Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst
1
2
  1. #21
    The Lightbringer Azerox's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    3,802
    I have WoW on my SSD (Micron S400v 64GB) and the lifetime after 1 year is downed to 99%, so thats 99 more years to go before it will fail.

    And before i even put WoW on it i had Windows installed on it for over a year, now i have 2 SSD and Windows on my Samsung 830.

    You can check this with Crystaldiskinfo or hdtune.

    Old SSDs had the problem to wear down very fast, but the newer ones dont > atleast not the coming 100 years

    So just copy/paste your WoW folder to the SSD, then make a new link from Launcher.exe to your desktop or where ever u like.

    The only inprovement you get is faster loading times when phasing into zones (faster loading screen), further no difference.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Azerox View Post
    The only inprovement you get is faster loading times when phasing into zones (faster loading screen), further no difference.
    More than just loading screens, I noticed mining nodes popping up on my map before I fly past them, NPC's appear faster when you walk into a city, you don't stand there for half a minute looking at a nameplate with nothing below it. People just say "faster loading screens" its not just that, its little things that hardly anyone notices, that all add up to be quite a massive improvement and increase the quality of life while playing MMO's.

  3. #23
    Pandaren Monk
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Notarget View Post
    Well it's going to be faster than a HDD but it won't be that big of a difference.
    Classic case of someone that doesn't know what he's talking about. SATA II and III are just interfaces, a max theoretical transfer speed. Until a year or so ago, very few drives could even saturate SATA II. Furthermore, I doubt interface speed has any effect at all on the actual loading speeds, just on big file transfers.

    To put it to other words, just because a drive supports SATA III, is no guarantee it'll be faster/better than a drive that only supports SATA II.

  4. #24
    Scarab Lord Wries's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    4,127
    I have an Intel x25-M 2nd gen ("slow", SATA II), Intel 510 ("decent") and a Samsung 830 ("Pretty fast") and can't notice a darn difference between them in real-life usage. The biggest step is going SSD in the first place. And it won't necessarily show much of a difference in games if you came from a good hard drive. I still continue to put some of these huge MMO-games on my WD Caviar black stripe.

  5. #25
    Stood in the Fire mojo6912's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    433
    I thought the inner edge of the HD was the fast part and gets written to first. The outer edge is slower. Please correct me if I am wrong.

  6. #26
    i love the fact you can copy/paste wow. i have it on a USB key and i can play it where ever i go... at my friends... parents... at work

  7. #27
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by n0cturnal View Post
    While SATA2 is half as fast as SATA3 you still get most of the benefits of an SSD, you still get the really low access time, you get the high IOPS and you get the very fast small file writes. The only thing you really miss out on is the continuous throughput in large file transfers.
    For gaming and such you get almost the full benefit of an SSD even if you only have SATA2.
    Yeah I know and I never said it wasn't fast or that you wouldn't see any benefits just that you shouldn't expect the same performance as running SATA3/SATA3. Obviously Mosotti didn't pay any attention before replying or he would know I use an SSD.

    Actually the system I'm using right now while in the US is running off a SATA2 connection and I can tell you it is much slower than my normal system. System boot times are slower but of course it's both affected by the motherboard as well (Intel E8500 with Asus P5N-D).

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by mojo6912 View Post
    I thought the inner edge of the HD was the fast part and gets written to first. The outer edge is slower. Please correct me if I am wrong.
    This is incorrect.

    It has to do with aerial density. Take a CD, DVD, BRD, whatever and look at it. Now imagine you have a piece of floss and you wrap that floss around the inside edge of the disc and then with a straight ruler measure the distance of the floss. Now do the same thing with the outside edge.

    Which one is longer (bigger circumference)? The inside? Or the outside?

    The Read/Write Head will pass by more information on the outside edge in one revolution than it would on the inside edge.

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/5729/w...0dhtz-review/2
    Scroll down to the bolded: Performance Across All LBAs
    And read that first paragraph.

    Or read this:
    http://www.overclockers.com/forums/s...d.php?t=678783

    Or google it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •