Originally posted by: MrK6
Originally posted by: Markstar
Originally posted by: MrK6
I'd take an i7 over a SSD any day, especially if it meant going for a Phenom II. The Phenom II has the same performance and efficiency of a Q6600/Q9450, only two years later; that's not impressive, at all.
Wow, how immature is that to criticize someone for quoting the result of someone else, let alone if said person is hosting the site you are one and is well respected (we are not on Tom's Hardware, after all). And then totally ignore the argument and change the subject when Trevelyan already said he'd go for an i7. :roll:
Every modern processor is fast enough to run your every-day apps, but only a SSD will make your system feel that responsive. While your i9 EE 6GHz@8GHz rocks at Doom 4, your traditional hard drive will still be the bottleneck and you wait for Photoshop to start while I (hopefully by that time), will already have opened Photoshop on my "old" X2 2.5GHz thanks to the SSD. And to many people, that is more important than some more FPS at a 3D-Shooter or some saved minutes when encoding their DVDs.
Do you read the actual flow of the conversation or just explode verbal diarrhea whenever someone says something you don't like? Go re-read what was posted so you can look like you have a clue when you reply to this. Make sure you have fun with less than half the FPS of an i7 on your X2 2.5GHz; it must be awesome loading your slide show two seconds faster than the i7 rig loading it's great gaming experience (cause, you know, that's what the OP does with his comp, he doesn't just sit on his desktop all day timing how fast Photoshop opens).
The first comment was in reference to Anand's comment - which I don't agree with. Maybe he was blow away by the "gee whiz" factor of SSDs, or maybe he's supposed to promote them, I don't know and I don't care. I've used them, you notice what's still in my PC? There's almost no difference in everyday computing when using an SSD, none. And to suggest grabbing a poorer performing processor for the sake of getting an SSD is poor advice. The highest performing function of the OP's rig seems to be gaming, if for some reason he ended up getting a Phenom II instead of the i7 he was planning on due to such comments, he would really be missing out.
Now if you want to justify the $300 you paid for a meager 80GB of slightly faster storage, go ahead and do it in the mirror, don't take others with you.
Originally posted by: Idontcare
Originally posted by: MrK6
Originally posted by: deputc26Have you ever used a modern SSD? The benefit to the end user (perceived speed) relative to an HDD is far greater than the benefit of going PhII -> i7 unless you're encoding all day. See Anand's opinion below and
tests.
" the biggest upgrade you could do for your PC - whether desktop or notebook, wouldn't be to toss in a faster CPU, it would be to migrate to one of these SSDs." -Anand La Shimpi
Have you? Or do you just repeat Anandtech articles verbatim?
I'd take an i7 over a SSD any day, especially if it meant going for a Phenom II. The Phenom II has the same performance and efficiency of a Q6600/Q9450, only two years later; that's not impressive, at all.
I take it then, by your willingness to impugn this poster over your perception of them not having used the hardware firsthand, that you have operated a rig with either a vertex or Intel SSD as well as doing so in matrix testing with and without Phenom II, Q6600, Q9450 and an i7?
Or do you just repeat what you have read in articles about these hardwares verbatim?
What on Earth are you talking about? Again, someone else who needs to actually read what was said before flying off the handle. The question extrapolated from the comment is should one trade an i7 set-up for a Phenom II + SSD, and no, one shouldn't.
Again, I've used Intel X-25M's. SSD's are cool, no doubt. They're great technology and probably are the future of storage. Are they that much better? Nope. Are they worth the cost to the average user? Definitely not. Are they still too new? Yup. Two years from now my recommendations will probably change. Right now, you can't beat the price/performance of a 1TB HDD.
Think about what you folks are actually recommending so that you can see how silly this looks - you want the OP to dump all his cash on a single, 80GB drive for his new system. That's like what, Vista and 5 games + office apps and about 20GB of media, if that? He also wants to dual boot OSX, that'll require a few GB anyway (don't know, don't really use macs). So rather than get 1TB of storage for 1/3 of the cost that's almost as fast, you're going to recommend that? How do you even take yourselves seriously and continue to attempt giving advice.
Facebook
Twitter