HDD versus SSD

I've seen this huge push to get people off harddrives and onto SSD's these last few years, especially in the gaming section of the PC crowd. What's up with that? Is there any reason you'd wanna fork out your cash for a 'gaming' SSD?
Any of you fags do this, is so, Why?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card
archive.is/umIUT
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

...

that's retarded, but a standard SSD is a good idea.

Read times are faster, which means you load you OS/games faster, plus they run cooler than standard HDDs.

There's nothing stopping someone using a 10tb HDD in conjunction with an SSD.

What could you use 10TB for though?
I have 2TB and never came close to filling it and that made me switch to ssd's.

I can pick up a 2TB HDD for 40 and be content with it for a few years. Let faggots jump to SSDs and bring down HDD prices as a whole.

OS on a small SSD, everything else on a HDD.
You don't need a large harddrive anyway unless you want to put some AAA games with uncompressed audiofiles on it.

I hear they have a much shorter life span than that of a hard drive. What keeps me from getting one is the cost per GB.

I've got a couple of 1TB SSDs but then again I use shit like Photoshop and After Effects and fast scratch disks is a big performance boost. I've got all my vidya and media on some big HDDs though.

WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO THIS BOARD?

SSDs are not viable as the only storage in your PC. They are simply too expensive to use them for media and even most games.

But having a 128/256gb SSD for your OS and games/software that are know for having long load times is pretty handy. I was on the fence with SSDs for quite some time but they simply don't cost that much anymore and the boost is worth it.

This is clearly bait.
In case anyone's genuinely lazy, SSDs are faster than normal spinning platter HDDs. Google if you want specifics

Because you turn an SSD around and it won't instantly break.


Which is logical as an SSD can read data when gaming at around 150MBPS, a HDD in comparison does the same thing at 18mbps, that's a bit more then 10% the speed of an SSD

No.
Yes, if you're actively playing games and you want instant loading times getting an SSD is the way to go. Store the games you're actively playing and your OS on your SSD and store your media library on your harddisk.

more like a few random anons

but yeah I recommend going for the SSD OP

Why not just use both?

SSD for things you run regularly and HDDs for general storage and backups.

I asked why there's been such a big push for SSD's in PC video games as it hardly improves loading times and isn't all that more reliable, depending on what you get. On top of that, if anyone here had made the switch and if so, why.


This is what I do. I bought a cheap small SSD that I keep my essentials on, like the OS, and a few programs. But no games

...

Dude - you don't need that much porn.

I do have 4TB of HDD storage in my main rig. And 3TB externally on harddrives with anime, movies and gay shit I haven't put in any other computers as of yet.

It's retarded, having an SSD for your OS and most used programs is a good idea but bothering to put games you play on it isn't, unless you want to erase and redownload/copy back shit constantly just use a normal HDD for your games, the gains aren't worth the trouble in most games since the loading times aren't always bottlenecked by disk reading speed.

And if you really wanted to go out of your way to bother copying ames back to your SSD just for potential smaller load times just go for a huge RAMdisk

Faster boot and read/write speeds for shittily optimised games, that's pretty much it. Any actual storage requirement is more than satisfied by a HDD.

This is a shitpost / summer thread, but I'll bite.

SSDs and HDDs serve different purposes.

SSDs read and write data faster then HDDs, but writing and re-writing data to an SSD will damage it over time. Reading the data is thankfully harmless.

HDDs are slower than SSDs, but you can re-write it as much as you like and it will never damage the disk, assuming the motor doesn't burn out.

And yes, the previously mentioned fact that large capacity HDDs are much cheaper.

SSDs are good for your OS and programs so they run faster.

HDDs are good for all of your media files, photos, and documents, so they don't take up space on your SSD. Double bonus that as you write and re-write media files as you download, edit, delete, or move them, you're not wasting precious write cycles on your SSD and preserve it's lifespan.

However, if you choose to use an SSD for your programs, you must be less flippant with installing and uninstalling.

Sage because this thread is garbage.

I always thought SSD's were more for people who needed more space, but not several TB's of space.

I have an SSD that I install vidya to and a few other programs.
HDD for OS and personal/media files, because I don't want to wear an SSD with writes from an OS and the storage allows me to keep the media around. I don't care about boot speeds.
External HDD for backups.

If I'm not mistaken, a feature of SSDs is that when you delete something, it is actually deleted. Not like "permanent delete" on an HDD where it simply marks the space available for writing and it's actually recoverable through file recovery and carving, but actually deletes it.

I've been using mine for over 4 years now and it still works like the day I've bought it. Key is not being an absolute retard and rewriting data constantly.

Nigga, just because your system isn't screaming: ==this operation is taking twice as long because you're being a poorfag that only uses a HDD== doesn't mean you're not being bottlenecked.

Move your system around a lot? Congratulations you just broke your HDD because the needle on the header scratched the platter. It's the reason most laptops die after just a year or two of use.

Forgot to mention if you're running Linux you could just partition /var and /home on the HDD and put the rest on SSD.

If your computer has been turned off properly that doesn't happen, now if you move your computer while it's turned on that's your problem.

For games specifically it doesn't improve thing anywhere near as much as you seem to think it does

That wasn't what I said, user. I said it was hardly faster, which is true.
For games, you'll see seconds of load time improvement, and not much else, assuming you're not using a HDD from 2004.

Are you booting off a fucking punch card or something?

As an illiterate when it comes to computers I could probably say yes

SSDs are great, user. My boot time went down to like five seconds when I put Windows on one.


They're for people who want to remove the bottleneck of read/write speeds.


Potentially. SSDs are made with an amount of space that's greater than the advertised capacity. It uses this extra space at random to increase its lifespan. It's impossible for most people to tell if something is actually deleted, or if the used space is just replaced with another section.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_card

What I don't get it why people tell me not to put my page file on my ssd.
Isn't page file EXACTLY the kind of thing I want faster read/write on?

At a guess I'd say it's because of how often it has to be written to, decreasing the lifespan of the drive. Like others in the thread have said you want shit that you'll read often rather than write to/change often.

Yeah, i just read that user's post.
I didn't know only writing aged ssds, i figured it was reading and writing.

It makes more sense now. But still, wouldn't speeding up virtual memory give a good boost in all kinds of loading times and operations?
I mean, even with just your OS, your always downloading updates, and your temporary internet files and thumbnails are constantly being updated and changed.

It seems like a whole bad idea to just have the OS on the ssd now.
Might as well just have programs, and avoid putting in programs that are constantly saving temporary files, like your web browser (another thing everyone wants to speed up).

Well, ideally you'll have any critical information on a HDD and/or backed up in other locations so how careful you want to be about the lifespan of the drive really depends on whether or not you can afford to replace it rather than what data you lose.

I personally haven't had enough experience with the drives over a long enough time (and considering how recently they came into common use, most probably don't) to really say how badly more frequent writing affects the drive over the years.

I keep all my gaming shit on HDD and all my OS shit on SSD. Also some applications as well but not the material they work with (that goes on another drive).

SSDs are getting better on the $$$/GB end of things but it will still be a few years before they are around HDD levels. I can see that happening sooner rather than later as we are starting to see (expensive) consumer grade 1TB SSDs, which I suspect will be affordable in the next 3-5 years.


Windows you are only downloading patches once a month. Linux, whenever you feel the need to update.

The trick is to set the amount of drive space the computer can access (the partition size) to 75% the absolute maximum it could use. That way when a bit of it goes down hill for whatever reason, it uses the 25% slack to make up for the issue.

Of course if you are getting a 1TB SSD, that would only give you about 750GB of usable space for example, although with the larger capacity drives the ratio might be a bit more flexible.

There's an old AnandTech article about the whole thing: archive.is/umIUT

Website isn't what it used to be (like most hardware sites) but back in the day they had a lot of good info on a regular basis.

The longest loading time since I've switched to SSD for OS and games has been maybe 6 seconds? Contrasted to 30-90 seconds for a standard HDD, that's substantial. Maybe you've been buying shitty SSD's.

More like good HDD's. The longest loading time in a game the last… 3 year or so on PC has been Subnautica.

Notice how i'm not shitting on SSD's when it comes to things like Adobe or an OS. I thought I was quite clear I was talking about the push for getting people to disgard their HDD's in favor of SSD's when it comes to storing digital games.

Yeah SSDs for games isn't really needed at this point. It's more for OS and applications (read: Adobe and their otherwise 80 year load times).

Also if you have LOTS to blow, high capacity enterprise SSDs are pretty neat for video rendering (not so much video storage though) if you also have the hex core+ system to go with it.

Also does that guy sign all his tweets with his profile picture or was that a special occasion?

I work in a refurb pc parts warehouse, and one thing we need to do is sanitize disks.
One thing I see, is that pretty much every single drive has a different write speed, even two drives of the same model.
Also, most SSDs are not far ahead of the good HDDs.

However, those HP zturbo pci-e SSDs are fucking incredible. Ridiculously fast write speeds.
But those only work in the HP worstations. I don't know if anyone else makes similar hardware for enthusiast PCs.

Plextor did have a bunch of very fast PCIe SSDs, they're pretty good but a pain in the ass to make bootable.

Nice selfie, faggot. Other anons were right - you are retarded and so is your thread

Summerfags