Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

What's more important read or write speed in SSD's?

Last response: in Memory
Share
August 18, 2013 10:15:52 AM

I am finishing up buying the last parts for my custom build. I am looking at getting a SSD to run all my programs with around 240-250GB. I just want to boot the OS and run my programs and save all work to HHD's. If I don't need to save anything to the SSD after loading those programs will it matter if the write speed is slower then the read speed or vice versa? I'm just looking for the fastest and cheaper option that is reliable. Prefer to stay under $200. Looking at these SSD's.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...




a b } Memory
August 18, 2013 10:18:33 AM

mostly read and then write, i would get the samsung 840 since they are known to be very reliable.
m
0
l
August 18, 2013 10:29:29 AM

I have run 840 Pros since they have come out in several rigs and couldn't be happier. I am considering an EVO for testing. Cannot wait til hard disks no longer exist, lol.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 128 } Memory
August 18, 2013 10:31:26 AM

Walt1227 said:
I am finishing up buying the last parts for my custom build. I am looking at getting a SSD to run all my programs with around 240-250GB. I just want to boot the OS and run my programs and save all work to HHD's. If I don't need to save anything to the SSD after loading those programs will it matter if the write speed is slower then the read speed or vice versa? I'm just looking for the fastest and cheaper option that is reliable. Prefer to stay under $200. Looking at these SSD's.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...






Neither. The number of IO Operations are what you want to look at. This correlates strongly with read and write throughput, but certain forms of data can skew the read/write metrics in benchmarks.
m
0
l
a c 104 } Memory
August 18, 2013 11:03:53 AM

The os does mostly small random reads and writes, so that is where the performance advantage of a ssd is.
The response time will be 50x better than the best hard drive.
For a desktop user, they will all perform the same.
It takes a synthetic benchmark driving them to unrealistic queue lengths to detect any difference.
I would look at the new Samsung 840 EVO http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
m
0
l
a c 1941 } Memory
August 18, 2013 11:32:37 AM

Primarily you want reads, even though SSDs are much better today, still don't want to write to them more than you have to, sowant to redirect caches, temp dirs, page files, etc to a platter drive...of those listed I'd go with one of the Samsungs
m
0
l
August 18, 2013 6:02:17 PM

Tradesman1 said:
Primarily you want reads, even though SSDs are much better today, still don't want to write to them more than you have to, sowant to redirect caches, temp dirs, page files, etc to a platter drive...of those listed I'd go with one of the Samsungs


Hey Tradesman,

I just need the SSD to read the programs because the Platter drives I have will do the writing.
m
0
l
a c 1941 } Memory
August 18, 2013 6:09:53 PM

That's why I said reads - then tried to explain a little - there's still tons of people here advocating SSDs for everything, was glad to see you mention storing data etc on platters, but I like to spread the word where opportunity presents
m
0
l
August 18, 2013 6:16:31 PM

Tradesman1 said:
That's why I said reads - then tried to explain a little - there's still tons of people here advocating SSDs for everything, was glad to see you mention storing data etc on platters, but I like to spread the word where opportunity presents


I understand. You have been a great help to me while I have been doing this build and I really appreciate that. I know not to trust a SSD totally for reads and writes cause they aren't bullet proof...well not sure if any thing is to be honest concerning computers. I just want fast boots for my programs that's all that matters to me. With me not doing any gaming what so ever or having the internet on the system I am just concern with having the fastest and coolest system I can afford. But like I said a few months back when we talked, I want to watch a blu-ray on the system from time to time.
m
0
l
a c 104 } Memory
August 18, 2013 6:29:18 PM

A SSD is lilely to be more reliable than a hard drive. No moving parts.
Here is one older article on return rates Look at ssd's and hard drives and you will find ssd's better.
The best ssd's have return rates of 0.5%. The best hard drives are 1.5%.
http://www.behardware.com/articles/881-6/components-ret...
The only drawback for ssd's is the larger cost per gigabyte of capacity.
It is appropriate to store large files such as videos on a hard drive.
But for every file you put on the ssd, you will get better performance.
Even sequential operations are 2-3x faster than the best hard drives.
For faster boots, don't boot at all.
Use sleep to S3(ram) and wake takes 2-3 seconds.
Yes, boot is faster, but it is everything else you do that is quicker. Files open instantly.
Once you use a ssd, you will never build without one again.
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 1941 } Memory
August 18, 2013 6:40:45 PM

Basically any good platter drive, 7200 or better is fine for blue-ray movies or straight from even the slower DVD drives, should have a good rig there
Share
August 19, 2013 7:29:53 PM

Tradesman1 said:
Basically any good platter drive, 7200 or better is fine for blue-ray movies or straight from even the slower DVD drives, should have a good rig there


Would it be ok if I loaded the sound libraries along with the programs onto the SSD and write (save) everything to the platter drive? Or is it better to store the sound libraries on the platter drive and call them up from it? All the music will be stored on the platter drive I just wonder if it's ok to load the sound libraries to the SSD for faster load and performance.
m
0
l
a c 1941 } Memory
August 19, 2013 8:06:14 PM

Sure, see how it goes :) 
m
0
l
a c 104 } Memory
August 19, 2013 8:26:41 PM

You buy a ssd for performance.
Do not try to micromanage it.
The "tweaks" you may read about were perhaps applicable when a 32gb ssd cost a bunch and when endurance was an unknown.
Buy one large enough so that you don't worry about filling it up.
Use a hard drive for bulk storage. Files such as backups and video's.
Use the ssd for everything else.
m
0
l
a c 1941 } Memory
August 19, 2013 8:50:38 PM

Those tweaks are still applicable, writes to the SSD are still a bane and shorten the, which the manufacturers even attest to, are they better than early ones, definitely, but why shorten the life for no appreciable gain...I see SSDs every month brought to me that are dead or dying and less than 2, sometimes even a year old.....and gee they have the page file on there, cache and temp directories taking those hundreds/thousands writes, data stored on them, indexing on (ridiculous), auto defrag on, and people wonder why they die so soon.... then there's the SSDs that people set up correctly that they bought what some clear back in 08-09 and they are still running
m
0
l
a c 104 } Memory
August 20, 2013 7:11:52 AM

Windows detects a device as a ssd by it's short response times.
Once that is done, it should turn off defrag, but it might be wise to check. That certainly could do a lot of writes for absolutely no benefit at all. Page file accesses, on the other hand do benefit from the ssd. A app will wait for a demand page fault to be resolved.
Even simple browsing will do some file reads and writes.
The key to maintaining longevity is to have a sufficiently large ssd. Preferably one that does not get to 80% full.
m
0
l
August 20, 2013 8:30:28 AM

I am thinking about putting two Samsung 250GB SSD's in my system as they are fairly cheap cause I already brought one yesterday. The extra one would be for some more audio software I will get in the near future.
m
0
l
a c 1941 } Memory
August 20, 2013 2:23:05 PM

Sounds like a plan
m
0
l
a c 104 } Memory
August 20, 2013 2:31:16 PM

A single 500gb would probably be better assuming the total cost is similar to a pair of 250's.
A larger ssd is easier to manage and will have better endurance. It will also tend to be a bit faster.
The new Samsung 840 EVO seems to be attractively priced in larger sizes.
m
0
l
August 20, 2013 2:33:43 PM

geofelt said:
A single 500gb would probably be better assuming the total cost is similar to a pair of 250's.
A larger ssd is easier to manage and will have better endurance. It will also tend to be a bit faster.
The new Samsung 840 EVO seems to be attractively priced in larger sizes.


For what I am doing it is better to break this stuff up on separate drives. Some of these programs can be hogs. I'm not building your average computer.
m
0
l
a c 104 } Memory
August 20, 2013 2:41:16 PM

I suspect it would make little difference.
But, one can devise a case where two are better.
If an app reads one file and simultaneously reads or writes a second file in an overlapped manner, then it might be beneficial to have those files on different sata channels. Also, the app should not be cpu intensive.
To my mind, the simplicity of a single device is worth something.
m
0
l
August 20, 2013 2:48:36 PM

geofelt said:
I suspect it would make little difference.
But, one can devise a case where two are better.
If an app reads one file and simultaneously reads or writes a second file in an overlapped manner, then it might be beneficial to have those files on different sata channels. Also, the app should not be cpu intensive.
To my mind, the simplicity of a single device is worth something.


I understand what you are saying. However, looking at others who are doing the same thing as me it is said that having separate drives to run different programs is important because some programs can cause higher thannormal temps on the SSD if to many hog type software are installed to one SSD. I know people who have 700 plus GB SSD's in their system and still have other dedicated SSD's for other programs because of the sound libraries being so large. Then there is the problem with sample base sounds that cause overheating. That's why I prefer to run two separate 250GB SSD's and have the 2 HHD's for storage.
m
0
l
!