Hi everyone,
So I was thinking of putting my Steam games in a SSD and run games from the SSD via USB 3.0 (or eSata) but then I came to a question of will that configuration speed up the loading time of the games stored in the SSD compare to having the SSD as a boot device and store some Steam games there?
Since SSD costs so much per GB, I'm thinking of picking up a 60GB and either store it with just games, OR install the OS and store some games and then let the laptop boot the OS in the SSD.... both connected via USB 3.0 or eSata.
So which is faster? I'm assuming the SSD as a boot drive with some games will be faster but how much of a difference in performance are there?
Thanks
-
-
tilleroftheearth Wisdom listens quietly...
If you can use the following link to move your 'users' folder to another HDD, then I could (possibly) recommend getting a 60GB SSD.
See:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/win...gramdata-folder-separate-drive-partition.html
If you don't have a two drive bay system - I say don't bother with SSD's until you can afford at least a 160GB or larger unit. The smaller SSD's have too many compromises with certain performance aspects slower than a good mechanical HDD (like the properly partitioned Scorpio Black 750GB model, for example). -
I'd also recommend not going with a 60GB drive, but think 120GB/128GB are also good drives to go for, and as fast as the 160GB drives tiller is referring to. But, use the SSD as a boot drive with some games on, as many games don't get large performance boosts from being on an SSD (so leave them on an external HD).
-
So what you are saying is that games don't get large performance boost huh?
I actually have the Scorpio Black 750GB on my laptop. I guess I'll just stick to that than going out to buy a 120GB SSD.
I just think the current SSD prices are tad bit too much for me. Well that's my view of it. -
-
-
partitioning does help. make a small sector where you want to store your windows/some essential programs, then the rest as storage.
as i understand the smaller the first partition the faster it will be.
but upgrading to a ssd is just so much faster. i was running raid 0 velociraptors 150gbx2 on my desktop before switching to a intel g2 80gb ssd. the change in access time and read speed was very very impressive. WoW loading time was particularly noticable -
Partitioning will do NOTHING to improve speed. All sectors on an SSD are accessed at the same speed. Partitioning on an HD can actually make things slower. Size of a partition will do nothing appreciable to affect the speed.
-
-
-
Well, I just ordered a drive caddy bay for my laptop, which will replace the optical drive with the caddy. So I do have room for one more drive. Yeah, I guess the ultimate showdown is speed vs. space.
Either i choose space and stick in my extra 2.5" HDD in it or buy a 120GB SSD... hmmm decisions, decisions lol -
If you got a dual drive system, and can afford it, a setup of a 120gb+ SSD and a big HDD for storage is the way to go.
My setup is a snappy Intel SSD 510 120gb and a big 500gb hybrid hdd for storage. -
-
tilleroftheearth Wisdom listens quietly...
Yeah, no doubt about it, with a two drive bay system:
SSD: O/S plus programs
HDD: Not only the data files - but the whole users folder moved using the following link:
See:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/win...gramdata-folder-separate-drive-partition.html
Keep us posted!
SSD as a storage vs. SSD as a boot drive
Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by Aznkorealee, Jul 6, 2011.