Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Best Use Of 2 SSD's

Last response: in Systems
Share
March 7, 2012 5:25:43 PM

Well I decidied to buy the Crucial M4 - 128 Gig SSD after all.

So my drive arsenal is as folows:

1 - Crucial M4 - 64 Gig SSD

1 - Crucial M4 - 128 Gig SSD

1 - Western Digital 1 TB HDD Black Caviar
*Divided into 2 Volumes
- Both With Windows 7 - 64 Bit Installed
- DAW#2 & Related Programs & Plugins Installed on one of the Volumes

1 - Western Digital 1 TB USB 3 External Drive
*Divided into 3 Volumes for Storage

I was planning on installing XP SP2 (x86) on the 64 Gig SSD & my other DAW#1 on the new 128 Gig SSD, but I'm open to ideas.

Especially now that it has been brought to my attention about Intel's SRT, & caching.

So if I may ask, what would be the best use of my 4 drives?

Particularily the 64 G & the 128 G SSD's. (I've pretty much settled on the 1TB USB 3 for storage & archived files.)

Would it be better to install DAW #1 on the 128 SSD, or on the 1 TB HDD, and use the SSD for SRT / Caching ?

Thanks,

Jim

More about : ssd

a b B Homebuilt system
March 7, 2012 5:50:08 PM

my mind seems to recall that windows only supports a boot drive up to a certain size. this makes me want to say to use the smaller one as your primary boot.
m
0
l
a c 78 B Homebuilt system
March 7, 2012 6:06:53 PM

I am pretty sure that it is MBR that only supports up to 2 TB drives and you have to have GPT to read a 3TB drive or have the 3TB drive in an external device with a special chip in it to get NTFS to be able to read it.

That being said, I would be tempted to put the OS on the 64 GB, applications on the 128 GB, and data on the 1TBs if it were me.
m
0
l
Related resources
March 11, 2012 6:24:07 AM

So my new 128 G Crucial M4 - SSD just arrived.

So based on the advice above, I already have Windows 7 installed on the smaller 64 G Crucial M4 - SSD.

I built this rig exclusively to be for my 2 DAW's - [Digital Audio Workstations, namely Cakewalk's Sonar X1 & Presonus' Studio One.]

No internet access whatsoever. No unnecessary stuff either.

So I'm torn between installing Windows 7 on the new 128 G SSD plus 1 or both of the DAWs and their related 3rd party programs, [VSTs] - or just the 2 DAWs on the 128 G SSD and use the Windows 7 already installed on the first smaller 64 G SSD.

I'm really new to using SSD's and have never considered having the OS on one Drive & programs etc. on other Drives.

Any thoughts or ideas?

Any precautions?

I have read some of the sticky's about SSD's and will read more.

Thanks,

Jim
m
0
l
a b B Homebuilt system
March 11, 2012 8:15:20 AM

2537730,4,976180 said:
So I'm torn between installing Windows 7 on the new 128 G SSD plus 1 or both of the DAWs and their related 3rd party programs, [VSTs] - or just the 2 DAWs on the 128 G SSD and use the Windows 7 already installed on the first smaller 64 G SSD.I have read some of the sticky's about SSD's and will read more.quotemsg]

If it were my setup I'd put Windows 7 on the 64gb ssd alone. This will make for a quick easy reinstall of the OS if you ever develop a problem with it (without effecting any of your other programs).

I'd use the 128gb ssd for my main application installs.

I'd use the TB's as data storage/backup only.

If you haven't done so yet check out this link:
http://www.intel.com/p/en_US/support/highlights/chpsts/...

I'd wager we're all kind of new to this ssd thing. :D 
Good Luck in your choices.
m
0
l
a b B Homebuilt system
March 11, 2012 9:18:32 AM

I say you should put a ruler between the two ssd's on a desk and force ants to walk the Bridge of Doom'
its a plan.....
:p 
Moto
m
0
l
a c 78 B Homebuilt system
March 11, 2012 5:12:01 PM

Chaz21 said:
(without effecting any of your other programs)..


I just wanted to point out that the registry will still be housed on C and will still be blown away during a reinstall.

That could affect the operation of programs that were installed on other drives. The OP wouldn't be 100% safe from having to reinstall programs on other drives after a reinstall of Windows.

That being said, this is a risk to be managed not avoided.
m
0
l
a b B Homebuilt system
March 11, 2012 9:49:42 PM

Raiddinn said:
I just wanted to point out that the registry will still be housed on C and will still be blown away during a reinstall.

That could affect the operation of programs that were installed on other drives. The OP wouldn't be 100% safe from having to reinstall programs on other drives after a reinstall of Windows.

That being said, this is a risk to be managed not avoided.

True. The vital stuff though-the accumulated data-would be safe. And periodically backing up the registry would ease the pain so to speak. :) 
m
0
l
March 11, 2012 11:42:23 PM

Raiddinn said:
I just wanted to point out that the registry will still be housed on C and will still be blown away during a reinstall.

That could affect the operation of programs that were installed on other drives. The OP wouldn't be 100% safe from having to reinstall programs on other drives after a reinstall of Windows.

That being said, this is a risk to be managed not avoided.

What about a Disk Image BackUp as soon as I'm content with the install on C:.

Wouldn't that lesson or even iliminate the risk of the registry being 'out of wack' if a reinstall was needed?

Jim - OP
m
0
l
a c 78 B Homebuilt system
March 12, 2012 12:20:36 AM

It should theoretically be fine.

Don't get me wrong, I am all over Norton Ghost for the enterprise environment when you have 100 PCs and you want to have the exact same configuration on all of them. Accept no substitute.

On a micro level, though, I am not such a big fan of putting trust in disk images. Certainly it is good to have one, but I definitely wouldn't get rid of my CDs once you get the image stored.

I agree the data is the #1 most important thing and that should be fine on the 3TB data drive.

If my computer crashed, though, I would take it as a good opportunity to reload the OS and clean out all the stuff that built up since the last time I formatted C. If you just restore from an image whatever negative stuff was in the image will continue to be brought forward with you.

Stuff like a bloated registry from all the entries that weren't deleted right during program installs/reinstalls/uninstalls/etc. Malware you don't realize you have as well.
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 1:38:06 AM

Well, I typically do my back ups and disk images along the way as I go through successful install points.

So, even though it may use up alot of disks, they are fairly clean stages to back to, if needed.

As far as storage goes, I have the WD 1 TB HDD, another WD 1 TB USB 3 External drive and lots of USB flashes to 'remove my data files right out of the system' in the event of a crash or problem.
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 2:09:21 AM

Personally I would use the 128GB for the main, and install apps to the 1TB. Use the 64GB as your swapfile drive and other misc stuff that you want to access quickly. Windows 7 of course. Done.
m
0
l
March 12, 2012 2:18:31 AM

mickey21 said:
Personally I would use the 128GB for the main, and install apps to the 1TB. Use the 64GB as your swapfile drive and other misc stuff that you want to access quickly. Windows 7 of course. Done.

Since this is different advice from others, would you care to expand on why you would go this route instead of the other ways?

I'm wide open to all ideas at this point.
m
0
l
a b B Homebuilt system
March 12, 2012 8:59:20 AM

Raiddinn said:
Stuff like a bloated registry from all the entries that weren't deleted right during program installs/reinstalls/uninstalls/etc.
That's why you use CCleaner.
Raiddinn said:
Malware you don't realize you have as well.

No internet should limit the Malware exposure. :) 
m
0
l
a b B Homebuilt system
March 12, 2012 9:08:00 AM

mickey21 said:
Personally I would use the 128GB for the main, and install apps to the 1TB. Use the 64GB as your swapfile drive and other misc stuff that you want to access quickly. Windows 7 of course. Done.

I'd like this explained also. What is the advantage?
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 78 B Homebuilt system
March 12, 2012 1:45:26 PM

There is nothing wrong with going that route, per se. It will still work.

I don't think it has very many advantages, though.

The way I explained it, the swap file would automatically be created on the 64GB one. Windows would be on there taking up maybe 20 or 25 gigs and that would leave 40 more for the swap file and anything you can't get to install right on the 128 for whatever reason.

That would leave the whole 128GB for programs.

If you went with the other way that was mentioned, you would have Windows taking up 20 or 25 GBs out of the 128 leaving 100ish for programs. The swap file would be on the 64GB taking up maybe 8 or 12GBs of it with the remaining wasted.

It just depends on where you want to waste the space. If you waste the space on the boot drive you have more space on the programs drive.

The swap file isn't such a big deal it needs its own drive. Technically, it does work better to have it on a different drive than your OS and if we were talking having both your OS and your swap file on a 5900 RPM regular drive, yes you could see a large performance increase by putting it on a different drive, but these are SSDs we are talking about here.

SSD speeds what they are, you would have a tough time telling the difference between the swap file on the primary or a secondary drive.

Chaz21 said:
No internet should limit the Malware exposure. :) 


You would be surprised. There were some ultra hackers that took down the Iran nuclear reactors which weren't connected to the internet in any way shape or form. Obviously, you aren't likely to draw attention from these people, but you would be surprised how often malware gets onto computers not connected to the internet.

It takes a human error for this to happen, and maybe you wouldn't make any, but just to say its not connected so you are safe is not at all true.
Share
a b B Homebuilt system
March 12, 2012 2:04:04 PM

Raiddinn said:
It just depends on where you want to waste the space. If you waste the space on the boot drive you have more space on the programs drive.

My point exactly. :) 


Raiddinn said:
You would be surprised. There were some ultra hackers that took down the Iran nuclear reactors which weren't connected to the internet in any way shape or form. Obviously, you aren't likely to draw attention from these people, but you would be surprised how often malware gets onto computers not connected to the internet.

It takes a human error for this to happen, and maybe you wouldn't make any, but just to say its not connected so you are safe is not at all true.


If his app's are only going to be the DAW'S and related programs as he stated (and he somehow manages to not piss-off the Mossad )I think he'll be fine. :D 
m
0
l
a b B Homebuilt system
March 12, 2012 7:03:33 PM

**but you would be surprised how often malware gets onto computers not connected to the internet.
It takes a human error for this to happen, and maybe you wouldn't make any, but just to say its not connected so you are safe is not at all true. **

it takes a flashdrive and 20 seconds, as most of us know :p 
So tempting some days to fry work's network hehe
Moto

m
0
l
March 19, 2012 10:05:31 PM

Best answer selected by jimusic.
m
0
l
!