Is there really THAT much of a difference of having and not having an SSD?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
thatfancypenn

thatfancypenn

Honorable
Oct 23, 2013
344
0
10,780
Mainly I'm asking this because I'm currently building a PC and am trying to keep the price low, for a 120gb Samsung SSD it is $100. If I didn't get an SSD then I could use the extra $100 on a better GPU which would be awesome. With the SSD I am getting a GeForce GTX 770 with 2GB GDDR5
but if I got rid of it I could get 4GB of GDDR5, which is good for Battlefield 4. So would it be worth it?
 
Solution
fudoka711


I agree. The difference in load times and the general responsiveness of programs that an ssd makes is amazing. However, when gaming, an ssd will give you, maybe, 2-3 fps improvement. All an ssd really does for games is decrease load times. Having a beefier gpu with more vram for bf4 at 1440/1600p resolution will be more rewarding. If you're only going to be playing on 1080/1200p, then there's no...
Sort by date Sort by votes
E

enemy1g

Honorable
Oct 3, 2013
2,224
1
12,460
If you use a higher resolution monitor, or use multiple monitors, the 4GB version would definitely be the best choice. But if you're using a single 1920x1080 monitor, the 2GB -should- be fine. A SSD is substantially faster than a hard drive. If you don't mind sitting on a loading screen for a while, then you don't NEED a SSD. It's something you need to experience side by side, or just take the plunge. I switched over to a SSD in 2010, and since then I could never go back.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
burdenbound

burdenbound

Splendid
Aug 9, 2011
3,225
0
22,960
Once you build a rig with an SSD you won't go back, let me put it to you that way. But if you are going to skimp on your GPU for the SSD I would get the better GPU and save up for the SSD.

Might want to look at the 7970 and R9 280x for similar performance and a cheaper price point, might be able to get both of best worlds that way.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
fudoka711

fudoka711

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2012
1,308
0
19,960


I agree. The difference in load times and the general responsiveness of programs that an ssd makes is amazing. However, when gaming, an ssd will give you, maybe, 2-3 fps improvement. All an ssd really does for games is decrease load times. Having a beefier gpu with more vram for bf4 at 1440/1600p resolution will be more rewarding. If you're only going to be playing on 1080/1200p, then there's no reason to go for more than 2gb vram.

I also recommend looking at what AMD has to offer. The R9 280x is a great alternative with 3gb vram (which could be seen as a compromise) and only costs ~$310. BF4 is also a little more optimized for AMD gpu's.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
thatfancypenn

thatfancypenn

Honorable
Oct 23, 2013
344
0
10,780

Okay... Well I looked at the Sapphire Radeon 7970 and it has 3gb of GDDR5 vRAM and is only $350. I think I may go with that one because the only R9 280x I can find that is $310 is the Gigabyte version and the tower I am going to get is a Mid-Tower - so I don't think that a 15 inch card will fit that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
fudoka711

fudoka711

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2012
1,308
0
19,960


Good choice! Can't go wrong with Sapphire and the 7970 is still a better card than the r9 280x.

But wait, which exact card are you looking at? I was under the impression that gigabyte's r9 280x was just under 11.5".

Its listed in mm: http://www.gigabyte.us/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4793#sp
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
thatfancypenn

thatfancypenn

Honorable
Oct 23, 2013
344
0
10,780

I was looking on amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/Gigabyte-GDDR5-3GB-2xMini-Graphics-GV-R928XOC-3GD/dp/B00FONITA6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382747378&sr=8-1&keywords=r9+280x and I'm pretty sure now that the page is wrong and may be a scam or something since it has no reviews. But I think that the 7970 has a better price/performance ratio so I'll go with that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom