Solid state drive for gaming? Not worth it.

SSDs are definitely worth it!

@ivangrozny: I got a 4TB SSD for $400. Go on IGN, there is an article about 'best external drives for gaming'.

Not worth it for all games just for some. I put the OS and slow loading games like Star Citizen on my SSD and the rest go in my regular HDD.

Umm. which one? And from where?

it is if you can afford it!

Nope. Not worth it. If you're life is so bad that you can't wait 15 seconds for an hour of gameplay, you have failed at life.

I just bought a 1 TB SSD... but it wasn't really for the games.

I guess it is sort of worth it for that only because games are freaking huge nowadays and only grow bigger each update/patch. I don't like cleaning my fridge that often. :P

For speed though you should be using your OS and maybe your most played games on it (in my case an M.2 SSD). Other stuff goes to archive (another 512GB SSD and the new 1TB SSD).

I also have AWS S3 as an alternate backup for my object storage stuff. My local machine has a ton of projects and stuff on it so I need all the room I can get, and high durability just in case major failure happens.

It's actually down to $100 now. https://www.amazon.com/Book-Desktop-External-Drive-WDBBGB0040HBK-NESN/dp/B01LQQHL4E/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1512162320&sr=1-1&keywords=WDBFJK0040HBK-NESN

That's an external hard drive

A 4TB samsung SSD costs ~$1500

How do you determine the value of something that you never tried or used to a degree where you would have a reasonably informed opinion on?...

Price alone of course a SSD is not going to win any awards, but after having used a SSD for 5 years as my main boot drive SSD's are very much worth it even for game load times it's very much noticeable.

HDD are so slow that my upgrade to a SSHD actually show's faster load times in games. Personally a SSD for a boot drive is a must have and a 1-2TB or storage drive 7200rpm or SSHD is the ideal gaming setup.

Note: Sorry, but english is not my native language.

And, yes, I know, this is a old tread, but...

I bought yesterday a 1 Tb SSD drive - the Crucial MX300 1050. It was my first SSD drive. And I must confesse that I´m a little disapointted. Yes, it's faster than my previdous HDD - a 7200 rpm Samsung HDD - but it's not so fast as somes people want to make to belive. If you are a hard gamer, use your money in the most powerfull graphics card you can buy. That's the most important demanding hardware for the most games out there.

If a player records gameplay, I think an SSD helps a bit. It seems to have helped with my recordings of STALKER: Call of Pripyat.

Since when has gaming been the deciding factor in SSD's for PC builds? The common practice to have them just as the boot drive with Windows, and maybe a couple of select applications that are used on a regular basis. In my case with my 256 GB, I also have the Adobe Suite and my web browser installed on that. Then it's the mass storage mechanical drives for the rest of the general purpose programs and of course personal files.

This is well known because of the cost, the budget breakdown of just getting an SSD of sufficient size for those essentials, and the largest mass storage you can afford, or getting additional HDD's down the road. I'm sure games do get a performance benefit from SSD speeds, and while you can swap games in and out between that and the mass storage drive as needed for what you're currently playing, last I checked it isn't good for the long term life of the SSD.

Seriously, what's up the RAM prices man. I was going to get 32GB of DDR4 4266 but at almost 700 for the G.Skill I was like no thanks. I ended up getting the 4133 with only 16GB at less than 300. Still very expensive but better than paying 600-700

And an SSHD? I mean a hybrid.

Install Rainbow Six Siege with Ultra HD texture pack on an HDD and you'll understand.

they are competing with companies like samsung and apple who use ddr4 for their smartphones.

Most AAA games require 80 GB??????

Since when?

I agree that it's too much work to keep moving games back and forth from your regular drive to your SSD and vice versa. Honestly, I'm using a SSHD for games and it's been perfectly fine for everything.

An SSD dedicated to games would be great, but for me, personally, it's just too expensive at the moment. I only use one 500 gb 850 evo for windows.

I wouldn't say it that way, but I feel you. Big waste of money. Mechanical hard drives are fast enough. I think I have one game on my SSD right now, Max Payne 3, since I play that the most.

If you can afford it they are great. Definitely use SSD for the OS drive. Some games see a real loading time benefit to running on SSD. Some don't get that much of a benefit for some reason (like GTA5).

-Byshop

I just bought a 1TB SSD (Samsung Evo 850) on Boxing Day. Easily the best gaming hardware decision you can make. Games load almost instantly. Texture pop-in is a thing of the past. Your computer restarts in 5-10 seconds after updating anything. Windows background processes don't slow you down to a crawl anymore. And so on.

I picked this up for $350 CAD. That's extremely affordable.

Games with frequent loading screens are annoying.

A game like Elder Scrolls Online has loading screens every few minutes as you teleport around different zones. An SSD substantially cuts down on loading times (average load times are around 2 minutes with an HDD, while only 20-30 seconds with an SSD).

You also get a ton of texture pop-in with an HDD.

I use one. On PC games aren't that big. Much smaller than on PS4. And most good games are indie games. I have about 25 games installed now on a 1 TB and have more than 1/3rd space left. And not just small games. It includes Assassins Creed:O, PUBG, Elite: Dangerous with all DLC, Divinity OS2 and such.

I got a 1TB SSD when they were still cheap a couple years ago. They are still more expensive today.

Is that a pain to move them back and forth?

And it got bumped again, haha.

OP made this thread 1 month ago. It's not like it's from a few years ago. SSDs were just as "worth it" then as they are now.

Bumping a more than week old thread has been against Gamespot rules for as long as I've been here.

It's not really value for money. Paying more for much less, for faster boot times?

@aki2017: It improves game performance substantially.

@UssjTrunks: Meh, don't fill it warrants the smaller space and higher price tag.

I never understood why any sane individual would pay 3-6x more for something that will only load your games faster; it doesn't even PLAY games at higher frames, you simply load them faster. And even for that, you don't need to waste money on an SSD. I have a 7200 RPM 1 TB HDD that boots up my computer in like 15 seconds. I mean you can literally get a 10 TB HDD for only $100 more than you could for a 1 TB SSD. What a complete waste.

I'll bet you don't boot up in 15 seconds with an HDD. And an SSD helps with texture pop-in too.

This must be trolling at this point.

BS. 7200 HDD take like around a minute to load windows, and even more depending on the startup programs you have. Even an SSD will take like around 20 seconds, with very little impact from startup programs.

i have a ssd 240gb dedicated to my games, i have bf1, bf4, pubg and overwatch and a bunch of other games i play than delete, best thing i ever boiught for my pc,

I dont put ALL my games on my SSD, just the ones I think could take advantage of it.

I really dont need uber performance for Another Brick in the Mall for exmaple

I don't know why people would't have an SSD these days

I feel SSD's make a pretty big difference over mechanical drives. The difference may make a difference to some, others just don't care. For me I prefer them. For my Gaming PC I use Samsung Evo's w/ 500GB SSD for Windows OS/programs/apps, 1TB SSD for games. For file storage (pictures, music, misc. files) I use an internal 2TB spinner and then a 6TB external for backups.

For my consoles I have a 2TB mechanical in the PS4 Pro and an additional 500GB SSD external drive one the Xbox one X. Games do load up pretty fast on the SSD on the XOX vs the 1TB internal drive.

I thought the same you did TC.

Then I made the switch. Trust me, saving 10-20 sec every load screen (or more) makes a HUGE difference.

not yet at least.......

@glez13: @UssjTrunks: If I'm including start up programs, sure, Windows takes about a minute-2 minutes to fully boot up (though I am able to use Steam and Chrome almost immediately), but to actually get Windows 10 to start up, it doesn't take much time at all - unless you count the time to scan my face to log in, which is probably another 15 seconds.

Point being that outside of load time, which is only a few seconds to begin with, SSD has pretty much no effect on gaming performance at all, and it's definitely not worth the price.

EDIT: Oh I see, I have Windows 10 on "Fast Startup Mode". That's why it boots up so quickly. Which is even more reason why you shouldn't spend money on an SSD.

Still, the point stands that spending $200 more for an extra 15 seconds of game-play is utterly asinine. It simply makes no sense. And often, with games that take a millennia to load, will often boot up quicker the second time you play it. Like in BF, maps I play frequently often times load up much quicker - 15-30 seconds often - than maps I infrequently play, or never play at all.

@gamingpcgod: Like most things in life, performance comes at a cost. One user may find the costs neglible and worth it while another does not. The fact still remains most all SSD drives will "own" a mechanical drive in the performance arena. I feel it all comes down to what one will pay for space vs performance. Sometimes storage trumps the benefits of an SSD and that's all right. For me..

I go for the blended approach of need and performance. I will say that an SSD will not magically make your gaming performance better. It is only one ingredient that goes hand in hand with other components to improve performance of your experience.

Worth it for some games that take forever to load.

Test the waters out, buy a SSD or M.2 drive for your OS... and then install your favourite MP game on it, then find out if the load times are worth the price.

Me I went with a SSD for OS and SSHD for gaming.

I would like to add... Get a SSHD, seriously its close to SSD load times for games and at fraction of the cost. My Firecuda cost me £65 and is drastically faster than my Barracuda HDD when it comes to loading in to BF1 and PUBG.

Good advice. ;)

Note that with those hybrid drives you dont see the solid state performance gains until you run the same program/files a few times .... its when the most accessed stuff is stored onto the SSD portion of the harddrive is when you see the gains.

@Grey_Eyed_Elf: yeah I'm really enjoying the Firecuda I bought recently. My computer is like a new machine now that the OS is on SSD and the games are on SSHD. I'd previously tried leaving my OS on my old HDD and just install games on the SSD and that was a mistake - so much of how the computer works relies on the speed of the primary drive. Things are all much faster now, even with the games on a slower drive than before

Good advice, my laptop uses an SSHD and it delivers SSD speeds at times.

But aren't SSHD more prone to breaking? I mean they have more parts after all.

Kinda like a cache, then? I wonder how that would affect recording game play?

My nephews and I watch each other's gameplay on YT. I wonder if a combination of SSD (OS), SSHD (game storage), and ample RAM (24-32 GB) would eliminate spike lags in games such as STALKER: Call of Pripyat?