I'm going to be buying a custom PC in the next few weeks and I have a budget of Â£900. I was wondering should I invest in a 90gb SSD with a 1TB second hard drive for all my files or should I just get a 1TB hard drive and use the extra 120 bucks for a better processor?
Keep up the videos only just found your channel a few weeks ago and feels like I have watched every TLDR video. :)
Answer by Razor512 · Jan 20, 2013 at 07:10 PM
For $120 you can get a 128GB SSD.
After core i3, most normal usage will have almost 100% no noticeable difference even if you were to go to a core i7 3770k and overclock it.
after core i5, you get no noticeable improvement in gaming even if you move to a core i7.
But moving from a HDD to a SSD, will give you a major performance boost. For example look at this video
Most of the time you spend waiting during normal usage, is spent waiting for the hard drive to do something and not the CPU.
Answer by kiernanh · Jan 21, 2013 at 08:07 PM
I bought a SSD so I could into games faster in battlefield 3, the problem is it is so fast that BF3 has syncing errors that rely on slower drives, I think having a 6 core AMD processor is not helping it either.. I strongly suggest if you are doing anything graphics related to get an NVidia graphics card, the CUDA processing permits it to render on my graphics card ten times faster than my processor. Blender 3D currently supports CUDA processing, its fun to watch it render glass objects in real-time then tweak the textures and watch the refractive changes trickle through..
But SSD really only benefits on application load times.. I don't suggest using a SSD for memory swapping, these things detioriate with use, the more writes, the shorter the lifespan.. A better idea is if you could put the swap file on a ram drive, or just get more ram.. You will want a 64-bit processor so you can address more ram, the more ram you have, the less you need swap, the faster everything goes.. SSD will only benefit you on program loads, again, and that is only a burden on starting a machine and loading applications.. I'd get a 64-bit processor if you don't already have one, one with a shared on-chip memory cache among the cores and the ability to down-clock cores not in use.. Memory a cheap add that improves performance.. Then maybe a SSD if you really hate booting your machine..
I don't suggest overclocking, it only gets you a small speed increase and it almost guarantees you will be shortening the lifespan of motherboard components, the reason manufacturers reward it so much is that they make more money off people who overclock their machines, and burn out their CPU's, etc... It would be better to just get a processor with more cores than to overclock, because overclocking causes the processors to run hotter, it also causes syncing errors. I'm not an expert, there is probably ways around that stuff, but I don't really see the point of risking it.. Not all programs make use of processor cores, and that's where having a faster processor would benefit, but there are things multiple cores can do that a single core can't, like juggle a process (playing hot potato), to reduce the overall CPU temperature..
Which Phone Next...? 2 Answers
SSD vs RAID-0 2 Answers
What is Your Next Computer? 23 Answers