Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Can i use an ssd for my o/s and an ssd for storage?

Last response: in Storage
Share
September 21, 2012 3:13:41 PM

I am a complete rookie. First time build, and have minimal knowledge of computers. I am learning as I research and I am currently researching SSD's compared to HDDs. Forgive me if this is just a stupid question, but do i need an hdd? Can i just use two separate SSD's? One for my O/S and one for storage? If it is possible, what are the pros and cons for going only ssd? Lastily, if i can use two ssds, do I need to do anything specific to install these seperate.

Thanks to anyone that can post something and help me achieve a first time successfull build.

More about : ssd ssd storage

a c 91 G Storage
September 21, 2012 3:28:59 PM

^+1, but you pay a lot more for the ssd. This is why many people use a SSD for the OS and a HDD for data.
m
0
l
Related resources
September 21, 2012 3:29:34 PM

Yes you can, but don't think about getting rid of that old HDD entirely, if you have space to keep em installed you can install your OS on one ssd, the programs you use the most on the other ssd and all other large not neccesary files on to the HDD. Or if you want to make your two ssd's into a RAID array (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Drives) by setting them up on RAID 0 they can be even faster, but RAID 0 isn't very reliable, if one of the two drives fail all data is lost, essentially two drives are setup to act as one. Hope this helped.
m
0
l
September 21, 2012 3:35:09 PM

agentfood01 said:
Yes you can, but don't think about getting rid of that old HDD entirely, if you have space to keep em installed you can install your OS on one ssd, the programs you use the most on the other ssd and all other large not neccesary files on to the HDD. Or if you want to make your two ssd's into a RAID array (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Drives) by setting them up on RAID 0 they can be even faster, but RAID 0 isn't very reliable, if one of the two drives fail all data is lost, essentially two drives are setup to act as one. Hope this helped.



Ok great. Thank you for taking the time to help me out!
m
0
l
a c 353 G Storage
September 21, 2012 4:56:15 PM

1) it is best to buy a single SSD that is large enough to hold OS and all programs.
I find that a 120/128 gig is MORE than enough for a non gamer as a Typical installation is roughly 35 gigs. To this add up the space required for game and add to the 35 gigs to determine the size needed. Only recommend adding the 2nd SSD if you find that your original purchase is to small.
.. 1 A 240/256 gig of SSD of Brand xyz is faster than it's smaller brother (120/128 gig same make model).
.. SSDs only speed up load times for OS and program Plus files that are on them. programs, Video play back, internet/email NO NOT run any faster. it makes little since to put word documnets, spread sheets, Video files and Photos on an SSD. Not majority worddocs and spreadsheets are realitively small files. Video files tend to be HUGH, ie a DVD is made up of 4->6 1 Gig files and a single blu-ray video file is from approx 13 gigs to 35 gigs for a single file - NOT going to want to store very many on a SMALL SSD. Not many will store a large collect of High res Photos on an SSD either (100 High res Photos x 10 megs per photo = 1 gigs UNLESS you are loading them repeatively. Small word doc and excell spreadsheets - load time is not a big factor to warrent being on an SSD.
..... Bottom line here is, Unless your rich go for a larger SSD + a HDD.

Just a comment on raid0. First ALL my OLDER systems, BEFORE SSDs used Raid0.
"RAID array (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Drives)" is a misnommer - ther is NO Redundency with Raid0. Raid0 primarilly ONLY improves on Sequencial read/write performance which means that it provides very little boost to Loading and OS or programs which are much more dependent on access time nd small 4K read/write performance.

While I indicated my preference of Large SSD (ie 1 240/256 Gig) + a HDD, ALL my systems have two SSDs - BUT I bought many when the cost was Much Higher than today.
Have 13 SSDs, all except last 2 were 18 gig and smaller. The 2 256 gig SSDs were just recently purchased ($180 ea which was CHEAPER than any of the majority of the smaller SSDs.
m
0
l
September 21, 2012 5:23:45 PM

I have 1 SSD for OS, one for Program files, and a 1.5 TB for Storage.
m
0
l
September 21, 2012 5:44:47 PM

I have an SSD for boot/OS and everything else runs from RAID0'd 250G `Raptors. I do okay speedwise.
m
0
l
September 22, 2012 5:06:50 AM

RetiredChief said:
1) it is best to buy a single SSD that is large enough to hold OS and all programs.
I find that a 120/128 gig is MORE than enough for a non gamer as a Typical installation is roughly 35 gigs. To this add up the space required for game and add to the 35 gigs to determine the size needed. Only recommend adding the 2nd SSD if you find that your original purchase is to small.
.. 1 A 240/256 gig of SSD of Brand xyz is faster than it's smaller brother (120/128 gig same make model).
.. SSDs only speed up load times for OS and program Plus files that are on them. programs, Video play back, internet/email NO NOT run any faster. it makes little since to put word documnets, spread sheets, Video files and Photos on an SSD. Not majority worddocs and spreadsheets are realitively small files. Video files tend to be HUGH, ie a DVD is made up of 4->6 1 Gig files and a single blu-ray video file is from approx 13 gigs to 35 gigs for a single file - NOT going to want to store very many on a SMALL SSD. Not many will store a large collect of High res Photos on an SSD either (100 High res Photos x 10 megs per photo = 1 gigs UNLESS you are loading them repeatively. Small word doc and excell spreadsheets - load time is not a big factor to warrent being on an SSD.
..... Bottom line here is, Unless your rich go for a larger SSD + a HDD.

Just a comment on raid0. First ALL my OLDER systems, BEFORE SSDs used Raid0.
"RAID array (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Drives)" is a misnommer - ther is NO Redundency with Raid0. Raid0 primarilly ONLY improves on Sequencial read/write performance which means that it provides very little boost to Loading and OS or programs which are much more dependent on access time nd small 4K read/write performance.

While I indicated my preference of Large SSD (ie 1 240/256 Gig) + a HDD, ALL my systems have two SSDs - BUT I bought many when the cost was Much Higher than today.
Have 13 SSDs, all except last 2 were 18 gig and smaller. The 2 256 gig SSDs were just recently purchased ($180 ea which was CHEAPER than any of the majority of the smaller SSDs.



sweet man, thank you for taking the time to give me a detailed answer. Every opinion helps. thanks again.
m
0
l
September 22, 2012 11:33:15 AM

You can use one SSD install os,one HDD save data,cost effective
m
0
l
a c 353 G Storage
September 23, 2012 1:37:48 PM

^ "Cost effective", Not totally true.
Newegg as of this morning.
OCZ Vertex 4 - 2 ea 128 Gig, $200, 1 ea 256 gig , $200 - No cost savings
Samsung 830 - 2 ea 128 gig, $240, 1 ea 256 gig, $200, 256 is $40 cheaper
Curcial m4 - 2 ea 128 gig, $240, 1 ea 256 gig, $200, 256 is $40 cheaper
NOTE, I bought 1 ea 256 gig Samsung 830 and a 256 gig M4 for $180 on sale.

However here is a good case where 2 drives would be cost effective. Do not NEED 256 gigs (Who DOES NOT always need more - LOL). Say you do NOT need the full 256 gigs, but 178 gigs would be fine, then 1 28gig + a 60 gig would be cheaper in cost, but not always cheaper in $$$/Gig. 2nd Example 1 128 gig + 1 256 gig (Total = 384 Gigs) would be about $100 cheaper than a single 512 gig SSD

1) as to performance, the single larger drive is "Faster" than it's half size brother.
2) By having 2 drives increase the risk of a single drive failure. But the flip side is that if a drive fails you only lost the data/files/programs on that drive, Plus it is cheaper to replace. That said, of the 13 SSDs that I have, I have YET to have a failure - knock on wood.
3) Added felexability in determining size for "C" and "D" with single SSD.

My recommendation still stands.
A) if You can not afford the larger initially, then get the smaller and Add to it at a later date. A second reason for daul SSDs is that you want MORE than say 256, but can not afford a 512 gig SSD. here you could purchase a 128 gig SSD and a 256 Gig and save about $10 over a 512 gig SSD.
B) If you can afford the larger, Then This is the way to go.
.. Set up two partitions, a "C" and "D". C for OS + programs, D for your Data files. A 2ndary advantage to this is that you are not stuck with the Sise C= SSD1 and D= SSD #2. If you find that say you felt 80 Gigs was fine for "C" (leaving 176 Gigs for D)., And later find, OPPS I want 180 Gigs for C ( leaving 76 Gigs for D), All you need to do is save "D" contents to HDD, delete D partition and Resize C partition, Then copy Ds contents back on to the new D.

Disclaimer - My reference to size is manuf size, Not the "true" formated Computer size.
Also don't forget that The Recommended MIN free space is 10%, However the Recommended free space is 15->20 Percent of the drive - Reducing the "avalaible" size still further. PS This is so that TRIM, CG, and wear leveling can work thier magic.
m
0
l
!