128 gb slower?

[theking]

Hi, i really dont have much games so 128 GB is enough. I was going to buy the Samsung 840 pro 128gb ssd. And i noticed that the specs are better on the 256 and 512gb models. Will that be a noticeable in normal use and boot up times?

[TheSLSAMG]

Hi, i really dont have much games so 128 GB is enough. I was going to buy the Samsung 840 pro 128gb ssd. And i noticed that the specs are better on the 256 and 512gb models. Will that be a noticeable in normal use and boot up times?

 

No, the performance decrease is only slight. It will be pretty much unnoticeable.

[Glenwing]

Between different SSDs performance difference is not possible to notice.

[Hazy125]

For the same brand and series you won't notice a difference for normal use. You might see some differences between hyper-x SSD's and a 60GB no name SSD

[theking]

Right... So it doesnt matter. Thanks alot

[orangecat]

Don't buy an SSd and only use it for games you load time won't be that much better.

[WoodenMarker]

Don't buy an SSd and only use it for games you load time won't be that much better.

He's not getting it for games. It seems he's getting it as a primary drive.

 

Fyi, don't get the pro. Just get the normal 840. The performance difference is negligible but the price gap is not.

[jbr]

Don't buy an SSd and only use it for games you load time won't be that much better.

 

Wrong.

[orangecat]

Wrong.

Actually true.

[jbr]

Actually true.

 

Wrong.

 

LOL, don't know what planet your living on.

[orangecat]

Wrong.

 

LOL, don't know what planet your living on.

prove it then I have installed games on my SSD and the loading times were not that much different. Don't talk smack if you can't prove it.

[jbr]

prove it then I have installed games on my SSD and the loading times were not that much different. Don't talk smack if you can't prove it.

 

No smack talk.

 

Your comments about SSD's are usually wrong and sometimes downright ridiculous.

[orangecat]

No smack talk.

 

Your comments about SSD's are usually wrong and sometimes downright ridiculous.

Prove it to me that you are right. Seriously do you even own a SSD?

[jbr]

Prove it to me that you are right. Seriously do you even own a SSD?

 

I'd ask you the same thing.

 

Maybe you should check to see your SSD is plugged into a SATA III controller on your board.

[orangecat]

I'd ask you the same thing.

 

Maybe you should check to see your SSD is plugged into a SATA III controller on your board.

First off stop acting like I am an idiot. My SSD is installed into a native Sata 3 interface running off the Intel chipset and yes a SSD is faster at loading games its common sense but its not a huge difference. The price of an SSD is still like 10x the price of a HDD and you get a ton more capacity from a 100$ HDD then you will a 100$ SSD. Maybe it takes you five or six more seconds to load your game but tis not going to make the loading times go from 30 seconds to 3 seconds.

[jbr]

. Maybe it takes you five or six more seconds to load your game but tis not going to make the loading times go from 30 seconds to 3 seconds.

 

Actually speeds can be that significant with games.  Have a tour of Youtube and see.

 

Games are 1's and 0's just like Applications, an SSD does not know the difference.

if you have videos and splash screens disabled then things are much much faster.

 

I'm also sure it you were one of a handful of people claiming Games gain nothing from being installed on SSD's...... again... WRONG.

 

- LOD Switching gets enormous improvements

- Micro-stutter disappears or is greatly reduced.

- z-fighting is a lot less noticeable and annoying.

- Maps and levels load faster

 

I'm sure there are many more you can read on the Bohemia forums [Arma series]  Myself and others were early adopters of SSD willing to pay a premium

for maximum performance from Arma 2/3/Take On Helicopters and other games that stream massive amounts of data from the drive.

 

Simply put, if you have a decent CPU, GPU and RAM then your HDD becomes the bottleneck..  SSD's solve that.

[orangecat]

Actually speeds can be that significant with games.  Have a tour of Youtube and see.

 

Games are 1's and 0's just like Applications, an SSD does not know the difference.

if you have videos and splash screens disabled then things are much much faster.

 

I'm also sure it you were one of a handful of people claiming Games gain nothing from being installed on SSD's...... again... WRONG.

 

- LOD Switching gets enormous improvements

- Micro-stutter disappears or is greatly reduced.

- z-fighting is a lot less noticeable and annoying.

- Maps and levels load faster

 

I'm sure there are many more you can read on the Bohemia forums [Arma series]  Myself and others were early adopters of SSD willing to pay a premium

for maximum performance from Arma 2/3/Take On Helicopters and other games that stream massive amounts of data from the drive.

 

Simply put, if you have a decent CPU, GPU and RAM then your HDD becomes the bottleneck..  SSD's solve that.

Z-Fighting is not a problem that gets fixed with a faster storage device you clearly don't even know what that is. Linus has way more experience then you do in computer parts and benchmarking and even he says that it doesn't make that much of a difference. Personally i have tested this and what he said is true and I don't know what else to say. The way i see it is that I am right because I know I am and you don't seem to agree with me for whatever reason. Only a select few games actually take use of a SSd when it is installed on one. Loading times can be reduced allot and streaming files form the storage disk can be improved but not all games require this. Take Skyrim for example most of the game is loaded into ram and what isn't is loaded from disk fast enough fo that the end user wont even notice any hiccups ingame. i run my entire steam library off a external HDD and yea my loading time are not perfect but they are not that much better wen it runs off my SSD. The loading time are not so much better that using a HDD is going to make me join a multiplayer game last or cause my to die because the game is locking up waiting for object in a game to load. I am not saying a SSd doesn't improve performance i'm just saying its not night and day when it comes to loading times and thats a fact. Now if you want to tell me I'm wrong again go right ahead because I'm done responding to you.

 

BTW this is Z-Fighting... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z-fighting

[theking]

I am getting it for my OS. i think i will buy the 840 evo 120 instead. I have like 2 games.

[MG2R]

Fyi, don't get the pro. Just get the normal 840. The performance difference is negligible but the price gap is not.

Listen to this dude.

 

I got my girlfriend a regular 840 and it is freaking fast.

 

EDIT: 840 evo is a good idea as well ;)

Edited August 13, 2013 by MG2R

[WoodenMarker]

prove it then I have installed games on my SSD and the loading times were not that much different. Don't talk smack if you can't prove it.

No smack talk.

Your comments about SSD's are usually wrong and sometimes downright ridiculous.

Prove it to me that you are right. Seriously do you even own a SSD?

Jbr is right you know. I know experience that games can load faster from ssds. Kilobytez95, maybe you don't notice it yourself but I do and the numbers are there.

Not my video but check the description for load times.

[TheProfosist]

Yes on last gen ssds below ~256gb you loose considerable speed especially with writes. The intel 520 and comparable drives were the same way. With the newer ones like the 840 evo, m500, intel dc ssds anything below ~500gb (400gb for the dc 3700 as it has a ton of overprovisioning) you lose considerable speed. This is due to the few number of chips needed thus they only populate half the channels, at least this was the case with the 520. Also the 330 only use half of them for every size I believe.

[orangecat]

Jbr is right you know. I know experience that games can load faster from ssds. Kilobytez95, maybe you don't notice it yourself but I do and the numbers are there.

Not my video but check the description for load times.

I have seen that video and yes loading times are better I know I never said they are not at all but they are not so big tat its worth spending 100s of dollars on a SSD large enough to hold a large steam library on. if the lading times went from 60 seconds to under 10 then yea I could see why it would be a good idea but the loading times are only a few seconds better maby 10 at best for 90% of games. I could see if you had like dual 780s or something you are probably a serious gamer and maby a SSD storage drive you games would be good for you but 90% of gamers wont care and its to expensive for not that much better loading times.

[MG2R]

Jbr is right you know. I know experience that games can load faster from ssds. Kilobytez95, maybe you don't notice it yourself but I do and the numbers are there.

Not my video but check the description for load times.

He said that he knows it makes a difference, he just said that he doesn't think the 3 to 5 second difference in load times is worth the incredible premium you pay per GB of space.

[orangecat]

He said that he knows it makes a difference, he just said that he doesn't think the 3 to 5 second difference in load times is worth the incredible premium you pay per GB of space.

Thanks for understanding. i know there are some games that having a SSD makes a huge difference but most games load in under 15 seconds and the SSD only shaves maybe 6 seconds off at best. The file structure of 90% of games are not optimized for SSDs and that is why loading times are crappy. Why pay 700+ $ for a 1TB SSD when you can get 1TB HDD for 80$ and have loading time that are not to bad at all.

[TheProfosist]

Thanks for understanding. i know there are some games that having a SSD makes a huge difference but most games load in under 15 seconds and the SSD only shaves maybe 6 seconds off at best. The file structure of 90% of games are not optimized for SSDs and that is why loading times are crappy. Why pay 700+ $ for a 1TB SSD when you can get 1TB HDD for 80$ and have loading time that are not to bad at all.

a consumer would be kinda stupid to buy as 1TB ssd now