[QUOTE="Martin_G_N"]We won't see tablets with 8 core CPU's yet, tablets and phones will use 2 or 4 cores with a upgraded GPU instead. And I doubt that the I7 can compete with the PS4's Jaguar at the same frequenzy. If we were talking an 8 core Intel CPU I would agree. The PS4's APU design has advantages compared to a regular PC setup, and having a higher total system bandwidth is one of them. When we can get a motherboard with DDR4, we will see a performance boost. But it will be years before regular laptops and PC's get this, which means most people will still have DDR3 and GDDR5 for years. ROFLOL. You are kidding me right? You need to look up Amdahl's law of parallelization to understand why the AMD CPU in the PS4 would get owned. I would not be betting $1,000 if I did not think I would win 100%. ONE core of this CPU has far less GFLOPS than ONE core of the i7-3820. That means your slowest code that cannot be parallelized across multiple CPU cores will be limited to the speed of how fast one core can complete the task. Intel GHZ does not equal AMD GHZ. A lower clocked Intel i5 or i7 series totally destroys AMD that has higher clocked CPU's. You can look up all the benchmarks if you do not believe. Ok, you may be right, I have an I7 in my PC and I have no doubt Intel is at the top in CPU's. But at that low frequenzy, I doubt the differences is important. And we also have to remember all the processing the CPU in the PS4 don't have to do, compared to the CELL in the PS3. Physics, animation, helping the GPU for graphics, and audio processing is gone. Even the OS will be run by an own processor if rumors are correct. So I think a 100+Gflops CPU will do just fine for running the basic game code. It's the GPU and RAM that has been the biggest bottlenecks of the current gen consoles.[QUOTE="Dennisreece"]LOL, the cows here are so stupid. We PC guys had the ability to address more than 4 GB of RAM since April 2003 when AMD released the K8 architecture. Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64 . My current system that I built has 16 GB of DDR3 ram and many people I know have at least 8 GB of RAM. Four GB of RAM has been dead a long time ago because 32 bit is not used anymore. If you do simple math of 2^32 then you cows can see that before April 2003 that we were limited to 4 GB. Now it's at 2^64 which puts us at a huge amount of RAM. I almost spat out my coffee when you cows where so amazed to have 8 GB or RAM because of the 64 bit extension that has been a technology in the PC space for 10 years!!! ROFLOL. So I have proposition for cow slaughtering if you cows agree to it. How many cows on here are stupid enough to take my bet of $1,000 that my Intel i7-3820 down clocked to 1.6 GHZ to match the CPU of the PS4, and the fact that my i7-3820 has only 4 cores and uses DDR3 with a 256 bit interface, that you cows believe will outperform my CPU in math benchmarks, Folding@Home, Milkyway@Home, password cracking, Prime95, Sisoft Sandra, or any other CPU intensive tasks? Let's not forget you guys get "to the metal programming" that you are sooooo proud of...... You guys talk smack, but I know a hell of a lot about PC hardware and I know 100% that the 8-core AMD processor does not stand a chance as it is based off the Bobcat core with only a 15% enhancement. A tablet processor is what it is: http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/42645-amd-reveal-low-power-jaguar-x86-core-aimed-tablets/Dennisreece
Well, that didn't take long, PC gets GDDR5 system RAM support
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Source? Benchmarks? Â The 7970 is quite a bit better than a 7850. Â And by then the 8000 series and probably the Nvidia GK110 based cards will be coming out. PS4 already out of datelostribThe PS4 GPU has GCN2 parts something the 7850 doesn't have. On BF3 on Ultra 2560x1600 it edge the 7850 by 21FPS,on games like Crysis warhead at the same 2560x1600 ultra the 7970 is just 14 FPS faster than the 7850. But the PS4 is not a 7850 is much better optimized... http://www.vgleaks.com/orbis-gpu-compute-queues-and-pipelines/ Just look at the diagram and see how much it differ from GCN in many ways.
My GPU is almost a year old already and better than what emostation 4 will offer.percuvius2How do you know that.? Oh wait you just pulled that from deep deep inside your a$$..
If it was true then we would have seen something better than Killzone on PS conference. So far Killzone looks like a PC hd7850 game, nothing else.jhonMalcovichWhat is a 7850 game.? How many games use as target the 7850 i would love to hear your reply.. You are extremely dumb,so by your argument of Killzone is all the PS4 can do,doesn't Perfect Dark Zero be the best the xbox 360 should have give.? Wait wait is Resistance 1 the best looking game on PS3.? Was Tekken Tag the best looking game on PS2,was Halo the best looking game on xbox.? My go is a launch game running on unfinish hardware,by your argument the best the xbox 360 could do was Perfect Dark,because launch games actually represent everything a console can give.
[QUOTE="the_bi99man"][QUOTE="tormentos"]Funny how games like Crysis did not started using Rad doll physics until Killzone 2 put basically all PC games to shame animation wisetormentos
Crysis... 2007
Half Life 2... 2004
FEAR on PC... 2005
Â
Killzone 2... 2009
Â
lolwut?
Crysis 1 animation were sh** compare to KIllzone2,it wasn't even close and on 2007 before Crysis was even release Killzone 2 was demo real time,not talking about the 2005 CG movie that predate even Crysis.. Also your physics are as good as the hardware that runs them,Cell was incredible for Physics this was even stated by Mark Rein from Epic.Kay... doesn't change the fact that you said games didn't start using ragdoll physics until Killzone 2 "put PC games to shame", but PC games have had ragdoll physics since half a decade before killzone 2. Probably since before you've been gaming, based on your tastes.Â
Also. "the 2005 CG movie that predates crysis"? You talking about FEAR? Cuz.... that's a first person shooter, with a handful of cutscenes, like any other single player shooter. Not an interactive movie. You're thinking of PS3 exclusives.
Crysis 1 animation were sh** compare to KIllzone2,it wasn't even close and on 2007 before Crysis was even release Killzone 2 was demo real time,not talking about the 2005 CG movie that predate even Crysis.. Also your physics are as good as the hardware that runs them,Cell was incredible for Physics this was even stated by Mark Rein from Epic.[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="the_bi99man"]
Crysis... 2007
Half Life 2... 2004
FEAR on PC... 2005
Â
Killzone 2... 2009
Â
lolwut?
the_bi99man
Kay... doesn't change the fact that you said games didn't start using ragdoll physics until Killzone 2 "put PC games to shame", but PC games have had ragdoll physics since half a decade before killzone 2. Probably since before you've been gaming, based on your tastes.Â
Also. "the 2005 CG movie that predates crysis"? You talking about FEAR? Cuz.... that's a first person shooter, with a handful of cutscenes, like any other single player shooter. Not an interactive movie. You're thinking of PS3 exclusives.
Should i go PS2 or PS1 or should i give physics a rest..
[QUOTE="lostrib"]Source? Benchmarks? Â The 7970 is quite a bit better than a 7850. Â And by then the 8000 series and probably the Nvidia GK110 based cards will be coming out. PS4 already out of datetormentosThe PS4 GPU has GCN2 parts something the 7850 doesn't have. On BF3 on Ultra 2560x1600 it edge the 7850 by 21FPS,on games like Crysis warhead at the same 2560x1600 ultra the 7970 is just 14 FPS faster than the 7850. But the PS4 is not a 7850 is much better optimized... http://www.vgleaks.com/orbis-gpu-compute-queues-and-pipelines/ Just look at the diagram and see how much it differ from GCN in many ways.
Can you provide some sources to support that.
This link http://www.vgleaks.com/orbis-gpu-compute-queues-and-pipelines/ has no benchmarks regarding BF3 and Crysis.
[QUOTE="percuvius2"]My GPU is almost a year old already and better than what emostation 4 will offer.tormentosHow do you know that.? Oh wait you just pulled that from deep deep inside your a$$..
If it was true then we would have seen something better than Killzone on PS conference. So far Killzone looks like a PC hd7850 game, nothing else.jhonMalcovichWhat is a 7850 game.? How many games use as target the 7850 i would love to hear your reply.. You are extremely dumb,so by your argument of Killzone is all the PS4 can do,doesn't Perfect Dark Zero be the best the xbox 360 should have give.? Wait wait is Resistance 1 the best looking game on PS3.? Was Tekken Tag the best looking game on PS2,was Halo the best looking game on xbox.? My go is a launch game running on unfinish hardware,by your argument the best the xbox 360 could do was Perfect Dark,because launch games actually represent everything a console can give.
A PC hd7850 game means a game that a PC with ATI 7850 can play in 1080p, high details and 30+fps. Right now PS4 didn´t show anything what a 7850 couldn´t run.
If PS4  GPU is so much more optimized and faster than 7850, why don´t you show us some games or some benchmarks to support that claim ? Is having common sense too dumb for you ?
[QUOTE="lostrib"]Source? Benchmarks? Â The 7970 is quite a bit better than a 7850. Â And by then the 8000 series and probably the Nvidia GK110 based cards will be coming out. PS4 already out of datetormentosThe PS4 GPU has GCN2 parts something the 7850 doesn't have. On BF3 on Ultra 2560x1600 it edge the 7850 by 21FPS,on games like Crysis warhead at the same 2560x1600 ultra the 7970 is just 14 FPS faster than the 7850. But the PS4 is not a 7850 is much better optimized... http://www.vgleaks.com/orbis-gpu-compute-queues-and-pipelines/ Just look at the diagram and see how much it differ from GCN in many ways.
I did not see any benchmarks in there that show the PS4 GPU is on the level of a 7970; all you showed is that the 7970 beats the 7850 by quite a bit. Try again
[QUOTE="clyde46"] Did you not read what I put? I said that my load times aren't much different in games but in general, an SSD pretty much pays for itself. Everything is much smoother and snappier. And LOL at replacing your mechanical with an SSD. You don't do that dumb dumb, you use your old mechanical as a storage drive and keep your OS on the SSD.tormentosBut we are not talking about PC you can't have a SSD+ a normal HDD on a console that is just mind blowing expensive for any company.
That's too bad, I actually have two SSDs and two HDDs in my PC. Domination
[QUOTE="lostrib"]That's too bad, I actually have two SSDs and two HDDs in my PC. DominationtormentosYes because having 2 SSD's and 2 normal HDD actually make your PC 1 million times stronger.. My god so much waist of money..
*waste
Well I have 4 hard drives and you only have 1, so like 4x stronger! domination!
The PS4 GPU has GCN2 parts something the 7850 doesn't have. On BF3 on Ultra 2560x1600 it edge the 7850 by 21FPS,on games like Crysis warhead at the same 2560x1600 ultra the 7970 is just 14 FPS faster than the 7850. But the PS4 is not a 7850 is much better optimized... http://www.vgleaks.com/orbis-gpu-compute-queues-and-pipelines/ Just look at the diagram and see how much it differ from GCN in many ways.[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="lostrib"]Source? Benchmarks? Â The 7970 is quite a bit better than a 7850. Â And by then the 8000 series and probably the Nvidia GK110 based cards will be coming out. PS4 already out of datejhonMalcovich
Can you provide some sources to support that.
This link http://www.vgleaks.com/orbis-gpu-compute-queues-and-pipelines/ has no benchmarks regarding BF3 and Crysis.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/549?vs=508 That link has the benchmarks ^^ the one you quote actually show that the PS4 GPU is not a straight up 7850..[QUOTE="jhonMalcovich"][QUOTE="tormentos"] The PS4 GPU has GCN2 parts something the 7850 doesn't have. On BF3 on Ultra 2560x1600 it edge the 7850 by 21FPS,on games like Crysis warhead at the same 2560x1600 ultra the 7970 is just 14 FPS faster than the 7850. But the PS4 is not a 7850 is much better optimized... http://www.vgleaks.com/orbis-gpu-compute-queues-and-pipelines/ Just look at the diagram and see how much it differ from GCN in many ways.tormentos
Can you provide some sources to support that.
This link http://www.vgleaks.com/orbis-gpu-compute-queues-and-pipelines/ has no benchmarks regarding BF3 and Crysis.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/549?vs=508 That link has the benchmarks ^^ the one you quote actually show that the PS4 GPU is not a straight up 7850..So still not benchmarks that the PS4 GPU can match a 7970 or >7850? Try again
Yes because having 2 SSD's and 2 normal HDD actually make your PC 1 million times stronger.. My god so much waist of money..[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="lostrib"]That's too bad, I actually have two SSDs and two HDDs in my PC. Dominationlostrib
*waste
Well I have 4 hard drives and you only have 1, so like 4x stronger! domination!
First i don't have 1 drive on my PC and second why in gods green earth i would want 4 damn HDD..? I don't download 10GB of data daily nor plan to...I am not a pirate so i don't need endless space to store or my stolen stuff.. In fact i have a 500GB and PS3 HDD which was 120GB when i replace my HDD on PS3 i use the old PS3 one on my pc.
[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Yes because having 2 SSD's and 2 normal HDD actually make your PC 1 million times stronger.. My god so much waist of money..tormentos
*waste
Well I have 4 hard drives and you only have 1, so like 4x stronger! domination!
First i don't have 1 drive on my PC and second why in gods green earth i would want 4 damn HDD..? I don't download 10GB of data daily nor plan to...I am not a pirate so i don't need endless space to store or my stolen stuff.. In fact i have a 500GB and PS3 HDD which was 120GB when i replace my HDD on PS3 i use the old PS3 one on my pc.1 SSD for OS, 1 SSD for most used games, 1 high rpm HDD for games, 1 large Green drive for media.  And I was referring to your PS3, only one drive :lol:Domination
[QUOTE="lostrib"]So still not benchmarks that the PS4 GPU can match a 7970 or >7850? Try againtormentosQuote me saying i have benchmarks for the PS4...:lol:
You said the the PS4 would be better than a 7850 and match a 7970. Â I want to see the benchmarks behind that claim. So where are they?
Gotcha buster... You can run a 7970 on 1080p and a 7850 on 1080p and you will not notice the difference,quality will be the same,the only real different would be frame rate and if both games are over 60FPS or close even less... So the whole Killzone look like a 7850 game is total BS on you part,in fact you can have 4 different GPU and as long as the are at the same quality with same effect and the same resolution you will not know which is which..A PC hd7850 game means a game that a PC with ATI 7850 can play in 1080p, high details and 30+fps. Right now PS4 didn´t show anything what a 7850 couldn´t run.
If PS4  GPU is so much more optimized and faster than 7850, why don´t you show us some games or some benchmarks to support that claim ? Is having common sense too dumb for you ?
jhonMalcovich
Quote me saying i have benchmarks for the PS4...:lol:[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="lostrib"]So still not benchmarks that the PS4 GPU can match a 7970 or >7850? Try againlostrib
You said the the PS4 would be better than a 7850 and match a 7970. Â I want to see the benchmarks behind that claim. So where are they?
Is a stronger GPU than the 7850 and more efficient,on the same die with the CPU with tons of more ram should i make you and even bigger map.? Now i did not say it will match the 7970 i say to beat the PS4 you need a 7970..[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Quote me saying i have benchmarks for the PS4...:lol:tormentos
You said the the PS4 would be better than a 7850 and match a 7970. Â I want to see the benchmarks behind that claim. So where are they?
Is a stronger GPU than the 7850 and more efficient,on the same die with the CPU with tons of more ram should i make you and even bigger map.? Now i did not say it will match the 7970 i say to beat the PS4 you need a 7970..And where are the benchmarks and sources to back that up
Is a stronger GPU than the 7850 and more efficient,on the same die with the CPU with tons of more ram should i make you and even bigger map.? Now i did not say it will match the 7970 i say to beat the PS4 you need a 7970..[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="lostrib"]
You said the the PS4 would be better than a 7850 and match a 7970. Â I want to see the benchmarks behind that claim. So where are they?
lostrib
And where are the benchmarks and sources to back that up
Is call PS3 and xbox 360.. And to think those where highly inefficient compare to how this systems are,to give you an example the xbox 360 was say to be 60% efficient the PC counter part was even less,now they say MS is shooting for 100% efficiency,so apparently is sony. When you have a GPU that has 2.76TF of performance and is beaten by one on the same brand that has 1.76 something gotta give,is call inefficiency,in fact the new 8XXX from AMD with HSA alone even that is a re-bag 7XXX will deliver better performance than the 7XXX counter part.. I never claim i have benchmarks for the PS4,but trying to argue that my argument is wrong when consoles are more efficient than PC is like arguing that PC don't get new hardware each year.[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Is a stronger GPU than the 7850 and more efficient,on the same die with the CPU with tons of more ram should i make you and even bigger map.? Now i did not say it will match the 7970 i say to beat the PS4 you need a 7970..tormentos
And where are the benchmarks and sources to back that up
Is call PS3 and xbox 360.. And to think those where highly inefficient compare to how this systems are,to give you an example the xbox 360 was say to be 60% efficient the PC counter part was even less,now they say MS is shooting for 100% efficiency,so apparently is sony. When you have a GPU that has 2.76TF of performance and is beaten by one on the same brand that has 1.76 something gotta give,is call inefficiency,in fact the new 8XXX from AMD with HSA alone even that is a re-bag 7XXX will deliver better performance than the 7XXX counter part.. I never claim i have benchmarks for the PS4,but trying to argue that my argument is wrong when consoles are more efficient than PC is like arguing that PC don't get new hardware each year.No one denied consoles are more efficient than the PC, but the problem is, you act like optimization is some magic, and have failed to back up your speculation about PS4 reaching 7970 levels of performance with any proof...
[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Is a stronger GPU than the 7850 and more efficient,on the same die with the CPU with tons of more ram should i make you and even bigger map.? Now i did not say it will match the 7970 i say to beat the PS4 you need a 7970..tormentos
And where are the benchmarks and sources to back that up
Is call PS3 and xbox 360.. And to think those where highly inefficient compare to how this systems are,to give you an example the xbox 360 was say to be 60% efficient the PC counter part was even less,now they say MS is shooting for 100% efficiency,so apparently is sony. When you have a GPU that has 2.76TF of performance and is beaten by one on the same brand that has 1.76 something gotta give,is call inefficiency,in fact the new 8XXX from AMD with HSA alone even that is a re-bag 7XXX will deliver better performance than the 7XXX counter part.. I never claim i have benchmarks for the PS4,but trying to argue that my argument is wrong when consoles are more efficient than PC is like arguing that PC don't get new hardware each year.You argument is complete speculation without any sound evidence to back it up. Â So unless you have some benchmarks or sources, you shouldn't tell people they need a 7970 to beat the PS4. Â Try Again
[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Yes because having 2 SSD's and 2 normal HDD actually make your PC 1 million times stronger.. My god so much waist of money..tormentos
*waste
Well I have 4 hard drives and you only have 1, so like 4x stronger! domination!
First i don't have 1 drive on my PC and second why in gods green earth i would want 4 damn HDD..? I don't download 10GB of data daily nor plan to...I am not a pirate so i don't need endless space to store or my stolen stuff.. In fact i have a 500GB and PS3 HDD which was 120GB when i replace my HDD on PS3 i use the old PS3 one on my pc.All it takes is 1 steam sale and that 500GB HDD will be full
[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="tormentos"] Yes because having 2 SSD's and 2 normal HDD actually make your PC 1 million times stronger.. My god so much waist of money..tormentos
*waste
Well I have 4 hard drives and you only have 1, so like 4x stronger! domination!
First i don't have 1 drive on my PC and second why in gods green earth i would want 4 damn HDD..? I don't download 10GB of data daily nor plan to...I am not a pirate so i don't need endless space to store or my stolen stuff.. In fact i have a 500GB and PS3 HDD which was 120GB when i replace my HDD on PS3 i use the old PS3 one on my pc. I've got 9TB of storage. Mostly filled with gaming videos and the RAWs I got from my uni course. Its 2013, if you don't have an SSD in your PC then you're doing it wrong.*waste
Well I have 4 hard drives and you only have 1, so like 4x stronger! domination!
First i don't have 1 drive on my PC and second why in gods green earth i would want 4 damn HDD..? I don't download 10GB of data daily nor plan to...I am not a pirate so i don't need endless space to store or my stolen stuff.. In fact i have a 500GB and PS3 HDD which was 120GB when i replace my HDD on PS3 i use the old PS3 one on my pc. I've got 9TB of storage. Mostly filled with gaming videos and the RAWs I got from my uni course. Its 2013, if you don't have an SSD in your PC then you're doing it wrong. SSD's still have very little benefit in most use case scenarios. They are best in mobile devices where removing mechanical parts makes it much much safer to run around with.[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="tormentos"] First i don't have 1 drive on my PC and second why in gods green earth i would want 4 damn HDD..? I don't download 10GB of data daily nor plan to...I am not a pirate so i don't need endless space to store or my stolen stuff.. In fact i have a 500GB and PS3 HDD which was 120GB when i replace my HDD on PS3 i use the old PS3 one on my pc.savagetwinkieI've got 9TB of storage. Mostly filled with gaming videos and the RAWs I got from my uni course. Its 2013, if you don't have an SSD in your PC then you're doing it wrong. SSD's still have very little benefit in most use case scenarios. They are best in mobile devices where removing mechanical parts makes it much much safer to run around with. I say being able to put into Windows and being to open applications in really quickly is very beneficial.
[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="lostrib"]First i don't have 1 drive on my PC and second why in gods green earth i would want 4 damn HDD..? I don't download 10GB of data daily nor plan to...I am not a pirate so i don't need endless space to store or my stolen stuff.. In fact i have a 500GB and PS3 HDD which was 120GB when i replace my HDD on PS3 i use the old PS3 one on my pc. I've got 9TB of storage. Mostly filled with gaming videos and the RAWs I got from my uni course. Its 2013, if you don't have an SSD in your PC then you're doing it wrong.*waste
Well I have 4 hard drives and you only have 1, so like 4x stronger! domination!
clyde46
At least one for the OS, makes things so fast.Â
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="tormentos"] First i don't have 1 drive on my PC and second why in gods green earth i would want 4 damn HDD..? I don't download 10GB of data daily nor plan to...I am not a pirate so i don't need endless space to store or my stolen stuff.. In fact i have a 500GB and PS3 HDD which was 120GB when i replace my HDD on PS3 i use the old PS3 one on my pc.savagetwinkieI've got 9TB of storage. Mostly filled with gaming videos and the RAWs I got from my uni course. Its 2013, if you don't have an SSD in your PC then you're doing it wrong. SSD's still have very little benefit in most use case scenarios. They are best in mobile devices where removing mechanical parts makes it much much safer to run around with.
Tell that to people who use Photoshop, Illustrator and Indesign with photos of 25 GB in size. Sure, that's not gaming-related, but SSD helps pretty damn much.
I've got 9TB of storage. Mostly filled with gaming videos and the RAWs I got from my uni course. Its 2013, if you don't have an SSD in your PC then you're doing it wrong.[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="tormentos"] First i don't have 1 drive on my PC and second why in gods green earth i would want 4 damn HDD..? I don't download 10GB of data daily nor plan to...I am not a pirate so i don't need endless space to store or my stolen stuff.. In fact i have a 500GB and PS3 HDD which was 120GB when i replace my HDD on PS3 i use the old PS3 one on my pc.lostrib
At least one for the OS, makes things so fast.Â
I've got 2, one 128Gb Samsung 830 for my OS and a Corsair Force GT 240GB for my games. I have a 1TB WD Black for my FRAPS recordings.[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="clyde46"] I've got 9TB of storage. Mostly filled with gaming videos and the RAWs I got from my uni course. Its 2013, if you don't have an SSD in your PC then you're doing it wrong.clyde46SSD's still have very little benefit in most use case scenarios. They are best in mobile devices where removing mechanical parts makes it much much safer to run around with. I say being able to put into Windows and being to open applications in really quickly is very beneficial. Its actually not, the new windows 8 loads in 30 seconds and ssd barely improves upon it, with a good cached drive theres almost insignificant load times. For the prices they are asking its still overly expensive to use for the amount of data they can store. There biggest stregthn is they can't fail due to mechanical reasons which is why they are so popular in laptops. If you have SSD's in your desktop, your doing it wrong.
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] SSD's still have very little benefit in most use case scenarios. They are best in mobile devices where removing mechanical parts makes it much much safer to run around with.savagetwinkieI say being able to put into Windows and being to open applications in really quickly is very beneficial. Its actually not, the new windows 8 loads in 30 seconds and ssd barely improves upon it, with a good cached drive theres almost insignificant load times. For the prices they are asking its still overly expensive to use for the amount of data they can store. There biggest stregthn is they can't fail due to mechanical reasons which is why they are so popular in laptops. If you have SSD's in your desktop, your doing it wrong. Do you have an SSD in your desktop? Because you sure sound like you don't.
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] SSD's still have very little benefit in most use case scenarios. They are best in mobile devices where removing mechanical parts makes it much much safer to run around with.savagetwinkieI say being able to put into Windows and being to open applications in really quickly is very beneficial. Its actually not, the new windows 8 loads in 30 seconds and ssd barely improves upon it, with a good cached drive theres almost insignificant load times. For the prices they are asking its still overly expensive to use for the amount of data they can store. There biggest stregthn is they can't fail due to mechanical reasons which is why they are so popular in laptops. If you have SSD's in your desktop, your doing it wrong.
Dude, on work we upgraded on SSDs about half a year ago. It BOOSTED our productivity. Stuff that we had to render for half a day, now it's done in ten minutes. And those SSDs are upgrade for desktop workstations, not laptops. And contraty to popular belief, SSDs CAN fail.
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] SSD's still have very little benefit in most use case scenarios. They are best in mobile devices where removing mechanical parts makes it much much safer to run around with.savagetwinkieI say being able to put into Windows and being to open applications in really quickly is very beneficial. Its actually not, the new windows 8 loads in 30 seconds and ssd barely improves upon it, with a good cached drive theres almost insignificant load times. For the prices they are asking its still overly expensive to use for the amount of data they can store. There biggest stregthn is they can't fail due to mechanical reasons which is why they are so popular in laptops. If you have SSD's in your desktop, your doing it wrong.
Except I (and I would assume most people) don't have windows 8
[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="clyde46"] I say being able to put into Windows and being to open applications in really quickly is very beneficial. clyde46Its actually not, the new windows 8 loads in 30 seconds and ssd barely improves upon it, with a good cached drive theres almost insignificant load times. For the prices they are asking its still overly expensive to use for the amount of data they can store. There biggest stregthn is they can't fail due to mechanical reasons which is why they are so popular in laptops. If you have SSD's in your desktop, your doing it wrong. Do you have an SSD in your desktop? Because you sure sound like you don't. I don't, i've got one in my laptop, i've got two 128gb ones sitting here I'm going to try to upgrade my laptop to make a software raid for work. I've also got a 256mb one buts its an async nand which isn't as goot s my two 128's. But my desktop I used a ssd cached hybrid drive which actually works nearly as good but still gives me ridiculous amounts of space nom nom nom.
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] Its actually not, the new windows 8 loads in 30 seconds and ssd barely improves upon it, with a good cached drive theres almost insignificant load times. For the prices they are asking its still overly expensive to use for the amount of data they can store. There biggest stregthn is they can't fail due to mechanical reasons which is why they are so popular in laptops. If you have SSD's in your desktop, your doing it wrong.savagetwinkieDo you have an SSD in your desktop? Because you sure sound like you don't. I don't, i've got one in my laptop, i've got two 128gb ones sitting here I'm going to try to upgrade my laptop to make a software raid for work. I've also got a 256mb one buts its an async nand which isn't as goot s my two 128's. But my desktop I used a ssd cached hybrid drive which actually works nearly as good but still gives me ridiculous amounts of space nom nom nom. Put one in your desktop, use a HDD as storage and it will be wonderful.
Its actually not, the new windows 8 loads in 30 seconds and ssd barely improves upon it, with a good cached drive theres almost insignificant load times. For the prices they are asking its still overly expensive to use for the amount of data they can store. There biggest stregthn is they can't fail due to mechanical reasons which is why they are so popular in laptops. If you have SSD's in your desktop, your doing it wrong.[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="clyde46"] I say being able to put into Windows and being to open applications in really quickly is very beneficial. lostrib
Except I (and I would assume most people) don't have windows 8
50 seconds for windows 7, and it's closer to 30 with an ssd, 20 hole seconds, but I never shut the desktop off so boot speed is... pointless.[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="clyde46"] I've got 9TB of storage. Mostly filled with gaming videos and the RAWs I got from my uni course. Its 2013, if you don't have an SSD in your PC then you're doing it wrong.clyde46
At least one for the OS, makes things so fast.Â
I've got 2, one 128Gb Samsung 830 for my OS and a Corsair Force GT 240GB for my games. I have a 1TB WD Black for my FRAPS recordings.Yeah, whenever I update my desktop again I think I will get a 250gb for games (they were just ridiculously expensive compared to 128Gb at the time). Â I use a 64gb M4 for just my OS and normal programs. Â My WD Black holds most of my games, but it is loud as hell (relatively)
[QUOTE="lostrib"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] Its actually not, the new windows 8 loads in 30 seconds and ssd barely improves upon it, with a good cached drive theres almost insignificant load times. For the prices they are asking its still overly expensive to use for the amount of data they can store. There biggest stregthn is they can't fail due to mechanical reasons which is why they are so popular in laptops. If you have SSD's in your desktop, your doing it wrong.savagetwinkie
Except I (and I would assume most people) don't have windows 8
50 seconds for windows 7, and it's closer to 30 with an ssd, 20 hole seconds, but I never shut the desktop off so boot speed is... pointless.Pretty sure it also helps my desktop wake from sleep faster, and opens other programs faster. Â Also, it's quiet, unlike other high speed drives like my WD Black
I've got 2, one 128Gb Samsung 830 for my OS and a Corsair Force GT 240GB for my games. I have a 1TB WD Black for my FRAPS recordings.[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="lostrib"]
At least one for the OS, makes things so fast.Â
lostrib
Yeah, whenever I update my desktop again I think I will get a 250gb for games (they were just ridiculously expensive compared to 128Gb at the time). Â I use a 64gb M4 for just my OS and normal programs. Â My WD Black holds most of my games, but it is loud as hell (relatively)
I got my 240GB SSD at Eurogamer because Scan had a stand there and it was £50 off. Plus I had lots of cash in my bank thanks to my dad.[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="clyde46"] Do you have an SSD in your desktop? Because you sure sound like you don't. clyde46I don't, i've got one in my laptop, i've got two 128gb ones sitting here I'm going to try to upgrade my laptop to make a software raid for work. I've also got a 256mb one buts its an async nand which isn't as goot s my two 128's. But my desktop I used a ssd cached hybrid drive which actually works nearly as good but still gives me ridiculous amounts of space nom nom nom. Put one in your desktop, use a HDD as storage and it will be wonderful. it's not, thats why i took them out, figured i couldn find something niftiers to attach them too. Windoze sets me up with a 32gb paging file, I have little room for applications left so its at a point where the miniscule amount of time it shaves off of loading didn't benefit over a nice 750gb hybrid with 2 2tb drives in a raid 1 for mass storage
All this SSD talk... have one installed for a week or so, but it's sitting empty, haven't reinstalled the Windows yet.
Have a few loose ends to tie before I start formating, like finishing a few games. Easier to get it done now, than to install them again...
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] I don't, i've got one in my laptop, i've got two 128gb ones sitting here I'm going to try to upgrade my laptop to make a software raid for work. I've also got a 256mb one buts its an async nand which isn't as goot s my two 128's. But my desktop I used a ssd cached hybrid drive which actually works nearly as good but still gives me ridiculous amounts of space nom nom nom.savagetwinkiePut one in your desktop, use a HDD as storage and it will be wonderful. it's not, thats why i took them out, figured i couldn find something niftiers to attach them too. Windoze sets me up with a 32gb paging file, I have little room for applications left so its at a point where the miniscule amount of time it shaves off of loading didn't benefit over a nice 750gb hybrid with 2 2tb drives in a raid 1 for mass storage
Just turn off the page file
[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="savagetwinkie"] I don't, i've got one in my laptop, i've got two 128gb ones sitting here I'm going to try to upgrade my laptop to make a software raid for work. I've also got a 256mb one buts its an async nand which isn't as goot s my two 128's. But my desktop I used a ssd cached hybrid drive which actually works nearly as good but still gives me ridiculous amounts of space nom nom nom.savagetwinkiePut one in your desktop, use a HDD as storage and it will be wonderful. it's not, thats why i took them out, figured i couldn find something niftiers to attach them too. Windoze sets me up with a 32gb paging file, I have little room for applications left so its at a point where the miniscule amount of time it shaves off of loading didn't benefit over a nice 750gb hybrid with 2 2tb drives in a raid 1 for mass storage To be fair, if you can get sub 1 minute boots with a standard drive then props to you. I got my SSD because I was sick to death waiting ages for Windows to boot. I need to get another SSD to put into my Macbook Pro now.
[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="clyde46"] Put one in your desktop, use a HDD as storage and it will be wonderful.clyde46it's not, thats why i took them out, figured i couldn find something niftiers to attach them too. Windoze sets me up with a 32gb paging file, I have little room for applications left so its at a point where the miniscule amount of time it shaves off of loading didn't benefit over a nice 750gb hybrid with 2 2tb drives in a raid 1 for mass storage To be fair, if you can get sub 1 minute boots with a standard drive then props to you. I got my SSD because I was sick to death waiting ages for Windows to boot. I need to get another SSD to put into my Macbook Pro now.
I need to do the same thing. Â Although I don't shutdown my macbook unless it needs to update something
it's not, thats why i took them out, figured i couldn find something niftiers to attach them too. Windoze sets me up with a 32gb paging file, I have little room for applications left so its at a point where the miniscule amount of time it shaves off of loading didn't benefit over a nice 750gb hybrid with 2 2tb drives in a raid 1 for mass storage[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="clyde46"] Put one in your desktop, use a HDD as storage and it will be wonderful.lostrib
Just turn off the page file
It's not worth it, if windoze allowed it, I'd get my laptop two 750gb hybrids since they are cheap and create a logical drive with them. Linux is so awesome, it's too bad it's support from developers is still ****Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment