Solved

Is ssd a need for modern systems

for a rig like intel i5 2500k,asrock p67 pro3,nvidia gtx 570 ,1Tb seagate 7200rpm ,corsair 650tx and antec300 cabinet..what is the main use of ssd if i get a 40gb intel ssd and use it for os what will be the difference between a harddrive and ssd
17 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about modern systems
  1. Boot up and shut down times and the loading speeds of any programs installed on it will be the only difference.
  2. An SSD is a nice thing to have, but not a "need". And if you get one, I'd say 60GB is more or less the minimum.

    Oh, and drop the GTX570 and get an HD6970 2GB. Better value for money better performance, as well as longer lasting with the bigger available memory, even if the bus is a bit thin for the amount.
  3. Yes the real difference for an SSD is the quicker boot times and access time for any applications loaded onto it, but there is another thing that the SSD that is very nice and that is it runs silently. Only after you have had a SSD do you realize how much noise was coming from HDD. For a boot drive I generally advise that an 80GB is the smallest that you really want to go.

    Christian Wood
    Intel Enthusiast Team
  4. ok if i buy a intel 80gig ssd for my only c drive which is only for windows and installing programs..does it increase the performance of games if i install it in another hard drive like e or f in my hdd which is 500gb 3gbps
  5. No, it wouldn't. At 80GB you have enough room for the OS and your most commonly used software. So you can put Windows 7 Pro, Microsoft Office and a couple games without a problem. That is what I have on my Intel® SSD 320 80GB drive.

    Christian Wood
    Intel Enthusiast Team
  6. Best answer
    Perhaps this experience will give you your answer. I set up my son's box by installing Win 7 to a 2TB Seagate Barracuda XT. Two days later the new generation 550 MBps SSD's arrived on shelves and the following weekend we installed the SSD. The original OS install to the HD was left in place on a 128 GB partition. The data cable to the HD was unplugged during the install to the SSD and now he can boot to either the SSD or the HD via the BIOS.

    Boot time off HD = 21.2 seconds
    Boot time off SSD = 15.6 seconds

    At a cost of $300 and 1 boot (5.6 seconds saved) per day, you save yaself a little over a half hour per year in boot time.

    MMO Load time off HD = 45.1 seconds (average over 5 tries)
    MMO Load time off SSD = 45.3 seconds (average over 5 tries)

    As for the MMO test, I think the load time were constrained by other than storage and the difference was only a statistical aberration.

    And yes, it does increase the speed of programs and applications installed on the HD to some extent as long as the tmp file and page file location is on the SSD.....data loaded off the HD or stored in memory will swap faster on the SSD than on the HD so everything that uses swap and tmp files will see some improvement.
  7. I agree with everyone here... I have an Intel 510 series and it boots instantly once Windows is done with it's splash screen - and I mean instant! I have tons of start-up apps too so this says a lot. It also shuts down notably quicker. As far as games? No. I've tested it and other than the game itself launching quicker there is no difference. Guaranteed you will not get improved frames. Games typically take what they need from disk and put that data onto RAM so that knocks drives out of the equation.

    All of my games, music, pictures and videos on my mechanical drives(because their space hogs), and my most used apps onto the SSD. Honestly, SSD's are great for the OS. I'll never again put an OS onto a mechanical drive.

    Be careful of SSD's that you decide to go with... pure numbers of speed mean nothing if the particular drive is known to fail (like OCZ and it's SandForce controller)... The drives I only consider are Intel and Crucial. Both have good customer support although Intel's is a little too formal.
  8. Some points:

    1) I noticed a big difference when temporarily downgrading to my Velociraptor 10K drive from an OCZ Vertex 3. Start times and program opening times were slower. I was quite surprised at the overall difference. So a good SSD will make a big difference.

    2) 60GB was too small after Windows applies Updates, System backups etc. I recommend 120GB.

    3) The best deal I saw was the 120GB OCZ Agility 3, at NCIX on sale.

    4) Even if someone only had SATA2 and not SATA3 on the motherboard, I would still recommend the newer SSD's like the Vertex 3 or Agility 3 from OCZ. Most of the file transfers involve smaller files which transfer slower than the 300MB/second cap of SATA2. I even compared a Vertex 2 to a Vertex 3 when installed in a laptop that had only SATA1 (max 150MB/second). The Vertex 3 was STILL noticeably faster!

    5) I have my system setup like this:

    Drive 1:
    120GB OCZ Vertex 3 (Windows 7 and programs)

    Drive 2:
    2TB hard drive (*Games, backup images, downloads and Multimedia files)

    *You'll have to choose the manual method when installing games. I first created the folder "GAMES" on my 2TB drive, then I install games to that.

    I also added the folder "STEAM" on my 2TB drive which I setup Steam to use. That's all automatic once it's setup.
  9. photonboy said:
    Some points:

    1) I noticed a big difference when temporarily downgrading to my Velociraptor 10K drive from an OCZ Vertex 3. Start times and program opening times were slower. I was quite surprised at the overall difference. So a good SSD will make a big difference.

    2) 60GB was too small after Windows applies Updates, System backups etc. I recommend 120GB.

    3) The best deal I saw was the 120GB OCZ Agility 3, at NCIX on sale.

    4) Even if someone only had SATA2 and not SATA3 on the motherboard, I would still recommend the newer SSD's like the Vertex 3 or Agility 3 from OCZ. Most of the file transfers involve smaller files which transfer slower than the 300MB/second cap of SATA2. I even compared a Vertex 2 to a Vertex 3 when installed in a laptop that had only SATA1 (max 150MB/second). The Vertex 3 was STILL noticeably faster!

    5) I have my system setup like this:

    Drive 1:
    120GB OCZ Vertex 3 (Windows 7 and programs)

    Drive 2:
    2TB hard drive (*Games, backup images, downloads and Multimedia files)

    *You'll have to choose the manual method when installing games. I first created the folder "GAMES" on my 2TB drive, then I install games to that.

    I also added the folder "STEAM" on my 2TB drive which I setup Steam to use. That's all automatic once it's setup.



    My setup is nearly identical to this setup, as close even to the "steam" folder... I even have "Amazon Games and software downloader" on the mechanical drive. The only one I have an issue with is "Games for Windows Marketplace". For some reason even if I set it to install to D: it installs to C:(?) Microsoft products want to hog C: for some reason. But this is a non-issue, I then just manually move the game folder to the D: directory and then delete the folder in C:... just the unecessary writes to the SSD that pisses me off.
  10. simon12 said:
    Boot up and shut down times and the loading speeds of any programs installed on it will be the only difference.


    You are acting as if its not a big difference...

    Everything works smoother, faster, snappier. It makes the computer feel 10x more powerful then it really is.

    Almost anybody with an SSD upgrading from a regular HDD will say its a totally new experience.
  11. blackhawk1928 said:
    You are acting as if its not a big difference...

    Everything works smoother, faster, snappier. It makes the computer feel 10x more powerful then it really is.

    Almost anybody with an SSD upgrading from a regular HDD will say its a totally new experience.


    You're right, there is a difference and it's for the good. I'd recommend to anyone getting a ssd. If I could afford one giant drive I'd give the mechanical drives to charity. Lol

    What's really special is when you have to shut down and restart the comp. After applying changes. Very fast when the ssd is installed correctly and optimized. The only thing I stress to warn is getting quality. Just because a company advertises top speeds doesn't necessarily mean they're worth it.

    All in all, they're great...
  12. photonboy said:
    ...

    2) 60GB was too small after Windows applies Updates, System backups etc. I recommend 120GB.


    ...


    60GB is fine.

    Every time you do an update or install an application or driver, Windows creates a restore point. Windows also creates system checkpoints, and there may be 'shadow copies' of system files in addition to boat-loads (high-tech term) of temporary files and Internet cache.

    In a months time these files can 'bulge' to 25-30GB. Running Disk Cleanup and eliminating all but the most recent Restore/Check Points on a timely basis frees that space up on an OS SSD.

    And a system backup should never be saved on the disk you are backing up --- that's crazy talk.
  13. vishalaestro said:
    ok if i buy a intel 80gig ssd for my only c drive which is only for windows and installing programs..does it increase the performance of games if i install it in another hard drive like e or f in my hdd which is 500gb 3gbps


    It will boost the performance of the game if it hits the page file on a significant basis, simply because R/Ws off the SSD are much faster.

    Your games will boot a bit faster, but not as quickly as if they were installed completely on the SSD. It is still important to partition mechanical HDDs for speed while committing slower partitions for data storage, critical backups and OS/App drive clones.
  14. Wisecracker said:


    Every time you do an update or install an application or driver, Windows creates a restore point. Windows also creates system checkpoints, and there may be 'shadow copies' of system files in addition to boat-loads (high-tech term) of temporary files and Internet cache.


    Even if you have System Restore disabled?? I have no need for it and it slows my HD down (in its VM that is. Don't laugh my WEI scores in my VMs beat many actual hardware based scores). Disabling System Restore is one of the first things I always do on MY personal setups.
  15. halcyon said:
    Even if you have System Restore disabled?? I have no need for it and it slows my HD down (in its VM that is. Don't laugh my WEI scores in my VMs beat many actual hardware based scores). Disabling System Restore is one of the first things I always do on MY personal setups.


    I think you probably need to run Disk Cleanup to clean out the other stuff, but yeah, disabling Sys Restore saves that other stuff from piling up. I generally back up my logs then let 'er rip -- nothing is safe from my wrath.

    I used to turn it on and off - create a single clean restore point when I made some significant changes - but then I decided to simply leave it on and committed myself to the Disk Cleanups. I change stuff around more often than some folks change their drawers :D For some reason I like to keep a single 'clean' restore point with everything optimized in case I need to go 'Last Known Good Configuration'. I'm assuming that is why it's there but I can't say it with 100% certainty. Over the years it has saved my bacon a few times.

    Interesting it slows your VMs down -- good to know and something to look out for ...
  16. Best answer selected by vishalaestro.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs SSD Systems