Thread: Wow on an SSD?

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Duskstorm View Post
    That being said, if I wanted screeching fast HDD performance in WoW, I'd use conventional HDDs with RAID before I tried SSDs. Better value, IMO.
    I dislike the RAID0-idea. The only raids I can see myself using, are RAID10 (and 5/6 to a lesser degree).
     

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by NaitFury View Post
    Everything has a limited lifespan. I see more broken HDD in my store than SSD, then again not everyone has an SSD but stil, everything breaks.
    Another important thing to note is that hard drives break down at wildly unpredictable points in their lifespan. So while glo may have put his raptor to work for 6 years now, other people's hard drives may break down in half the time. Flash is much more predictable that way.

  3. #63
    With the new SSD's coming this year, running anything in a raid 0 won't be as economical, or fast. the Vertex 3 is going to do 500/mb write and read, and the new Crucial coming in Feb will do 425-450 read/write. On power consumption and heat alone it would be smarter to get an 80gb SSD and a second drive for storage then trying to build a Raid that will come close to comparing.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by tetrisgoat View Post
    I dislike the RAID0-idea. The only raids I can see myself using, are RAID10 (and 5/6 to a lesser degree).
    Raid 0 has the obvious problem of being twice as likely to fail; also, note that you have to use hardware-offloaded RAID for this to really work; you need your CPU for WoW. I didn't specify the raid scheme because, well, that's dependent on the best available from your hardware.

  5. #65
    The Lightbringer Asera's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    This side of an imaginary line in the sand
    Posts
    3,741
    Quote Originally Posted by Titan View Post
    You noticied a difference because you probably treat your computer like shit and the re-format sped everything up. the difference between a Phenom II X4 955 BE and a E8400 in non quad-core optimized games is very little. Go look at any benchmark on planet earth. In fact, on some gaming benchmarks for games not optmized for four cores (like WoW), the E8400 even outperforms it. The main difference you see in games that don't use more then two cores, is simply due to the 955 being clocked higher, and once again, the difference is basically unnoticeable.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/88?vs=56

    Please don't comment unless you know what you are talking about. Thanks.
    You're trying to argue a point using games that don't thrash the CPU as much as WoW does, and at the same time assuming I treat my computer like crap? You're a funny guy.

    I'm sure the E8400 beating the 955BE in 2 out of 5 synthetic Sysmark tests, and Fallout 3 by barely 1% is going to make a whole lot of difference in a 25man raid.
    red panda red panda red panda!

  6. #66
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Cilraaz View Post
    Wrong. WoW is actually optimized for 3 cores. It consists of a large main thread, large sound thread, and then about 40+ smaller threads (check for yourself using Process Explorer). A quad core is perfect, as it leaves the 4th core open for background processes such as Ventrilo and a browser. Also, if you went from an E8400 to i5 2500K and noticed no difference, you either spend all of your time solo or are lying. In a raid, there would be a world of difference between the two.
    Actually he is right, just go ahead and check your affinities in task manager for WoW, turn some off and on and experiment, you'll notice there's very little difference. You are right however about the situation, in a combat situation with a lot of people a stronger cpu (Not more, just a stronger one) will show more improvement.


    Quote Originally Posted by Cilraaz View Post
    In crowded cities and raids, your GPU is not what's powering your framerate. In an MMO there are too many calculations required (player/mob positioning, spell casts, damage done/taken, etc, etc). That's why the CPU is your biggest upgrade. Now, if you're standing alone in Ashenvale, then yeah, a better GPU would yield better framerate. Unfortunately, that's extra framerate when it's not needed, whereas a better CPU grants you better minimum framerate during intense situations, which makes the game more playable.
    Actually the thing that slows you down in cities is the loading of textures, like logging in does. A GPU doesn't increase framerate unless the drive allows the textures to be loaded quicker which is done through the SSD not the CPU. Thus a CPU won't be a bigger upgrade unless you are below a certain treshhold.


    Quote Originally Posted by Cilraaz View Post
    Once textures are loaded, the SSD grants you exactly zero fps. Good financial investment over a better CPU, which grants those extra fps during the scenarios where the difference between 15 and 30 might be the difference between a dead boss and a wipe.
    Everytime you switch from characters or you enter a dungeon bg or arena it has to load; which increases your enjoyment from having an SSD while a CPU may grant more of an improvement in overall gameplay, it'll also be a LOT bigger of an investment to get such a change as going from HDD to SSD.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cilraaz View Post
    SSDs are a quality of life improvement. Things load faster. Once those things are loaded, it sits idle and grants you no performance. If you already have a top of the line (or even second tier) CPU, enough RAM, and a strong enough video card, then yes, it's a decent addition to make life easier. It's not, however, the single largest performance boost for WoW.
    As I said above, it is if you look at it money-wise and you have a half decent computer, upgrading a CPU first of all is NEVER worth it and a GPU upgrade goes along the same line. Why drop 300-400 bucks when you can buy an SSD for 100 and have an improvement you actually notice? I mean if I have to buy a new CPU I'll just buy a new computer with everything upgraded, obviously the better choice seeing as replacing a CPU is like cutting your own arm off financially.

    ---------- Post added 2011-01-17 at 09:13 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Duskstorm View Post
    Another important thing to note is that hard drives break down at wildly unpredictable points in their lifespan. So while glo may have put his raptor to work for 6 years now, other people's hard drives may break down in half the time. Flash is much more predictable that way.

    I work at a computer store repairing computers and I gotta give it to the HDD's for having weird errors. The SSD's sometimes simply quit working while HDD's sometimes just seem to be in a bad mood and then work again the other day allowing us to retrieve data before it dies out again.

    Odd things they are, them drives.

  7. #67
    Moderator Cilraaz's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    PA, USA
    Posts
    10,139
    Quote Originally Posted by Titan View Post
    You noticied a difference because you probably treat your computer like shit and the re-format sped everything up. the difference between a Phenom II X4 955 BE and a E8400 in non quad-core optimized games is very little. Go look at any benchmark on planet earth. In fact, on some gaming benchmarks for games not optmized for four cores (like WoW), the E8400 even outperforms it. The main difference you see in games that don't use more then two cores, is simply due to the 955 being clocked higher, and once again, the difference is basically unnoticeable.

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/88?vs=56

    Please don't comment unless you know what you are talking about. Thanks.
    1. That benchmark doesn't apply. WoW isn't included and reacts to CPU/GPU differently than most games.
    2. If you can't tell a difference between a Phenom II and Core 2 Duo in a raid environment, I feel sorry for you. The difference is quite large.
    3. Again, WoW uses more than 2 cores. Check thread usage in Process Explorer. See how many there are? Because there are that many, some can spread to new cores. Also, my i5 750's 70/30/30/70% usage disagrees with your statement.
    4. Don't insult other people by assuming that they don't know how to maintain their machine. Asera is a long-time poster in this forum and has brought valuable information.
    5. Don't tell people when they can and can't comment. It makes you look like a jackass... and in this case, you're wrong anyway. Besides, that's my job.



    Quote Originally Posted by NaitFury View Post
    Actually he is right, just go ahead and check your affinities in task manager for WoW, turn some off and on and experiment, you'll notice there's very little difference. You are right however about the situation, in a combat situation with a lot of people a stronger cpu (Not more, just a stronger one) will show more improvement.
    No, actually, he's wrong. The program can make use of as many cores as you put in front of it and is optimized for three. As I said, use Process Explorer. If you see WoW using only 2 threads, then yeah, it'll only use 2 cores. If it has any more than 2 threads, it can spread over more than 2 cores.

    Quote Originally Posted by NaitFury View Post
    Actually the thing that slows you down in cities is the loading of textures, like logging in does. A GPU doesn't increase framerate unless the drive allows the textures to be loaded quicker which is done through the SSD not the CPU. Thus a CPU won't be a bigger upgrade unless you are below a certain treshhold.
    On initial load, yes. After initial load, it's the CPU keeping track of people's placements, movements, spell casts, etc, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by NaitFury View Post
    Everytime you switch from characters or you enter a dungeon bg or arena it has to load; which increases your enjoyment from having an SSD while a CPU may grant more of an improvement in overall gameplay, it'll also be a LOT bigger of an investment to get such a change as going from HDD to SSD.
    I never said it wouldn't speed up load times. In fact, I believe I said multiple times that it would. My argument is that the decrease in load times isn't more valuable than more framerate during a boss fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by NaitFury View Post
    As I said above, it is if you look at it money-wise and you have a half decent computer, upgrading a CPU first of all is NEVER worth it and a GPU upgrade goes along the same line. Why drop 300-400 bucks when you can buy an SSD for 100 and have an improvement you actually notice? I mean if I have to buy a new CPU I'll just buy a new computer with everything upgraded, obviously the better choice seeing as replacing a CPU is like cutting your own arm off financially.
    I would much rather spend $300-400 and have better raid performance. I don't care how anyone else spends their money. I just want proper information put out. If all of the SSD enthusiasts convince the guy running an Athlon II to get an SSD, he's probably not going to be too happy when he finds out that he zones in really fast and still sees shit framerate when they engage. If the same person has all of the information available and still buys the SSD, then he only has himself to blame.


    -- Separate from quotes
    This is why I hate SSD arguments. People react to my statements like I'm trying to call SSDs snake oil. I'm not! They are good pieces of hardware. I'm thinking of getting one myself. I, however, don't like the people who say that they are the single best upgrade anyone can get. It's simply not true. Anyone with a CPU more than one generation old will generally benefit from a platform update much more than an SSD.

    I'm not saying people are evil for advocating SSD usage. Not at all. I'm saying that for anyone looking for system performance, then they'd be better off with upgrades to CPU, GPU, and RAM. Loading into the instance faster is all well and good, but if you're system doesn't give you decent framerate in the boss fight, then what did you really gain from the SSD?

    Spend some time in this forum. The vast majority of posts don't consist of "man, these instances load too slow and I don't know what to do about it". The vast majority of posts are "my framerate sucks, help!". If even one of those people stumbles into an SSD thread and sees people spouting the wonders of SSDs, they can pretty easily spend $150-200 getting one and see zero improvement in the area they were concerned about. I post in the SSD threads to prevent that. I want people to realize that while SSDs are great, they only help with load times.

    Bottom line: SSDs are a great quality of life improvement. Things load faster. Wonderful. They won't help with a computer that performs poorly in raids, though.
    Last edited by Cilraaz; 2011-01-17 at 08:49 PM. Reason: Added last paragraph before "bottom line"; Typo

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Cilraaz View Post
    In fact, I believe I said multiple times that it would. My argument is that the decrease in load times isn't more valuable than more framerate during a boss fight.
    And I think this is where the problem lies.
    How to define "performance".

    I don't wish to insult anyones playstyles, but to me..
    Decreasing loadtimes is infinitely more important than increasing FPS on boss-fights.
    I raided through Vanilla and BC. EU-top 20 kills on C'Thun, Kel'Thuzad, Illidan, Kil'Jaedan. But frankly, I don't see the point in this casual, easymode content (ie, todays PvE). I haven't raided in WLK or Cataclysm, apart from VoA and Baradin Hold. I also did Obsidian Sanctum once-or-twice. Bleh.

    My computer never bring me below 50FPS. I raided Baradin Hold with full ultra not dipping below 58. Stormwind? 58+.
    An SSD is a bigger increase in fun playingwise, than the difference of maintaining 60fps and 30. Because for someone who nowadays PvP, there's quite a bunch of loadingscreens.

    (This is not meant to insult you or your arguments, so please don't take it as such.)
     

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by tetrisgoat View Post
    But frankly, I don't see the point in this casual, easymode content (ie, todays PvE).
    That old tired bullshit qq almost invalidates the rest of your post outright, but I'll do serious reply anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by tetrisgoat View Post
    I don't wish to insult anyones playstyles, but to me..
    Decreasing loadtimes is infinitely more important than increasing FPS on boss-fights.
    If the difference is 20 seconds vs 2 seconds load time you pay $100 for, it's rather badly spent money. Especially considering you spend several minutes to several hours inside the instance where SSD will not help, but CPU does. It's just damn poor use of resources all around, unless there's there's nothing else left to upgrade.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by tetrisgoat View Post
    And I think this is where the problem lies.
    How to define "performance".
    I'm pretty sure that's exactly Cilraaz's point. Since your computer is already running the game at 50+ FPS most of the time, the SSD was probably the best upgrade for YOU. But it certainly does not mean that it's also the best upgrade for another person who would read your stuff and think "this guy said that an SSD would fix every performance issues that I have, I'll buy one". They might just need a new video card or CPU, you don't really know that.

  11. #71
    Moderator Cilraaz's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    PA, USA
    Posts
    10,139
    Quote Originally Posted by tetrisgoat View Post
    And I think this is where the problem lies.
    How to define "performance".

    I don't wish to insult anyones playstyles, but to me..
    Decreasing loadtimes is infinitely more important than increasing FPS on boss-fights.
    Playstyle will definitely have an impact on what component is best for a person. Anyone who has seen a lot of my build suggestion posts has seen me say more than once that building a system is an intimate thing and requirements will vary person to person.

    Quote Originally Posted by tetrisgoat View Post
    I raided through Vanilla and BC. EU-top 20 kills on C'Thun, Kel'Thuzad, Illidan, Kil'Jaedan. But frankly, I don't see the point in this casual, easymode content (ie, todays PvE). I haven't raided in WLK or Cataclysm, apart from VoA and Baradin Hold. I also did Obsidian Sanctum once-or-twice. Bleh.
    This has no bearing on the argument, but if OS was the closest you got to raiding in WotLK, how can you comment on the ease or difficulty of raiding? Also, try some Cata content. It's well ahead of WotLK in difficulty already.

    Quote Originally Posted by tetrisgoat View Post
    My computer never bring me below 50FPS. I raided Baradin Hold with full ultra not dipping below 58. Stormwind? 58+.
    You fall into the group that I'd mentioned as being an exception (current generation or one generation out setups). An i5 760 isn't necessarily worth the cost of upgrading to an i5 2500K. You also have a GTX 460, which is a great card for WoW. At that point, an SSD is a potentially good option.

    Quote Originally Posted by tetrisgoat View Post
    An SSD is a bigger increase in fun playingwise, than the difference of maintaining 60fps and 30. Because for someone who nowadays PvP, there's quite a bunch of loadingscreens.
    That goes back to playstyle.

    Quote Originally Posted by tetrisgoat View Post
    (This is not meant to insult you or your arguments, so please don't take it as such.)
    Debate is a much better thing than insults. I like the people on this forum who can debate and debate "properly". Don't worry about any insults being taken.

    ------------------

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinoose View Post
    I'm pretty sure that's exactly Cilraaz's point. Since your computer is already running the game at 50+ FPS most of the time, the SSD was probably the best upgrade for YOU. But it certainly does not mean that it's also the best upgrade for another person who would read your stuff and think "this guy said that an SSD would fix every performance issues that I have, I'll buy one". They might just need a new video card or CPU, you don't really know that.
    That's pretty much exactly my point.

  12. #72
    Useless retort.
    Last edited by BicycleMafioso; 2011-01-17 at 09:22 PM.
     

  13. #73
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by vesseblah View Post
    That old tired bullshit qq almost invalidates the rest of your post outright, but I'll do serious reply anyway.



    If the difference is 20 seconds vs 2 seconds load time you pay $100 for, it's rather badly spent money. Especially considering you spend several minutes to several hours inside the instance where SSD will not help, but CPU does. It's just damn poor use of resources all around, unless there's there's nothing else left to upgrade.
    I don't do pve. At all. Does this apply to me aswell?

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by NaitFury View Post
    I don't do pve. At all. Does this apply to me aswell?
    Better CPU benefits PvP raids (Wintergrasp and Tol Barad and 100 vs 100 players while hitting other faction's cities) as well, while SSD gives exactly nothing after you've zoned in.
    Last edited by vesseblah; 2011-01-17 at 10:38 PM.
    Never going to log into this garbage forum again as long as calling obvious troll obvious troll is the easiest way to get banned.
    Trolling should be.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by NaitFury View Post
    I don't do pve. At all. Does this apply to me aswell?
    BG's and arenas won't rely on an SSD once you're actually inside, so spending money on a better CPU is definitely going to help a lot more. Oh, and what gives about the raiding "argument"? Ulduar hard modes when they were current were actually quite difficult. Getting Insanity 25M when it was current was quite difficult(well, not in full 258 gear). Heroic LK was pretty hard from no buff to 15%, at which point I quit as well, but the requirements for AoE on valks was ridiculous.

    Best part is, most of these fights are more taxing on a CPU than Sartharion, anyways! =D
    Last edited by Badpaladin; 2011-01-17 at 10:57 PM.

Posting Permissions

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