Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Reply to this thread

Solved Forum question

Started by buytick | | 13 answers
SSD as only storage?
Can I build a system where the SSD is my only storage? I have no need for more than 128gb.
If I find later I need more, I can always add a cheap HDD.
  • By posting on this site, I confirm I am over 13 years of age and agree to abide by the site’s rules.

a b G Storage
June 5, 2014 9:13:49 AM

Alright, and its worth it. But they're saying they need to test more longer to see how much it adds, and what affect after I think 12-16gb ram has on it. They say the 4gb vs I think 12gb is worth it but after that they're not sure on effects. But also disabling fetch prefetch, indexing, and other windows features that write need to be disabled as well as they're huge background data writing hogs.

But yes larger drive means better performance and endurance, as well as I'd say minimal 8gb ram if you want to get the most from your ssd. Your still talking like 5 years 128gb, 7-8 years 256gb, and 10+ years on 500+ GB models.
a b G Storage
June 5, 2014 8:14:43 AM

Dblkk said:
Suztera said:
Here what's i mean about the new technology advances in SSD in increasing endurance:
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/183162-new-method-...

I will agree with adding more ram helps the endurance of the SSD but the gains still need to be tested.


"Having more ram doesn't affect your SSD's lifespan at all." quotes from your own post.

And new technology advances have always been there, on a more expensive normally enterprise level. Samsungs 3bit per layer TLC NAND originally was horrible, and with better controllers and better flash now used, its not as bad. But there is and always has been factual concrete links (from the very beginning to enterprise level now) that larger ssd provide best performance, and longest endourance vs smaller identical drives. Which is again, totally opposite what you posted earlier.


It means i changed my mind on the idea of increasing ram but it still need to be tested to be worth it or not.
a b G Storage
June 5, 2014 8:11:59 AM

Suztera said:
Here what's i mean about the new technology advances in SSD in increasing endurance:
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/183162-new-method-...

I will agree with adding more ram helps the endurance of the SSD but the gains still need to be tested.


"Having more ram doesn't affect your SSD's lifespan at all." quotes from your own post.

And new technology advances have always been there, on a more expensive normally enterprise level. Samsungs 3bit per layer TLC NAND originally was horrible, and with better controllers and better flash now used, its not as bad. But there is and always has been factual concrete links (from the very beginning to enterprise level now) that larger ssd provide best performance, and longest endourance vs smaller identical drives. Which is again, totally opposite what you posted earlier.
a b G Storage
June 5, 2014 8:08:47 AM

Suztera said:
Link to SSD degradation: http://www.anandtech.com/show/2738/8
You have to read all the pages of the article to understand why TRIM is so important in SSD.


I totally understand trim, know why it must be used, know why ssd's aren't as good if theyre not the OS drive (why my second and third 1tb Samsung evo drives read write around 300-350mbps), and know that after the first round of writing on the ssd that things slow down, and the impact of better controllers(another reason samsungs included Samsung magician software lets you use ssd space for added control use space).

How does any of that really involve ssd size not mattering or ram not mattering?
The larger the drive, the more bytes you have to use before your rewriting vs writing, the larger the setaside for controller can be, 10% is Samsung default so 10% 128gb is 12gb while 10% 1tb is 100gb. Would also make sense that using more ram to cache smaller files and keep from writing to your ssd would make things degrade slower and increase performance since your not rewriting stupid temp files onto your ssd vs your ram which for most part is to fast for you to notice a write/rewrite cycle vs just a write.
a b G Storage
June 5, 2014 7:52:42 AM

But I did hear the other day that the grass was 'green'? And sky was 'blue'?

Could you post links to these known facts? But don't use facts or links that are from any area other than where I live as, even though irrelevant, its just not specific enough for me to believe.
a b G Storage
June 5, 2014 7:45:56 AM

Suztera said:
Second link is been tested on Samsung PM810 SSD. They are still different from 840 EVO. SO ram test on the SSD is invalid since technology has advanced. Also in the 2nd link, there is no mention of what was the 4GB ram model, ram speed etc
Also rendering obvious creating lots of writes. For casual usage or gaming, it is not a big deal.
But please pm me more links. I am interested in your points if they are true.


quote from quoted article

"At the same time, each write that doesn't go from RAM to the SSD helps improve responsiveness, even if it doesn't reflect directly in our benchmark numbers (those tests are quite definitely CPU-bound, so they scale most significantly as we throw more processing performance at them). Still, Windows doesn’t have to move as much data to the SSD. Swapping or paging to an SSD, while faster than writing to mechanical storage, is a relatively slow operation. Clearly, this is something we'll have to take into consideration when we're making upgrade recommendations. At the end of the day, we can't always let ourselves get hung up on what our CPU-bound productivity and GPU-bound gaming metrics tell us.


Of course, the numbers we generated today are specific to the drive and modules used on our test bench, and we'll need to do more testing to see if they apply just as relevantly to other memory kits (we don't see any reason why they wouldn't) or SSDs (the same logic would seem to apply there as well). But we were interested to see that adding memory cut back on the writes so many enthusiasts worry about when it comes to SSD endurance. With RAM prices at near-historic lows, we thought it might be a good time to consider an upgrade."

It doesn't matter what ssd drive is used. How does a Samsung vs intel vs ocz matter, the test showed that more ram led to computer using ram to write temp files, not the ssd. It doesn't matter at all what brand or model. Also doesn't matter what ram speed, faster ram has no effect on the ram is being used vs the ssd being used. it could be ddr1 or ddr3 or even ddr4, its still getting used vs the ssd.

If you want links, go to www.google.com , type in the question, and they will provide hundred for you to read!
a b G Storage
June 5, 2014 7:39:33 AM

Second link is been tested on Samsung PM810 SSD. They are still different from 840 EVO. SO ram test on the SSD is invalid since technology has advanced. Also in the 2nd link, there is no mention of what was the 4GB ram model, ram speed etc
Also rendering obvious creating lots of writes. For casual usage or gaming, it is not a big deal.
But please pm me more links. I am interested in your points if they are true.
a b G Storage
June 5, 2014 7:30:32 AM

Suztera said:
Dblkk said:
I'd recommend a 256gb, you can get the very well rated Samsung 840 evo 256gb for like $120 right now, just cheap.

You have to remember that windows itself eats up a large chunk of space.

With ssd, the smaller you get the slower they are, the faster you use their life. SSD have so many write cycles. The smaller the drive, the less time it takes to write over and over in a specific block. If you only need a 128 but get a 256, you could easily double the life of the ssd. Having more ram in your computer also increases life of the ssd, but in most cases 8gb is the standard for pc's now and is more than enough to help with the ssd.


That is wrong. The smaller you get, the same speed you get until you actually fill 90% of the SSD.Then the speed falls. SSD has a longer lifespan than a hard drive. Having more ram doesn't affect your SSD's lifespan at all.
Windows roughly take 25GB of your storage.



I'm 100% right, heres a quick tops article/bench that proves me 100% right
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-840-evo-rev...

I can provide probably a hundred more that also say the same thing. Plus if you look up actual benches, instead of using Samsungs word for it, you'll also see that the smaller drives rarely hit Samsung claimed marks while larger drives actually surpassed them. As well, when you use samsungs included drive magician software, you use system ram to cache and extremely speed up your ssd, the more ram you can use for this, the faster it gets. My 1tb Samsung evo using ready cache is getting over 900mbps read, 1000mbps write. Take off cache and I get 450/500's.

As for more ram, yes, again I am 100% right. More ram means the computer can utilize more ram to write quick cached data instead of using the ssd. Therefor less writes to ssd.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-ram-endurance,3...

again another toms article proving this. If you want I can provide probably 50 more articles that explain the say thing.

See all answers