VelociRaptor or SSD

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
sowexly

sowexly

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2010
325
0
18,790
I'm gaming primary I currently have a 750GB SG and it gets the job done I don't find that I'm running out of room but more won't hurt me, the real question is would an SSD be noticeable better then a VelociRaptor for gaming?

I have support for SATA III so I would plan on getting a HDD that supports it also (Vertex 3 etc)
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
sminlal

sminlal

Splendid
Jul 10, 2009
6,357
3
28,515
SATA III is irrelevant for hard drives (and even a lot of SSDs) because the drives themselves aren't fast enough to be bottlenecked by SATA II.

The reason you pay extra for a Velociraptor is because of it's faster access time - about 2-3X faster than a standard hard drive. But an SSD has access times that are about 100X faster, so obviously the performance improvement you get from a Velociraptor is going to be pretty small compared to that of an SSD.

But in most games the only difference you'll see is in the time it takes to start it up. Once most games are running they don't spend a lot of time accessing the disk, so disk speeds are largely irrelevant. But if you find your game pausing to load new scenes, that's the kind of thing that could see improvement with a faster drive.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
W

Wamphryi

Distinguished
Feb 21, 2010
1,630
1
20,160
The Velicoraptor is the better option. I have an SSD that has been less than reliable and the difference in performance is next to nothing in terms of real world performance. Thanks to the cache on the HDD and Win 7 using Superfetch there is little to be gained by the SSD but a lot to lose in terms of dollar per GB cost.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
geofelt

geofelt

Titan
Oct 9, 2006
54,277
4,132
174,240


The velociraptors were good in their time. Primarily because the 10k rotation gave them better random access time. That is what the OS mostly does. Sequential throughput was not significantly better than the more modern 1tb drives. That is because the 1tb drives are denser, and can transfer more data per revolution..

For games, you are probably more interested in sequential transfer, primarily for level loading.
The newer gen3 ssd's will be sometimes limited by a sata 2 interface. If you have sata3, look at one of the new gen3 drives. I would look at the Intel 510 drives. They are particularly good at data transfer, perhaps twice what a conventional hard drive can do. The Intel drives have had a lower return rate in the past, and I would trust them a bit more for a trouble free product.
http://www.behardware.com/articles/810-6/components-returns-rates.html
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
redgarl

redgarl

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2009
2,796
63
21,140
SSDs are good for running programs, they are really worth it IMO. If like me you are impatient, it's the way to go >XD

And forget Velociraptor, they are more a name than anything else now.

SSD can be purchased for dirt cheap now. Get 2 60GB in raid 0 and be prepared to be blown away, I would not go back to hard drive for running my programs, lets not forget the click click click after 6 months of use.

Don't know for you, but for me it kind of play on my nerves >:p
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
geofelt

geofelt

Titan
Oct 9, 2006
54,277
4,132
174,240


For loading games, use the Intel 510 ssd. 120gb is fast, the 240gb is a bit faster.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
tecmo34

tecmo34

Administrator
Moderator
Jan 20, 2009
9,317
113
37,590

This is my exact setup :)

I run an OCZ Vertex 2 for OS & Apps, VRaptor for Games and Samsung Spinpoint 1TB for Storage (User folders, personal files, etc.).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sowexly

sowexly

Distinguished
Jul 9, 2010
325
0
18,790
Sorry for this very late reply, I don't like vague statements like is just is. On the other hand the lower returns of Intel SSDs is nice to see but Vertex 3 does have a very sizable lead in speed.
 
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