jjjrmy Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 Yeah, by the time SSDs drop down to a reasonable price there is going to be something new that costs a lot. It'll be like data stored in crystals or something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waco Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 Yeah, by the time SSDs drop down to a reasonable price there is going to be something new that costs a lot. It'll be like data stored in crystals or something. SSDs are pretty reasonable considering the speed boost they offer (especially compared to upgrading GPUs every year or so). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedway Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 SSDs are pretty reasonable considering the speed boost they offer (especially compared to upgrading GPUs every year or so). I mean most people are getting SSD's for a boot drive and as many progs/games they can fit, and from that standpoint with the increased performance, I think prices have gotten reasonable in the last year. Now from a storage standpoint Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 SSDs are pretty reasonable considering the speed boost they offer (especially compared to upgrading GPUs every year or so). I agree, I just need more space . I could get buy with 128GB but 256GB would give me more breathing space. I will start considering them once $1/GB pricing is achieved, the technology will be even better by that point Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MercuryDoun Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 I agree, I just need more space . I could get buy with 128GB but 256GB would give me more breathing space. I will start considering them once $1/GB pricing is achieved, the technology will be even better by that point I came pretty close to the $1/GB when i got my SSD. Was about $140 for my 120GB Corsair sandforce drive, GG NEWEGG sale + Promo code!! I agree 256GB would be better, but 120GB is pretty good actually. Most of my games are on steam, and with steam you cant install games anywhere except where the steam application is install. So i ended up needing to install steam and those those steam games on my raid-0 setup. But i still got windows all my basic apps, and SC2 on my SSD. Any other game that i get that isnt from steam will most likely be going on the SSD. But i kind of like it this way as it sorta forces me to keep the SSD clean. I suppose i could have caved and just put steam on the SSD and only kept a few games installed at a time, but meh i play too many different games are once to really do that effectively, and its not like my raid is slow either lol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flibo Posted April 20, 2011 Posted April 20, 2011 SSDs are pretty reasonable considering the speed boost they offer (especially compared to upgrading GPUs every year or so). This is so true. For the performance boost they aren't expensive at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffchop Posted April 23, 2011 Posted April 23, 2011 Lol, does OCZ not realize that people who can do math can get two 240GB Vertex 3's for $1100, instead of a single 480GB for $1900? It's not like most motherboards don't have at least two SATA 6GB ports. Also, it will take 16 minutes to fill up the 480GB SSD at the rated write speeds. That's got to be a rare 16 minutes of fun for $1900. Filling up the drive? No you miss the point. The point of such a drive is to read and right data quickly. Such as an operating system, swap file, temporary internet files, temp file, games etc. So all the intensive date reading and writing is comparatively lightening fast when compared to whatever we had before, ATA33 for example. As far as buying two drives of half the capacity. That also is a missed point. You could buy two 2tb WD Green drives for $95 each or a single 3tb Green for $249. The comparison being you'd get the 3tb for 3/4 x $190 = 142.00 rather than $249.00. 249 to 142, 1900 to 1100, each is about 1.75 X more expensive than the smaller size. Highest capacity is cutting edge technology and costs more per terabyte. So NO the 480Gb Vertex is NOT as "overpriced much" as you so facetiously make out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
El_Capitan Posted April 23, 2011 Posted April 23, 2011 Filling up the drive? No you miss the point. The point of such a drive is to read and right data quickly. Such as an operating system, swap file, temporary internet files, temp file, games etc. So all the intensive date reading and writing is comparatively lightening fast when compared to whatever we had before, ATA33 for example. As far as buying two drives of half the capacity. That also is a missed point. You could buy two 2tb WD Green drives for $95 each or a single 3tb Green for $249. The comparison being you'd get the 3tb for 3/4 x $190 = 142.00 rather than $249.00. 249 to 142, 1900 to 1100, each is about 1.75 X more expensive than the smaller size. Highest capacity is cutting edge technology and costs more per terabyte. So NO the 480Gb Vertex is NOT as "overpriced much" as you so facetiously make out. Do you work for OCZ? Quite a first post, I must say. I'm missing a lot of points it seems. Though I don't know how "more per terabyte" fits in... more like more per gigabyte. $800 for 240 more GB's, to be exact. I never knew OS's, swap files, temp internet files, and games to be so intensive, either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedway Posted April 23, 2011 Posted April 23, 2011 Do you work for OCZ? Quite a first post, I must say. I'm missing a lot of points it seems. Though I don't know how "more per terabyte" fits in... more like more per gigabyte. $800 for 240 more GB's, to be exact. I never knew OS's, swap files, temp internet files, and games to be so intensive, either. LoL, Capi this looks like just a troll You shouldn't feed him, especially after midnight! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sticknstone Posted April 29, 2011 Posted April 29, 2011 In 2006 I purchased an ide 80 gb drive for 145 (1.81/gb), jump ahead to 2011 and I replaced that drive with an ide 500 gb for 85 (0.17/gb). The reason I just purchased another 240 gb ssd is that I went through reaching the end of the 80 gb drive and having to make uninstalls or format and fresh installs periodically and I did not wish to repeat that operation on this setup. I would never purchase a drive for those current prices. The 120 gb ssd was 200 (1.67/gb) and the 240 gb ssd was 340 (1.42/gb). I had the intent never to purchase a 2.5" drive, but at the 340 price I changed my mind. These rebates and gift cards (awards, 1st place hahaha) are the things making ssd's palatable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sticknstone Posted April 29, 2011 Posted April 29, 2011 I know, I know, its still not enough!!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krieg1337 Posted April 29, 2011 Posted April 29, 2011 You missed it. Look at the speeds. 530mb/s write and 450mb/s read(Or flipped) on Sata III. Now sure you can go ahead and Raid, but you sacrifice Trim and other important features that degrade your SSD faster. Personally, I would also go with 2 seperate drives, but that just shows that this is not for us Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now