I am buying components to build a desktop and am considering an SSD for the OS (Win7). I multitask while booting the PC and don't mind 2 minutes vs 30 seconds too much, but my main motivation for SSD is low noise/power... I don't think I'll be able to tolerate the supposed loudness of the WD Black Caviar drive!
I don't want to worry constantly about over-writing and lifespan of an SSD, though.
Should I put all my programs on there, as well? I've gotten mixed feedback from salespeople... some say due to heavy interfacing b/w the OS and programs, it's best to have them on the same drive. Others say it doesn't matter if your Mobo has to access 2 drives. What's the truth on this?
I'd like to have Firefox start and browse faster, but one concern is the amount of writing to the SSD. I've read that it's best to move the cache to the HDD... will the slowdown due to accessing 2 drives be noticeable? Would a Caviar Green suffice, if it has SATA-3 with 64MB cache?
But will moving Firefox cache actually prevent ALL or at least most of its crazy-high amount of writing* from going on the SSD? I'm skeptical because according to the Task Manager's Resource Monitor (disk tab), Firefox appears to be writing directly to a Windows folder (C:\Users\Name\AppData\Roaming) on the computer (SSD not installed yet)... can this be redirected, and should it be, since Firefox then slows back to HD speed? The oxymoron here is that the SSD was supposed to help performance!
* Firefox is writing at speeds as high as 4 MB/sec sometimes! I'm not even surfing the web right now, although I do have about 30 tabs open (in 3 windows/exe files of Firefox), but wow... at that rate, I'm estimating as high as 300-400 GB/day of writing! Is this accurate... if so, I'd suspect the pundits' estimates of SSD life are obsolete, as now flash is used so much more heavily on web sites, even when idle.
Any suggestions?? Thanks much.
I don't want to worry constantly about over-writing and lifespan of an SSD, though.
Should I put all my programs on there, as well? I've gotten mixed feedback from salespeople... some say due to heavy interfacing b/w the OS and programs, it's best to have them on the same drive. Others say it doesn't matter if your Mobo has to access 2 drives. What's the truth on this?
I'd like to have Firefox start and browse faster, but one concern is the amount of writing to the SSD. I've read that it's best to move the cache to the HDD... will the slowdown due to accessing 2 drives be noticeable? Would a Caviar Green suffice, if it has SATA-3 with 64MB cache?
But will moving Firefox cache actually prevent ALL or at least most of its crazy-high amount of writing* from going on the SSD? I'm skeptical because according to the Task Manager's Resource Monitor (disk tab), Firefox appears to be writing directly to a Windows folder (C:\Users\Name\AppData\Roaming) on the computer (SSD not installed yet)... can this be redirected, and should it be, since Firefox then slows back to HD speed? The oxymoron here is that the SSD was supposed to help performance!
* Firefox is writing at speeds as high as 4 MB/sec sometimes! I'm not even surfing the web right now, although I do have about 30 tabs open (in 3 windows/exe files of Firefox), but wow... at that rate, I'm estimating as high as 300-400 GB/day of writing! Is this accurate... if so, I'd suspect the pundits' estimates of SSD life are obsolete, as now flash is used so much more heavily on web sites, even when idle.
Any suggestions?? Thanks much.