Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What size SSD?

Last response: in Systems
Share
November 7, 2011 11:49:42 AM

Hi
I was thinking of buying an SSD to run Windows 7 and maybe CAD or BF3 on. What size is needed for the OS and how much bigger does it need to be to run a few other programs off of?
Thanks

More about : size ssd

November 7, 2011 12:38:10 PM

Crucial M4 64Gb is enough, but i would recommend a 128Gb for some headroom.

Win7 64-Bit will take up roughly 40Gb after all updates and patches

BF3 i believe is around 10Gb

CAD has roughly 13Gb of room to use.

I would recommend the 128Gb version


The reason i recommend the Crucial M4, as it has many competitors, is that it freely states synchronous storage writing, which you can google compared to asynchronous. This is a huge benefit, and worth the extra $20 you will spend for the size range.
November 7, 2011 12:56:45 PM

I agree with casualbuilder. You want no less than 64GB. 64GB will be enough for Windows 7, Applications and programs but not many games, maybe one or two smaller games. Idealy you want 128GB for headroom especially if you want to put games on.

I would also recomend the Crucial M4.
Related resources
November 7, 2011 12:59:43 PM

casualbuilder said:

Win7 64-Bit will take up roughly 40Gb after all updates and patches


You sure? mine only takes up 15GB. I understand it will be more for some people but 40GB seems a little high.
November 7, 2011 2:45:40 PM

@ Gathems finest.. yes a fresh install is only about 15GB, but after about a year's worth of working, you drive will fill up very quickly.

I too recommend a 128GB. My current build has corsair 128GB SDD paired with 2x 1TB drives for storage. Keep in mind steam games must be placed on a second drive. You will fill up your SSD very quickly if you place steam on it.

For stand alone BF3, i see no problem putting it on your SSD. Works great btw.

Edit:

Be sure to turn off Hibernate and if you have 4+ GB of RAM, get rid of the Pagefile.

If you need help finding lost space on your SSD, check out spacesniffer

http://www.uderzo.it/main_products/space_sniffer/

a b $ Windows 7
November 7, 2011 2:45:41 PM

On my 120gb ssd, I use 84gb which includes w7-64 with all updates, some photos, about 8 games, including FSX which is quite large.
I have made no attempt to reduce usage yet.

On my laptop, w7-32 bit took about 14gb of a 40gb ssd, including e-mail and mse security essentials.

With prices coming down, I think 60-80gb would be about the minimum, particularly if you have a hard drive to which you can offload large files or apps.

Today, I think Intel, and perhaps Samsung will be the most reliable units to buy:
http://www.behardware.com/articles/831-7/components-ret...
November 7, 2011 3:07:02 PM

With Win 7 Pro 64, all updates, adobe reader, flash, firefox, etc and norton internet security, my system ssd uses 24gb.

The 64gb ssds are plenty for a system drive. Even the 40gbs work (but the price diff makes you want to just get a 64) But if you want to use it for games too then get something much bigger.
November 7, 2011 7:07:46 PM

Thanks, your recommendations were very helpful.
November 7, 2011 7:20:33 PM

when i was looking over ssd, i couldnt help but notice the 120gb drives performed a lot better than the 64gb drives. the 64s were lacking tbh. could be different with crucial m4s, i honestly dont know. i can tell you though, games are taking up 10 gigs plus a piece now adays. i fill my 120 no problem, with only my current crop of games installed. i would say 120
a b $ Windows 7
November 7, 2011 8:07:26 PM


You may read about glowing benchmarks for the newest SSD's.
The sequential benchmarks drive the SSD to it's maximum with programs that issue I/O operations
at a much faster rate than an application can, and does so at high queue levels. 6gb sata looks great.
But, a normal desktop user rarely does anything remotely like that.

The second type of benchmark measures maximum IOPS which will be done at high queue levels again. Think >30.
That is also not what we do. The OS does mostly small random I/O, and at smallish queue lengths.
It is the response time that matters most.

It turns out that at low queue lengths, Most SSD's have the same response time, and they are very low.
That is exactly what you want from a SSD, particularly for the OS.

So, what does this mean when buying a SSD?
---------------Bottom line-----------

Get the capacity you need at the lowest cost per gb

Among equals, I would favor Intel or Samsung for reliability.
November 7, 2011 8:10:29 PM

I bought 2 Seagate Barracuda 1 tb hdd last week and I am going to set them up with RAID. I have no budget at the moment because I just bought everything for a new computer. If I wanted to buy an SSD in a month or so, would I be able to uninstall win7 from the hdds and reinstall it on the SSD without issue or would this cause all sorts of unspeakable problems?
November 7, 2011 8:11:03 PM

geofelt said:
Get the capacity you need at the lowest cost per gb


Well this goes without saying, this is common sense.
November 7, 2011 8:12:38 PM

roblaw42 said:
I bought 2 Seagate Barracuda 1 tb hdd last week and I am going to set them up with RAID. I have no budget at the moment because I just bought everything for a new computer. If I wanted to buy an SSD in a month or so, would I be able to uninstall win7 from the hdds and reinstall it on the SSD without issue or would this cause all sorts of unspeakable problems?


No its doable.
a b $ Windows 7
November 7, 2011 9:53:24 PM

roblaw42 said:
I bought 2 Seagate Barracuda 1 tb hdd last week and I am going to set them up with RAID. I have no budget at the moment because I just bought everything for a new computer. If I wanted to buy an SSD in a month or so, would I be able to uninstall win7 from the hdds and reinstall it on the SSD without issue or would this cause all sorts of unspeakable problems?


I don't know that you can easily "uninstall" windows without fully clearing out the whole drive/partition.

I suggest you install windows 7 only on one of the hard drives.
You will then be able to clone the os to the ssd and then wipe out the old windows in favor of something else.

What do you wish to accomplish with raid? Are you looking at raid-0 or raid-1? As a rule, neither is a great option.
November 7, 2011 9:58:59 PM

raid-1
a b $ Windows 7
November 7, 2011 10:02:54 PM

roblaw42 said:
raid-1


The value of raid-1 and it's variants like raid-5 is that you can recover from a drive failure quickly. It is for servers that can not tolerate any interruption.
Modern hard drives have a advertised mean time to failure on the order of 500,000+ hours. That is something like 50 years.
With raid-1 you are protecting yourself from specifically a hard drive failure. Not from other failures such as viruses, operator error,
malware, fire, theft, etc.
For that, you need external backup. If you have external backup, you do not need raid-1
November 9, 2011 8:05:10 AM

i cant suggest raiding ssds yet. you lose your trim
!