5 ms·

I'd argue that SSDs have done more harm than good. Since the worst-case is now far superior that it used to be (HDDs), most developers see no need to optimize a

I'd argue that SSDs have done more harm than good. Since the worst-case is now far superior that it used to be (HDDs), most developers see no need to optimize any further. For example, plenty of video game engines will stream copious amounts of data from disk instead of optimizing memory usage, asset size, and in general more creative solutions (i.e. shader effects instead of GBs of redundant assets). If hitting the disk slowed everything to a crawl, then maybe software would've been designed in much more efficient ways. Good (enough) is the enemy of great.

khalladay 4y ago
Ah yes game engine development, where we herd all the lazy folks who hate efficient solutions to problems.
- morelisp 4y ago
  It's not about (in)efficiency but creativity and development budgets. If you have "unlimited" fast storage, the most technically efficient way to render highly-detailed realistic assets is to underpay a bunch of artists to make a metric ton of highly-detailed realistic assets, then stream them in off disk. If you don't have that storage, the most efficient way might be to make a smaller number of assets modulated by some technical work, which is more accessible to smaller teams who have one top-shelf programmer but no army of contract artists. Or, the team is forced into a non-realistic art style which gives artists and the industry as a whole more space to design in. It also means that when you do blow your technical budgets for whatever reason (e.g. nobody upgrades their SSDs for 2 years due to a chip shortage so your median performance projections for release were way off), it starts getting much worse very fast.
LtdJorge 4y ago
Games are a bad choice as an example. (Some) Games are always trying to squeeze the most out the latest hardware. You can't have a massive world with 4K textures and no loading screens using an HDD and 8GB of RAM without performance degradation.
- account42 4y ago
  Games are a good choice as an example. *Some* games are trying to squeeze ot the most of the latest hardware but most just target a minimum acceptable framerate for common hardware and then move on. Good enough to ship is pretty much the game industry's entire mode of operation. Also, games generally don't make good use of extra resources you have. Have 128 GiB ram and plenty of VRAM? In almost all games you're not going to see any less loading screens in most games than someone with 8 GiB ram even in really simple scenarious like going back to the area you just came from.
xenadu02 4y ago
> I'd argue that SSDs have done more harm than good I can't imagine the thought process that would lead to a statement like that. SSDs are the single best thing to happen to personal computing in the past 15 years. Absolutely no question and not even arguable.
goosedragons 4y ago
Has that even happened yet? PS5 and Xbox Series are the first consoles to use SSDs instead of HDDs and they're only beginning to gain serious steam. PS4 games are still being released and they have to cater to that stock 5400 RPM HDD.

khalladay 4y ago

Ah yes game engine development, where we herd all the lazy folks who hate efficient solutions to problems.

morelisp 4y ago
It's not about (in)efficiency but creativity and development budgets. If you have "unlimited" fast storage, the most technically efficient way to render highly-detailed realistic assets is to underpay a bunch of artists to make a metric ton of highly-detailed realistic assets, then stream them in off disk. If you don't have that storage, the most efficient way might be to make a smaller number of assets modulated by some technical work, which is more accessible to smaller teams who have one top-shelf programmer but no army of contract artists. Or, the team is forced into a non-realistic art style which gives artists and the industry as a whole more space to design in. It also means that when you do blow your technical budgets for whatever reason (e.g. nobody upgrades their SSDs for 2 years due to a chip shortage so your median performance projections for release were way off), it starts getting much worse very fast.

LtdJorge 4y ago

Games are a bad choice as an example. (Some) Games are always trying to squeeze the most out the latest hardware. You can't have a massive world with 4K textures and no loading screens using an HDD and 8GB of RAM without performance degradation.

account42 4y ago
Games are a good choice as an example. *Some* games are trying to squeeze ot the most of the latest hardware but most just target a minimum acceptable framerate for common hardware and then move on. Good enough to ship is pretty much the game industry's entire mode of operation. Also, games generally don't make good use of extra resources you have. Have 128 GiB ram and plenty of VRAM? In almost all games you're not going to see any less loading screens in most games than someone with 8 GiB ram even in really simple scenarious like going back to the area you just came from.

xenadu02 4y ago

> I'd argue that SSDs have done more harm than good I can't imagine the thought process that would lead to a statement like that. SSDs are the single best thing to happen to personal computing in the past 15 years. Absolutely no question and not even arguable.

goosedragons 4y ago

Has that even happened yet? PS5 and Xbox Series are the first consoles to use SSDs instead of HDDs and they're only beginning to gain serious steam. PS4 games are still being released and they have to cater to that stock 5400 RPM HDD.