they seroiusly thebest upgrade a PC has seen in the last 10yrs' no otehr part in the PC which has made so much of an impact in performance for the past decade.
Printable View
they seroiusly thebest upgrade a PC has seen in the last 10yrs' no otehr part in the PC which has made so much of an impact in performance for the past decade.
I guess the newer CPUs and GPUs have offered nothing over 10 year old tech compared to disk speed?
Stop spamming for free delivery please, your starting to post nonsense.
Bit harsh!!
Actually, I'd agree - after all hard disks were easily the slowest point in the PC and thus the effect is dramatic. It's even more true on latops - a gen 2 intel drive in my ULV lappy means it starts up to desktop before the windows blobs meet on the boot screen and the overall snappyness of the system is wonderful given it's built for battery life above all.
As has been said, many times, it's down to personal preference but I don't think binning his opinion was warranted just because yours doesn't correlate.
I think SSD's are great ive got a few. Have to say its worth getting a god brand like the crucial though as Ive had 2 cheap ones fail. Everything is backed up on my NAS but i still wish i had spent a little more on a decent one.
i think its the OTT time frame of 10 years. Clearly CPU and RAM performance are going to have made just as if not more significant affects on overall performance than an SSD 10 years ago (in the hypothetical situation that they were in existence then).Quote:
Originally Posted by dangel
Also add in the fact all 21 of his posts have been made today, a number of which have been on relatively stale threads... i think we know his motives for being here.
Same goes for this kustom guy...
I'd agree, hard disks have been the bottleneck for years and years. Arguably the next bottleneck will be the S-ATA interface if it isn't already?
I think I'm going to try and pick up a cheap one second hand on 'ere.
Well thanks for the warm welcome Biscuit. :undecided
To quote this site
"With you all registered and logged into the site you are required to make 20 constructive posts before the system will allow you to register with Scan. You will now need to wait till midnight of the day when you reach 20 posts in order for the database at Scan to recognise your registration. So go off, have a cup of tea, eat some food, and come back and join in discussions here if you want, before getting some sleep, ready for the new day."
So its a bit unfair to flame people when they do just that.
I'm not going to deny part of the reason I joined was the generous offer. But still I was looking to join for the longer term.
But im not here for an argument. :iloveyou:
Back to the original topic, I do think Solid state drives have made a massive difference to computers in recent years, but I agree with Buscuit 10 years is a bit OTT.
Only just saw these replies...
Bit harsh? He was spamming old threads for free postage and adding nothing of worth to discussions....this one just tipped me over the edge tbh.
Firstly, it's been written fast and not checked.....why are they in such a hurry to push the post button that they cannot use the spell checker first?Quote:
they seroiusly thebest upgrade a PC has seen in the last 10yrs' no otehr part in the PC which has made so much of an impact in performance for the past decade.
Secondly, I stand by my comments. SSDs have made very little difference. Unless you perform a task which requires a minimum transfer speed and that speed is less then what a HDD can provide, then you aren't going to see any benefit.
So, build yourself a list of tasks you perform that requires a transfer speed that a standard HDD cannot supply.....
Compare that to the plethora of tasks that are CPU/GPU bound.
While the "delta" between old and new is greater between HDD/SDD....the actual end-user impact can be virtually nil past system bootup speed.
Perhaps if they had been helpful and stated "If you are limited by HDD speed and/or your OS booting faster is imperative to you, then an SSD is probably the best upgrade you could do".....I would have saw his post as being helpful, rather then misinforming. A lot of people who come here for help could read his post and think "my game is running slow.....these SSDs are the biggest performance boosts in 10 years? I got to get me one!"
I apologize Kustom, we have seen quite a surge of users signing up and getting to 20 posts (which are in the most part, pretty useless) then just leaving the community. Gets me quite peed off! If your genuine intention is to stay and get involved then i hope you can accept my apology.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kustom
Its not just about constant transfer rates, its about the ability for the drive to handle a high number of small writes and the access speed, both of which have a noticeable effect in windows. Granted they wont help your frame rates in games but they do significantly reduce loading times.Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
Shaithis i think you have missed the true nature of an SSD, its not the transfer speeds that matter (albeit in specific things like photoshop? or something it can help!) it is the access time which is around .1seconds iirc? compared to a standard HDD its 120x faster and comparing to a laptop drive which is generally a 5k rpm probably hanging around 20ms its even better!. With these low latencies it means everything can be processed quicker heres a very brief example:
My laptop with a 5k rpm hdd took about 2 minutes to logon to win7 pro 64bit and it would only just be able to start opening programs, opening word took 20 seconds and the browser (firefox / chrome / ie9 tried them all) took around 30 - 35 seconds... HUGE LAGS however as soon as i put in a cheaper 40GB intel ssd i went to
10 second boots, instant loading of word (i click the shortcut and tis already open before i move the mouse again!) and the browser takes a mere second or two depending on how many tabs are open!.
Now my lappy is meant purely for uni work, reason why i didnt care for the spec and i need it easily accessible i dont want to be waiting ages for loading applications or booting/ getting out of sleep when i whip it out in a lecture or something perfect for the laptop.
For my PC its been insane, boots are extremely quick and everything opens instantly. In games ive noticed that things like starcraft 2 load much quicker, im generally waiting 30 seconds to a minute longer than people with similar setups without ssds.
Opening many programs is where SSDs shine, if you can only think of booting times being effected then really an SSD is not for you :D
TBH, you'd have to prize my SSD from my cold, dead fingers. The way I see where my SSD speeds things up is not on my system but by how irritated I get using any non SSD system now. Everything takes AGES! I hate using HDD systems now.Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
and I think you completely and utterly missed the point of my post.......Quote:
Originally Posted by Hicks12
And just to sum up AGAIN for those who still do not get it....
What modern software does not reliably run on a 10 year old HDD TODAY?
What modern software does run reliably on a 10 year old CPU, memory and GPU combo?
Once you answer those (all you need are ball-park answers!) then perhaps you could see my problem with the spammer who stated SSDs give the largest impact of any upgrade in the last 10 years....
And I have SSDs from just about every generation of them we have seen and have benchmarked them heavily.....I know what they bring to the table and for me, they would be the first to go. Loading times vs realtime performance.....realtime performance wins every time for me and I am sure every gamer will agree as would most people who use their PCs for more than surfing the net.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shaithis
Apologies Shaithis must have misread the context of your post, i was mainly replying about this line:
I.e there is a huge impact :P. I totally agree that the 10 years is a broad spectrum way to broad, if you bring it down to basically any device that as an AMD / intel dualcore chip it WILL notice a big difference, my laptop is 3 years old now... intel p8400 is its heart yet it does perform well and the SSD amplifies this. The fact HDDs have hardly changed over the years is the reason to this huge difference, cpus gpus etc have improved dramatically over the years and we have got to the point now where most tasks are easy and we are waiting for the age old HDD so its the next step in removing bottlenecks.Quote:
While the "delta" between old and new is greater between HDD/SDD....the actual end-user impact can be virtually nil past system bootup speed.
When you say you know what they bring to the table and they would be the first togo, what do you actually mean? You mean if something had to be cut from your system it would an SSD? Benchmarking drives is a bit of a silly thing todo as it just hinders their performance and loading times is a realtime performance is included in load surely? you open photoshop it can take ages to load yet on an ssd its incredibly quick, we also have the advantage of lower power usage (noticeable improvement for laptops) and noise, for me my hard drives are the loudest thing in my system and its not vibration its simply the sound of spinning which is unavoidable :P.
More on photoshop, for example open up an image edit it then produce the final result requires multiple loading times and an ssd can help massively there. Theres also the fact we are at a stage where low end chips are good enough for the tasks and an ssd will just amplify its speed.
SSDs aren't about (largely sequential) loading times, the main difference is the non-existent access times - random reads and writes are done in a flash (excuse the pun) and that makes everything so much snappier - all those hundreds of background tasks that windows does suddenly no longer get in the way.
If getting rid of the hard drive then battery life and noise will also improve.
In terms of the equivalent priced upgrade between CPU or GPU versions, the same money on an SSD upgrade over a HDD is much more noticeable.
Yup. I'd take longer loading times over any kind of decreased real-time performance or removal of functionality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hicks12
Doing write tests will reduce the lifetime.....but then you can argue the same for a HDD. Just because we are aware of the finite re-write capabilities of SSDs it seems more tangible.....but HDDs take wear and tear from benchmarking also - it's just much harder to quantify.Quote:
Benchmarking drives is a bit of a silly thing todo as it just hinders their performance and loading times is a realtime performance is included in load surely? you open photoshop it can take ages to load yet on an ssd its incredibly quick, we also have the advantage of lower power usage (noticeable improvement for laptops) and noise, for me my hard drives are the loudest thing in my system and its not vibration its simply the sound of spinning which is unavoidable :P.
And if you do not benchmark something, how can you compare it? Sacrifices have to be made, at least occasionally.
Power, noise etc.....none of them make the system do more. They are fringe benefits for people who can justify the outlay.
Oh no im not talking about durability, if you take a drive like a crucial M4 its safe to say it will last 8 years + (in terms of the cells, not the actual device as we all know every type of tech can randomly die :D). Its the fact you are just adding random data that will then be sorted out by TRIM at a later date :P.
I have done a few benchmarks on my SSDs but after that ive 'benched' them in the realworld... i.e i notice the benefit then its ok and if i dont then whats the point. Im yet to find a con for SSDs bar the obvious price!
Its a hard one , as for myself when i finally changed my setup after 4 years (bar the gpu) i could have gone for the i7 2600k instead of the i5 2500k but it provided no tangible benefit over the i5 and the cost was around £85 extra at the time... a 64gb M4 cost £70 at that time and that meant i could either have a new boot drive and an i5 or just an i7, in this scenario i feel the i5 SSD combo kicks ass and make the difference night and day between my old system!.
However if you look at it purely with GPUs then it can be different as buying a £150 gpu vs a £220 gpu can be a big tangible difference, but again quantifiable... a system that can output 80fps instead of 70fps vs an all round snappy system :D.
As you mentioned (and looking at your sig ) you have alot of SSDs, so surely there must be a big reason for you to have invested in them and keeping them rather than reselling asap?