I want an SSD but its too expensive

xiphrex

xiphrex

xiphrex

Associate
Joined
21 Sep 2003
Posts
1,408
Location
Leicester
Anyone else in the same position?

When are they going to come down in price, and I mean waaaay down, comparable to normal hard drives?

I thought they are meant to be more mainstream now but the prices reflect otherwise. I mean why would anyone spend 300 quid on 120gb SSD when they could get terabytes of storage for the same price.

I really want one though, I think the HD is the weak link in any PC. I want a PC that is responsive, we have 4ghz multicore cpus but we still have to wait to load programs and access data just like we did 10 years ago. But I cant justify a few seconds for those sort of prices.

:(
 
Well unless you are willing to wait, I recomment one of the 64GB SSD's, as long as you only put on the apps/games that loading times really matter on it, then it is enough space!
 
+1 for #2.

I think selective is the name of the game - for instance, a game like Arma2 constantly streams textures from disk, leading to stutters. Then a small SSD can revolutionise play as it drastically reduce the stutters and smooths out gameplay without increasing FPS. I have one of the Kingston 40Gb and it is sufficient for Arma2 and a couple of other Apps but little else, so I would advocate 64Gb minimum as per the above.

cjph
 
I've been waiting and waiting and had enough of it, so bought one last night. They'll probably come crashing down the minute I receive it
 
I don't think it is fair to compare HDDs to SSDs -they are a completely different technology to one another that just happen to be used for the same purpose i.e. storage.

Of course SSDs are going to be more expensive but that's because it is newer tech - Welcome to the world of bleeding-edge technology, please do not enter unless you have limitless credit!

Honestly, I doubt SSDs will ever be comparable to HDDs, price-wise or capacity-wise. I would imagine that there will be a faster storage technology developed before SSDs can offer 2TB capacities at an affordable price. No doubt by that time mechanical HDDs (if still being manufactured) will be offering Yottabyte capacities but still at a fraction of the "£ per GB" cost of it's SSD counterpart.

I wouldn't say that SSDs are mainstream just yet, I think they are still in the luxury/enthusiast category just about? When will they come down in price? Who knows. It sounds like you are really struggling with this one though - shall I get one, shall I not??? Oh the decisions us westerners have to struggle with eh! If finances are a limiting factor then the answer should be obvious - No. However, if you are fed up with wasting your life away looking at loading screens, you want to increase your e-peen, or you simply want a performance boost of notable significance that will complement your other components, then it is a clear - Yes. If none of the above apply then I would advise waiting it out until one is relevant to you.

It is entirely subjective anyway - one person will think that it is an essential performance upgrade which offers value for money, whereas another will think it is a complete rip-off and utterly pointless, and of course there are always those in the middle. Not everyone can be right can they?

So, to surmise: It's completely up to you whether you get one or not - you will have to really think hard and wrestle with your conscious until you decide whether you think they are worth investing in now. It is a bit of a punt either way because if you decide not to then who knows when, and indeed if, they will significantly fall in price to a point where you think they are deserving of your hard-earned cash. Hope that helps ;)












P.S. I have got 3 of the little wallet-draining suckers and, despite the cost, can't imagine using a mechanical drive for anything more than storage drive now (which I do). My advice? BUY NOW YOU FOOL!
 
Last edited:
Perhaps this might help...

I setup a computer, be it laptop or desktop machine, if it has a hard drive larger than 80GB I often partition off the first 50GB to 60GB just for the OS. Rarely have I ever used up all of that. Even with multiple programs and games installed I can easily managed on that. The trick is, to make sure your important data is either on the second partition or another drive. The reason I partition my drives this way is to take advantage of "short stroking" (Stop the sniggering kids!). A small OS partition helps by cutting seek time on a Hard drive and therefore boot times are a little quicker.

However, the above obviously does not apply to SSDs because all the sectors can be accessed randomly at the same time. So, if I were to get an SSD drive, I would get one that was purely for the OS and APPS but nothing else. So as previous posters have advised you, minimum of 64GB is probably your best bet. Then use a Hard drive for backup data storage, at least until the prices of SSDs come down.

For me personally, I am not bothering with SSDs until the price comes down significantly and the hardware has matured a bit more.

Good luck with it though.
 
SSD's have their own place in a system build, don't think of it as being an expensive hard drive, think of it as a storage accelerator that you use in partnership with your existing storage. Put your OS and favorite apps on the accelerator and use your mechanical drive for the leftovers.
SSD's should be considered a must-have central part of any new build. Change the size to fit your budget, but make sure you've got one even if it's just 30GB for your OS.
 
I waited and waited, mostly because SSD performance sucked with the Jmicron controller, Who needs a stuttering PC anyway... But the Intel 80 GB ssd (and the 160) are just too good, and I dont regret buying mine for even a nanosecond. Best upgrade I have fitted since I went from Pentium 4 (northwood 3.2) to a 2.67ghz E6700
 
I'm considering a 120/128gb for my OS and APPS. However, 3-5 years ago XP and APPS alone took up around 30-40gb. Today WIN7 and APPS alone take up around 80gb. I expect, considering the ever increasing size of OS' and APPS, within 2-3 years my £200+ purchase will leave me a little tight for space.
 
save up and get one if you want one, ul like it :)
doubt they will come down in price in a hurry, more likely they will just get bigger in capacity
 
gee3000 said:
I'm considering a 120/128gb for my OS and APPS. However, 3-5 years ago XP and APPS alone took up around 30-40gb. Today WIN7 and APPS alone take up around 80gb. I expect, considering the ever increasing size of OS' and APPS, within 2-3 years my £200+ purchase will leave me a little tight for space.
Click to expand...

What apps are you running?
For me OS + Apps (office, photoshop etc) take up around 20Gb, leaving me 55GB for game installs.
 
FWIW my Crucial M225 128gb has been my best/most satisfying ever upgrade to a computer, from boot time to overall 'snappiness' in general use, it genuinely still gives me pleasure lol, esp if have been using a PC with a conventional drive.......that really annoys me now.
 
For me they are still not worth the price tag currently. I don't think I could get by with a 64gb. Would have to be a 128gb really, or possibly 2 x 64gb drives. Just too much money at the moment. Maybe mid to late 2010 we will see some developments, but at this rate it will be 2011 as the prices aren't really budging. Memory prices are not helping though.
 
goodl said:
If you have to ask why you need one then you just dont get it
Click to expand...

I can agree with that. Often, a purchase is the right one for you if you don't need to question it.

As for a previous poster saying they are essential for a new build......hmmmm...I am not so sure. We have got by with mechanical hard drives for years and at the moment the price of SSDs are beyond what the average consumer would consider a worth while use of money. It all depends upon your needs, be it capacity or speed.

SSDs are still a luxury for now. Lets see what 2010 brings.
 
deepblue69uk said:
at the moment the price of SSDs are beyond what the average consumer would consider a worth while use of money. It all depends upon your needs, be it capacity or speed.

SSDs are still a luxury for now. Lets see what 2010 brings.
Click to expand...

If you consider graphics cards, is it essential to get a £300 over a £150 one? If you adjust your budget and get a £150 SSD and a £150 Graphics card you'll be far happier with the system performance. Same with CPU's, RAM etc.
An SSD will make more noticable difference than most other component upgrades in a mid range build.

Like I said, they just need a mindset change. Cut back a little on the rest of your components and you'll be able to afford an SSD.
 
Thing is I wouldnt buy a £300 graphics card anyway as I think its too much.

Also Im a bit confused as to which SSD's are good and which are not as good i.e. write speeds are bad etc.

Im under the impression the more expensive the SSD then the better it is.
 
Not really, it's the law of diminishing returns at the moment. Each new release gives you a performance increase, but only a small one.

SSD's aren't even worth looking at until you can get a 128Gb model for less than £150 imo. Strangely enough Crucial started by selling their recent M225 model for £200 for the 128Gb model which was a decent start

Now thanks to demand and cashing in its £282. Anyone who would knowingly pay an extra £82 for the same thing is mad imo :)
 
It's still a relatively niche product that people don't need, they just want, like the top-end graphics cards.

Don't expect prices to come down any time soon, NAND is in high demand for many other things besides SSDs and as has already been said just because they are used in the same manner as hard disks you shouldn't dwell on their price as compared to them - internally they are completely different.

I imagine it's likely to be business sectors driving down the price for SSD over an extended period of time, not consumers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom