Relative SSD Performance

[7h3C47]

Hi all!

I'm going to get an SSD to put my beloved MMORPG on. The HDD it's currently on is a WD Caviar Black 7200rpm that is frankly very noisy, given that it buzzes every time I get a loading screen (i.e. enter and exit a building, new map, dungeon, etc.) I also get stuttering and occasional split second screen freezes while the thing loads new towns.

The game itself is small, probably some 10GB. This means I really only need a small SSD for it--like a 16-30GB. This is good because they're very affordable too. I'm not interested in putting anything else on the SSD, OS included.

My question is this:
The 16-30GB SSDs (SataII) are inexpensive and appropriately sized for the game, but have slower read speeds from 180-280 MB/s.

If I got a 60 or 64GB device with SataIII (which my mobo indeed supports), I would get read speeds more like 550+ MB/s.

a) Would I notice the difference in game between the SataII 180-280MB/s speed and the SataIII 550+ MB/s speed?

b) What about if the SataIII device is faster, but not really perceivable? (Like when people talk about the difference in RAM speed where you can hardly tell unless you're a computer).

If I wouldn't get a *noticeable* difference with a SataIII device, then there's no use in me paying so much more for one over a small 16-30GB SataII drive. I know I'm paying for more space as well as increased performance, but as I mentioned before, I really only want to put the game on the SSD, not the OS or any other files, so the extra space would likely remain blank.

Thanks!

 

[RealBeast]

Don't waste the money if you aren't going to also put the OS on the drive also.

And no, in real world use SATA II and SATA III drives perform similarly, like your memory analogy.

 

[ctramp]

If you love your game that much... buy a 120G "$89" or 240G "$150ish" and run the OS and game on it. Huge difference in load times when zoning ect...

 

[7h3C47]

And no, in real world use SATA II and SATA III drives perform similarly, like your memory analogy.

Thank you.

If you love your game that much... buy a 120G "$89" or 240G "$150ish" and run the OS and game on it. Huge difference in load times when zoning ect...

Can you cite something that gives an explanation of why having the OS on the same SSD as the game would solve stuttering and improve load times more than having only the game on the SSD? I was under the impression my OS hasn't to do with the games ability to load quickly.

 

[RealBeast]

Clearly, an SSD will improve gaming performance where large data transfers occur -- like loading maps and whatnot. An SSD would greatly improve gaming performance where there are these large data transfers, as I think was concluded here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-gaming-performance,2991-14.html

However, with the prices of SSDs way down, get a 256Gb drive and throw the OS on there, which will only take 25-30Gb once you optimize it by moving the paging file, turning off hibernation, and ditching restore points, you will get improved general use in addition to gaming use. If you cannot afford the $150-160 and only want gaming performance improvement then yes, use the SSD just for game storage.

 

[geofelt]

The main value of a SSD is for the fast random i/o times. 50x faster than a hard drive.
That is what the OS mainly does.
A ssd will be 2-3x faster in sequential than a hard drive.

So using one for your purpose should be of some help.

Larger ssd's will be faster in sequential operations.
They have more nand chips that can be read in parallel. Sort of an internal raid-0 if you will.

I would heartily recommend using a larger ssd for the os and your game. 120gb should do it.
Everything you do will feel so much quicker.
There may be more accesses to the os drive than you realize.
Perhaps to the os catalog, page file, registry, etc.

 

[7h3C47]

Clearly, an SSD will improve gaming performance where large data transfers occur -- like loading maps and whatnot. An SSD would greatly improve gaming performance where there are these large data transfers, as I think was concluded here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-gaming-performance,2991-14.html

However, with the prices of SSDs way down, get a 256Gb drive and throw the OS on there, which will only take 25-30Gb once you optimize it by moving the paging file, turning off hibernation, and ditching restore points, you will get improved general use in addition to gaming use. If you cannot afford the $150-160 and only want gaming performance improvement then yes, use the SSD just for game storage.

I see what you're saying, thanks!

The main value of a SSD is for the fast random i/o times. 50x faster than a hard drive.
That is what the OS mainly does.
A ssd will be 2-3x faster in sequential than a hard drive.

So using one for your purpose should be of some help.

Larger ssd's will be faster in sequential operations.
They have more nand chips that can be read in parallel. Sort of an internal raid-0 if you will.

I would heartily recommend using a larger ssd for the os and your game. 120gb should do it.
Everything you do will feel so much quicker.
There may be more accesses to the os drive than you realize.
Perhaps to the os catalog, page file, registry, etc.

I hadn't considered that. The main reason I want to use the SSD for the game and not the OS is because of previous bad experience. After multiple installs and numerous guides I couldn't get the dang OS file to stop growing. I know how to move the libraries to my HDDs, but the file just got larger every time I checked which frustrated the heck out of me. On top of that, the drive died in a few months, which was a real pain.

 

[geofelt]

How much space are you currently using on your "C" drive?
Normally, a 120gb ssd will hold the os and a handful of games.

If you have ever upgraded windows, you may have a file called "windows.old" which was used to permit your upgrade to be backed off. It is large, and you can delete it if you do not need it any more.