS5 SSD didn't live up to the hype
While it is a huge improvement over the the mechanical hard-drive PS4 had it really has not delivered the vision mark cerny talked about here:

Unfortunately sony had to cut costs by using a cheap storage solution (probably QLC flash) it doesn't perform super-great in practice. Cerny also talked about using the NVME drive as if it were ram but the latency of the fastest SSD is still 1000x that of DDR4.

So far we have not seen much good utilization of the PS5 SSD, it hasn't done anything that couldn't have been done just by adding a little bit more ram and using a sata SSD:

Even on paper below spec (less than 5500 MB/s) third party NVME drives outperform the internal drive PS5 has. Even the sub-par XSX storage has faster write speed

PS5 (internal): 0.23 GiB/s
XSX(internal/expansion): 0.5 GiB/s
Samsung 980 pro: 1.4 GiB/s (PS5)

Firecuda 530

The write speed for it was worse in that test (0.83 GiB/s).


Gigabyte Aorus 7000s

While games currently does not need fast write speeds this will limit what developers can do, it will be harder to use the internal SSD as if it were ram (such as when a lot of data that cannot fit in the limited ram has to be stored somewhere). The new consoles only have 16 GiB of ram and it's even less after you subtract what the wasteful operating system reserves for itself.

The 980 pro does perform better on PC possibly due to having access to faster CPU

There might be some issue with using the 980 pro on PS5 (resulting in worse performance), he mentioned lack of rapid mode but that is probably not the issue here, you could try upgrading to the lattest firmware but that requires you to have a compatible PC (which many people do not have):



As expected an SSD heatsink has no real impact on performance (PS5)
He tested samsung 980 pro (one of the more energy efficient drives) and found that it did actually run cooler with a tall heatsink (where you cannot put back the SSD cover).



German test confirms: third party drives are faster (PS5)
The difference wasn't particularly big when it comes to game loading times (a few seconds at most) but it does illustrate how using a high end gen4 drive will give you give you better performance

Digital foundry found indication that 980 pro will improve the framerate in "ratchet & blank: rift apart"

This is a very good case for buying an overkill SSD like samsung 980 pro, Western Digital SN850, Seagate firecuda 530.

Because then if a game does not run optimally due to the slow build-in SSD you can just install in on a far faster third party drive and fix that issue.
If you experience problems, try installing the drive on the internal drive
So far only the exact opposite of that has been found. It's unclear if the internal ps5 SSD is overall better than the worst gen4 drive on the market.


Why you want go get firecuda 530 or SN850 for PS5
While it is true that all current gen4 drives are faster or close to as fast as the build-in PS5 SSD we cannot assume that all games will work just fine on the build-in PS5 SSD. Therefore we cannot assume that a game that doesn't perform properly on a third party gen4 NVME would work fine with the cheap build-in NVME.

History tells us that game developers will not actually respect hardware limitations, there is no guarantee that the internal PS5 will remain fast enough for all titles and if you then do not have a third party drive that perform better you will be kinda fucked.

SSD performance is not just about sequential speed, an SSD with worse sequential performance can end up being faster in real-world usage

From the benchmark i have looked at it seems like the best options in general (both PC and PS5) are firecuda 530, SN850 and samsung 980 pro. That will give you faster loading times right now so it's not just buying something for future-proofing (you cannot future-proofing without present-proofing).

Unfortunatily samsung 980 pro does seem to have some firmware issue on PS5 (show up in some tests but not others) leaving SN850 and firecuda 530 as the best choices.

One issue with phison-E18 drives is that the controller tend to become very hot so you very much need a heatsink, performance is however pretty good on PS5:


Debunked: game developers will be held back by the weakest platform
This may have been true to some extent in the past but increasingly game developers are just letting games run terribly on weak platform in other to push forward (or save money by not optimizing). Developers know that technology will keep progressing so it doesn't really make sense just to look at current consumer hardware.

Why having settings so demanding no GPU on the market can properly play the game might seem strange at first over time that will pay giving the game a longer shelf-life.

In addition people willing to pay thousands of dollars for computer hardware will generally be far more willing to also buy videogames, there are people spending thousands of dollars for ships in star-citizen. Why should game developers cater to poor people who cannot afford to buy their games anyway?

In addition many people who play on poor systems do not really care much about performance anyway (probably doesn't pay attention in the first place).



Is this the memory PS5 is using?
The write performance indicate they were using QLC but here is a TLC memory chip that almost match what is in the PS5


Toshiba TLC

Since only one letter differs it's probably just a variation (pretty much the same).

Here we see a PS5 picture where the toshiba serial number ends in C


Digital foundry found indication that 980 pro will improve the framerate in "ratchet & blank: rift apart"
NX gamer were unable to replicate this:

The heatsink version of the SN850 is overpriced, third party heatsinks will cool it just fine for 40$ less

The third party heatsink tested here was marginally hotter though.


XSX and XSS are catching up to PS5
PS5 is still selling better but the difference in sales is getting smaller

Global hardware estimates (Followed by lifetime sales):
  1. Switch - 293,514 (89,316,236)
  2. PlayStation 5 - 180,170 (10,617,098)
  3. Xbox Series X|S - 125,591 (6,563,971)
  4. PlayStation 4 - 28,346 (116,329,049)
  5. Xbox One - 12,639 (50,320,955)
  6. 3DS - 302 (75,939,959)

Pk Thunder whoa! wrote:

I would like to thank gamepass because I no longer have to rely on reviews on games I’m interested in. All I have to do is try it out for myself and form my opinion on the game.

RahimKnicks wrote:

Ive got the Series X and disc ps5. I spend a significant amount of time more on the Xbox cause of gamepass, smart delivery, quick resume. All these make it a smoother and better value experience