The problem being that while sequential speeds might be just as fast on your RAID setup, mechanical hard drives generally just can't at all keep up in terms of random access. You might be able to copy files from one drive to another quickly but not a lot of small files, which seems to translate nicely to a snappier windows feel to most people.Ashen said:Yes, I have used SSD's before. Like I said, they are just not for me/I'm not sold on them yet. Yes, they are fast. You don't have to jump through the hoops of raid to get good performance with them either. BUT the cost to performance ratio does not appeal to me at all. Especially considering (as was already stated previously) most people set up their OS on their SSD and then INSTALL ALL THEIR APPS/GAMES to a second/third/fourth standard drive anyway.
So yea, your computer boots 10 seconds faster than mine. I however have 10x+ the space you do for 1/2 the cost and only marginally inferior performance. My "Windows experience index" rates my HDD transfer rates at a 6.9 out of a possible 7.9 (yes, I know its a flax benchmark). Still, it gives me something to compare it to and it's pretty good IMO.
Until the prices come WAY down on SSD's I'm just not buying it.
For some slightly more informative results on what I'm talking about, look at some CrystalDiskMark benchmarks between say, a new WD Velociraptor and any current market SSD.