Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Is Buying a SSD Worth It!?

Last response: in Storage
Share
May 3, 2013 9:50:54 PM

Hi everyone
I want to build myself a gaming PC but I'm not sure if its worth it to spend all that money on a SSD. if it is worth it, which SSD should i get.
PS: I live in Australia if that makes a difference
THANKS

More about : buying ssd worth

a b G Storage
May 3, 2013 10:01:23 PM

It's hard to justify the expense, but once you've had one, you will never want to back to those L-O-O-O-N-G boot times. I had my SSD fail on me after nine months, and had to use a 500 GB HDD for the 12 days it took me to get it replaced by the manufacturer. That's when I realized how addicted I had become to fast boot times. Instead of being on my desktop in like 20 seconds, I ended up waiting about two and a half minutes before I could actually do anything. I tell you, I could not wait to get that replacement SSD back!

But . . . If you don't have the money, then you'll have to pass it up. I would trade some frames per second for an SSD, if it was a choice between running new games at 60 fps vs. 45 fps, and medium-to-high settings are fine with me. But then I'm not a hard-core gamer. And I will never voluntarily part with my SSD (256 GB Samsung 830).
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b G Storage
May 3, 2013 10:04:13 PM

Yes it is a big difference and its awesome boot times. I use one for my os and a regular hard drive for files and apps makes it sweet!
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
May 3, 2013 10:10:53 PM

yes it's worth it. Not just for boot times either. Everything feels snappier in windows. It's impossible to go back once you start using an ssd.
If your build is between $750 and about $1000, a 120GB is appropriate. If it's between $1000 and $1500, then a ~256GB is appropriate. But those are just estimations.
Anything smaller than 120GB isn't really worth it since ssds are cheap enough now days. And if you build is less than $750, you might want to wait with the ssd since you'll need all of your budget to get enough gaming power.

Also, I think all of my prices need to be scaled about %15 to %20 since it's australia and there seems to be a special "tax" applied to everything here. I'm living there atm but only for a few months so I haven't really figured out the prices here.
m
0
l
May 3, 2013 10:12:50 PM

Is buying a SSD worth it? Yes it is! Worth it for gaming concerns only? No it's not. The Samsung 840-120GB's are priced pretty decently in the states. No idea how they are price down under. Get the best price to size ratio you can afford. Typically that's the 120-128GB range.
m
0
l
May 3, 2013 10:16:45 PM

Would you take a Cadillac over a Yaris?
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b G Storage
May 3, 2013 10:23:13 PM

Nowadays, I think every PC should include an SSD period. They’re waaaaaaaaay faster and they draw less energy, but unfortunately they do cost a significant amount more than a traditional hard drive.
m
0
l
May 3, 2013 10:29:38 PM

mbreslin1954 said:
It's hard to justify the expense, but once you've had one, you will never want to back to those L-O-O-O-N-G boot times. I had my SSD fail on me after nine months, and had to use a 500 GB HDD for the 12 days it took me to get it replaced by the manufacturer. That's when I realized how addicted I had become to fast boot times. Instead of being on my desktop in like 20 seconds, I ended up waiting about two and a half minutes before I could actually do anything. I tell you, I could not wait to get that replacement SSD back!

But . . . If you don't have the money, then you'll have to pass it up. I would trade some frames per second for an SSD, if it was a choice between running new games at 60 fps vs. 45 fps, and medium-to-high settings are fine with me. But then I'm not a hard-core gamer. And I will never voluntarily part with my SSD (256 GB Samsung 830).


so u saying that ssd increase +- 15 fps when gaming?
m
0
l
a b G Storage
May 3, 2013 10:37:47 PM

serafim said:
mbreslin1954 said:
It's hard to justify the expense, but once you've had one, you will never want to back to those L-O-O-O-N-G boot times. I had my SSD fail on me after nine months, and had to use a 500 GB HDD for the 12 days it took me to get it replaced by the manufacturer. That's when I realized how addicted I had become to fast boot times. Instead of being on my desktop in like 20 seconds, I ended up waiting about two and a half minutes before I could actually do anything. I tell you, I could not wait to get that replacement SSD back!

But . . . If you don't have the money, then you'll have to pass it up. I would trade some frames per second for an SSD, if it was a choice between running new games at 60 fps vs. 45 fps, and medium-to-high settings are fine with me. But then I'm not a hard-core gamer. And I will never voluntarily part with my SSD (256 GB Samsung 830).


so u saying that ssd increase +- 15 fps when gaming?


No he saying that he would take from the cpu/gpu budget to fit an SSD into a build.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a b G Storage
May 3, 2013 10:56:39 PM

On a gaming computer for $500-900, I'd say no. For $900+ builds the answer is yes. It's not about boot times, it's about the fact everything snaps open when you want it. Also, more evidence is coming out suggesting most SSDs are nearly the same in terms of real world experience. For your average and gamer, you won't notice a difference in using a SSD that is $100 vs $140.

Look for deals and grab one around $100 AUD.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
May 3, 2013 11:02:17 PM

Yes, I meant that I would sacrifice from the GPU, and possibly the CPU, in order to afford an SSD.
m
0
l

Best solution

a b 4 Gaming
a c 102 G Storage
May 4, 2013 12:58:14 AM

SSD's and GAMING:

I started testing SSD's for gaming. What I discovered was a little surprising. On average, very few games feel much different. There were a few major exceptions such as:
- Far Cry 3/NV (the stutter-fix mod benefitted a lot too)
- Oblivion
- Skyrim (mostly for LOADS, stutter issues were minimal on Hard Drive anyway)
- Assassin's Creed II
- Witcher Enchanced (#1)

Far more games felt nearly identical between a 3TB Seagate HDD, and a 256GB Samsung 840 Pro during gameplay. Load times were always faster on SSD, but saving 20 seconds might not justify the cost of an SSD for many people unless the game runs better.

*Windows and general opening/closing programs felt snappier.

STEAM and SSD's:
Steam now allows a second Steam folder. This is great because you can install to a Hard Drive, but move games to the SSD (and back again)!! Like this:

1) Backup Steam game
2) Delete Local Content (for that game)
3) Restore Steam game (but point to the 2nd Steam folder on the SSD)

Examples of HDD/SDD:

#1: 2TB HDD only
(partitioned to 200GB and remainder on Partition 2; Steam folder on 2nd partition)

#2: 128GB SSD (Windows/apps) + 2TB HDD
*As an UPGRADE from #1 you could simply CLONE (or backup/restore) Windows to the SSD from the HDD Partition #1 (then recover Partition 1 of the HDD)

#3: 128GB SSD + 2TB HDD + 256GB SSD
**Roughly what I have.
Windows/apps on the smaller SSD. HDD for main Steam folder, backup image of Windows, media etc.. Finally, an SSD dedicated to the 2nd Steam folder. Even a 64GB SSD is very useful because as I said you can MOVE games with Steam (and usually the SAVE GAMES are fine) so you can even move just to TEST and see if an SSD performs better.

(Games in the future should hopefully be optimized to buffer the content properly in your Main Memory and Video RAM and avoid the HDD/SSD. The PS4 with its 8GB of Shared Memory will help speed up this type of optimization. For example, Witcher 3 on the PS4 is being designed to pre-buffer as much as possible. Likely the main game would pre-load and other areas will start pre-loading in the background as you play until most/all of the entire game is loaded. That should drop load times from 40 seconds to less than 1 second.)


CHEERS!!

SUMMARY:
- SSD's have a big impact on Windows/app loading time (varies by PC, amount of RAM etc)
- SSD benefit for GAMES on average isn't significant (though some benefit a lot)
- Steam 2nd folder on SSD for currently played games (that benefit)

- SSD's are mainly about load times and preventing stutter in poorly coded games that access the hard drive regularly during gameplay. They have almost no effect on frame rates.
Share
January 3, 2014 11:11:50 AM

photonboy said:
SSD's and GAMING:

I started testing SSD's for gaming. What I discovered was a little surprising. On average, very few games feel much different. There were a few major exceptions such as:
- Far Cry 3/NV (the stutter-fix mod benefitted a lot too)
- Oblivion
- Skyrim (mostly for LOADS, stutter issues were minimal on Hard Drive anyway)
- Assassin's Creed II
- Witcher Enchanced (#1)

Far more games felt nearly identical between a 3TB Seagate HDD, and a 256GB Samsung 840 Pro during gameplay. Load times were always faster on SSD, but saving 20 seconds might not justify the cost of an SSD for many people unless the game runs better.

*Windows and general opening/closing programs felt snappier.

STEAM and SSD's:
Steam now allows a second Steam folder. This is great because you can install to a Hard Drive, but move games to the SSD (and back again)!! Like this:

1) Backup Steam game
2) Delete Local Content (for that game)
3) Restore Steam game (but point to the 2nd Steam folder on the SSD)

Examples of HDD/SDD:

#1: 2TB HDD only
(partitioned to 200GB and remainder on Partition 2; Steam folder on 2nd partition)

#2: 128GB SSD (Windows/apps) + 2TB HDD
*As an UPGRADE from #1 you could simply CLONE (or backup/restore) Windows to the SSD from the HDD Partition #1 (then recover Partition 1 of the HDD)

#3: 128GB SSD + 2TB HDD + 256GB SSD
**Roughly what I have.
Windows/apps on the smaller SSD. HDD for main Steam folder, backup image of Windows, media etc.. Finally, an SSD dedicated to the 2nd Steam folder. Even a 64GB SSD is very useful because as I said you can MOVE games with Steam (and usually the SAVE GAMES are fine) so you can even move just to TEST and see if an SSD performs better.

(Games in the future should hopefully be optimized to buffer the content properly in your Main Memory and Video RAM and avoid the HDD/SSD. The PS4 with its 8GB of Shared Memory will help speed up this type of optimization. For example, Witcher 3 on the PS4 is being designed to pre-buffer as much as possible. Likely the main game would pre-load and other areas will start pre-loading in the background as you play until most/all of the entire game is loaded. That should drop load times from 40 seconds to less than 1 second.)


CHEERS!!

SUMMARY:
- SSD's have a big impact on Windows/app loading time (varies by PC, amount of RAM etc)
- SSD benefit for GAMES on average isn't significant (though some benefit a lot)
- Steam 2nd folder on SSD for currently played games (that benefit)

- SSD's are mainly about load times and preventing stutter in poorly coded games that access the hard drive regularly during gameplay. They have almost no effect on frame rates.



will an ssd help me with video editing and music production and photo editing , as thats what i want to do, as well as gaming this is my build here im going to get and i got 250 g ssd , i thought it would help allot with editing vieeo if i put the files im working on on it ? is it really worth it though or could i save the money
m
0
l
a b G Storage
January 3, 2014 11:27:45 AM

I've done some video editing. My understanding and limited experience is that video editing hits the CPU much more than any other component of the system, although now-a-days it might also use the GPU a lot, depending on what editing software and GPU are being used. And since video editing typically uses lots and lots of disk space, I would say go with a large hard driver over an SSD.
m
0
l
a b 4 Gaming
a c 102 G Storage
January 5, 2014 12:09:00 AM

RushNReady,
You should start your own thread to ask this question.

The answer is actually pretty complicated and there's some good guides online. The short answer is YES, but it depends on your total budget. You are likely much better off investing in enough DDR3 memory, CPU and other components and get an SSD only if budget permits. The amount of DDR3 that is optimal varies quite a bit based on video file size and editing features etc. The general advice is at least 16GB.

However, your videos might be pretty small. If they're under 1GB for example, chances are 8GB is enough.
m
0
l
!