|
|
|
|
|
|
by nucleardog
98 days ago
|
|
|
> SSDs booted faster and launched programs faster and were a very nice change, but they weren't that same sort of night-and-day 80s/90s era change. For me they were. I still remember the first PC I put together for someone with a SSD. I had a quite beefy machine at the time and it would take 30 seconds or more to boot Windows, and around 45s to fully load Photoshop. Built this machine someone with entirely low-end (think like "i3" not "Celeron") components, but it was more than enough for what they wanted it for. It would hit the desktop in around 10 seconds, and photoshop was ready to go in about 2 seconds. (Or thereabouts--I did time it, but I'm remembering numbers from like a decade and a half ago.) For a _lot_ of operations, the SSD made an order of magnitude difference. Blew my mind at the time. |
|
|
So it was the only way to get that visceral improvement in user experience like CPU and platform upgrades were in the mid 90's to very early 00's.
The experience of just slapping a new SSD in a 3 year old machine was similar to a different generation of computer nerds.
Nothing could really match the night and day difference of an entire machine being double to triple the performance in a single upgrade though. Not even the upgrade from spinning disks to SSD. You'd go from a game being unplayable on your old PC to it being smooth as butter overnight. Not these 20% incremental improvements. Sure, load times didn't get too much better - but those started to matter more when the CPU upgrades were no longer a defining experience.