What? Using SSD for PS2 speeds up loading times tremendously. Copied my install to my old sata 2 ssd and it takes 10 seconds tops to be on the server selection screen after pressing play. With my 7200 RPM HDD it could take up to minute to load to there. SSD drives seek out data way faster than old hdd's. Your bro must either have ****** SSD or its not aligned correctly. Remember, just buying a SSD and throwing it into case will not speed up computer that much. You have to align it and change some settings to get most out of it. PROTIP: you can also align normal HDD's for minimum speed increase.
Just timed it with a stopwatch, 11.46 (+/- 0.5s for reaction times) seconds to load with good ol' mechanical drives. 2x1TB SATA3 WD Caviar Black 64mb cache drives in RAID 0. Getting one mechanical drive and an SSD would have been the same price or probably more and I would have 55% as much space. Not enough of a trade off for one or two seconds of saved time. Still waiting for SSDs to make sense for me to buy, hasn't happened yet. I would sooner have someone upgrade almost anything else.
Yes, just like Advanced Format HDD. Just easy, prepare a windows 7/8, go into BIOS, turn on AHCI, and windows will get the real sector size from AHCI and aligned correctly.
Problem is the grand total of 40 seconds per day I would save by spending a second or two less loading each program is not that important to me. If I'm going to play a game for two hours, two seconds out of the 7200 I have to use isn't a big deal to me. If I'm going to spend thirty hours over the course of two weeks writing a paper, the accumulated few seconds saved launching Word 15x during that time aren't going to improve productivity by a significant amount. Point is, lowering access times from an unnoticeable amount of time to next-to-nothing is irrelevant because you didn't notice it in the first place. The fact remains that most people would rather wait an extra second or two to play than get twelve frames per second while playing so an SSD is one of the last upgrades I'd recommend. I'm not saying I hate SSDs. I might even get one in the near future because I have the extra money. I'm just saying that it is absolutely stupid in my opinion to prioritize an SSD over a CPU, GPU, RAM, Mobo, etc. Performance > loading times unless you're on an ancient drive that literally takes five minutes to load the game at which point realistically your performance is probably so low that my point holds true anyway.
You can't put out a blanket statement like that. The Desktop responsiveness is massively improved. Games that load levels a lot respond faster. Money well spent. Upgrading from an I5 to an I7 or from a lower top tier gfx card to an upper top tier graphics card wouldn't have that much effect for the money. I fix PCs for a living and get seriously annoyed when I have to put up with a machine with a cheapa** less than 5400U/min green harddisk.
I have an ssd, and, yea, it isn't strictly necessary for gaming the way good cpu/gpu/mem is. that being said, 256gb should be enough for most games and applications and the operating system, and those ssd's are very affordable.
That would be a wonderful rebuttal if OP had an i5 or a top tier gfx adapter. I see an E4700 and a GT610. That's my point. A GPU or GFX card, preferably both, would help MUCH more than just an SSD. He'd load faster but barely be able to play - nothing accomplished. We're going back to the "massive" improvement from "nearly instant." I can choose any program on my desktop and open it within 1.5 seconds. With an SSD, it would open in 0.25 seconds. It's a massive improvement, but hardly significant in terms of your overall time use. Again, I do not hate SSDs - I even said I will probably get one eventually. That's not the point here. The point here is that for an overall weak PC such as OP's case, the SSD should be a lower priority than moving on from an old C2D and a GT610. The difference between a decent 7200rpm drive and an SSD is it loads faster. The difference between an E4700 and an i5 is whether he can play it without raging at lag or not.
Agreed, but it was aimed at his sort of situation. Someone who already has an i5 and a $300 GPU along with the associated performance level of other parts should totally get an SSD if he's looking for something to upgrade. For anyone who does not already have top-tier or high up there components, the SSD should be low priority. The general point was that the load time improvement of an SSD isn't nearly amazing enough to overshadow the active performance improvements gained by upgrading other parts unless those other parts are already extremely good.
Just stop it... SSD don't improve the performance of game if it has "load up all the thing at the loading screen". But PS2 still loading after the loading screen, just running it first time, log-in, and you will see the UI and other thing came up slowly.
SSD only contributes to load times. That's not necessary right now. You are hurting in the CPU and GPU area. GT610 is weak for gaming. At least get a GTX 650 if you're limited on budget, GTX 660 if you can spend.
Wow I dunno what to say to that setup, there's very little room you can upgrade on, even the Q6600 isn't that big of an upgrade over the E4700. The Q9550 is a better choice but difficult to find and expensive. But that GT610 card isn't that great either... hum.
It's not much of an increase from my 7200rpm HDD on my laptop. You say 10 secs. My not SSD goes in 16-18 secs.. (from play to inside the game shooting) not worth it to me. and yes, loading this game, not very noticeable unless your HDD sucked.. which you stated 1 min.. it did suck I'm not a computer noob, we know a lot about PCs as we have dealt with it far more longer than nearly everyone here. Not saying that is an indication of anything, however, 10 secs to 16-18 seconds isn't really noticeable for me. It allows me to drink more.. Wait, I just re-read what you said. It doesn't take that long to get onto the server screen either. Let me count. Well, look at that. It takes my HDD exactly 10 seconds to get from launcher pressing play to the server screen, as you also indicated that your SSD can do. Now, that's very unnoticeable.
Guys, this thread is irrelevent now. I have decided to upgrade my PC, instead of building a new one (que the hate for having a five year old PC that will match 3rd gen I3's) I am starting with an SSD, as I have been alerted that that is the cause of my lagspikes. Then I will get a GTX650 and a Q6600, or a Q9550 (Depending on whether or not I feel like OC'ing) and I will be getting only 4gb ram (My MOBO only has two slots, but supports High density 4gb ram sticks which I have not found cheap enough yet), so I guess it is kind of relevant... But I have decided, my mind is set in stone. EDIT: As it has been brought to my attention that Windows 7 was not the cause of my lagspikes (My bad!) I have got it installed and ready for an upgrade.
Yes that was my bad. It doesnt take up to minute to load with my old hdd either after you have started it first time. First game start after logging in to windows takes up to minute still but after that its 11 to 14 seconds on HDD. Though i am no using pagefile so that can increase loading time few secs. Same test again for my SDD after first game start is 5 to 7 seconds now. So you will still gain 25 to 50% improvement to loading times. Also i love how it takes 5 to 10 seconds to be on windows desktop screen after pressing power button on computer. So SSD is definitely huge performance upgrade.
Yes, in normal use, it showing huge performance, you can select 10 apps and click enter which open in a few second. And if you are using Chrome and the RAM is fully used, the pagefile in the SSD will help you also.
