PS5 won't run straight off HDDs. You can use HDD as storage for PS5 games. But you need to continuously swap the game between the Hard Drive and SSD drive to play games. So it wouldn't be 300GB, it'll be the same as the XSX of 100GB.
You arent following the chain of posts my friend.
Amiga said PS5 could store the games uncompressed because it has more throughput.
Its RAW speed is about equal to the XSXs compressed throughput.
So compress on XSX while uncompressed on PS5. (for a theoretical increase in performance)
Im trying to convince him/them that this is a bad idea.
If the game is in an uncompressed state it would be bigger than a game that is in a compressed state.
So compressed 100GB vs 300GB uncompressed.
The PS5 has limited SSD space internally.
A Final Flash 4.0 SSD will likely cost half the console (~$200)
Amiga suggests cheap HDD.
PS5 cant play games off HDD, which means user will have to transfer large uncompressed games slow as fuck between HDD and SSD everytime they want to play.
The alternative is to use the PS5s stellar dedicated hardware decompression to keep games sizes reasonable while maintaining excellent performance as the PS5 is designed with this very technique in mind.
I don't have a Switch memory expansion, I only play one game at a time. It's manageable without extra cost. a console gives you the minimal requirements shared by everyone. you can spend on extra convenience however you choose.
3 x 300GB games will lapse the PS5s SSD.
The attach rate of PS4 was 9 games.
Assuming that remains the same, hell PS5 owners will have even lowballing atleast 6 games.
Making the average game be 300+GBs is dumb when you have brilliant hardware that can do decompression for you basically for free.
