Short version: SSDs are BETTER/FASTER at SEEKING-AND-READING LINEAR data than HDDs. But that is NOT true in all "disk-like data accesses," but it true "over all."
read me
Finally, my opinion on this entire thread: There is absolutely NO REASON to get/build the "most technically up-to-date" computer for any use other than specific commercial or research uses, period. Keep in mind that - whatever computer you get/build - it will have a value of $0 in ~ three years.
I saw you say that before, how does that work?
Even if computing technological and manufacturing areas grew at a linear pace and new standards matched that pace your computer would be three "generations" old in three years. (That's assuming annual "jumps," which in today's computing world is driven by the economics of the consumer, and for "family" computing, that's roughly September - December, annually.)
So in three years time, you're essentially using "your Great Grandfather's" computer from a Technological perspective, which basically means that it's junk. (Think about it: How many THREE YEAR OLD "computers for sale" do you see advertised?!?!)
Now, any investment that falls to $0 in just three years is a BAD investment, right? So the idea is to get ONLY WHAT YOU NEED and spend nothing more than that since you're throwing it all away in three years of use. I.e. Would you buy an expensive, fancy refrigerator if it only lasted three years, or a model that "just did the job?"
Hence the BEST you can do is to spend
just what it takes to "just get the job done" with a new computer.
So I always advise that Technology-based purchases be made ONLY when there is a NEED for newer Tech', and to buy "what's just going OUT of favor" due to the newest "wave" of replacement Tech'. E.g. If you want to get a new game/program that's just come out, find the LEAST CAPABLE COMPUTER that can play that game, and then see if you can find anything just "one step up" from that (set of spec's) for a very small increment in price, and get THAT computer. [E.g. A refrigerator that's CAPABLE of holding all you might put in it, and then find one that's "frost-free" and has an ice-maker for $10 more, and get THAT.]
The best evidence to support all this is to look at how businesses handle this "rapid obsolescence" problem on their bottom line. To see the best analogous example, look at the Tech' Industry itself: What's the "write-off" for a computer in a Technology company? In the 1990s we were writing them to $0 in five years at Silicon Valley companies - They were just trash to us at that point. It's
TWO DECADES later now, so they're likely worthless in
under 18 months now. (And the Tech sector - no one for that matter - isn't "fat" any more, so they're all being frugal nowadays....) So three years is probably "a REAL long time" to have the same computer in the business world, even in today's tough times.
I hope this answers this question once and for all. I get it all the time and it boggles my mind since it's blatantly obvious to me, and has served me well in all my purchases - of ANY type of durable item - since the 1970s. I think it might be a semi-unique USA "mass consumption" + "latest & greatest" attitude-gone-wild thing, too, as I see a lot more "level heads" about this sort of thing OUTSIDE the US! (Note that there's evidence of all this now SLOWING - likely due to the world-wide economic situation, methinks - because of late, the computers that I've serviced ARE older machines, some of them five+ years old even. People seem to be "squeezing that orange" really hard in such times....)
