Wow, 68 pages in eleven hours. Needless to say, I didn't read every last post, but the first about fifteen pages.
From the original post, I gathered this.
You can't have a good CPU if you don't have an SSD.
Rubbish. It's called different priorities. Just because you have a Sandy Bridge CPU, doesn't mean you need this, that, and the other. Just because I can afford a Sandy Bridge CPU doesn't mean you need and can afford very high end GPUs (sometimes multiple ones), gobs of RAM, expensive monitor (or multiple ones), expensive speakers and sound cards, and SSDs. Give me a break.
There's this thing called money which ultimately dictates our limits. Yeah, SSDs are fast, but alot of us are simply holding out and waiting for more, because to alot of us, they don't offer what the price demands, and there's nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with an SSD offering you alot and knocking you on your feet. We don't all jump the gun the second something better is available.
Originally Posted by turrican9
Are you aware that many games can stutter due to harddrive loading? Whilst they do not with an SSD. What's the point of having a great CPU and graphics card if the game stutters due to harddrive loading?
My hard drive doesn't cause me stuttering in my gameplay, and I hardly have the speediest mechanical drive.
The smoother Windows experience isn't worth the money to me right now (I am still slightly considering it, however, but it's at the bottom of the list of priorities). A better CPU, however, is.
Most of what's on my C:/ drive, besides Windows and programs, are my Steam games. I keep them all installed. I can't be hassled downloading and installing them all of the time. Why should I when I have the space to fill them? As a result, I'd require alot of space from an SSD before it starts replacing my mechanical drives. An SSD wouldn't hold my Steam games (A couple hundred GBs, plus more for headroom) unless I get something more expensive than is worth it.
So, why jump on an unnecessary purchase now, when I am fine with what I have now, and the offerings of SSDs will only grow for me if I wait? Your logic is trying to group everyone where everyone doesn't fit. Yes, SSDs are faster, but at the end of the day, there is a WHOLE LOT more to it than that that you're failing to take into equation. In MY case, an SSD isn't worth it yet. Later, it may be, and I'm anticipating that day.Edited by Princess Garnet - 4/20/11 at 4:57pm