Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

SSD Recomendations


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 of 14 Patrick_S

Patrick_S

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,947 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 01 2000

Posted June 26 2013 - 11:09 PM

I would like to add an SSD to my desktop computer. My motherboard and the case have support for it so I figured why not try it and see how it goes.

 

Any comments and recommendations from those of you that are using an SSD as your boot drive would be greatly appreciated.



#2 of 14 Gerald LaFrance

Gerald LaFrance

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts
  • Join Date: May 28 2002
  • Real Name:Gerald LaFrance
  • LocationEarth

Posted June 27 2013 - 07:00 AM

Well I had bought an SSD a while back Great thing it does decrease the bootup time and Scan times like when using Antivirus or Antimalware.. IF you are a gamer it increases the speed of loaduptimes but does nothing to increase FPS perhaps only very little if any..

 

I had looked and with all the speeds it is good to get a FAST 4K Write Speed. here have a look at this guide:

 

 

http://thessdreview....acturers-bluff/

 

It explains the Proper points in making a decision about which drive to buy..


"IF the Facts don't Fit the Theory Change the Facts"    Albert Einstein

#3 of 14 mattCR

mattCR

    Advanced Member

  • 9,830 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 2005
  • Real Name:Matt
  • LocationOverland Park, KS

Posted June 27 2013 - 07:11 AM

The Samsung ssds are always solid.

trakt.tv

Ask Me about HTPC! (Threads in HTPC / PMs always responded to)

This signature is povided by MediaBrowser 3 Trakt Plugin: Media Browser 3


#4 of 14 Randy Ghost

Randy Ghost

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 28 1998

Posted June 27 2013 - 09:38 AM

The Samsung ssds are always solid.

+1 on the Samsungs.  They are the highest rated SSD's.  I have 2 Samsung 830 SSD's in my Asus ROG laptop.  My laptop boots up in 10 seconds.



#5 of 14 Patrick_S

Patrick_S

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,947 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 01 2000

Posted August 06 2013 - 12:15 PM

I would like to thank everyone for their replies, they were very helpful.



#6 of 14 Paul Thrussell

Paul Thrussell

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 19 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 22 2012
  • Real Name:Paul Thrussell
  • LocationEdmonton, AB, Canada

Posted August 06 2013 - 12:39 PM

Keep in mind with the Samsung SSDs that the regular and the pro models are totally different drives. The regular ones are quite inexpensive and decent for everyday purposes (certainly competitive in speed), but the type of flash memory that they use does not last for as many write cycles as more expensive drives (which will still give many years of operation for casual users whose systems are configured properly for SSD use.) The pro series are some of the fastest SSDs on the market, and they use a less dense form of flash that has more write cycles.



#7 of 14 EarleD

EarleD

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 732 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 27 2000

Posted August 12 2013 - 04:45 AM

Go with the Samsung 840 pro 256gb.  Great HD fast as hell.  Best upgrade to my laptop ever.  Got mine on Ebay for about $230


  • Patrick_S likes this

#8 of 14 ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 5,792 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted August 23 2013 - 07:08 PM

I'm thinking about the Samsung 840 Pro - 256GB as well, but wonder if it's really alright to use it for the swapfile, not just system and program installations.  Don't wanna have the system crash and burn after a few years w/ the swapfile located on the SSD, if that's an issue.

 

I should probably bump up system memory from 8GB to 16GB first though before bothering w/ an SSD -- Win8 seems like a hog eating 3-to-4GB memory just running IE10 w/ a handful tabs open...

 

Also wondering if it makes sense to add an SSD (and maybe WiFi card) to a 10-yo P4 2.8Ghz 3GB RAM XP machine -- maybe just a 128GB one for that. :P  The machine's still very useable for ordinary daily stuff and would likely benefit, especially if the swapfile's on the SSD, but not sure that makes sense when a new core i3 machine w/ much bigger HDD runs ~$400 -- not that I'd actually consider getting another new machine right now...

 

_Man_


Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things..." (St. Paul)

#9 of 14 ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 5,792 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted August 23 2013 - 07:14 PM

BTW, anyone here tried installing one of these SSDs on a laptop instead?  Would imagine a typical laptop benefits even more since it'd only have a 4500-5400rpm HDD (and maybe less RAM)...

 

Asking since I also have a spare, old (core 2 duo) laptop that we have for general, lite usage -- the battery's long dead though...  Might just give it to our 6-yo to use...  :P

 

_Man_


Edited by ManW_TheUncool, August 23 2013 - 07:18 PM.

Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things..." (St. Paul)

#10 of 14 Clinton McClure

Clinton McClure

    Casual Enthusiast

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,677 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 28 1999
  • Real Name:Clint
  • LocationCentral Arkansas

Posted August 24 2013 - 05:01 AM

I don't personally use SSDs but I don't really see much use of having a big swap file on one if you are running 8+GB of RAM (especially 16GB). I would think you could do like my MacBook Pro when I run Windows 7 in Bootcamp and set the swap file to 1024MB and forget about it. Basically everything I am doing runs from RAM anyway since I have 16GB installed. With that much RAM, you might even be able to completely disable the swap file and not worry with it. I have heard stories of PCs becoming unbootable after disabling the swap file, so you should do some research if you're looking at going that route. I know some older XP and NT 4.0 machines could run fine with no swap file, depending on the application of that particular computer.

#11 of 14 ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 5,792 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted August 24 2013 - 05:54 AM

Guess I'm just too used to seeing XP hit the swapfile before it probably needs to. I'd regularly see it using up say 1GB swapfile space when there's still at least 1GB available main memory on my 3GB RAM machine.

Maybe Win8 is better at that and won't start swapping when there's still say 2GB (out of 8-16) main memory available...

Not sure I really need that much faster startup and program launch times than I get now, but the big, single partition TB HDD hasn't started fragmenting yet nor reached the point where it's using slower parts of its storage. Guess I could also just get another smaller, fast HDD for the system+programs (and swap file) though not sure it's worth saving the $ for something substantially slower than SSD. Maybe I could just run the swapfile off on the 2ndary drive (ie. the current, big HDD), if it won't likely hit it much anyway though not sure that's allowed...

One other thing. Anyone know if 128GB would actually be enough for the system+programs for Win8? I don't generally burden my PC w/ tons of extraneous programs, and I'm sure 128GB would be plenty for my main drive in XP, but no idea about Win8. Seems like most everything may double in size at 64-bit on Win8 (though not everything is actually native 64-bit so far)...

_Man_

Sent via HTF mobile app


Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things..." (St. Paul)

#12 of 14 mattCR

mattCR

    Advanced Member

  • 9,830 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 05 2005
  • Real Name:Matt
  • LocationOverland Park, KS

Posted August 24 2013 - 06:01 AM

Win8 does do a much better job of managing the swap file and understands SSD natively so it does a better job with it.   In regards to the question of using it on a laptop, you get two benefits:  the first is obvious, speed.   But the second one is a very nice perk: better battery life.  Because SSD doesn't use moving components and uses less juice, an SSD pulls far less power.  Current SSDs pull about 2W.  Current mechanical laptop HDDs pull 6W-8W.  The difference isn't enough to add hours to your battery life, but it does give you some extra time :)


trakt.tv

Ask Me about HTPC! (Threads in HTPC / PMs always responded to)

This signature is povided by MediaBrowser 3 Trakt Plugin: Media Browser 3


#13 of 14 HDvision

HDvision

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 854 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 11 2007
  • Real Name:David
  • LocationPandora

Posted August 24 2013 - 10:25 AM

There are only two top choices: Samsung for performance, or Crucial for a slight lower performance but cheaper and bigger storage space.

 

Don't follow the reviews because they are made by geeks who will lament on a -12% speed decrease that you will never notice in your daily usage ever. So they basically dismiss a Crucial SSD just based on that it takes 1.5 seconds more to copy a file on them, or something as trivial as that.

 

If you want the geek version, get a Samsung 256. If you want the general user version, get a Crucial 500 for the same price, or even the 1tb. Personaly I went for the Crucial 500 and I'm not regretting it. 



#14 of 14 Clinton McClure

Clinton McClure

    Casual Enthusiast

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,677 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 28 1999
  • Real Name:Clint
  • LocationCentral Arkansas

Posted August 24 2013 - 11:39 AM

Expect Win8 to take 8-9GB by itself.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users