Compatibility Question

[redfish]

I think SSD is probably the most universal upgrade... Anyone can notice the speedy startup and program load times, whereas someone like me wouldn't be able to fully understand the benefits of fancy graphics cards etc. That doesn't mean I'm suggesting SSD because I personally would see a performance increase, but I am saying that SSD is beneficial to all users. I'm planning on going SSD myself soon so maybe I'll sing a different tune then, but I doubt it.

 

[patonb]

I doubt many can see the added benifit of a speedir startup. Most people will boot up as they do something, or don't shut down at all.

I do understand the benifits, but getting a tiny drive just for nthe sake of getting that small boost is a waste of cash. Why waste that money, when saving abit more on a 60 plus size drive will be a longer term item.

Especially when games are hitting HD graphics and 12Gig hard drive space.

 

[acerinpa]

I agree with "patonb" - if you can't game on the SSD and you are a gamer- spend the cash on upgrading system to game better = RAM, GPU, CPU, etc. and deal with a slower boot up time.

 

[redfish]

You guys are right. SSD does remain a viable option for later upgrade(s), though.

 

[patonb]

^Oh yes, very much so.... it's just the 30Gig size thats all. 60 plus Gigs is in my opinion the smallest one should go.

 

[redfish]

It's just for OS?!?!?!? why do you need 60 GB for Windows 7 and maybe a game or two?

 

[patonb]

Because games, like COD are hitting 12Gigs on the drive now.... So to get more than a startup boost and keep gameing on it a while, 30 gigs is just to small to justify the cost

 

[redfish]

Who has the time to be seriously into more than 2 games? Maybe I suffer from misconception but I doubt anybody would have that kind of time on their hands. So windows and the two games you play most on a 40 GB SSD... I think that would work out.

 

[patonb]

Right, but 40 isn't a 30, hence why I think 60Gig....

 

[redfish]

Many of the less expensive models are 40GB.