ssd's whats the story ???

ok so i went out did overtime at xmas and got myself a corsair performance pro 128 ...
other than boot time can i really see a diffrence ??? well no bf3,eve all my other games run the same .. yes there on the ssd .. hmmm


so i did the cdm test ..
this is with the drive 53% full..

read write
seq 298.1 303.7

512k 269.4 312.9

4k 26.75 69.30

4k 263.0 217.3
qd32


so is that good or bad some of it is nothing near what sites bench at some is ..hmmm

i'm running on a phen x6 @4.1ghz on a crosshair v board ...??

tell me what ya think are these drives that there pushing really needed or is it just all over hype ..

Games wont really get faster other than load times, the system will be more responsive though and just generally snappier. I think they are more notices in laptops tbh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flearider

ok so i went out did overtime at xmas and got myself a corsair performance pro 128 ...
other than boot time can i really see a diffrence ??? well no bf3,eve all my other games run the same .. yes there on the ssd .. hmmm


so i did the cdm test ..
this is with the drive 53% full..

read write
seq 298.1 303.7

512k 269.4 312.9

4k 26.75 69.30

4k 263.0 217.3
qd32


so is that good or bad some of it is nothing near what sites bench at some is ..hmmm

i'm running on a phen x6 @4.1ghz on a crosshair v board ...??

tell me what ya think are these drives that there pushing really needed or is it just all over hype ..

---

SSD's won't likely improve framerate, what you'll see is reduced loading times, reduced booting times, reduced search times and faster file transfers. SSDs really pull ahead in random reads, so anything based on that you will notice a difference.

It's all about where the bottleneck is, which in games is more likely to be the CPU or GPU. What you have done though is upgraded from a mechanical component to an electronic one, so on balance probably quite a cost effective upgrade for general use. In specific situations you will see massive or little improvements, depending on the component most directly responsible for this performance.

This is why I really try to stress in SSD threads that they only improve load times.....so many use phrases like "best PC upgrade", "biggest upgrade in years", "never seen such a performance boost" etc.....which can be extremely misleading.

I find that about a lot of components. These clever marketing ppl know what they're doing, and this is just the latest thing to get excited about. I do think though that SSDs are effectively the final piece of the current puzzle, and certainly in older machines and laptops can make quite a pronounced difference for day to day use.

They are quite expensive at the moment, but SSDs are more reliable? They are chips (PCM isn't it, or still using flash memory?).

Suppose they will last longer, should be cooler as well.

I am going to wait till they are cheap, for the price they aren't worth it.

Gaming wise, pointless to upgrade JUST for gaming. No performance hits using a hard drive, may be a bit quicker but for say £300? Worth it, my opinion no.

Loading times are already quick, about 10 seconds on my machine. That is quick enough for me :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shaithis

This is why I really try to stress in SSD threads that they only improve load times.....so many use phrases like "best PC upgrade", "biggest upgrade in years", "never seen such a performance boost" etc.....which can be extremely misleading.

---

You're right, but so are the comments you mention.

Personally, when I get a new graphics card I don't necessarily notice it. Yes, I can play a game at 45fps rather than 25fps, but it's more or less the same process each time. Your card gets worse and worse, and you get something that bumps it up again. You probably still can't play a new game at top settings and high resolutions though, unless you're forking out £500 for your graphics cards.

With an SSD on the other hand, there isn't really a hierarchy. You either have one, or you don't. You don't go from 25 seconds of load time with an HDD, to 20 seconds with a 2008 SSD, to 15 seconds with a 2009 SSD and so on - it goes from very slow to incredibly quick, and the huge gulf is incredibly noticeable. Far more so than 15 seconds less to encode a video, or 5 seconds less to encode a .wav, or 5fps faster in a game.

Certainly though, SSDs aren't designed to improve gaming performance. For me, they do though - autosaves are instant, level loads and so on are much quicker, everything feels much smoother. As everyone always says, it depends what you want. Certainly a gamer can manage without an SSD and still have a top notch rig, but once you're used to an SSD machine everything else feels like a muddy slough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikeo01

Gaming wise, pointless to upgrade JUST for gaming. No performance hits using a hard drive, may be a bit quicker but for say £300? Worth it, my opinion no.

Loading times are already quick, about 10 seconds on my machine. That is quick enough for me :)

---

£300 is a bit overzealous. That would buy you a brand new 256GB SSD, which for most is unnecessary. You're right though, for gaming alone it would be a bit odd. The main reason is for snappiness of the OS, games come a distant second to that... once you've got the SSD bug though, everything starts to feel sluggish in comparison :p

They will make the OS generally feel snappier and more responsive, things like alt-tabing will react quicker
load times are reduced.

But as has been said gaming fps isn't going to change, cache swapping would be reduced but with the amount of system ram and vram that's not a major issue these days (and a lot of random writes to the ssd would decrease it life span)

Laptops are the one area where an SSD makes real sense to me, it's an easy upgrade, laptop hard drives are generally slower so even more noticeable difference and no moving parts means almost 0 risk of damage in a portable system that gets moved around.

I'm hoping these SSDs are worth the expense. Read of many failures of a variety of drives, I dont know if it's a witch hunt or not but they dont sound as reliable as they're made out to be.

Buy Samsung or Intel and it will be fine

A SSD is a must have in a modern PC I would say. Ignore the marketeers with all their fancy advertising. The cheapest SSD in a capacity to fit your OS, Apps and may be a game or 2 is all you need.

I have have had a Kingston V100 (non-trim enabled version), OCZ Vertex 2 and Crucial M4 over past 3 years and on the average computer you will not actually notice a difference between them. The important part is simply to have a SSD in first place - any SSD (provided it is reliable that is of course).

I find sluggish computers extremely frustrating to use.

If you don't think the SSD is giving you your money worth go back to a normal hard drive for 3days. I bet you will rip the hard drive out after just a few hours of use to put the SSD back in.

a friend bought a brand new ocz vertex 3 - aweful POS , frequent and random blue screen ` F4` crashes - he went back to his mechanical drive and voila - been rock stable since.

latest mobo bios , firmware for ssd , all settings as suggested (ahci , c3/c6 off etc) and it was aweful

Faulty is the word I would use.