Again, you do not understand how I/O works.
Oh look, someone who thinks they know better than someone else.
A fetch (of a game map, or any file) simply goes faster from an SSD than an HDD. It is not hit or miss based on a game, its a fetch from a drive.
I'll go to Tom's, since it was the first thing that popped up on side research: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/bat ... 62-14.html
Not all games are mostly reads, not all games have the same I/O requests, and not all games behave the same way. The only real benefit you get out of using an SSD in games is system response, but again this can be mitigated by how you do your storage. In my case, I never really see a problem because 1. I use a massive hard drive 2. I'm using all the features of SATA and 3. If I'm playing a game I'm pretty much doing nothing else with that hard drive. The only thing that would use it is if my IM goes off (because I log it all).
I'd dig up other posts (various people on the web did this), but I'm feeling lazy right now. But the last time I did any research on this, it was basically either, the same, some improvement, or a few games getting performance you'd expect from 500MBs vs. 150MBs.
Some of the initial series of Intel's Sandforce controller SSDs had to be recalled from dealer's shelves and required a firmware update. You really should become more knowledgeable and experienced before you post. Members want solid, informed advice, not your opinions!
Uh. Intel uses custom firmware so all of the firmware issues from SandForce are non-existent. And the recall program is because Intel found out that it can't do 256-bit AES encryption
, which is a hardware flaw, not a firmware one.
I'm tired, and I'm sick of people wanting to show off their e-penises, so mods, I apologize but I need to get this out.
Get the fuck off my case.