Hey guys. since I have to buy a new hardrive and I was thinking to buy http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227725
For diablo III. just wondering if its worth it? A few of my friends say we dont need a SSD for diablo3. but later we may need better computer set up when pvp comes out no? just imo
Sound good :0
For my computer setup. I can load max but shadow with a bit lag. thats why I'm thinking what should I upgrade for.
looks like SSD is a good choice.
Once you're loaded, SSD vs. HDD is meaningless. It's all GPU from that point on*. So an SSD isn't going to improve your PvP success.
They are nice, and make great OS drives, but in general I'd consider them a luxury item with little value for gaming. Especially the 60 GB one you're looking at. It'll get very cramped, especially when you factor in future D3 expansion packs and the many programs that insist on being on your C-drive.
* Assuming you have enough RAM and CPU performance, of course.
Once you're loaded, SSD vs. HDD is meaningless. It's all GPU from that point on*. So an SSD isn't going to improve your PvP success.
They are nice, and make great OS drives, but in general I'd consider them a luxury item with little value for gaming. Especially the 60 GB one you're looking at. It'll get very cramped, especially when you factor in future D3 expansion packs and the many programs that insist on being on your C-drive.
* Assuming you have enough RAM and CPU performance, of course.
This, kardaxx knows wtf he is talking about.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
One is never hurt by being given additional choices, only by taking them away. A QUADRILLION MAGIC FIND is worthless if you can't kill shit!
Yea, I recently was wondering weather or not to buy a SSD or a bigger HDD.
I decided on a bigger HDD, 300GB running at 10k RPM.
Tbh what made me choose the HDD over SSD was mainly I needed the storage more than faster loading times.
Diablo will not benefit from having a SSD as the load times wont be that large, the only real benefit to SSD are when it comes to operating system, they load them super fast and can get programs open just as fast.
If your looking for a hard drive just go with a 10k rpm HDD, will save you money in the long run and for gaming works just as good.
10k RPM HDD were pretty much made obsolete by SSD's.
Its pretty much a dead technology. The 7200 RPM HDD will remain as storage kings, but the need for speed on storage drives really just isn't there.
Once you're loaded, SSD vs. HDD is meaningless. It's all GPU from that point on*. So an SSD isn't going to improve your PvP success.
They are nice, and make great OS drives, but in general I'd consider them a luxury item with little value for gaming. Especially the 60 GB one you're looking at. It'll get very cramped, especially when you factor in future D3 expansion packs and the many programs that insist on being on your C-drive.
* Assuming you have enough RAM and CPU performance, of course.
Except some games such as D3 do some loading once you're already in the game. So in that case an SSD would help. But yes, you're right, as long as everything is preloaded at a loading screen it wouldn't affect gameplay.
Once you're loaded, SSD vs. HDD is meaningless. It's all GPU from that point on*. So an SSD isn't going to improve your PvP success.
They are nice, and make great OS drives, but in general I'd consider them a luxury item with little value for gaming. Especially the 60 GB one you're looking at. It'll get very cramped, especially when you factor in future D3 expansion packs and the many programs that insist on being on your C-drive.
* Assuming you have enough RAM and CPU performance, of course.
Except some games such as D3 do some loading once you're already in the game. So in that case an SSD would help. But yes, you're right, as long as everything is preloaded at a loading screen it wouldn't affect gameplay.
+1 d3 is constantly loading everytime you take a step, that's why the load screens are so short.
What I've gathered from reading and testing... It's not so much the on-the-go loading that matters as is the constant pulling of assets from the servers. This was actually a clientside bug on the Beta that will not be present on Live according to many blue posts.
So the "stuttering" you may find in the Beta test is almost certainly coming from that constant pulling of assets.
A big part of this bug was pulling audio files, as they are mostly larger. If you lower your audio quality to 16bits you'll notice the stuttering will lower as well (if you suffer from that issue).
I also think an SSD will not help with D3 in the slightest. My 7200 HDD passes the loading screen in about 2 seconds after which there is only the occasional stutter when loading new assets like spell effects, that haven't been used during that play session and other things like that. :]
A SSD is worth it in general, especially considering how cheap they are now. £100 for 120GB is nothing, I remember paying £250 for 80GB when they first came out and I don't regret it one bit.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The question isn't why do I kill. The question is, why I don't kill everybody.
Once you're loaded, SSD vs. HDD is meaningless. It's all GPU from that point on*. So an SSD isn't going to improve your PvP success.
They are nice, and make great OS drives, but in general I'd consider them a luxury item with little value for gaming. Especially the 60 GB one you're looking at. It'll get very cramped, especially when you factor in future D3 expansion packs and the many programs that insist on being on your C-drive.
* Assuming you have enough RAM and CPU performance, of course.
Except some games such as D3 do some loading once you're already in the game. So in that case an SSD would help. But yes, you're right, as long as everything is preloaded at a loading screen it wouldn't affect gameplay.
+1 d3 is constantly loading everytime you take a step, that's why the load screens are so short.
The info coming in would have to exceed what the standard HDD could process to affect performance at all. That is no where near the case. HDD and Memory mean almost nothing in gaming, unless you are completely anal about load screens.
If you are building a new pc thats the absolute 1st place to look to cut spending.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do you want to get scammed? Perhaps a nice keylogger?
"Just google "diablo 3 gold guide" and magical rainbow covered demons will assault your eyes."
Once you're loaded, SSD vs. HDD is meaningless. It's all GPU from that point on*. So an SSD isn't going to improve your PvP success.
They are nice, and make great OS drives, but in general I'd consider them a luxury item with little value for gaming. Especially the 60 GB one you're looking at. It'll get very cramped, especially when you factor in future D3 expansion packs and the many programs that insist on being on your C-drive.
* Assuming you have enough RAM and CPU performance, of course.
Except some games such as D3 do some loading once you're already in the game. So in that case an SSD would help. But yes, you're right, as long as everything is preloaded at a loading screen it wouldn't affect gameplay.
+1 d3 is constantly loading everytime you take a step, that's why the load screens are so short.
The info coming in would have to exceed what the standard HDD could process to affect performance at all. That is no where near the case. HDD and Memory mean almost nothing in gaming, unless you are completely anal about load screens.
If you are building a new pc thats the absolute 1st place to look to cut spending.
That link doesn't goto HDD, so I can't see how relevant that benchmark is.
My guess is that its an outlier game, or just a bad test that shows bias in favor of SSD.
I am leaning towards the latter as those min FPS are abysmal. I am guessing the system in question is severely lacking in other areas, thus skewing the benefit of the HDD.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do you want to get scammed? Perhaps a nice keylogger?
"Just google "diablo 3 gold guide" and magical rainbow covered demons will assault your eyes."
That link doesn't goto HDD, so I can't see how relevant that benchmark is.
My guess is that its an outlier game, or just a bad test that shows bias in favor of SSD.
I am leaning towards the latter as those min FPS are abysmal. I am guessing the system in question is severely lacking in other areas, thus skewing the benefit of the HDD.
"I can't find facts supporting my argument so I'm going to dismiss your proof by saying that it's wrong."
That link doesn't goto HDD, so I can't see how relevant that benchmark is.
My guess is that its an outlier game, or just a bad test that shows bias in favor of SSD.
I am leaning towards the latter as those min FPS are abysmal. I am guessing the system in question is severely lacking in other areas, thus skewing the benefit of the HDD.
"I can't find facts supporting my argument so I'm going to dismiss your proof by saying that it's wrong."
I wasn't trying to provide proof, as its pretty much common knowledge among gamers. Instead I commented on you so called "proof".
Your link doesn't even work....It goes to an article about memory.
Crysis is an old game, maybe more HDD dependent than others, idk I haven't played it. Though one thing is certain, a single benchmark on one game means nothing.
There are a lot of other unknown factors from that benchmark that we don't know.
The fact of the matter is that picture is about as much proof as an episode of scooby doo.
Edit: Unless it was your intention to not even provide a link for the HDD argument. Did you think a mere picture was enough evidence? I can only assume so.
Anyways from the same article you linked regarding memory,
Conclusion:
"
Every time when we discussed the effects of memory speed on the overall performance
in certain configurations, we arrived at the conclusion that these effects were quite insignificant. This conclusion that we made back in the days for Socket AM3 and LGA1156 systems proved true one more time."
===============================================================
I actually found the link,
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 (2.66GHz) Motherboard: Intel DG45ID Chipset: Intel G45 Chipset Drivers: Intel 8.1.1.1010 (Intel) Memory: Corsair XMS2-8500 1066 Video Card: VisionTek Radeon HD 4850 OS: Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit
The system was slightly better than recommended settings for crisis.
You'll notice the average framerate barely goes up...
But the minimum framerate skyrockets.
This is caused by the engine not preloading textures fast enough. It can happen in some games for a number of reasons. Lack or RAM, the player spinning around really fast... or maybe the game has difficult terrain, or the engine just has stupid preloading algorithms.
However, in most games, situations like this aren't encountered often, unless you are strapped for RAM.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do you want to get scammed? Perhaps a nice keylogger?
"Just google "diablo 3 gold guide" and magical rainbow covered demons will assault your eyes."
What I've gathered from reading and testing... It's not so much the on-the-go loading that matters as is the constant pulling of assets from the servers. This was actually a clientside bug on the Beta that will not be present on Live according to many blue posts.
So the "stuttering" you may find in the Beta test is almost certainly coming from that constant pulling of assets.
A big part of this bug was pulling audio files, as they are mostly larger. If you lower your audio quality to 16bits you'll notice the stuttering will lower as well (if you suffer from that issue).
I also think an SSD will not help with D3 in the slightest. My 7200 HDD passes the loading screen in about 2 seconds after which there is only the occasional stutter when loading new assets like spell effects, that haven't been used during that play session and other things like that. :]
This is exactly where an SSD would help. It's not a huge difference but it will most certaintly provide smoother gameplay. What you're saying is akin to 60hz monitors being as smooth and responsive as 120hz monitors. Just because the 60hz monitor works doesn't mean it can't be done better.
*SNIP* However, in most games, situations like this aren't encountered often, unless you are strapped for RAM.
Good thing I already said it happens in D3. As was already stated in this very thread by others. The game loads things that will cause FPS drops while you're playing. An SSD alleviates this.
Good thing I already said it happens in D3. As was already stated in this very thread by others. The game loads things that will cause FPS drops while you're playing. An SSD alleviates this.
The beta is laggy as hell on even great system, though D3 will supposedly run much smoother when its live.
There is also the question of how much information is being loaded. The information at any on time would have to reach a certain point before you would notice any difference at all.
The final version isn't even out to say one way or the other would be false. Though from experience with other games, even HDD intensive games, we know the overall FPS difference will be almost nothing.
If you have shitloads of money to blow, then sure, get an SSD and HDD. If you are on a tight budget, then the SSD is by far the best thing to throw to the curb.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Do you want to get scammed? Perhaps a nice keylogger?
"Just google "diablo 3 gold guide" and magical rainbow covered demons will assault your eyes."
The part where I added that "new assets are loaded" was not intended for "HDD loading", but for "Internet loading". You pull them from the Battle.net servers, not your local HDD - they're not there.
The bug present on the client side of the Beta is that assets do not get saved locally. You pull them from the Internet every new session. Thus why the stuttering.
But that's all my own interpretation and what I've tested makes me inclined to believe I'm right.
edit: My opinion of SDD's is shared by what Mysticjbyrd mentioned. Budget-wise.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ha. Bagstone.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
For diablo III. just wondering if its worth it? A few of my friends say we dont need a SSD for diablo3. but later we may need better computer set up when pvp comes out no? just imo
For my computer setup. I can load max but shadow with a bit lag. thats why I'm thinking what should I upgrade for.
looks like SSD is a good choice.
They are nice, and make great OS drives, but in general I'd consider them a luxury item with little value for gaming. Especially the 60 GB one you're looking at. It'll get very cramped, especially when you factor in future D3 expansion packs and the many programs that insist on being on your C-drive.
* Assuming you have enough RAM and CPU performance, of course.
A QUADRILLION MAGIC FIND is worthless if you can't kill shit!
10k RPM HDD were pretty much made obsolete by SSD's.
Its pretty much a dead technology. The 7200 RPM HDD will remain as storage kings, but the need for speed on storage drives really just isn't there.
That's my perception of it anyways.
http://www.harddrive...end_drives.html
You won't see many if any HDDs in that list, especially not at the top.
A QUADRILLION MAGIC FIND is worthless if you can't kill shit!
Except some games such as D3 do some loading once you're already in the game. So in that case an SSD would help. But yes, you're right, as long as everything is preloaded at a loading screen it wouldn't affect gameplay.
+1 d3 is constantly loading everytime you take a step, that's why the load screens are so short.
So the "stuttering" you may find in the Beta test is almost certainly coming from that constant pulling of assets.
A big part of this bug was pulling audio files, as they are mostly larger. If you lower your audio quality to 16bits you'll notice the stuttering will lower as well (if you suffer from that issue).
I also think an SSD will not help with D3 in the slightest. My 7200 HDD passes the loading screen in about 2 seconds after which there is only the occasional stutter when loading new assets like spell effects, that haven't been used during that play session and other things like that. :]
Ha. Bagstone.
The info coming in would have to exceed what the standard HDD could process to affect performance at all. That is no where near the case. HDD and Memory mean almost nothing in gaming, unless you are completely anal about load screens.
If you are building a new pc thats the absolute 1st place to look to cut spending.
"Just google "diablo 3 gold guide" and magical rainbow covered demons will assault your eyes."
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/memory/display/sandy-bridge-ddr3_7.html#sect0
My guess is that its an outlier game, or just a bad test that shows bias in favor of SSD.
I am leaning towards the latter as those min FPS are abysmal. I am guessing the system in question is severely lacking in other areas, thus skewing the benefit of the HDD.
"Just google "diablo 3 gold guide" and magical rainbow covered demons will assault your eyes."
"I can't find facts supporting my argument so I'm going to dismiss your proof by saying that it's wrong."
I wasn't trying to provide proof, as its pretty much common knowledge among gamers. Instead I commented on you so called "proof".
Your link doesn't even work....It goes to an article about memory.
Crysis is an old game, maybe more HDD dependent than others, idk I haven't played it. Though one thing is certain, a single benchmark on one game means nothing.
There are a lot of other unknown factors from that benchmark that we don't know.
The fact of the matter is that picture is about as much proof as an episode of scooby doo.
Edit: Unless it was your intention to not even provide a link for the HDD argument. Did you think a mere picture was enough evidence? I can only assume so.
Anyways from the same article you linked regarding memory,
Conclusion:
"
===============================================================
I actually found the link,
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2614/14
CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 (2.66GHz) Motherboard: Intel DG45ID Chipset: Intel G45 Chipset Drivers: Intel 8.1.1.1010 (Intel) Memory: Corsair XMS2-8500 1066 Video Card: VisionTek Radeon HD 4850 OS: Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit
The system was slightly better than recommended settings for crisis.
You'll notice the average framerate barely goes up...
But the minimum framerate skyrockets.
This is caused by the engine not preloading textures fast enough. It can happen in some games for a number of reasons. Lack or RAM, the player spinning around really fast... or maybe the game has difficult terrain, or the engine just has stupid preloading algorithms.
However, in most games, situations like this aren't encountered often, unless you are strapped for RAM.
"Just google "diablo 3 gold guide" and magical rainbow covered demons will assault your eyes."
Good thing I already said it happens in D3. As was already stated in this very thread by others. The game loads things that will cause FPS drops while you're playing. An SSD alleviates this.
There is also the question of how much information is being loaded. The information at any on time would have to reach a certain point before you would notice any difference at all.
The final version isn't even out to say one way or the other would be false. Though from experience with other games, even HDD intensive games, we know the overall FPS difference will be almost nothing.
If you have shitloads of money to blow, then sure, get an SSD and HDD. If you are on a tight budget, then the SSD is by far the best thing to throw to the curb.
"Just google "diablo 3 gold guide" and magical rainbow covered demons will assault your eyes."
The bug present on the client side of the Beta is that assets do not get saved locally. You pull them from the Internet every new session. Thus why the stuttering.
But that's all my own interpretation and what I've tested makes me inclined to believe I'm right.
edit: My opinion of SDD's is shared by what Mysticjbyrd mentioned. Budget-wise.
Ha. Bagstone.