SSD advice

  • Thread starter Thread starter G.T
  • 28 comments
  • 1,910 views
G.T

G.T

Messages
11,462
United Kingdom
U.K
Messages
Paganisterr
Messages
Ak Paganister
Hi all

I'm planning on some time in the near future maybe upgrading to an SSD to install windows on it for faster boot times and run programs faster, etc, etc.

Are there any recommended drives? I would prefer 128GB drives as I may need to have dual booting in the future.

Also is there any things I should know before I buy one? Reliability? Speeds degrading over time? Things like that.

Thanks!

Edit: I was thinking of one of these:

http://www.dabs.com/products/crucia...le&utm_medium=product+search&utm_content=Q200

I don't want anything blisteringly fast - just something mid range enough to handle a few games and normal tasks really.
 
I have a 128GB OCZ Agility 3 as a Boot Drive, and am pretty happy with it. Most of the SSDs on the market these days are pretty similar, Corsair, Kingston, Patriot, OCZ* are all basically the same. I've also heard good things about Crucial, but had personally no experience with them.

If you don't RAID them and are running Windows 7, then you'll get TRIM support which increases the lifespan of the drive.

Are there any particular drives you're looking at? I wouldn't waste my time with less than 128GB these days to be honest, even a few games/programs fills things fast on 60GB drives.
 
From what I have been reading, so far maybe the 96GB/128GB Kingston V+100 or the 128GB Crucial M4. I've heard some reliability issues with certain OCZ and Corsair drives which share the same controller. I've heard some scary stories about them which leads me to question about the reliability of SSDs in general...
 
I would recommend only adding windows on a 60GB SSD(make sure it has trim support) and then add your programs and games on a partition on a normal HDD.

I would recommend OCZ or Corsair for SDD's.

SSD's are more reliable than than normal HDD are there are no spinning parts.
 
May I ask why programs should still be installed on a HDD? Wouldn't that only make Windows/Windows programs boot/load faster and won't gain any performance benefit elsewhere?
 
G.T
May I ask why programs should still be installed on a HDD? Wouldn't that only make Windows/Windows programs boot/load faster and won't gain any performance benefit elsewhere?
Click to expand...

I put the OS, Office, Browsers, A couple of games, programs I use all the time (Like WinAmp, etc) on the SSD. There is no reason not too. I have a 2.5TB of HDDs for games I don't play as often/too large/no benefit, also for media, etc.

You put the things you want to be responsive all the time on the SSD.
 
G.T
May I ask why programs should still be installed on a HDD? Wouldn't that only make Windows/Windows programs boot/load faster and won't gain any performance benefit elsewhere?
Click to expand...

I have a 50GB partition for windows, a 25GB for programs, 150GB for Steam(and i am still expanding it), the rest i use for random things on a 931GB RAID 0 HDD.

When i get an SSD will just get a 64GB one.

Give windows 50GB and the rest to a recovery image i will make.
 
Yes, that's what I do for my computer. I got a 64GB Western Digital SiliconEdge Blue SSD which is just enough for what I need it to do. I keep my media on a separate external hard drive.
 
Yeah there's no reason to put everything on an SSD. I happen to have a Vertex 2 in my Mac, and most of my actual data is on another drive or on the NAS.

As for reliability, the I would not consider my SSD any more reliable than any other drive. At least with the the "affordable" MLC based drives we're all using. I love my Vertex 2, but I still assume it's disposable and have redundant backups in place.
 
Actually, thats a question that i have about SSD's:

What is the projected lifespan of an SSD?
 
I have 8 60gb OCZ vertex drives in Raid 0...I might have gone a little overboard

IMG_1163.jpg

IMG_1171.jpg
 
dice1998
Actually, thats a question that i have about SSD's:

What is the projected lifespan of an SSD?
Click to expand...

A lot more than people think. I know Intel has said it aims for 5 years at 20GB of writes a day (Which few people would get remotely close to). OCZ have a MTBF of 2 million hours. And with TRIM support you'll only get negligible slowdown on the drive over time.
 
G.T
May I ask why programs should still be installed on a HDD? Wouldn't that only make Windows/Windows programs boot/load faster and won't gain any performance benefit elsewhere?
Click to expand...

I don't know why everyone else does it, but I put programs other then windows and the current few games I'm playing on my HDD, because the SSD is so expensive per gig of memory. I have a 120 OCZ and it gets filled up really fast. I think right now I have wndows and witcher 2 on it and it's over half full. I'll probably put battlefield 3 on it and that will be it.

It does make a huge difference though. The longest load time in witcher 2 is about 1 second. Windows also runs great. I have never been on a computer that is such a pleasure to use. Everything just works so much better in windows. It's all almost instant clicking. It's really hard to sit back down at my laptop after spending a few hours at the desktop.
 
Also since programs read and write to the drive a fair bit this also applys to games you are basicly reaching the limited read/writes the flash memory can do.
 
Yeah I understand the space issue so I would only put my most used applications on the SSD like web browsers, MS office, Windows Live Messenger, Spotify, a few games etc on the SSD.

But Grayfox I still don't understand why you don't install your mostly used applications like those mentioned above on the SSD. Unless it's a space issue? Because surely they would load a lot faster and you would gain more benefit from the drive? Surely Windows itself is constantly reading and writing to the drive also?
 
The programs i use open fast enough for me and i don't care about waiting 1 second or so longer if i don't install on an SSD.
 
Your average user uses less than 10GBs per day. Going by that my SSD's MTBF(the life of the drive) is 1,400,000 hours, that's 64 years of use and my drive is rated for 10.5GBs per day of use. I normally don't use more than 10GB's per day and I can most likely expect it to last somewhat as long as it's rated for.
 
Okay thanks for the advice guys.

I've bid on one of these. Not too sure whether to go all the way yet depending on what price it goes up to:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/180730838909?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

I would go OCZ but I've personally not had good experience with them (having had their power supplies fail on me and huge postage costs to them repaired). The Crucials seem to be good value for what you get, have great customer reviews, and are improved dramatically when you update the firmware on them.


Edit: Oh another quick question. How can I tell if my motherboard is SATA III compatible or not? It's a 2 year old Asus P7P55D so I reckon it probably doesn't have it...

EditEdit: Doesn't look like it has... But is there any way of double checking in the device manager somewhere or something?

http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/Intel_Socket_1156/P7P55D/#specifications
 
Last edited:
Yeah I figured it will still work just with slightly lower performance.

Anyways I won the drive in that auction, so I should have it in a few days. Shall keep you updated. :)

Guessing I need to buy a 2.5" to 3.5" bay converter for my case too.
 
G.T
Yeah I figured it will still work just with slightly lower performance.

Anyways I won the drive in that auction, so I should have it in a few days. Shall keep you updated. :)

Guessing I need to buy a 2.5" to 3.5" bay converter for my case too.
Click to expand...

I have mine double sided taped to the side of the drive bays. You can put an SSD anywhere you like.
 
:lol: I'm guessing they barely weigh anything. I know someone who has theirs just screwed in with a single screw and it seems to keep it in place. Guess ill see when I get it to see if I need the bay conversion or not.
 
G.T
:lol: I'm guessing they barely weigh anything. I know someone who has theirs just screwed in with a single screw and it seems to keep it in place. Guess ill see when I get it to see if I need the bay conversion or not.
Click to expand...

They weigh like nothing. You can literally leave it on the floor of your case with no issue.
 
Another Q...

Since my mobo only supports SATA 2, if I were to buy a SATA 3/ USB3.0 card to put in my PCIe 2.0 slot (making sure the card's above 1x bandwidth) will I gain speed benefits for sure? Or will I come across other issues?
 
G.T
Another Q...

Since my mobo only supports SATA 2, if I were to buy a SATA 3/ USB3.0 card to put in my PCIe 2.0 slot (making sure the card's above 1x bandwidth) will I gain speed benefits for sure? Or will I come across other issues?
Click to expand...

You'll get speed benefit of SATA3. But not tangibly in the real world. The difference between a read/write speed of 300MB/s and 500MB/s isn't that noticeable unless you do tasks that involve that all the time. In terms of Windows and Program snappiness it's basically identical.

You'll get an obvious benefit with USB3 rather than USB2 though.
 
Yes.

A USB 3.0 card or a SATA 3 controller card will give you the speed boosts as long as you have devices that support them.

I have a USB 3.0 PCIe card that i got with my My Book 3.0 and i get peak speeds of 110MB/s, i also have a Passport which also has USB 3 and another mybook HDD.

I would recommend USB 3 cards that have 4 ports on them as you will get more devices than you can support unless you want to get a USB 3 hub
astrotek4port_s.jpg
 
Okay thanks.

I may get one anyway just for USB 3.0 support, and have the benefit of SATA 3 if it works properly.

I say if it works properly because I'm interested in buying one of these:

http://novatech.co.uk/products/components/controllercards/usb/90-c1bmy0-00eay00z.html

And from what I've been reading performance differs greatly depending on what drivers you use and what mobo etc. One example shown here:

http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=214793

Read performance is improved but everything else drops.

Meh... I'll just give it a go and buy it somewhen. Only 2 USB 3.0 ports but I figure by the time I have enough devices to benefit them I'll have a whole new PC anyway.
 
Update!

All is up and running!

The only few quirks I had was trying to plug it into my mobo (had to shuffle cables around in my case a bit) and screwing it in (which was a pain in my case), and blue screening of Windows whenever I booted in ACHI mode, which was fixed by a small patch on the Microsoft website.

My system is a lot faster and responds better now! Boot takes ~ 20 seconds from first turning on to the desktop, and program open much faster.

Windows Index score for proof. :p

unledhz.png
 

Latest Posts

Back