Cyberpunk 2077 Update 2.0 Only Supports SSDs, CD PROJEKT RED Confirms

[Tsing]

CD PROJEKT RED has confirmed that Cyberpunk 2077's new, soon-to-be-released 2.0 update only includes support for SSDs. The developer shared the PSA in a tweet this morning, which included a copy of the PC specifications that show a 70 GB NVMe SSD and 70 GB SSD under the storage recommendations for the Ultra/RT Recommended/Overdrive and Minimum/Recommended/RT Minimum quality settings, respectively. Cyberpunk 2077's 2.0 update, which brings new skill trees and more to the game, is out tomorrow, September 21.

See full article...

 

[Brent_Justice]

The time is coming boys, get yo SSDs

With prices at an all-time low for SSDs, now is the time, I don't regret for a minute upgrading to a 4TB NVMe from a 1TB SATA SSD on my main this year.

 

[Grimlakin]

Yea if you're still on spinning disk for your steam library... it's past time to upgrade and use that for your low res pro.. I mean plex server for home use.

 

[Brian_B]

Spinner still works fine for all the older stuff - a lot of those load screens and menu changes and texture streaming were built with the fact that they would be installed and run of HDDs that are much slower than even today's SATA3 stuff. But yeah, all the newer titles really do run better on a SSD.

So it's not like you need to transfer your entire Steam library over to SSD. But I wouldn't fault you if you did, that would be awesome.

 

[Endgame]

I mean, I've been running SSDs since the X25m around 2009, so this transistion seems well overdue. To be fair, I did use a short stroked 5 drive WD Velicoraptor matrix raid array until around 2013 for games like civilization that didn't really need the extra speed, but I wouldn't have considered running spinning disk for any games since that array got retired.

 

[MadMummy76]

I've been telling everyone since 2010, that the first thing they should do before any upgrade is buying an SSD at least as a system drive if they didn't already have one. Of course 2 out of 3 people would tell me to pound salt, and spend their money on a CPU anyway and then complain why games stutter so much and take ages to load when they just upgraded.

 

[Grimlakin]

I've been chasing that performance dragon for a while... went from disk to a 512gig samsung ssd... back when I had a 2600k cpu. From there to a 7700k. Didn't go NVME till I got a 3900k, then had a PCIE 3 1tb. When I got my current rig well the specs are there. Next upgrade is video card again then the next year probably ram CPU and storage again... when PCIE 5 NVME drives are not miniature frying pans.

 

[DrezKill]

I haven't been running games from HDDs in almost a decade. I got two SATA SSDs and an NVMe SSD just for running games. Even the old sh1t that loads super-fast from modern HDDs I still got on SSDs, just cuz those are my dedicated games drives.

I've been telling everyone since 2010, that the first thing they should do before any upgrade is buying an SSD at least as a system drive if they didn't already have one.

And you do well to say it, for it is exactly how everyone should roll. And even the most ignorant of PC users can tell the speeds differences going from an HDD to an SSD.

...this transistion seems well overdue.

That's cuz it is.

A lot of people also forget that the console market dictates the standards (unfortunately) due to being the lowest common denominator and the focus of most game developers, and both 9th-gen consoles have PCIe 4.0 SSDs. So that's what game developers are starting to develop around now. For example, check out 18:06 to 26:53 in this video:

 

[Zarathustra]

The time is coming boys, get yo SSDs

With prices at an all-time low for SSDs, now is the time, I don't regret for a minute upgrading to a 4TB NVMe from a 1TB SATA SSD on my main this year.

I'd argue 2012 was the time to switch to SSD's for clients.

If you are still booting or running games/programs off of a hard drive in 2023 you need to get with the times.

I got my first SSD in 2009, after which there was no going back. The experience was transformitive, making hard drive instantly obsolete for anything but mass storage.

 

[Zarathustra]

I've been telling everyone since 2010, that the first thing they should do before any upgrade is buying an SSD at least as a system drive if they didn't already have one. Of course 2 out of 3 people would tell me to pound salt, and spend their money on a CPU anyway and then complain why games stutter so much and take ages to load when they just upgraded.

Exactly. SSD's should have been the priority upgrade at any time in the last decade+

People kept complaining they were too expensive. Some of my friends swore they'd do it when SSD's broke the magic $1 per gigabyte barrier, and then didn't.

 

[Zarathustra]

I've been chasing that performance dragon for a while... went from disk to a 512gig samsung ssd... back when I had a 2600k cpu. From there to a 7700k. Didn't go NVME till I got a 3900k, then had a PCIE 3 1tb. When I got my current rig well the specs are there. Next upgrade is video card again then the next year probably ram CPU and storage again... when PCIE 5 NVME drives are not miniature frying pans.

I got my first SSD, a 120GB OCZ drive in 2009. I still kept a spinner in the desktop for another couple of years, but I didn't boot or run any programs or games off of it. I actually partitioned it two ways. Linux on a ~35GB partition, Windows and steam library on the rest. It was fine to only keep 3-4 games on it at any given time, and uninstall them when I wasn't playing them. The hard drive was for storing files only. Mostly media libraries, but I also symlinked my documents, downloads and media library folders to the hard drive.

Then about a year later in mid 2010 I built my first NAS, and since then I haven't had a spinning drive in any client machine of mine, Still use hard drives for mass storage, but they are all in the NAS server.

I got my first NVMe storage, a 400GB Intel SSD750 PCIe card in 2015. My system at the time (x79) didn't have an m.2 slot or the BIOS needed to boot from NVMe drives, but the SSD750 was one of the few NVMe drives ever made with a traditional boot ROM that allowed for traditional booting.

I used that 400GB NVMe drive as my boot drive, with a secondary OCZ 256GB SATA drive for a while, until in 2018, I picked up a 1TB Samsung 970 EVO and a 4x PCIe to m.2 riser adapter to use for my Steam library. Since then my main system has been NVMe only. I disable the SATA controller in the bios Couldn't boot from the Samsung 970 in the x79, but it was still recognized after boot, so I could use it just fine for the Steam library.

Once I upgraded to my Threadripper in 2019, the 970 EVO was replaced with a 2TB Sabrent Rocket 4 as my boot drive (I wanted a Gen 4 drive to go with my new Gen 4 system) but the 970 EVO and SSD750 stayed around as secondary drives. When the Sabrent Rocket failed last year, I RMA'd it, but since I needed to get up and running fast, I got a same day order of a 2TB Samsung 980 pro. Then when the Sabrent Rocket RMA replacement came back, it too went in as a secondary drive.

Then during prime day in July this year there was a decent sale on 2TB Samsung 990 Pro's, so I bought two of them.

Up until recently my main workstation thus had 6 NVMe drives in it:

• 2TB Samsung 990 Pro (gen 4) (boot)
• 2TB Samsung 990 Pro (gen 4)
• 2TB Samsung 980 Pro (gen 4)
• 2TB Sabrent Rocket 4 (gen 4)
• 1TB Samsung 970 EVO (gen 3)
• 400GB Intel SSD750 (gen 3)

Recently I pulled the 400GB SSD750 and stuck it back in the x79 motherboard that serves as my testbench machine, and use it to boot that. So right now, I "only" have 5 NVMe drives in the desktop.

 

[Zarathustra]

I've been telling everyone since 2010, that the first thing they should do before any upgrade is buying an SSD at least as a system drive if they didn't already have one. Of course 2 out of 3 people would tell me to pound salt, and spend their money on a CPU anyway and then complain why games stutter so much and take ages to load when they just upgraded.

This reminds me of ~1999 playing Quake 2 deathmatch with my entire college dorm floor (we were the first dorm on campus to get wired LAN and internet in the rooms)

I had this old beige ghetto Pentium 150 Mhz (pre-MMX) with a 6MB Voodoo 1 (Canopus Pure 3D / Miro Hiscore 3D) and a ghetto modded fan to help overclock the voodoo 1. The kids with their expensive "my parents bought me a new fancy 450Mhz Pentium II through 600Mhz Pentium III for college" PC's couldn't understand why the game ran so much better on my old ghetto machine than on their shiny new ones.

Of course, I had a GPU (or a 3D Card as we called them back then) and theirs didn't and had to render on the CPU.

I helped a few of them install GPU's (mostly TNT2's) that semester. Word got out that I knew what I was doing. For the kids I didn't know I charged a small service fee for the privilege, and that - in part - is how I saved up for my college PC build, an AMD Duron 650 (which I was able to overclock to 950Mhz, never got it stable at that magic Ghz) and a GeForce 2 GTS.

Fun times. I miss those days. Youth is wasted on the young.

 

[DrezKill]

Youth is wasted on the young.

Hahahaha, ain't that the truth!

 

[MadMummy76]

People kept complaining they were too expensive. Some of my friends swore they'd do it when SSD's broke the magic $1 per gigabyte barrier, and then didn't.

My first SSD cost around $2 / GB in early 2010. Even though it was a slow *** Kingston it was still the best part of the new build I did then. And the longest lasting, as after it got obsolete as a system drive, I moved it to a second PC and then a laptop, which I sold with the SSD in 2018.

Except for fake knock off SSDs from china any SSD is leaps and bounds better than the best spinner drive, IDK why some people still doubt this to this very day.

I've been chasing that performance dragon for a while...

I stopped chasing performance with SSDs after I got a decent SATA one. Now I just buy whatever has the best cost / TB. Even the "dreaded" QLC ones are perfect for day to day use and gaming now. Yes they do slow down when you want to move hundreds of gigabytes of data sequentially, but still remain much more responsive than a spinner. It is really not a bad compromise to make, buying top end NVME drives seems like a waste of money to me, gaining milliseconds in regular use. IOPS is still king, sequential is just marketing.

 

[Grimlakin]

I stopped chasing performance with SSDs after I got a decent SATA one. Now I just buy whatever has the best cost / TB. Even the "dreaded" QLC ones are perfect for day to day use and gaming now. Yes they do slow down when you want to move hundreds of gigabytes of data sequentially, but still remain much more responsive than a spinner. It is really not a bad compromise to make, buying top end NVME drives seems like a waste of money to me, gaining milliseconds in regular use. IOPS is still king, sequential is just marketing.

Oh I have no GOOD reason for increasing my storage performance beyond NVME PCIE 3.x4. I'll stand by that drive being a marked improvement from standard SSD for my use case. PCIE 4 drive... not so much. When you're only getting slightly less than 2x performance on raw throughput and not IOPS you're not doing it for the feel any more.

I'm doing it because I find it entertaining that the IOPS rating on my personal system storage rivals that of a professional storage array built for speed.

 

[Endgame]

Latency is a big deal with SSDs - my old Samsung 970 Pro is lower latency than my 980 pro, so I use the 970 for OS drive. I really lament that intel canned Optaine drives, as those were the next step in performance