Is upgrading to an SSD from a 5400 RPM HDD really worth it for gaming?

Yes.
Webm related - this takes minutes on a HDD.

That said, a low end NVME SSD isn't really much more expensive than a SATA one. Doesn't matter which one you get.

Is it worth getting a SATA SSD for an old board that doesn't support nvme?

If the alternative is no SSD at all oh god yes.

Yes, modern games are designed for SSDs, some games will even lock graphics settings to low if they detect and HHD. Even on older games the difference in loading speed is very noticeable, we're talking 20+ sec vs 1-2 sec.

SATA HDD

Uses moving parts, imagine an optical drive but with a tiny needle instead of a laser that has to move around to write and recover the data = very slow

SATA SSD

Uses tiny cells that hold the data, no moving parts. Much faster than HDD but limited by SATA bandwith

NVME

Same technology as SATA SSD but uses the PCIE connection = much more bandwith = can reach actual max speed of the SSD

yes you can close the thread now

moving parts

Is this a bad thing?

Modern games are so bloated that it has become mandatory. Devs can't code for shit these days so they rely on technology to brute force it's way through their slop.

If your mobo doesn't have sata3, just bite the bullet and get a new one.

Even a 7200rpm would be a notable difference. Get off your laptop.

Yes, SATA SSDs are more than good enough for daily usage, you only really make full use of NVME w/r speed if you use software that loads and manipulates huge file sizes like video editing, gamedev, 3D modeling, AI, etc..

*sniffs*

Absolutely

Even SSD via SATA1 would be a massive improvement just due to seek speeds alone. Main thing is just ensuring you're running an OS that supports TRIM and that's it.

Not really. Disc failure is a universal risk. It's just slower.

Does any game take full advantage of a Samsung 990 Pro or a Samsung 9100?

Not really - though in theory direct storage could but lmao that hasn't gained any traction.

Always. It means the needle has to physically move on the platter before it can read or write the data, it introduces latency. Furthermore moving parts means wear and tear leading to eventual mechanical failure.

That said from personal experience I consider HDDs to be more reliable for long term storage. For one SSDs have a limited lifespan, second they can randomly lose data if not powered for an extended period of time, third they have a tendency to fail catastrophically giving you no way to recover data. Never ever cheap out on SSDs, especially on SATA SSDs, I've seen way too many fail prematurely. Meanwhile 20 yo HDDs will click and make noises but still load everything properly.

Absolutely. Felt like a whole new computer.
I got my first ssd this year (specifically samsung's 990 nvme), only used hdds before that.
Everything, not just games, is so much faster.
Veracrypt supposedly slowed the ssd down by a lot according to the samsung benchmark tool, but I didn't even notice. Still WAY faster than my hdd.

It's cheap and "fast enough" for many tasks such as older games.

5400 RPM HDD

Nigga, Windows is near unusable on HDD

5400 rpm is very slow
that speed is only good for archiving and for steady active access
7200 rpm and the other types of storage are warp speed in comparison

and NOT* for steady active access

Nvme makes everything fast not just games. Even a cheap 4GB/s Nvme will make a huge difference over a 5400rpm that's only like 300MB/s. It's life changing. SSD's are just as slow as an HDD though, so avoid those. Waste of money. Of-course how fast can the Nvme operate will depend on the CPU. More expensive Nvme's are already north of 10GB/s and most Cpu's can't even keep up.

Even older games load times are atrocious without SSDs, retard-kun

1000x yes

upgrade PS4 from 5400rpm to SSD

some games it halves initial load

other games it barely saves a couple seconds due to CPU bottleneck

Fast

Faster (assuming you mean Sata SSD)

Fasterer

Doesn't REALLY mean much outside of crazy bloated games since most games do differed loading stuff.

as long as you have 16GB or more of ram HDD speed don't matter much for Windows. Applications, services and stuff just stay active in memory. For games, when well optimize, is the same too. If you got lots of the games just uses it and system memory is faster than any nvme. Someone with 32-64GB of ram wouldn't even notice a difference using an Nvme or HDD, except for the initial load or shader compilation. That would easiy take 10-20 minutes on an HDD.

due to CPU bottleneck

A lot of games assume load times based on hardware and don't let you exceed them.
This is why PS1 emulators tend to crash if you don't simulate the slow as fuck 2-4x read speeds the original playstation used to do.

A lot of games assume load times based on hardware and don't let you exceed them.

That's generally only true for PS1/Saturn games and that's it. PS3 onwards, once hard drives became standardized, try to load as fast as they're allowed to. Hell, some 360 games took it a step further and tried to load from disc and hard drive in tandem to get over i/o bottlenecks.

That's generally only true for PS1/Saturn games

Not even remotely.
It causes less problems

No they're not. Sounds like you've only ever played old games on old HDDs. It's not lightning fast, but I generally can't read loading screen messages during the second or so the HDD takes to load the scene.

Yes obviously, who the hell doesn't use an SSD nowadays. I only use one gigantic HDD for storage