PlayStation 4 (PS4) HDD, SSHD and SSD Performance Testing

Manufacturer: Sony

Load time improvements

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.

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.

View Full Size

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.

View Full Size

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.

View Full Size

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. 

Continue reading our analysis of PS4 HDD, SSHD and SSD Performance!!

View Full Size

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.

View Full Size

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.

View Full Size

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.

View Full Size

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, the Seagate drive has been shown in our previous review to provide tangible benefits for PC users.  Will that carry over to the PS4?

View Full Size

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 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.

View Full Size

While I have mentioned cost, the cost per GB is also worth nothing on all three options. 

View Full Size

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.

View Full Size

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.

View Full Size

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.

View Full Size

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.

View Full Size

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.

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.

Video News

November 17, 2013 | 06:02 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

what about downloaded games? it seems disk based games are still held back by the optical drive

November 17, 2013 | 07:14 PM - Posted by Branthog

All games have to be installed, regardless of delivery media.

November 18, 2013 | 04:34 AM - Posted by kyle (not verified)

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

November 18, 2013 | 05:00 AM - Posted by Branthog

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.

"The bad news is that every game you play, disc or no, has to be installed. When we popped Killzone: Shadow Fall, and it immediately consumed 39GB — nearly one-tenth of our 409GB of hard drive space." -- source

Edit: Also, I see Ryan has stated the same thing, a few messages further down.

November 20, 2013 | 03:49 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

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

November 17, 2013 | 06:26 PM - Posted by Tobylieyan (not verified)

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?

November 17, 2013 | 07:16 PM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

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.

November 17, 2013 | 06:28 PM - Posted by Felix (not verified)

"First console to launch in 7years"
Take that wii U

November 17, 2013 | 07:16 PM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

Yeah...oops.  lol

November 17, 2013 | 06:48 PM - Posted by unlovedhomie (not verified)

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

November 17, 2013 | 07:17 PM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

All games are installed locally, evene those that START on a disc.  They only use the disc for startup verification.

November 17, 2013 | 11:31 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 12:50 AM - Posted by unlovedhomie (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 01:07 AM - Posted by mLocke

> 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?


November 18, 2013 | 11:24 AM - Posted by unlovedhomie (not verified)

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.

November 19, 2013 | 09:48 AM - Posted by mLocke

Honestly didn't even think of renting games.

November 18, 2013 | 01:16 AM - Posted by mLocke

Out of curiosity, what happens when you eject the disc while playing a game?

March 11, 2015 | 11:33 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You even said that most of the time was possibly spent verifying the disc integrity, in reference to the NBA game, WTF dude.

November 17, 2013 | 06:55 PM - Posted by Branthog

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).

November 18, 2013 | 10:52 AM - Posted by IndoAssassin (not verified)

Well currently the PS4 doesn't have the suspend/resume game feature yet. But when it's implemented that will help a lot.

November 17, 2013 | 07:02 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I would of liked to have seen the 1TB 7200rpm hitachi in this benchmark. That's the hard drive i'm going with.

November 17, 2013 | 07:18 PM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

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.

November 18, 2013 | 12:12 PM - Posted by Joe Shmoe (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 12:53 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

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.

November 19, 2013 | 03:04 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

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 map on Battlefield 4 alone is probably 2GB to load.

November 17, 2013 | 08:02 PM - Posted by tbone8ty (not verified)

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.

November 17, 2013 | 10:23 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Is there any way to make a disk based "backup" image of the games for verifying instead of DVD?

November 17, 2013 | 10:54 PM - Posted by arbiter

givin' its a console most likely no. less its downloaded

November 17, 2013 | 11:37 PM - Posted by Shambles (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 02:22 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 05:26 AM - Posted by Squijji (not verified)

How does that criticism even remotely apply to a system where a single hard disk is your only option, though?

November 18, 2013 | 11:52 AM - Posted by jebo (not verified)

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

November 18, 2013 | 02:11 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

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.

November 20, 2013 | 09:05 AM - Posted by charlie brown (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 03:04 AM - Posted by wizpig64 (not verified)

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 :(

November 18, 2013 | 11:53 AM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

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.

November 18, 2013 | 09:21 AM - Posted by Hunter926 (not verified)

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,


November 18, 2013 | 10:48 AM - Posted by IndoAssassin (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 09:43 AM - Posted by Hunter926 (not verified)

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

November 18, 2013 | 11:48 AM - Posted by jebo (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 11:52 AM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

I believe you.  I'll try to DL the AC IV game today.

November 18, 2013 | 12:01 PM - Posted by Random Dood (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 12:01 PM - Posted by Random Dood (not verified)

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.

November 18, 2013 | 10:50 AM - Posted by IndoAssassin (not verified)

How come you guys didn't test a 7200rpm drive?

November 18, 2013 | 11:10 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Could you measure the power usage difference with the new drives? Thanks!

November 18, 2013 | 11:54 AM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

It should have no effect more than 1-2% on total system power draw.

November 18, 2013 | 11:35 AM - Posted by Random Dood (not verified)

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 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!

November 18, 2013 | 03:13 PM - Posted by nabokovfan87

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:

a) SATA 3 Gbit/s and SATA 6 Gbit/s are compatible with each other. Most devices which are only SATA 3 Gbit/s can connect with devices that are SATA 6 Gbit/s, and vice-versa, though obviously SATA 3 Gbit/s devices only connect with SATA 6 Gbit/s devices at the slower 3 Gbit/s speed.

b) SATA 1.5 Gbit/s and SATA 6 Gbit/s are compatible with each other. Most devices which are only SATA 1.5 Gbit/s can connect with devices that are SATA 6 Gbit/s, and vice-versa, though obviously SATA 1.5 Gbit/s devices only connect with SATA 6 Gbit/s devices at the slower 1.5 Gbit/s speed.

November 18, 2013 | 03:15 PM - Posted by nabokovfan87

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.

November 18, 2013 | 12:25 PM - Posted by PaulJ (not verified)

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:,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.

November 18, 2013 | 01:21 PM - Posted by mashy20

Is there a reason why you guys choose that specific ssd? Would a samsung pro perform better on the PS4?

November 18, 2013 | 03:03 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

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).

November 18, 2013 | 03:07 PM - Posted by nabokovfan87

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.

November 19, 2013 | 01:17 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

"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."

What!!! 122$ - 82$ = 40$ for 8GB of flash MLC which puts it at 5$/GB... I'd say it's a rip-off

November 19, 2013 | 08:33 PM - Posted by raulduke

Thanks Ryan.

I hate to be that guy, but there is a typo in the Closing Thoughts paragraph.

"That >IS< nearly the cost of the console itself."

November 20, 2013 | 08:52 AM - Posted by charlie brown (not verified)

these guys have zero clue how to test.
they made the same exact mistakes everyone did on the ps3 ssd test.

YOU NEED TO TEST MORE THAN ONE SSD (not all all ssd are equal)toy should try Samsung/marvel vs sandforce/barefoot.
how ssd perform and why make a huge difference in how they perform in a system.

blue ray and dvd last time I check still run on the old ATA-66 standard.(even if they have a sata interface)
why?because they are that dam slow.
if you guys knew what you where doing you know how slow the light disk read speed is and how that makes a huge bottle neck right from the start that even a y2k desktop hard drive would find.
some new laptop 5400 rpm are as fast as 4-5 year old 7200 but they even don't break the ata 133 standard but would still be best tested ON A DIGITAL DOWNLOAD.

YOU NEED YO TEST MORE THEN TWO GAMES.all game makers do things different.load times show this.

I have tested many ssd,i have worked with a ssd maker I tested and have ssd in my ps3 and it makes a difference.
in my laptop with a Samsung evo it boots in less than 10 secs with a ultra low bolt i5 chip (i54200U)with FDE!infact it boots faster than I can type the paswords.
I can tell you if windows 7 can do that than it going to be huge on light ps4 code and I almost certin sony did FDE on ps4 like they did on ps3.
forget the talk about trim it a dead old subject,did you use a sata 3 port test tool.
(they do sell a tool to test that)

so in the end another ssd test done that tells us nothing other than what most people already know.
install a good ssd and than use digital downloads because blue ray's even if sony update them are dog slow so how your system might perform that's why the xbox did not come with one before,microsoft knew that it would require a lot of extra effort,something they drop the ball on.

the ps4 will change the way we use a game system the same way the ps3 did.
the ps3 was a home media server,nothing could stream like changed everything and came with a blueray that gave us HD movies and games.
the ps4 will move in a new direction as well and we need to think about that because blue rays will go the way of flopys and I think steam and digital and 4k will become the norm not the exception and a solid state disk will be an investment in a system that could last 7-10 years that be the focal point of entertainment.

November 21, 2013 | 01:23 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)


I am thinking about installing 1 Tb drive, however, I have games installed and files saved on my stock PS4 drive. How can I transfer the data without having to download and re install everything including my 25+ hours on AC 4.


November 26, 2013 | 02:23 AM - Posted by Fred (not verified)

these long load times make no sense - is everything kept encrypted or compressed after installation?

December 4, 2013 | 10:01 PM - Posted by Opus Continuum (not verified)

Hopefully they will come up with a better system to handle drm which seems to be causing the latency. A comparison of load times for the psn distributed versions would be insightful. The idea that an induced delay could cause the consumer to purchase titles through PSN over discs has been researched thouroughly. Same old question, "Do you make your own or buy electricity?"

December 25, 2013 | 06:30 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

having a hard time with the memory upgrade and a CE-34788-0 code

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.