Could An SSD Be The Best Upgrade For Your Old PC?

Benchmark Results: PCMark 7 Drive Test

The gaming component of Futuremark’s new PCMark 7 benchmark shows that hard drive haven't sped up much in real-world applications, while replacing the hard drive by an SSD effectively triples bandwidth on games.

Video editing largely relies on sequential data, which is why the SSD's benefit isn't more pronounced in this type of workload.

There are only small benefits for Windows Media Center or Windows Media Player operation.

However, Windows Photo Gallery can import pictures much quicker if an SSD is used. Expect 3x to 5x performance, starting with a modern PC and going back in time.

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • infernox_01
    I would have liked to see some gaming benchmarks to see what difference it would make. Lower loading times is a given and maybe higher minimum frame rates.
  • aje21
    While I understand the why to facilitate comparisons between systems of different ages, would you really take a P4 system from 2005 and install Windows 7 on it? If I was spending the money on an SSD and new O/S then a new PC would be worth considering instead.
  • Anonymous
    The home user pc now days is to powerfull. When i see a kid whit a 2k$ pc and all what it does is 50% net surfing,30% playng, 10% chat , 5% watching movies and 5% doing something for school it literally makes me sick. A pc should be chosen for the needs of the client and not imposed by seller. Currently are to many powerful pc witch are not even at 50% of their full power used, is full of them, the gap between software needs and hardware power is bigger and bigger. I asisted many times at scenes where clients hwo whanted a ned pc have bought an aircraft whitout even knowing to verify email. No etics, nothing, so much processing power wasted for surfing web and watching pictures. I really think something must be done.
  • pat219
    I have seen that if you delete a file you do not get that back on the SSD drives so you will loss space as well as they cost way to much for such a small Gb size older is best and far cheaper than wasting money. they will come down but not for a lest 5 years when hopefully the disc size is worth talking about
  • jaksun5
    I have to say I have a Core Duo 1.6 notebook with 2Gb RAM and after replacing the 80Gb drive with a 64Gb Kingston SSDNow V running Ubuntu 10.04 it's faster than anyone I knows Vista and Windows 7 running Core 2 duos with double the RAM. My machine has now been used solid for 6 years and still ticks over well.
  • Gonemad
    RAM was the king of upgrades in the era when swap files were really critical to Windows. When machines had measly 128MB of RAM, you could bet you would get rid of all that HDD paging (hence slowness) by chucking in more RAM. Now, XP can survive having just 2GB of RAM (and won't benefit having more than 3GB by default...), but we still need to avoid that dreaded HDD poor performance. Enter SSDs...
  • Marko3333
    If all you do is simple applications, and you have a core duo or better with sata 300 mobo, a SSD would really make a difference. Boot time, windows updates, applications, all start with less then half the time as with an HDD.

    Just try a virusscan with your old HDD and then on a SSD, you can't miss the increase of speed even if you're blind. It's just a huge difference.
  • Rab1d-BDGR
    So... despite my manifold protestations that I would not buy an SSD until they hit the £1 per GB mark, I finally caved and bought a 60GB OCZ Solid 3 to put Ubuntu Studio on. Still got half an hour of twiddling my thumbs whilst the distro downloads.

    I can't wait to see what 500MB/s read and 450 MB/s write actually looks like!
  • usafang67
    I thought older pc's using IDE/ATA interface could not be connected to SSD?
    Do SSD's ship with some kind of adapter to make this possible?
    If so why isn't it mentioned in the article unless I completely missed it.