[Test] SSD vs HDD Real world

[CutaoNilaan840]

húhu_passt_híér_ñêt_rëín_âbà_i­ch_bïñ_sö_éìnsåm_wíll_jèmànd_m­ît_míá_schrêîbén

[Exterminator131]

Eclipse boot test was interesting... But I'd happy to see a compilation speed (for Java or C++ - doesn't matter).

[26psyside]

@ Angelisthebest There is performance drop depends on many things but there is. Even Anadtech reviews show that.

[point6000x]

ok ssd is faster but its WORTH TO PAY 50 TIMES MORE???

[TheQuillmaster]

@point6000x yep

[point6000x]

@TheQuillmaster for what??

[TheQuillmaster]

@point6000x SSD is totally worth it. I've had at least 5 or 6 HDD's fail on me. So much that I set up a RAID 1 in mine so I wouldn't lost my data. Speed is a huge difference, yes, but it doesn't fail hardly at all, so it's definitely.

[point6000x]

@TheQuillmaster listen: my 1TB HDD Western Digital had no error for 4 years now. sometimes it runned for more than 3 days. I Run this one in RAID with some other. I had never issues with HDDs?

[clamo636]

@TheQuillmaster are you keeping your Hdd's cool? need to put a fan right in front of them. hdd'd have moving parts so they get HOTTER! you ever note that your computers ram hardly ever fails....if it does at all? even if it gets a little hot, well ram may got hot but not as hot as hdd's get. hence the reason y ssd's have such a life span. they stay way cooler. ram don't move so it stays alive longer and proformas way faster. air cool an ssd and watch what happens.

[ccitrus]

SSD Disk should be in AHCI mode for better performance.

[angleisthebest]

Your hard drive must be cluttered with bloatware, since it is taking so long in your video. An SSD's performance doesn't degrade when using it close to its capacity, but a hard drive's performance will begin to degrade as soon as you go above 50% capacity usage. And sorry to say, but your first test is worthless. Loading different maps renders it so because one can be heavily modded map using higher-res textures while another could be a pre-made one with far less objects to render.

[He4db4nger]

@angleisthebest no bloatware, both are freshly installed. don't know what ya mean. none of the drives was used to its capacity and SSDs (the bad ones) DO degrade (like the "great" intel ones). both maps from hl2 are normal levels from hl2 and episode1.. and both levels did take quite the same time to load from an hdd.

[26psyside]

@angleisthebest

Wrong, SSD will also degrade when using it at full capacity. At least the controller will struggle to work properly, maybe not for the first 1/2 days but soon it will. Mostly (depending what type of controller the SSD has ofc if its Jmicron then your fucked)

Also HDD start to degrade after 70% of capacity not 50%.

[angleisthebest]

@26psyside I never said full, I said close to its capacity. And no, an SSD wouldn't degrade in performance regardless of the amount of capacity used up because it takes cheap SSD MLC flash chips about 100000 full writes (using full capacity of each chip) to wear them out, and there is no performance drop in between that time. As for controllers, they used to be picked to match the speed of the memory, but now that theyre trying to get cheaper SSDs with poor controllers, thats no longer the case

[AmH032uTuBe]

@angleisthebest Actually, it's nothing to do with any "50% or more" terms. It's just that the more data stored on an HDD, the more the data goes to the slow disc access areas of the platters stored inside the HDD.

The read-head has to travel back and forth a lot more for the seek time. SSDs don't have any 'seeking' work to do as there are no moving components; although there are slight delays from the hardware signalling.

[osht1]

Both are incredibly slow in your test. You must have a bottleneck elsewhere.  Most likely motherboard/CPU replated.

While your test does show the difference between the two, I don't think I would find either acceptable and would find the root of your lack of performance problem.

[He4db4nger]

@osht1 i have no idead what you mean. the last tests were done on a notebook, ok it had only sata1 with an intel ich8m, but the great pro for an SSD is the seek time compared to an SSD. it doesn't matter if you have sata3 with 350mb/s ssd or an sata2 ssd on a sata1 interface with 100mb/s like the mtron mobi. i've compared many ssds on many systems and all results are the same: for a operating system it doesn't matter what SSD, mainly you should have an ssd without jmicron controller.

[He4db4nger]

@osht1 and for other examples.. i have bfbc2 on a vertex 120 and every map loads in about 4secs. maybe the examples in the video aren't the best, but the improvement in hl2 can be overtaken to all games with bigger levels than doom2.

[clamo636]

@osht1 that's were the bottle neck is lol that POS phenom and that ATI card. LOL i used to own a 3870 it got replaced with a 9800gt that blew it away and ive replaced all my amd crap with intel. not to mention that motherboard hes got is a bottle neck LOL.

[Nightcover]

thanks for testing RCT3

[dharkbizkit]

hey das wallpaper hab ich auch, guter geschmack :D

SSD sind eine wirklich feine Sache und ein schritt in die richtige richtung der zukunft, ABER sie sind noch weitaus zu teuer. 80 € für ne platte, auf die ich win, alle programme und vll 1-2 aktuelle spiele bekomme ist mir bei weitem zu teuer, wenn ich vergl. für 80euro 750gb bekomme. von 100gb+ssd's garnich erst zu sprechen. Interessant wirds, wenn schnelle 300gb SSD's bei 200 euro liegen.aber das wird noch min. 2 jahre dauern denk ich

[ZupZupPflup]

warum hast du das video nicht so geschnitten, das die Programme gleichzeitig laden?