ssd's and gaming pc's

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, CatXice said:

 the pc loads it faster coz its got a 7600k in it not a dual core 2,3ghz thing in it 

That's not how loading things works

[CatXice]

1 minute ago, chris76816 said:

No, I was agreeing with you that it is worth a game loading faster, besides, an ssd only costs like 40 pounds, http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/product/m34NnQ/sandisk-ssd-plus-120gb-25-solid-state-drive-sdssda-120g-g26

ye it will load faster but that £40 takes u from a 212 evo to a aio cooler giving u better cpu performance in a system built around cpu and gpu performance 

[chris76816]

3 minutes ago, CatXice said:

ye it will load faster but that £40 takes u from a 212 evo to a aio cooler giving u better cpu performance in a system built around cpu and gpu performance 

whatever, enjoy your 1 minute bootup

[done12many2]

5 minutes ago, CatXice said:

am not am tryin to help people get better gaming for there money i said if u want a ssd get 1 but its not the best thing to do if its a gamin pc

 

See here's the thing.  Nobody thinks the way you do about the subject.  You don't seem to be picking up on that.

 

We're not saying that you're wrong for using a HDD as that happened to fit your budget, but if you think that we're all going to switch back to HDD in our next build because of this thread, you're wrong.  No way would any of us that have experienced SSD give that up.

 

If you are low on money for the build, sure a HDD is fine, but it is far from optimal.

[Mira Yurizaki]

3 minutes ago, CatXice said:

well it dosnt does it? coz i have a 5400rpm hdd and my laptop has a 7200rpm hdd and the pc loads it faster coz its got a 7600k in it not a dual core 2,3ghz thing in it 

That's only part of the picture:

Spoiler

 

2 minutes ago, CatXice said:

am not am tryin to help people get better gaming for there money i said if u want a ssd get 1 but its not the best thing to do if its a gamin pc

We're not saying it's the best thing for gaming. However, a gaming machine should be well balanced across the board. Sticking a 5,400 RPM drive in your gaming rig may as well be giving a high end sports car 89 octane. It'll still run and it'll probably run better than a Honda Civic, but it's still something that's holding it back.

 

[DocSwag]

Have you ever tried the two side by side? The boot up times are at least 4-5 times faster, especially when the hard drive is full, and with an SSD you don't get that pesky everything is slow for a minute or two after having just booted up. All your applications and files launch multiple times faster. And while I know that you're thinking, "Do I really care that Google Chrome took 0.1 seconds to launch instead of 3?", subconsciously it makes your PC feel waayyyyy faster. Searching files is much faster. Copying files is way faster. Writing files is way faster. Everything is way faster. If you don't have an SSD yet, I suggest you just get a cheap 120gb SSD, such as the SanDisk SSD Plus (which only costs $50), and just try it out and see the difference it makes. On paper, it doesn't sound like you'll notice the difference, but boy do you notice it. It's one of those things that when you're using the HDD, you don't think you need the SSD, but once you get the SSD, there's no going back.

[LabRat]

I can hear Bones from Star Trek right now............. good god man, this isn't 2008.

[plsno]

13 minutes ago, CatXice said:

u all said the same thing but things load faster ye no shit they do but u dont need fast loading times when your playing games

 

 

Go play world of warcraft and get back to me on that. 

[done12many2]

2 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

but boy do you notice it.

 

Worth repeating.  

[Guest]

I guess op saying an ssd is not needed without using an ssd

[DocSwag]

8 minutes ago, CatXice said:

well it dosnt does it? coz i have a 5400rpm hdd and my laptop has a 7200rpm hdd and the pc loads it faster coz its got a 7600k in it not a dual core 2,3ghz thing in it 

Processor speed makes no difference to load times. Even high end SSDs don't read and write data fast enough to be bottlenecked by the CPU. More likely the reason is either because the laptop HDD is more full and/or more fragmented, or your desktop's HDD is larger and so the radius is larger which lets the head be able to read more data per second.

[Vigilante505]

18 minutes ago, CatXice said:

but in a bugget gaming pc i would rather have frames over fast boot and loading times 

"bugget"

 

The guy is trolling. Everyone knows the benefit of an SSD even in a lowly gaming PC. 

[DocSwag]

1 minute ago, Vigilante505 said:

"bugget"

 

The guy is trolling. Everyone knows the benefit of an SSD even in a lowly gaming PC. 

I don't think he's trolling. He's just never gotten to experience what an SSD is like, so he doesn't realize just how much better it is.

[Cyborgsmith]

1 minute ago, Vigilante505 said:

"bugget"

 

The guy is trolling. Everyone knows the benefit of an SSD even in a lowly gaming PC. 

Trolling or just young and inexperienced. This thread makes my head hurt. 

[i_build_nanosuits]

22 minutes ago, CatXice said:

last time i checked when i was on a bf1 i wasnt opening and closeing loads of programs u know coz i have a gaming pc not a workstation i want to game on

you load battlefield 1 maps from a HDD?!? holy crap...hope you play conquest otherwise you must be doing 50% waiting, 50% gaming...

i'm playing domination and there is NO WAY on earth i would tolerate BF1 on an HDD...hell nahh

[CatXice]

if your building a gaming pc and you cheap out on a part for an ssd its not worth it if you build it and have left over money knock your self out. but in a pc designed for gaming you want max cpu and gpu performance which means you want the best cpu gpu ram and coolers you can afford to buy 

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, CatXice said:

if your building a gaming pc and you cheap out on a part for an ssd its not worth it if you build it and have left over money knock your self out. but in a pc designed for gaming you want max cpu and gpu performance which means you want the best cpu gpu ram and coolers you can afford to buy 

 

Everyone already knows this.  This has been common knowledge for MANY years.

[Mira Yurizaki]

3 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

Processor speed makes no difference to load times. Even high end SSDs don't read and write data fast enough to be bottlenecked by the CPU. More likely the reason is either because the laptop HDD is more full and/or more fragmented, or your desktop's HDD is larger and so the radius is larger which lets the head be able to read more data per second.

Actually it does. Applications are not magically ready to use once everything is loaded in RAM. The application has to initialize which takes CPU power.

 

I made a post earlier that showed that GTA V with a fast enough processor loading from an HDD can almost match a slower processor loading from an SSD in loading time.

 

[i_build_nanosuits]

4 minutes ago, CatXice said:

if your building a gaming pc and you cheap out on a part for an ssd its not worth it if you build it and have left over money knock your self out. but in a pc designed for gaming you want max cpu and gpu performance which means you want the best cpu gpu ram and coolers you can afford to buy 

if you're browsing the internet or doing ANYTHING else other than gaming...and SSD is absolutely worth it it makes EVERYTHING feel A LOT quicker and snappier...storage is the main bottleneck in a modern day PC...so unless ALL you do is gaming...like you don't watch youtube...you don't watch porn, you don't copy files, edit photos or videos from time to time,  you do nothing of that...then get a PS4 why did you bought a PC to begin with if you don't need it.

[Mira Yurizaki]

2 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

Everyone already knows this.  This has been common knowledge for MANY years.

But they're claiming you shouldn't even consider an SSD until you have, and I'm probably going to exaggerate their argument, high end components. i.e., you shouldn't even consider an SSD until you have an i7 with a GTX 1070 or GTX 1080

[CatXice]

2 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

you have no idea what you're talking about...if your browsing the internet or doing ANYTHING else other than gaming...and SSD is absolutely worth it it makes EVERYTHING feel A LOT quicker and snappier...storage is the main bottleneck in a modern day PC...so unless ALL you do is gaming...like you donm't watch you tube...you don't watch porn, you don't copy files, edit photos videos from time to time you do nothing of that...then get a PS4 why did you bought a PC to begin with if you don't need it.

am not sayin dont get a ssd but the people who get worse cpu's and gpu's to get a ssd on a rig they intend to only use for gaming and web browsing shouldn't be 

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, M.Yurizaki said:

But they're claiming you shouldn't even consider an SSD until you have, and I'm probably going to exaggerate their argument, high end components. i.e., you shouldn't even consider an SSD until you have an i7 with a GTX 1070 or GTX 1080

well i have a 980ti and an i7 but i have 4 SSD's...i should probably consider a TitanXP instead huh?!

[i_build_nanosuits]

Just now, CatXice said:

am not sayin dont get a ssd but the people who get worse cpu's and gpu's to get a ssd on a rig they intend to only use for gaming and web browsing shouldn't be 

an SSD is something that CAN be considered for a future upgrade if you have to cut down on main components...yes...IF you're willing to have a sloppy machine that takes 39 seconds to boot...19 seconds to launch firefox etc.

[STRMfrmXMN]

22 minutes ago, CatXice said:

u all said the same thing but things load faster ye no shit they do but u dont need fast loading times when your playing games

OK, here's an example.

 

SSDs feel significantly faster due to their random read/write capabilities which are vastly superior to any mechanical hard drive. Most any operation your system is doing in the background while you play games is a random read or write operation. While you play your game a component to a map is loading, a character model is loading, etc. These things aren't too hard and a hard drive that's not doing anything but loading these things is gonna be fine. Maps will take longer to load and (example: Overwatch) you'll probably not be able to insta-lock a character. While you're playing your game your system decides to do updates in the background. Well now you're out any sort of loading times to the point where the game will likely stutter to unplayable levels. With an SSD this wouldn't happen as it can handle far more read and write transactions at once before stuttering. 

 

OK, so you've installed your game, say it's GTA V which is 60GB. For whatever reason you notice the game takes nearly 3 minutes to load from Steam. You open the Disk Defragment application in Windows and see your hard drive is 35% fragmented. Well great, you're now out an hour and a half waiting for your hard drive to become usable again. If you insist on using this PC while it's defragging it's going to be painfully slow. 

 

Oh yeah, after a year of using the PC it's gotten slow and crappy. No such problem with an SSD.

[DocSwag]

4 minutes ago, CatXice said:

if your building a gaming pc and you cheap out on a part for an ssd its not worth it if you build it and have left over money knock your self out. but in a pc designed for gaming you want max cpu and gpu performance which means you want the best cpu gpu ram and coolers you can afford to buy 

Disagreed unless the performance difference is substantial. If it's rx 470+SSD vs. rx 480+HDD, I'd say rx 470 any day, but if it's 1050 ti+SSD vs rx 470+HDD then I'd pick rx 470.

2 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Actually it does. Applications are not magically ready to use once everything is loaded in RAM. The application has to initialize which takes CPU power.

 

I made a post earlier that showed that GTA V with a fast enough processor loading from an HDD can almost match a slower processor loading from an SSD in loading time.

 

Really? I thought CPUs were fast enough that that didn't matter at all. Afterall, most SSDs can transfer data at around 500-1000 MB/s peak, which translates to around 4 billion to 8 billion bits/sec, and CPUs these days are clocked at at least a few billion clocks per second plus they have multiple cores and each core can process lots of data at a time. Could you show me your post?