Gotta agree with that. There's a lot of reviews, tours and interviews, but the practicality of this episode was awesome. Definitely want to see more user tutorial stuff soon!Miral said:(I liked the practical theme of this episode, BTW. More!)
Gotta agree with that. There's a lot of reviews, tours and interviews, but the practicality of this episode was awesome. Definitely want to see more user tutorial stuff soon!Miral said:(I liked the practical theme of this episode, BTW. More!)
I vote for an episode on how to assemble a PC.Nerdfury said:Gotta agree with that. There's a lot of reviews, tours and interviews, but the practicality of this episode was awesome. Definitely want to see more user tutorial stuff soon!Miral said:(I liked the practical theme of this episode, BTW. More!)
PS3's just use laptop size HDD's. I've recently increased my HDD to 400GB.Shadefyre said:Those are 2.5'' hardrives, right? Nice to know PS3's don't have the ridiculous hardrive plug that the 360 has. Makes it a pain to modify.
Plug the parts that fit into the holes that are vaguely labeled in a complementary fashion. It's actually way easier to do, than it is to think about doing, or for that matter, the research that should go into any self-built PC.Danny Ocean said:I vote for an episode on how to assemble a PC.Nerdfury said:Gotta agree with that. There's a lot of reviews, tours and interviews, but the practicality of this episode was awesome. Definitely want to see more user tutorial stuff soon!Miral said:(I liked the practical theme of this episode, BTW. More!)
We did, though it didn't get spelled out in the final cut of the video. I'll check with Tom and the video crew and see if we still have the final results of all the different things we did to post, but here's what I remember that we actually checked:Joos said:To test the hard drive speed, you should test the load times of PSN downloaded games, or games that installs fully on the hard drive, such as Valkyria Chronicles and Grand Theft Auto 4.
*sigh* Almost there, chief.Kross said:That's a lot of factors that could throttle the speed on the SSD versus the normal drive. But because it's almost the same numbers, I'd imagine it's a hard limit somewhere (for one or more unknown Sony reasons). Also, if there's things like encryption going on for the data stored on the hard drive, there might be a fixed speed on the decryption/encryption or compression/decompression of files.
Oh I know how to do it, it's just to dispel the myths about the difficulty.Geoffrey42 said:Plug the parts that fit into the holes that are vaguely labeled in a complementary fashion. It's actually way easier to do, than it is to think about doing, or for that matter, the research that should go into any self-built PC.Danny Ocean said:I vote for an episode on how to assemble a PC.Nerdfury said:Gotta agree with that. There's a lot of reviews, tours and interviews, but the practicality of this episode was awesome. Definitely want to see more user tutorial stuff soon!Miral said:(I liked the practical theme of this episode, BTW. More!)
Aside from the extra storage space. As someone who downloads games and tv shows/movies off of PSN quite frequently, 250GB would be much nicer than 80GB.Earthbound said:So...it seems that there's no point in replacing the hard drive in the PS3.
Not sure what you're basing this off of. Where exactly are we 'dissing' Sony? Where was a 'scheme' mentioned?nipsen said:Honestly, though - I was about to congratulate you for stopping people from buying expensive drives in the belief that they would get increased performance on their ps3s. But then you have to go and make yourselves look savvy. Congratulations with today. But surely there are thousands of real, and very questionable business- practices Sony has employed lately that deserves the attention of the masses more than their latest scheme to hate superior hardware that costs a fortune?
Naturally, I know I am asking a lot of you, in that you would perhaps be held to some sort of standard the next time another company did the same thing. Unlike now, when you're simply dissing Sony apparently out of sheer stupidity, and therefore don't have to have this admirably critical attitude towards faceless corporations as a rule.
But I still think you should do it.
Let's see.. Read what I said about scheduled reads. Then check this concept with your reliable source of choice. Then read about SSD drive transfer speeds. The understand why I am being an "asshat" about this.GamerPhate said:Thanks for telling me in a nice a$$hat way!nipsen said:No. Look - this is not rocket science, and it's not secret information that's unavailable to people who can read. Please, enough.GamerPhate said:Very interesting. I think both theories are possible. If it is a software/driver coded thing, you could over ride it perhaps, but that would likely void the warranty with OS modding through patching.
You're saying they are limiting the hard- drives to fit with the lowest standard. As if somehow Sony conspires to stop you benefiting from a new piece of expensive hardware. It's right there in the clip! It's repeated in your "speculation" afterwards on the forum! That's what I'm basing this off of.paulgruberman said:The PS3 has a SATA controller. Most SATA II devices are backward compatable, but will obviously be limited to the lower throughput. Current generation SSDs may not reach the max transfer rate of SATA II, but they definitely are well beyond SATA.
The HDD is encrypted with a Sony proprietary format. Last I heard this was done by the PS3's OS or possibly the HDD controller, so encryption is done before transfer and could be a limiting factor.
Not sure what you're basing this off of. Where exactly are we 'dissing' Sony? Where was a 'scheme' mentioned?nipsen said:Honestly, though - I was about to congratulate you for stopping people from buying expensive drives in the belief that they would get increased performance on their ps3s. But then you have to go and make yourselves look savvy. Congratulations with today. But surely there are thousands of real, and very questionable business- practices Sony has employed lately that deserves the attention of the masses more than their latest scheme to hate superior hardware that costs a fortune?
Naturally, I know I am asking a lot of you, in that you would perhaps be held to some sort of standard the next time another company did the same thing. Unlike now, when you're simply dissing Sony apparently out of sheer stupidity, and therefore don't have to have this admirably critical attitude towards faceless corporations as a rule.
But I still think you should do it.
While you may have been correct a year ago, SSD technology has improved significantly since then, and this drive is a brand new high-end drive. We don't do full-on benchmarking, but I did find someone else who did compare the predecessor of this drive with a 7200rpm mechanical drive - their results are here [http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=658571]. That mechanical drive is likely faster than the one in the PS3nipsen said:Also, an SSD drive typically has faster seek times (no movable parts, mechanical delays). But has lower average data transfer speeds. So what you're really testing is a drive with about the same data transfer rate as the other one. So even if there was a difference, you wouldn't find it in loading times.
It was a loaner, we gave it back. Otherwise it probably would have just ended up in one of our web serversGamerPhate said:(although the IT tech guy probably knew all along it might not work, but now he gets a new fast arse HD to play with at work)
Really? Because I didn't list possible hdparm parameters, or encrypted file systems that might be in use, or compare proc diskstats against other drives, or analyze the data stream between system and application and instead listed a few likely possibilities, it's anti-Sony FUD? I never claimed to know why the speeds weren't different, I was just listing possible factors that would affect I/O speeds to make the point that several factors can effect loading speed from general lack of tuning for SSD.nipsen said:My apologies for being mad about this - but pushing pseudo- scientific stuff like this isn't very funny. Worse, it means that you are contributing to ensuring we are all screwed over yet again, when "the industry" demands that the customer should pay for yet another idiotic scheme.
DB server!Virgil said:It was a loaner, we gave it back. Otherwise it probably would have just ended up in one of our web serversGamerPhate said:(although the IT tech guy probably knew all along it might not work, but now he gets a new fast arse HD to play with at work)