The SSD and you. - Page 2

kaffis · 2012-04-11, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by Goku

Well there you go. Thanks for the feedback. Just depends on what you are looking for.

Yup, that definitely should be the takeaway message.

duomaxwl · 2012-04-11, 09:23 AM

Originally Posted by MonsterBone

For instance I learned how to mklink /J "D:Steamsteamappscommoncall of duty black ops" "C:call of duty black ops" certain files from D to C.

There's a program called SteamTool that does that for you. Not that mklinking is hard, it just helps those more inclined to be lazy (like me) and makes a decent GUI out of it.

Nick · 2012-04-11, 10:28 AM

SSDs are one of the biggest hardware upgrades in the modern days for gaming. Yes, it makes that much of a difference.

Baneblade · 2012-04-11, 10:58 AM

Not to divert the topic, but has anyone tried RAID configurations with SSDs? Do they perform significantly faster? Are SSDs more reliable than HDDs?

Rbstr · 2012-04-11, 11:53 AM

I don't know why anyone would be afraid, but I don't want or need one.
Current SSDs mean one thing to me: Extra work for extreme benefit in 1% of total time spent on a computer.

In general usage, I seen negligible benefit:
I don't start up/shut down my system more than a couple times a week at most, encompassing, perhaps 5 minutes of total time out of several dozen hours of operation.
The browser is always open...Even if it's not Chrome takes, perhaps, a second to load.
Video players (and this actually goes hand-in-hand with some gaming issues, below), Office programs, little utilities, whatever, all of those load times are negligible.
It doesn't help frame rates. So I get shorter load times but that is, again, a negligible part of the experience already.

What I really gain with an SSD is a whole host of annoyance:
Instead of just stuffing low use/archival/large stuff on the secondary or external drive, I've got to actively manage what's installed on the primary "fast" drive or see no benefit what so ever.
With a 120gb some SSD, I could have, maybe, 5-6 modern 10-20gb (and they're only getting larger) games when you include all the space a system needs. That means I've got to move shit around all the time.

Or I could stick with a drive that's an order of magnitude larger and not deal with any of it outside of full-system upgrade time scales.

Now this isn't to say I discount them outright. I'd love one in a notebook and if I could get the same size for 2x or even 3x the cost of a spinner I'd go for it. But right now it's added cost and hassle for marginal benefit.

Goku · 2012-04-11, 12:05 PM

Rbstr I don't agree with that at all. I almost cannot stand even using my secondary computer that doesn't have a SSD. It just feels that much faster having one in your computer. Have you even tried one yet? I wasn't ever expecting to notice the difference that much.

My lowly netbook with a AMD E-350 got a huge breath of life into with the upgrade to a SSD. Its so much faster and smoother now its ridiculous. It had a WD Black 320GB Scorpio in it previously and that isn't a slow laptop hdd either.

Natir · 2012-04-11, 12:46 PM

For myself, I love my SSD. I have my OS and my primary games/programs on it. Everything else is on my secondary. And any game that does not need the extra speed, I just stick on the other drive, like some RTS games, single player, etc. Look to Youtube for some raid SSD info. They have a few good videos.

Rbstr · 2012-04-11, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by Goku

Rbstr I don't agree with that at all. I almost cannot stand even using my secondary computer that doesn't have a SSD. It just feels that much faster having one in your computer. Have you even tried one yet? I wasn't ever expecting to notice the difference that much.

My lowly netbook with a AMD E-350 got a huge breath of life into with the upgrade to a SSD. Its so much faster and smoother now its ridiculous. It had a WD Black 320GB Scorpio in it previously and that isn't a slow laptop hdd either.

It is better, but it's not night and day in the least. In my eyes, the SSD suffers from "good enough" syndrome plus added annoyance. If there is one thing I'm not going to do, that's add annoyance to something that serves me very well already.

It's like...DVD vs Blu-ray. The difference is fairly large, but DVDs are pretty damn ok already. People aren't that excited about them. Only to complete the analogy, the blu-ray now has to be rewound or you've got to swap disks in the middle of a movie.

Give me $150 to add to the cost of my computer and I'll upgrade basically anything else before I step up to the SSD.

Goku · 2012-04-11, 01:37 PM

Like I said have you used one before?

This annoyance you speak of doesn't even effect me. I only put the main games I play on my 120GB. It still isn't even close to full.

**CyclesMcHurtz** · 2012-04-11, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

Not to divert the topic, but has anyone tried RAID configurations with SSDs? Do they perform significantly faster? Are SSDs more reliable than HDDs?

Suddenly, I'm reminded of what R.A.I.D. actually stands for ...

Saieno · 2012-04-11, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by CyclesMcHurtz

Suddenly, I'm reminded of what R.A.I.D. actually stands for ...

I think thats why they changed it haha. I believe you're referring to Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks, which was then changed to Redundant Array of Independent Disks. Still, I completely agree with ya on your unstated sentiment haha.

Baneblade · 2012-04-11, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by CyclesMcHurtz

Suddenly, I'm reminded of what R.A.I.D. actually stands for ...

smartass

Hermes · 2012-04-11, 03:41 PM

The speed is addictive. I acquired a work laptop with a replaced ssd. It's got around 230gigs usable, can't remember the read/write speeds I was getting the other day when i checked but it's fun times.

It blue screens in the most horrific way from time to time, but after an initial rage + cold sweat I still haven't motivated myself to change it. Because it's amusingly fast.

In fact I bought one for my new desktop.

EDIT: 400MB/sec Which is pretty useful.

duomaxwl · 2012-04-11, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

Not to divert the topic, but has anyone tried RAID configurations with SSDs? Do they perform significantly faster? Are SSDs more reliable than HDDs?

If you're referring to RAID0, than yes, I tried it when I got the M4's. The benchmarks were doubled, but I didn't notice a difference in load times. Plus, as of right now, most SSD's can't take advantage of TRIM when in RAID0, so it's kind of pointless. I un-zero'd them, and haven't looked back.

Originally Posted by Hermes

It blue screens in the most horrific way from time to time, but after an initial rage + cold sweat I still haven't motivated myself to change it

What kind do you have? I have yet to have any issues whatsoever with the M4s with the exception of Windows 7 not wanting to detect them for an install at first.

Baneblade · 2012-04-11, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by duomaxwl

If you're referring to RAID0, than yes, I tried it when I got the M4's. The benchmarks were doubled, but I didn't notice a difference in load times. Plus, as of right now, most SSD's can't take advantage of TRIM when in RAID0, so it's kind of pointless. I un-zero'd them, and haven't looked back.

That jives with what I've been reading about it. Thanks.