Go Back   Android Forums > Android Community > The Lounge > Computers & IT

Get excited for the Samsung Galaxy S5! Find everything you need and discuss it in our Galaxy S5 Forum!

Like Tree94Likes

test: Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old December 28th, 2012, 01:41 PM   #51 (permalink)
Antidisestablishmentarian
 
johnlgalt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 3rd Rock
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,396
 
Device(s): Motorola® DROID® BIONIC®
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 2,168
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,362 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to johnlgalt Send a message via MSN to johnlgalt Send a message via Yahoo to johnlgalt Send a message via Skype™ to johnlgalt johnlgalt@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Daemon View Post
Not really. Most storage vendors play number games when representing the capacity of their drives, so it's not unusual to see a different capacity than you expected. Most of the time this is due to the difference between the base-2 notations that computers use and the base-10 notation that most humans use. Numbers like 128 that are squares of 2 suggest that you're getting a number in gibibytes instead of gigabytes, which can be misleading. As long as the true capacity is more than enough for your needs, you're good.

120-128 GB (or GiB) looks a little small for something like Windows 7 to me. Technically it can be done, but free space will be tight. Don't forget about the hidden partition. The hidden partition on my laptop is only 100GB, which is smaller than the one that came pre-installed. My C: drive is nearly 200 GiB, which is the smallest that I could shrink it to on my 750GB HD. Microsoft says it'll install, but you may be giving up something that isn't readily apparent. I'd wait until I could buy a SSD twice the capacity, more like 250GB, if I had my druthers.

Linux OTOH will be more than happy with 120GB (or less) of disk.
I think you meant your hidden partition is 100 MB not GB.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
Thanks for the reply, didn't realise that posting in here meant you had to move threads just to help me out.

250GB SSD's are definitely out of my price window. So is it worth waiting for the prices to go down, or just get a 120GB?

Obviously you said to wait, but would the free space on a 120GB be that tight? I don't even know how big Win7 is tbh...
I successfully ran Window 7 off of a 60 GB SSD - the trick is to move all non-essential folders off the SSD - stuff like My Documents, My Pictures, etc.

With my setup, I have my new 180 GB SSD (Intel Cherryville 520 SATA III) as my OS drive, my older 80 GB (Intel X25-M G2 SATA 2) set up for all of my profiles, and dual 1 TB (Seagate Barracuda 7200.12) drives for storage.

Even before my incorporation of SSDs, I always kept data separate from my OS drive, so in Windows 7 I would always move the 'special' folders from the default location to another mechanical drive.

When I got the 80 GB SSD a few years back, I revamped the installation. I used Profile Relocator to relocate the entire user tree over to one of the mechanical drives, to save space on the 80 GB.

When I bought the 180 GB drive a couple of months ago, I revamped it again. I installed Win7, used ProfileRelocator to move the user tree to the old 80 GB drive, and set up the page file on both SSDs only. I then again manually moved the special folders to the mechanical drives to have ready access to all of my documents, photos, videos, etc.

Now, all of the cache related stuff is on the 80 GB drive, the main OS files and all programs on the 180, and all data on either of the 1 TB drives.

(I've actually toyed with combining the 2 TB drives into a RAID, since I really don't want to lose my data, and neither drive is more than 25% full, but have not found the time to incorporate the idea yet).


Quote:
Originally Posted by alostpacket View Post
My /windows directory alone is 22 GB, pagefile is 12GB, hiberfil.sys is 10GB.

So that's ~44GB right there and doesn't include some other basic stuff.

Granted your page and hiberfile/pagefile may be much smaller depending on your RAM. But I think assuming ~40-50GB for Windows is an ok approximation.

120GB is do-able, IMO, just tight.
That's about right. I have 12 GB of RAM, but I made my pagefile 12 GB on both SSDs, just to stagger it a bit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
I think I might do it. I mean, how long till 250GB SSD's are less than £100? A while I guess
Probably not less than 6 months. I bought my 180 GB drive on sale for $200 USD, which is, roughly, 123 pounds, so a 250 should come under 100 after a long while.


Quote:
Originally Posted by IOWA View Post
I just moved page file to my HDD.

Also, pretty good sale on amazon today.

Deal of the Day
Some apps use pagefile even if it is not needed, and this can cause the app to lag (compared to other apps that will only use the pagefile when actually needed).
When I had a singe SSD I did that as well, but with dual SSDs I now stagger the pagefile across the SSDs only.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
Wait... 50GB just on Windows? So 60gb free?

I see what you mean actually... Just adding a few games and that 60gb gets sucked up pretty quickly....

Batman is 16GB, GTA is 14.... Then chrome, photo shop and Vegas. That's all I need on it...

Reckon I can squeeze them in?

I guess a £125 250GB SSD isn't too bad. I'll have to wait for it to decrease in price. How long do you reckon? Easter? Summer? Christmas?
If it is already at 125, that's a damned good price. I paid almost that much a couple of months ago for my 180.

I would say ballpark 6 months to get it under 100. So, ignore my comments earlier, that was based on an assumption that 250GB SSDs were still around 150 pounds.

__________________

Files for the Motorola® DROID® BIONIC®:
Motorola USB drivers v5.9.0 | Motorola RSD Lite v5.7
My DropBox Referral link
johnlgalt is offline  
Last edited by johnlgalt; December 28th, 2012 at 01:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old December 28th, 2012, 02:29 PM   #52 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

I can get the 250GB, but it just means that my 'late Christmas present budget' will be used up. Otherwise I was gonna get a £60 ssd and a kindle or a Nexus 7.

If £125 for 250GB is a good deal, I might consider just getting it now. :-D

But what you're saying is that 120GB can be done...
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; December 28th, 2012 at 03:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old December 28th, 2012, 04:12 PM   #53 (permalink)
Antidisestablishmentarian
 
johnlgalt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 3rd Rock
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,396
 
Device(s): Motorola® DROID® BIONIC®
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 2,168
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,362 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to johnlgalt Send a message via MSN to johnlgalt Send a message via Yahoo to johnlgalt Send a message via Skype™ to johnlgalt johnlgalt@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
I can get the 250GB, but it just means that my 'late Christmas present budget' will be used up. Otherwise I was gonna get a £60 ssd and a kindle or a Nexus 7.

If £125 for 250GB is a good deal, I might consider just getting it now. :-D

But what you're saying is that 120GB can be done...
Oh yeah, it can be done - albeit a little creatively.

Check prices on a 180 - larger than a 120 (so you'll have room for a couple of large games) and still within your budget. :sly:
johnlgalt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 28th, 2012, 05:53 PM   #54 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Quick search on google shows roughly similar prices...

Serial ATA600 is a no go area, right?

Sales should start kicking in now. So maybe some deals will kick up...

Edit : just realised that the OCZ and Samsung 240/50 gb SSD's are £130.
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; December 28th, 2012 at 06:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old December 28th, 2012, 08:51 PM   #55 (permalink)
Mr. Logic Pants
 
IOWA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,827
 
Device(s): GS4 ASUS Transformer TF101 GS3
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 1,897
Thanked 2,343 Times in 1,209 Posts
Ask and ye shall receive!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlgalt View Post
Some apps use pagefile even if it is not needed, and this can cause the app to lag (compared to other apps that will only use the pagefile when actually needed).
When I had a singe SSD I did that as well, but with dual SSDs I now stagger the pagefile across the SSDs only.
.
That's exactly why I have a small pagefile on my HDD. I try to force programs to use RAM only, while leaving room to throw a RAM dump if I ever get a BSOD. With my 16GB of DDR3, 1600mhz, I want to get the most out of it. .

Not to mention a 16gb pagefile is just waste IMO.
__________________
Useful links: The Rules | The Team | FAQ | Unanswered Threads |
IOWA is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 28th, 2012, 11:37 PM   #56 (permalink)
Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,033
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 541
Thanked 556 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlgalt View Post
I think you meant your hidden partition is 100 MB not GB.
D'OH!!! When I wrote that, I was saying to myself "make sure you don't write GB" and I did it anyway. Thanks for catching that.

Reminder to self: never try to post when you're on the phone!
Speed Daemon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2012, 12:32 AM   #57 (permalink)
Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,033
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 541
Thanked 556 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IOWA View Post
That's exactly why I have a small pagefile on my HDD. I try to force programs to use RAM only...
Hmmm... Windows might have been changed since I got deep into its depths, but back in the day trying to force Windows to do pretty much anything was just asking for trouble (like thrashing). The best (and only) way to keep the application's executable image in RAM is to supply more than enough RAM. Even then that's no guarantee.

Like I said, my knowledge is dated. The last time Microsoft published really in-depth info about Windows internals was pre-Vista. Up to that point the Windows virtual memory subsystem used the executable file itself on the HD for paging purposes. So shrinking the pagefile wouldn't accomplish the desired effect, and could make things worse by creating race conditions as the VMM subsystem tries in vain to write to cache.

The Windows 7 / Server 2008 R2 documentation is adamant about allowing Windows to manage the pagefile(s), and suggests that using fixed size page files is a bad idea. To me that means that the trick of preallocating a fixed-size pagefile no longer helps performance, and may even hurt performance.

True, a 16 GiB pagefile isn't likely to be used fully, but the pagefile has to be at least enough to hold the commit charge and a little more. This old MCSE lets Windows 7 manage the paging file and uses his 32GB SSD with ReadyBoost to cache the terabyte HDs.
Speed Daemon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2012, 05:24 AM   #58 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

What's a page file :-P
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2012, 07:35 AM   #59 (permalink)
Antidisestablishmentarian
 
johnlgalt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 3rd Rock
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,396
 
Device(s): Motorola® DROID® BIONIC®
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 2,168
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,362 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to johnlgalt Send a message via MSN to johnlgalt Send a message via Yahoo to johnlgalt Send a message via Skype™ to johnlgalt johnlgalt@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Daemon View Post
Hmmm... Windows might have been changed since I got deep into its depths, but back in the day trying to force Windows to do pretty much anything was just asking for trouble (like thrashing). The best (and only) way to keep the application's executable image in RAM is to supply more than enough RAM. Even then that's no guarantee.

Like I said, my knowledge is dated. The last time Microsoft published really in-depth info about Windows internals was pre-Vista. Up to that point the Windows virtual memory subsystem used the executable file itself on the HD for paging purposes. So shrinking the pagefile wouldn't accomplish the desired effect, and could make things worse by creating race conditions as the VMM subsystem tries in vain to write to cache.

The Windows 7 / Server 2008 R2 documentation is adamant about allowing Windows to manage the pagefile(s), and suggests that using fixed size page files is a bad idea. To me that means that the trick of preallocating a fixed-size pagefile no longer helps performance, and may even hurt performance.

True, a 16 GiB pagefile isn't likely to be used fully, but the pagefile has to be at least enough to hold the commit charge and a little more. This old MCSE lets Windows 7 manage the paging file and uses his 32GB SSD with ReadyBoost to cache the terabyte HDs.
True enough, you can let Windows manage it, but you can also enable it on multiple drives, which allows for (theoretically speaking) better management of the page file.

Since I no have dual SSDs, I enabled it on both, letting Windows take care of the size.
johnlgalt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2012, 09:50 AM   #60 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default Saaaaalllllllllllleeeeeee!

There's this OCZ Octane 256GB for £120
OCZ Technology 256GB Octane SSD SATA 3 Solid State Drive - OCT1-25SAT3-256G - Scan.co.uk

But more importantly

This OCZ vertex 240GB for £90

OCZ 240GB Vertex Plus SSD - 2.5" SATA-II - Read.. | Ebuyer.com

Edit: The vertex is actually Sata II , so 250MBs..... DUnno if it's still worth it

Also found a Sandisk
SanDisk 256GB Pulse SATA-III SSD | Ebuyer.com


But the other,more expensive SSD's seem to have much higher read/write speeds....

Lol, I like how before I said a 250GB was too expensive, and now I might get one :-D

Just a FYI, I have a 1TB HDD and 8GB ram.
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; December 30th, 2012 at 05:49 AM.
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old December 29th, 2012, 01:15 PM   #61 (permalink)
Antidisestablishmentarian
 
johnlgalt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 3rd Rock
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,396
 
Device(s): Motorola® DROID® BIONIC®
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 2,168
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,362 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to johnlgalt Send a message via MSN to johnlgalt Send a message via Yahoo to johnlgalt Send a message via Skype™ to johnlgalt johnlgalt@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
There's this OCZ Octane 256GB for £120
OCZ Technology 256GB Octane SSD SATA 3 Solid State Drive - OCT1-25SAT3-256G - Scan.co.uk

But more importantly

This OCZ vertex 240GB for £90

OCZ 240GB Vertex Plus SSD - 2.5" SATA-II - Read.. | Ebuyer.com

Edit: The vertex is actually Sata II , so 250MBs..... DUnno if it's still worth it

Also found a Sandisk
SanDisk 256GB Pulse SATA-III SSD | Ebuyer.com


But the other,more expensive SSD's seem to have much higher read/write speeds....
You get what you pay for. A SATA II SSD will still blow the pants off of most mechanical drives, and unless you're trying for benchmark competitions and / or have mission critical data that absolutely needs every millisecond shaved off, you can easily settle for SATA II drive(s). Since they are cheaper, you could opt for a pair to help implement a strategy similar to mine, separating personal folders from OS and programs.

Ultimately, ts your call. Same as with brand - I stuck with Intel b/c I have too much critical stuff, and they did me right. YMMV.
johnlgalt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2012, 02:27 PM   #62 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

But if I'm gonna pay the money, might as well get SATA3, right?

How much of an actual difference would SATA3 make over SATA2...?

And is OCZ a good enough brand to trust, and should I get a particular model?
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; December 29th, 2012 at 06:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2012, 07:39 PM   #63 (permalink)
Under paid Sasquatch!
 
SamuraiBigEd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 4,098
 
Device(s): HTC One Max, waiting for root! Asus Transformer 16GB
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 3,061
Thanked 1,988 Times in 1,047 Posts
Default

Yes, SATA 3 is much faster and OCZ is an excellent choice!
__________________
Have you seen me in a kilt?
Site Rules/Guidelines
Use the !Report button to report spam or objectionable posts.
If you find a post helpful please use the button!
SamuraiBigEd is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2012, 01:13 AM   #64 (permalink)
Antidisestablishmentarian
 
johnlgalt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 3rd Rock
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,396
 
Device(s): Motorola® DROID® BIONIC®
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 2,168
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,362 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to johnlgalt Send a message via MSN to johnlgalt Send a message via Yahoo to johnlgalt Send a message via Skype™ to johnlgalt johnlgalt@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
But if I'm gonna pay the money, might as well get SATA3, right?

How much of an actual difference would SATA3 make over SATA2...?

And is OCZ a good enough brand to trust, and should I get a particular model?
More succinctly, SATA II drives averaged around 250 MB/s. Theoretical max was 300, IIRC.

SATA III drives break 550 MB/s easily, and can be boosted even faster - in a RAID setup, for example, people are getting over 1.0 GB/s speeds.

So, yeah, SATA III is the way to go if you can afford it.
johnlgalt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2012, 04:40 AM   #65 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Alright then. I'll be on the lookout for some deals.

Is a 250GB OCZ for £125 a good deal?

I think the page file stuff looks quite complicated so I think I'll get the bigger drive. :S

Is this SanDisk 250GB for £115 good?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B0093HMLJ4/ref=redir_mdp_mobile?creative=22206&creativeASIN=B 0093HMLJ4&linkCode=asn&ref_=asc_df_B0093HMLJ411250 936&smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&tag=googlecouk06-21

Also, how much less should a 180Gb drive cost? Realised that hey might not be that similar in price to 250's, espeically when I'm now looking at £120-40...
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; December 30th, 2012 at 07:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2012, 09:20 AM   #66 (permalink)
Jolly Bounty Hunter
Thread Author (OP)
 
NightAngel79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Northern Ky
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,317
 
Device(s): HTC OneMax; Note 10.1; DROID DNA (retired);Transformer Prime(daughter); Rezound(retired); Droid In
Carrier: Verizon

Thanks: 13,504
Thanked 6,328 Times in 3,873 Posts
Send a message via Skype™ to NightAngel79
Default

Think I'm gonna stay focused on Samsung 530 (think that is the right model number)
And the Intel 330 or the 5-whatever...

Can't remember the specific models I was looking at now and no pc for easy look up.

All I know for sure is my budget won't let me go over 200 and I want something bigger than 200gigs. And I agree, I'd rather just go with sata III get the most bang.

Eventually want to raid but will be happy with one at first
Mehta23 likes this.
NightAngel79 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2012, 03:07 PM   #67 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

In addition to the other links I put up, I still don'tknow if I should opt for a 120Gb, or a 250GB SSD.

I know that the 120 is cheaper, and I could squeeze a few big programs onto it and I can be happy-ish.

But I also know that I will try put as many games as possible onto it, and now most modern games are several GB big, so I don't know if a 250GB is more 'sensible', albeit more pricey.

I would ask about 180Gb drives, but only the Intel 330 one's fall into my budget, and they're the same prices as a 250Gb from other OEM's.

I guess I'm gonna have to go for a 250GB, not sure which yet...

Means I won't be able to afford my Nexus anymore
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 30th, 2012, 05:38 PM   #68 (permalink)
Mr. Logic Pants
 
IOWA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 8,827
 
Device(s): GS4 ASUS Transformer TF101 GS3
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 1,897
Thanked 2,343 Times in 1,209 Posts
Ask and ye shall receive!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
In addition to the other links I put up, I still don'tknow if I should opt for a 120Gb, or a 250GB SSD.

I know that the 120 is cheaper, and I could squeeze a few big programs onto it and I can be happy-ish.

But I also know that I will try put as many games as possible onto it, and now most modern games are several GB big, so I don't know if a 250GB is more 'sensible', albeit more pricey.

I would ask about 180Gb drives, but only the Intel 330 one's fall into my budget, and they're the same prices as a 250Gb from other OEM's.

I guess I'm gonna have to go for a 250GB, not sure which yet...

Means I won't be able to afford my Nexus anymore
Get the 250GB. I've only put 3 games a few programs on mine and I've used over 120GB.... which is why I'm happy I went 250GB.
IOWA is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to IOWA For This Useful Post:
Mehta23 (December 30th, 2012)
Old December 30th, 2012, 06:19 PM   #69 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

It may have been mentioned before, but I read that the 4K write speeds are the ones needed to be highest.... Used 50% of the time...

I'll have to compare all the 250GB drives, but do I need to worry about warranties and stuff?

I'm going to have trouble cos there's a Sandisk at £115 and then a variety of ocz, Intel, Samsung.. Up to £150. Which is when you think of it is only £35 more.... 35 quid more ssd? I dunno.

Are SanDisk ok to get or should I push for a certain model ?

Edit : idea : Two 120gb is cheaper than one 250. See where I'm going? Can I do that?

Problem : only 2x SATA3 ports on my mobo, unless those pcie connectors are any good / SATA2 is ok for my hdd.

Another question : would you buy off amazon from a seller with 800 ratings. 98% positive - just to save £10
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; December 30th, 2012 at 07:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old December 31st, 2012, 01:55 AM   #70 (permalink)
Over Macho Grande?
 
alostpacket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 7,873
 
Device(s): GlassXE, MotoX, N5, N4, N7'12, GNex, N1, SGT10.1, Revue, Xoom, Eris, OG Droid
Carrier: TMO

Thanks: 4,582
Thanked 3,563 Times in 1,522 Posts
Default

Hard to say, but SSDs are constantly going down. Just this past year they finally dropped below the $1/GB here in the US.


Edit: Also to add to what John Galt said, SATA 3 is definitely the way to go. Luckily SATA2 is almost harder to find than SATA3, and you dont really pay anything extra for it.

Newegg lists the following # of models for sale:
SATA (2)
SATA II (103)
SATA III (262)
alostpacket is offline  
Last edited by alostpacket; December 31st, 2012 at 01:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to alostpacket For This Useful Post:
johnlgalt (December 31st, 2012)
sponsored links
Old December 31st, 2012, 10:36 AM   #71 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

I am now in the same position as NightAngel.

But I think a sort of best of both, of a good price, and good performance, backed by a good brand.

I think I'm gonna go with my SanDisk 250GB SSD. Need to check if the difference between that and the extreme is big enough to spend to extra 10-20.


OH!

Samsung 840 for £132 vs Sandisk Extreme for £125
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old December 31st, 2012, 11:07 AM   #72 (permalink)
Jolly Bounty Hunter
Thread Author (OP)
 
NightAngel79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Northern Ky
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,317
 
Device(s): HTC OneMax; Note 10.1; DROID DNA (retired);Transformer Prime(daughter); Rezound(retired); Droid In
Carrier: Verizon

Thanks: 13,504
Thanked 6,328 Times in 3,873 Posts
Send a message via Skype™ to NightAngel79
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post

Samsung 840 for £132 vs Sandisk Extreme for £125
Sizes? Links?
NightAngel79 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old December 31st, 2012, 11:41 AM   #73 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Sorry, they're both 250GB (SanDisk is 240)

Samsung is from Amazon, Sandisk on dabs.Com

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B009LI7C9Y/ref=cm_sw_r_an_am_ap_am_gb?ie=UTF8

http://m.dabs.com/products/sandisk-240gb-extreme-sata-6gb-s-2-5--solid-state-drive-80C1.html?refs=52080000&catid=15004&src=3

Or I could wait it out. Til easter.


Edit : apparently the 830 Samsung is better than the 840, so that draws that one out.

Found this Mushkin, but it's from the US.
http://www.cqout.com/item.asp?id=16450008
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; December 31st, 2012 at 08:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mehta23 For This Useful Post:
NightAngel79 (January 2nd, 2013)
Old January 1st, 2013, 06:09 AM   #74 (permalink)
Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,033
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 541
Thanked 556 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnlgalt View Post
True enough, you can let Windows manage it, but you can also enable it on multiple drives, which allows for (theoretically speaking) better management of the page file.

Since I no have dual SSDs, I enabled it on both, letting Windows take care of the size.
Sure, you want to take advantage of your SSDs for paging. Here's a good guide that gives what's IMO excellent advice.
Speed Daemon is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Speed Daemon For This Useful Post:
johnlgalt (January 4th, 2013)
Old January 1st, 2013, 04:00 PM   #75 (permalink)
Over Macho Grande?
 
alostpacket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 7,873
 
Device(s): GlassXE, MotoX, N5, N4, N7'12, GNex, N1, SGT10.1, Revue, Xoom, Eris, OG Droid
Carrier: TMO

Thanks: 4,582
Thanked 3,563 Times in 1,522 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
Sorry, they're both 250GB (SanDisk is 240)

Samsung is from Amazon, Sandisk on dabs.Com

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B009LI7C9Y/ref=cm_sw_r_an_am_ap_am_gb?ie=UTF8

Sandisk 240GB Extreme SATA 6Gb/s 2.5" Solid State Drive (SDSSDX-240G-G25) - dabs.com

Or I could wait it out. Til easter.


Edit : apparently the 830 Samsung is better than the 840, so that draws that one out.

Found this Mushkin, but it's from the US.
240GB MUSHKIN CHRONOS SSD (HARDDRIVES), Computer Hardware on sale at CQout Online Auctions

The 830 isn't better than the 840, rather the 840 has more models. (e.g. 840 vs 840 Pro)

The one you linked is a lower-end TLC NAND drive. Whereas the more expensive high-end Samsung 840 Pro is MLC.


See anand (as always) for several excellent articles about TLC/MLC and that drive

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6337/samsung-ssd-840-250gb-review

AnandTech - Samsung SSD 840: Testing the Endurance of TLC NAND
alostpacket is offline  
Last edited by alostpacket; January 1st, 2013 at 04:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to alostpacket For This Useful Post:
NightAngel79 (January 2nd, 2013)
Old January 1st, 2013, 04:04 PM   #76 (permalink)
Over Macho Grande?
 
alostpacket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 7,873
 
Device(s): GlassXE, MotoX, N5, N4, N7'12, GNex, N1, SGT10.1, Revue, Xoom, Eris, OG Droid
Carrier: TMO

Thanks: 4,582
Thanked 3,563 Times in 1,522 Posts
Default

Also Samsung dropped like all their prices a day or two ago. But they still aint cheap heh.
alostpacket is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to alostpacket For This Useful Post:
NightAngel79 (January 2nd, 2013)
Old January 1st, 2013, 06:19 PM   #77 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

I read a review that the 830 was quicker than the 840, but not as good as the 840 Pro.

With prices coming down here, I think I am going to - sadly- postpone my SSD and get me a Nexus 7.

Still, if I'm lucky, I can get a SSD for my Birthday ;-)

But I'm still looking at getting that SanDisk Extreme 240GB. By April, it should be less than £120.
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; January 3rd, 2013 at 09:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2013, 04:15 PM   #78 (permalink)
ROM Developer
 
SUroot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Riddlesden, West Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 23,926
 
Device(s): SGS3 (Current) HTC Desire (Retired)
Carrier: 3 UK

Thanks: 1,923
Thanked 5,320 Times in 3,994 Posts
Default

I've just cloned my 7200 rpm HDD to an SSD and man, can I see the difference. I think they're so much faster in general that at the high end, you won't really feel much between one SSD and another (to an extent)
alostpacket likes this.
SUroot is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to SUroot For This Useful Post:
Mehta23 (January 15th, 2013)
Old January 15th, 2013, 04:57 PM   #79 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

May not be able to get the tablet now, but looking at the SSD's again - prices have increased. The one £125 sandisk is now at least £135, which is very closely priced to some other drives.
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 15th, 2013, 06:45 PM   #80 (permalink)
Member
 
Savage Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Gender: Male
Posts: 354
 
Device(s): TMobile Nexus 4 16GB, Samsung Galaxy SII, Samsung Galaxy Prevail, HTC EVO Design 4g
Carrier: TMobile

Thanks: 25
Thanked 138 Times in 71 Posts
Default

Why not go for smaller but top performance SSD, put your OS and most used heavy CPU and GPU intensive programs on there, and keep your HDD for everything else?
__________________
Want to share something? Do it for free! http://db.tt/TZm94Al2
Have I helped you? Hit thanks!
Savage Shadows is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old January 16th, 2013, 10:57 AM   #81 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Good point, and it was what I was asking about earlier on in the thread. But Windows , we've said, is around 20GB at least, I think SpeedDeamon said it was even 40GB. Then I have quite a few large games and files that I'd like on there, so even if I could fit all my stuff onto a 120GB drive, I was told that a 240Gb would be more sensible, and I'd then have more space for future stuff

Also, I'l give you an idea of the pricing here in the UK:
Samsung 840 Pro ( I'm assuming this is high performance enough) is £105
Sandisk 240GB is £115
Sandisk Extreme 240GB is £130.

£25 more, for double the space....

My issue was that I thought the prices in general were quite high, and as they were falling, I thought it might be best to wait for a bit, and get a tablet that my eye had been on.

Now, the tablet idea isn't looking like the best, but when I revisited the SSD's, I found that they prices have increased. I still think tha the 240Gb Sandisk Extreme is a good deal, so I might be getting that soon.


Edit: the sandisk extreme has been reduced to £127 with free delivery. But also Amazon's price has gone down to £129, so I'l opt for that. I mean, it's only a fiver more than the original price I saw - half a week's wages of my paper round :P

Yep. I thought I didn't realise that the £115 price I saw before was for the Sandisk Pulse, not the xtreme, so £127 means it's gone up £2.
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; January 16th, 2013 at 11:24 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old January 16th, 2013, 05:02 PM   #82 (permalink)
Antidisestablishmentarian
 
johnlgalt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 3rd Rock
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,396
 
Device(s): Motorola® DROID® BIONIC®
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 2,168
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,362 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to johnlgalt Send a message via MSN to johnlgalt Send a message via Yahoo to johnlgalt Send a message via Skype™ to johnlgalt johnlgalt@gmail.com
Default Re: Comparing SSD's

But if you bought 2 smaller capacity drives you could still have the space you wanted, just spread on different drives.

I the price break is still around 150 GB then it makes sense to get two smaller drives. However, if the price break is high, say around 240, then it makes sense to get the larger drive.

For maximum performance, you'll need multiple SSDs and a RAID setup, which really goes far beyond what you're looking for, though.

I took my older 80GB SSD and made it my repository for the user tree and manually installed a couple of my larger, but less HD intensive games there, keeping the 180 more free for business and compiling a well as Mass Effect
NYCHitman1 likes this.
johnlgalt is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2013, 12:09 PM   #83 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Two sandisk 120gb drives are £140.
One 240gb is £129.

£11 quid doesn't sound bad, I should have ough space and airflow, it just means I'll have to rotate the hdd cage and maybe get some more case fans.

Quick research shows that one big drive seems to be favoured. Although the performance on them could be different now - im referring to forum posts that are more than a year old
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; January 17th, 2013 at 12:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2013, 02:02 PM   #84 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default



I got an email from Scan, and they've reduced their OCZ Octane down to £113. Good deal I think. SATA 3 ( I think)

Max Read: up to 535MB/s
Max Write: up to 270MB/s

Whereas the Sandisk Extreme 240GB, for £129

550MB/s read speeds and 520MB/s

I know those figures don't necessarily mean much, but I definitely know that the Sandisk offers the right kinds of speeds in the right areas, compared to SSD's that are quite a bit more.

So... Octane vs Extreme....

Edit:

Found this comparison, and it looks like the 4K random ( which I've been told is the most used) is a lot better with the Sandisk.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/sandisk_extreme_ssd_240gb_review

But the octane is quite a bit faster in other places. May have to do more research and get that application to analyse which bits are used more.

Also, I need to check the price of a 120gb octane, but i only have 2 sata 6gbps, so if I get 2 SSD's, my hdd will have to go on a 3gbps slot. OK ? Or is it worth getting a pcie adapter thingy
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; January 18th, 2013 at 02:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old January 18th, 2013, 08:59 PM   #85 (permalink)
Antidisestablishmentarian
 
johnlgalt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 3rd Rock
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,396
 
Device(s): Motorola® DROID® BIONIC®
Carrier: VZW

Thanks: 2,168
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,362 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to johnlgalt Send a message via MSN to johnlgalt Send a message via Yahoo to johnlgalt Send a message via Skype™ to johnlgalt johnlgalt@gmail.com
Default Re: Comparing SSD's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post


I got an email from Scan, and they've reduced their OCZ Octane down to £113. Good deal I think. SATA 3 ( I think)

Max Read: up to 535MB/s
Max Write: up to 270MB/s

Whereas the Sandisk Extreme 240GB, for £129

550MB/s read speeds and 520MB/s

I know those figures don't necessarily mean much, but I definitely know that the Sandisk offers the right kinds of speeds in the right areas, compared to SSD's that are quite a bit more.

So... Octane vs Extreme....

Edit:

Found this comparison, and it looks like the 4K random ( which I've been told is the most used) is a lot better with the Sandisk.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/sandisk_extreme_ssd_240gb_review

But the octane is quite a bit faster in other places. May have to do more research and get that application to analyse which bits are used more.

Also, I need to check the price of a 120gb octane, but i only have 2 sata 6gbps, so if I get 2 SSD's, my hdd will have to go on a 3gbps slot. OK ? Or is it worth getting a pcie adapter thingy
Max write of only 270? Are you sure that is a true SATA III drive? You can use a SATA II drive on a SATA III connection (I know, I did it with my Intel X25-M Gen2 until I bought the Cherryville drive) but the HD is still the bottleneck in that case.

I it were me and I were buying, I'd opt for the slightly more expensive Sandisk b/c of the overall speed. But, it will be highly dependent on your use of it....
johnlgalt is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to johnlgalt For This Useful Post:
Mehta23 (January 19th, 2013)
Old January 19th, 2013, 06:39 AM   #86 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

For some reason , I forgot about the max speeds.

Now its 2x 120gb sandisks vs one 240gb
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 20th, 2013, 06:21 AM   #87 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Would have 2 smaller SSD's on a 6gbps slot and then my hdd on a 3gbps be alright?

I could get a pcie adapter so the hdd is on another 6gbps slot.

Also, would 2 SSD's be faster? Cos I thought the bigger ones had better performance...
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2013, 10:02 AM   #88 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Anyone?
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2013, 12:16 PM   #89 (permalink)
Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,033
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 541
Thanked 556 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
Would have 2 smaller SSD's on a 6gbps slot and then my hdd on a 3gbps be alright?

I could get a pcie adapter so the hdd is on another 6gbps slot.

Also, would 2 SSD's be faster? Cos I thought the bigger ones had better performance...
With a serial interface like SATA or SAS you'll need one port per disk.

You can use two SSD drives in a RAID0 stripe set for greater throughput. I am in the habit of buying a good RAID HBA card with battery backup for things like that. I'm guessing that you're constrained by what's available on the motherboard? Only 2 6 BGps ports?

Spinning disk HDD technology isn't going to saturate a 6 GBps connection (or even a 3 GBps one), so yes you should try to use the quickest ones for the SSDs.
Speed Daemon is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Speed Daemon For This Useful Post:
Mehta23 (January 21st, 2013)
Old January 21st, 2013, 02:46 PM   #90 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Really? So I should get two smaller SSD's (sandisk 120gb £140) and Lowe the pcie adapter?

Will order soon :-)
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old January 21st, 2013, 03:15 PM   #91 (permalink)
Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,033
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 541
Thanked 556 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
Really? So I should get two smaller SSD's (sandisk 120gb £140) and Lowe the pcie adapter?

Will order soon :-)
Before you do, you should know that if you lose data on one drive, the array can quit functioning. RAID0 offers no data protection, only speed. And if it fails, it's much harder to try to recover data from than a single drive.

Because SSDs do lose data more quickly than magnetic storage (under normal operation), I'd only use a RAID0 array to speed up access of very large files like uncompressed video. If I was using it for a boot partition, I'd mirror the RAID0 array with a duplicate one in RAID 0+1, which means 4 drives and a fairly costly RAID controller. (You can use the software RAID functionality that some motherboards offer, but those don't offer the same level of protection as a good battery-backed one.)

You can use the 2 smaller SSD drives in JBOD configuration, with one as your boot/system disk and the other for data.
Speed Daemon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 21st, 2013, 05:05 PM   #92 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

The biggest files used would be images / videos that I'm editing. Happy for them to be on hdd.

Would your last option be better than one big ssd?
Also... SSD's lose data?
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2013, 01:35 AM   #93 (permalink)
ROM Developer
 
SUroot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Riddlesden, West Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 23,926
 
Device(s): SGS3 (Current) HTC Desire (Retired)
Carrier: 3 UK

Thanks: 1,923
Thanked 5,320 Times in 3,994 Posts
Default Re: Comparing SSD's

How much performance does raid0 add to ssd (if its possible to quantify) compared to a 7200?
SUroot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 22nd, 2013, 05:44 PM   #94 (permalink)
Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,033
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 541
Thanked 556 Times in 440 Posts
Default

RAID0 (which technically isn't RAID because there's no redundancy) reads and writes data from/to several drives in a round-robin fashion. In theory you could string an unlimited number of drives together, although there are practical limitations. If you have SSD drives that can saturate a 6GiBps SATA channel, one will yield 6GiBps throughput, 2 will yield 12GiBps, 3 for 18GiBps and so forth. So you could use RAID0 to build a VERY fast virtual drive!

The downside is that RAID0 isn't redundant. Every drive is a link in the chain, and more drives means more things that can fail. And in RAID0, when one link fails, the entire chain is broken. That's why RAID0 is rarely used alone.

Although it's possible to use software RAID, I strongly recommend using a hardware RAID adapter card. A 4-channel card and 4 SSD devices can be used to make one virtual drive that's as much as 4 times as fast as a single SSD. As tempting as this is, I'd make a RAID 0+1 array, with a pair of 2-drive RAID0 arrays being mirrored to keep the data safe in case one or two drives fail. With an 8-channel card and 8 SSD drives, you can make a blazing fast 24GiBps array that's also protected from failure...if you can afford it!

I've seen RAID cards that take regular SD cards, and use them to create a RAID array that looks like a regular SATA drive to your computer. If you have a bunch of identical, large capacity SD cards just laying around, this might be for you. I don't know if it's any cheaper than using actual SSD devices, but it's certainly compact; everything fits onto the adapter card!

BTW, you can use regular "spinning disk" drives in RAID0 too.
Speed Daemon is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Speed Daemon For This Useful Post:
SUroot (January 23rd, 2013)
Old January 22nd, 2013, 06:12 PM   #95 (permalink)
Disabled
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,033
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 541
Thanked 556 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
The biggest files used would be images / videos that I'm editing. Happy for them to be on hdd.
Now that I'm doing more and more video transcoding, I could use a really fast "scratch drive" to speed up disk I/O whenever it becomes the bottleneck. Right now my old computers don't challenge my "spinning disk" drives, but if I upgrade to a faster one, it could benefit from the speed of SSD.

Quote:
Would your last option be better than one big ssd?
If you're finding that your workflow is disk I/O bound, then having enough SSD capacity to put your work files on SSD while you're editing them will help. If the one smaller SSD doesn't give you enough space to do this, then adding a second one will give you this space. Another benefit of keeping your system and data physical drives separate is that system disk I/O won't slow down your work. It's a small performance increase, but if you're saving money by buying 2 smaller SSD drives, it's a free benefit.

Quote:
Also... SSD's lose data?
Yes. All solid state storage has a much more limited number of read/write cycles than their magnetic counterparts. The microscopic microcircuitry is prone to damage from stuff like cosmic rays, as well as regular use. And the faster the SSD, the more prone to data loss they are.

I can only assume that a good SSD will have spare sectors to use when the inevitable failures happen, but the bottom line is that SSD users should plan on replacing their SSD devices sooner than later.

This may not become a problem for people and companies who can afford regular hardware upgrades. But if you're cash-strapped, you might want to start saving for a replacement SSD the minute you buy your latest one. By the same token I'd avoid buying used SSD devices unless they're from the factory and carry a full warranty.
Speed Daemon is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Speed Daemon For This Useful Post:
NightAngel79 (January 22nd, 2013)
Old January 23rd, 2013, 10:16 AM   #96 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Glad I'm researching into this now...
But it's seeming like spending a lot of money on these isn't such a good idea...

How long should a SSD last?

Also, 2x 120GB SanDisk Extremes are 10 quid more than a single 240GB.
Mehta23 is offline  
Last edited by Mehta23; January 23rd, 2013 at 04:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old January 23rd, 2013, 05:27 PM   #97 (permalink)
Check six!
 
Slug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Inverness, UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,431
 
Device(s): Sony Xperia Z
Carrier: EE

Thanks: 2,651
Thanked 10,884 Times in 5,533 Posts
Send a message via Skype™ to Slug slugbrem@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mehta23 View Post
How long should a SSD last?
Long enough.

My own X-25M is over 3.5 years-old and Intel's diagnostics show a total of two reallocated sectors, zero media wear. That's a drive that's been in use daily since installed.

Quote:
Also, 2x 120GB SanDisk Extremes are 10 quid more than a single 240GB.
It's ultimately your call, but earlier in the thread you mentioned "putting as many games as possible on it". If that's still your plan then one 120GB drive with OS and programs installed to it, and a second devoted to games, would seem an effective solution. Use the 1TB platter drive for transient data and long-term storage.... sorted!
Speed Daemon likes this.
Slug is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 23rd, 2013, 07:09 PM   #98 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: USA
Gender: Male
Posts: 55
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3,Nexus 7
Carrier: AT&T

Thanks: 2
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default

i use ocz vertex 128gb and i love it
dirtbikerr450 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2013, 09:20 AM   #99 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slug View Post
Long enough.

My own X-25M is over 3.5 years-old and Intel's diagnostics show a total of two reallocated sectors, zero media wear. That's a drive that's been in use daily since installed.



It's ultimately your call, but earlier in the thread you mentioned "putting as many games as possible on it". If that's still your plan then one 120GB drive with OS and programs installed to it, and a second devoted to games, would seem an effective solution. Use the 1TB platter drive for transient data and long-term storage.... sorted!

Well.... I don't need to have games on it. But of course I wants dat speed :-P
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old January 27th, 2013, 06:50 AM   #100 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: England,UK
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,387
 
Device(s): HTC Desire HD ( Running CM 10.1 ) HTC Sensation (Running CM10.1)
Carrier: Three

Thanks: 808
Thanked 284 Times in 221 Posts
Default

Price of the 240gb has gone up to £135. So the 2x 120gb is £5 more. Still not sure what to do?
Mehta23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Go Back   Android Forums > Android Community > The Lounge > Computers & IT
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:29 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.