We use a ton of terms to quantify storage performance. If you're a gamer, you have to be wonder how such dry terminology can apply to having fun. Rather than telling you, we're going to dissect three more popular titles to illustrate for you instead.
Gameplay In F1 2011
The two-minute trace captured in F1 2011 represents playing through a single Grand Prix race.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Overall Statistics
F1 2011: Gameplay
Elapsed Time
02:00
Read Operations
296
Write Operations
2 229
Data Read
35.93 MB
Data Written
252.19 MB
Disk Busy Time
0.63 s
Average Data Rate
459.51 MB/s
Gameplay in F1 2011 is interestingly similar to our last set of games, where a majority of operations are sequential writes. The I/O pattern is more similar to Crysis 2 than WoW, as there's little variety in F1 2011's file structure. Almost half of the disk accesses occur at a queue depth of two. Compare this to Crysis 2, where a majority of disk accesses are evenly distributed between queue depths of two and eight.
I/O Trends:
91% of all operations are 128 KB in transfer size
98% of all operations are sequential
50% of all operations occur at a queue depth of one
44% of all operations occur at a queue depth of two
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Thanks to all the reviews you made here guys. A couple of months ago I started planning my ssd purchase, and i decided to buy a Kingston HyperX 240gb bundle kit. I cant wait till it arrives. I have advanced computer skills, so many things I thought from personal experiences are published here, like I knew some games are more write dependant or read dependant from and HDD, and about the apps on the background on WIN7, and many many more. I already ordered my SSD, but its nice to have a serious review about ssds on gaming performance. Its all about the speed that the apps can be done by write/read on a ssd on the background that really matters, from this simple thing is that anyone willing to upgrade to an ssd can benefit with a smoother playable experience.
Storage can actually make a difference in FPS in certain situations. Only put in 2gb or so of RAM in the test system and rerun Battlefield 3, and the difference in frame rates will be different between HDD and SSD as the game switches to secondary storage once RAM is exhausted.
True, but it is much more cost effective to add more RAM to your system in that circumstance than to get an SSD large enough for your OS and a couple of games. With RAM so inexpensive these days there is absolutely no reason to be running low on it under any gaming scenario.
Agreed with xyzqwerty, please do another test with faster drives such as wd black or the f3. Comparing the ssd with green version is like racing your turtle with the neighbor's hare.
cumi2k4Agreed with xyzqwerty, please do another test with faster drives such as wd black or the f3. Comparing the ssd with green version is like racing your turtle with the neighbor's hare.
I'm a little confused why you would want to see that comparison. We established there was no diff between a slow HDD and a fast SSD. And you expect a difference between a fast HDD and fast SSD?
I'm a little confused why you would want to see that comparison. We established there was no diff between a slow HDD and a fast SSD. And you expect a difference between a fast HDD and fast SSD?
Cheers,
Andrew Ku
TomsHardware.com
He probably want to see that comparison on the "Hard Drive Performance Comparison" page, where is a big difference between SSD and HDD performance (the HDD up to 477% slower)