Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SSD upgrade, is it worth it?

Last response: in Storage
Share
July 9, 2010 12:45:50 AM

Okay, so I am buying two 1tb hdds (havent decided which yet) to run a Raid 0 system for gaming.

However, I may be coming into more money than I thought and was considering buying a SSD as well. One of these perhaps:

$154 - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

$174 - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

If I install Windows 7 Ultimate 64 on to this SSD along with some basic programs, would I see a performance increase in my system? Is 60gb enough for win7 64?

Keep in mind all my games and media will be on the raid 0 drives.

More about : ssd upgrade worth

a b G Storage
July 9, 2010 1:15:36 AM

60 gigs should be enough for the OS.. SSD's do have good performance figures although at a steep price but since you can afford one, you should go for it.. I'd have recommended the Kingston due to my high trust on them when it comes to memory but the lower price on the OCZ cannot be given a miss.. Both drives would perform equally though.. As for the RAID 0 setup, 2TB is a large amount of data to loose IMO.. May be you could buy two SSD's (one for your OS and the other for your main apps) and go with a single 1TB hard drive for secondary stuffs..
m
0
l
July 9, 2010 1:32:37 AM

Thanks for the advice. The Kingston also has the benefit of being for sale at a nearby store, so no shipping involved. Its also cheaper there than online.

On the Raid data loss issue, I do have a 500gb maxtor that I'm going to use for backup. The maxtor will have my game saves, media, and some other backup related stuff. Besides, the risk really isnt that high right? I have a friend that has run Raid 0 systems for over a decade and has never had one fail.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b G Storage
July 9, 2010 2:21:03 AM

Yeah the risk levels are very low.. Its just that, am a little skeptical with RAID setups without any prior backup plans.. Moreover for the price of two 1 TB hard drives, you can get a single SSD which will surpass the performance levels of those two 1TB hard drives even with a RAID 0 setup.. The only tradeoff is the amount of capacity available on the SSD will be 10+ times lower than those two hard drives combined.. But you can recover some of that by getting a single 1TB hard drive..
m
0
l
a b G Storage
July 9, 2010 8:58:55 AM

The plus and minus or the comparison between using RAID configuration and using an SSD has been explained by those people above. I just wanna add 1 thing :
2 or more HDDs in RAID consume more power than a single SSD and SSDs make no sound at all.

I recommend also to buy 1 big capacity HDD and an SSD, put the OS on the SSD and the datas on the HDD.

I also intend to buy another SSD for my laptop, I have one already for my PC and am starting about getting another one for my laptop.
The biggest weakness of an SSD for me is only the capacity-over-price value, but the rest is more than just good. SSD is the best PC upgrade you can get at the moment.

I bought Intel Postville 80GB for my PC about 3-4 months ago...now...I am also considering to buy Kingston V+ 64GB, after reading some small review, for the PC and use my old Intel Postville for my laptop...but since I haven't found any full review from it...
Question from my side : Is Kingston V+ 64GB any better than Intel X25 postville 80GB?
m
0
l
a b G Storage
July 9, 2010 5:15:41 PM

stonedzen said:
Okay, so I am buying two 1tb hdds (havent decided which yet) to run a Raid 0 system for gaming.

However, I may be coming into more money than I thought and was considering buying a SSD as well. One of these perhaps:

$154 - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

$174 - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

If I install Windows 7 Ultimate 64 on to this SSD along with some basic programs, would I see a performance increase in my system? Is 60gb enough for win7 64?

Keep in mind all my games and media will be on the raid 0 drives.


Using an SSD for your OS/Apps will redefine your computer usage experience...I am not even kidding. Performance increase...yes a huge one. Boot times will be between 7-12 seconds around...7 seconds after a fresh install and then it goes up as you add more applications. Loading your account is practically instant, no point in using the switch user function as you can log off/on in one second. All that stuttering HDD's give like when you open up a big application or even a simple one where you wait a few seconds, well this is instant. Moreover, you never have to defrag it, you never hear it, it takes up a fraction of power, much less heat...etc. The only downside is once you use an SSD, you won't be able to ever go back to using an HDD for a boot drive, you'll think its to slow. And 60GB is more then enough for win7. I have Microsoft Windows 7 64=bit Home Premium and it takes up less then 8GB on a fresh install.
m
0
l
July 9, 2010 7:15:54 PM

Very excited for this! I'm now stuck between the Kingston SSDNow V+ 64gb and the OCZ Vertex LE 50gb. Any input on these? I found a benchmark review that put the Kingston way behind the Vertex series in many tests, but idk if this affect real world experience.

One other question too,

I am definately installing Win7 ultimate 64 on the SSD as well as my basic media programs and drivers. However, I am considering installing steam the the ssd as well. Currently steam, with all my purchased games (Napoleon TW, L4D2, and COD:MW2), takes about 45gb on my hdd.

If I install steam onto the new ssd, I will have less than 5gb free space if I'm lucky. Will this affect the performance of my ssd? Should I keep a certain amount of free space on the ssd to maximize performance as I would with an hdd?
m
0
l
a b G Storage
July 9, 2010 8:35:51 PM

I don't you need to keep any free space on an SSD...you can fill it up to the last byte I think. On HDD's they recommend you leave plenty of space available for performance reason as data stored on the outer magnetic tracks is accessed faster, once it reaches the middle it gets sluggish and they recommend you leave space for defragmentation purposes. Seeing how you don't have to ever worry about defragging an SSD and everything on the SSD is accessed at the same I don't see why you can't fill it all the way up. And remember, whichever SSD you buy, it will be leagues faster then a hard drive.
If the improvement from a hard drive to a cheap SSD is lets say 1000% (in ratio) then a more expensive SSD will simply be another 100%. <not true, just using it as an example.

And the tests you speak of, are the read/writes or random access times?...the latter test is by far the more important of the two.
m
0
l
July 9, 2010 9:05:56 PM

Here is the article I read originally, so it was referring to access times.

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_conten...

Here is another article I found with the Kingston V+ and OCZ Vertex LE, which also shows the OCZ ahead. However, it should be noted that the articel discusses the 128gb V+ and the 100gb Vertex LE, and I am only able to afford the 64gb/50gb versions. Scroll down to pages 9 and 10 for benchmarks.

http://www.anandtech.com/print/2944

Additional thoughts?
m
0
l
a b G Storage
July 19, 2010 12:23:08 PM

I think it is now the time to write another official SSD charts in Tomshardware.
I hope tom's crew will put the charts in a short time, because many new SSD's are now already in the market since the last official SSD charts in this website.
m
0
l
July 19, 2010 4:22:34 PM

the vertex LE's are very good, i have the 50GB, and it is like blackhawk said, 12s boot time (i have everything installed), and the OS seems more responsive
m
0
l
July 20, 2010 5:53:31 AM

I asked myself the same question every time I use my computer. I consider myself to be internet-aholic. I use it daily, most of the time i use it more than once a day. from facebook, tweeter, THW, engadget, etc. it most definitely cut my booting time to less than half. it cuts my game booting time to about half. it is so snappy with all the photo and some software to almost instantaneous ex, firefox, WM player.

60GBs seem to be a lot at first sight; however, i have been having problem keeping it with in the limited space.

i got a vertex 2 60GB version for cheap ~$130. was it worth that much?
if i do not have any HD for storage, i would not get it. luckily I do have my 500GB samsung F1.
m
0
l
September 30, 2010 9:33:13 PM

I can testify to the sheer awesomeness of SSD's

I suggest the 60gb OCZ Vertex 2, (or one of the new OCZ biigfoot drives, which are cheaper)

I've used one in windows 7 64 and it is immense. everything loads so quickly, it really is the best performance upgrade you can do nowadays, to get a pc that 'feel's fast, all the time.

Seriously recommended, so much so, I actually offer people a deal: If they buy one and they aren't blown away by it, I will buy it back off them for exactly what they paid.

Which I can say because i'm so confident that everyone will be amazed at the difference. and never take me up on the offer.

But then, even if they did, I wouldn't mind another :p  build the RAID array of my dreams!
m
0
l
!