Agreed, SSD is NOT for PC gaming
Totally agree. I use my PC's for gaming, that's what I built them for. As game content size expands beyond the reasonable limits of currently marketed SSDs, those cheap TB HDD's with better max capacity and legacy GPU comparability, let's you add more games to a system that was DESIGNED to work around the needs of an overclocked CPU catering to an excellerated graphics card, on a MB that's basically had most of it's functions relegated to designated chip set cards (sound, media, internet, wifi) so it can focus on the express needs of the CPU/GPU for running the games and tossing big exe. files at top speed, and you better have 2 sets properly paid RAM chips too (if you can help it). I don't know what the dony guy is talking about when he claims he can tell the difference between SDD, and HDD, reg/root rpm speeds... that might be a factor if your OS is so badly configured your processing speed is THAT slow compared to uploads (still logically impossible), or your start-up menu is full of huge foot print programs that are useless and basically suck the life out of you RAM and act like malware hosting private bot nets through your raped port 80? He's comments don't make ANY sense at all. How the hell can ANY PC shuffle files in house, slower than what he claims he can pull faster with huge media files over his internet connection? I can upload a video or media file to and from any PC with external media devices/other PCs on intranet HELLA faster than trying to upload 3 pictures to Facebook, or heaven forbid, attempting to upload a 3 minute video to Youtube that responds with a 3 hour processing time, over the 'internet'. Sounds like the fluff talk of an SSD marketing company employee to me.