SSD - Another Noob Question

Good choice, the difference is huge, for everyday work. I have a high-end desktop without SSD, and a high-end laptop with SSD, the high-end laptop is so much faster for anything except gaming and heavy rendering and such.

It finally came in, I blame the snowpocalypse most of the country is in.

Cloned C: and stuck the SSD in alone to make sure everything was good and my initial thoughts are yes it is faster. Nothing overwhelming but I've yet to do more than boot, open up a few things and shut it all down a few times as I'm at work.

I used Samsungs clone tool and I was surprised it did it from within windows rather than a reboot straight to the tool. I guess I've been using my old bootable CD clone tool for to long and things have evolved. Everything seems to be working fine tho.

edit: And I noticed that this is my 666th post. I hope my laptop doesn't open up a portal or something as the post was about it.

Originally Posted by Toff
edit: And I noticed that this is my 666th post. I hope my laptop doesn't open up a portal or something as the post was about it.

Dunno about laptop, but I'd definetly blame it on the weather.

Instead of ssd Im planning to buy hybrid drive (sshd). They are normal drives that also contain ssd. According to some tests their performance was closer to real ssd than the normal one while offering much higher capacity for much smaller price.

I am not sure if things has changed, but before those sshd were more likely to break compared to normal HD.

I wouldn't do that zakhal. Because I was on limited budget I was thinking about that when putting together my new machine. So I did some research and found out that the hybrid drive would only have SSD-like performance with cached data, not everything. It'd be better on average than a regular hard drive for that cached data, but otherwise, it's just a hard drive.
There is also a fact that, as has GG pointed out, most of SSHDs have 3 years warranty while SSDs have 5 and 10 years ones.

The 850 EVO 1TB is still at $400 on Amazon.

Originally Posted by zahratustra
I wouldn't do that zakhal. Because I was on limited budget I was thinking about that when putting together my new machine. So I did some research and found out that the hybrid drive would only have SSD-like performance with cached data, not everything.

All i really need is windows to start faster (wife complains about that) and cache is propably enough for that.

In any other use the ssd drives are totally out of my price range. For windows I would need atleast 1Tt and for ps4 2Tt.

Just don't.

Originally Posted by zakhal
For windows I would need at least 1Tt and for ps4 2Tt

What? I have 256 gigs SSD which happily accommodates Windows AND 2 or 3 games I choose to play (with 132 gigs of free space left)! Rest of the stuff is stored on 1TB HDD.

Originally Posted by zahratustra
What? I have 256 gigs SSD which happily accommodates Windows AND 2 or 3 games I choose to play (with 132 gigs of free space left)! Rest of the stuff is stored on 1TB HDD.

I have three operating systems and space for one more in my current hard drive. Each has 250gb so that comes to 1Tt. And since the current drive is allready quite full I would never swap it for smaller drive.

Apart from that I have 6Tt of other drives for games etc. And those are mostly full too. I have some 330 games in steam alone.

Originally Posted by zahratustra
There is also a fact that, as has GG pointed out, most of SSHDs have 3 years warranty while SSDs have 5 and 10 years ones.

The last hd failure I had was in 2002 and after that I have bought 5 new hds. I dont see why sshd would break more often than hd. Atleast I havent seen any real info on that yet. Warranty alone is not enough imho.

1. Don't see why you need 250gb partitions for each OS - especially an OS that you might use once in a blue moon. I think I did just fine with Win7 on a 64gb SSD back in their early days.

2. 330 concurrently installed Steam games? Lol.


I think this thread is more about priorities than it is hardware. Get an SSD for your default OS, one or two standard platter drives for your other OS's, and then your Terabyte drive for various media

Originally Posted by zakhal
I dont see why sshd would break more often than hd. Atleast I havent seen any real info on that yet. Warranty alone is not enough imho.

I think the only problem may be with the maturity of the technology. There were a LOT of SSD failures in the earlier models, but this was down to manufacturing and design problems, rather than flaws in the fundamental tech. The current generation seems highly reliable. It's possible that these hybrid drives are also not mature yet, hence reports of high failure rates, but you're right - there's no good reason why they should fail more often.

By the way, I also keep my entire game collection permanently installed on my gaming PC. I started doing it because of my fondness for modding and tinkering with games, and didn't want to reinvent the wheel every time I reinstalled them. I call it 'game farming'.

I still have a 128gb vertex 2, known as the drive of death… As it happens, its sandforce 1200 controller is incompatible from haswell upwards. Meaning it's only detected 50% of the time at boot, need to reset a couple of times until it catches on. Still I coped with that but this morning it seemed to have died completely.

So yes I'm happy ssds have matured, though I still need to get one of those. I want 512gb for under 100 euro.

oof, a Sandforce controller… My first SSD was a corsair "force" based off of that… one of my worst computing experiences ever. Unpredictable now you see me, now you don't BSODs.

Stumbled upon this:
http://www.aliexpress.com/item/KingF…023850722.html

Just can't believe that price. I have Kingston SSD 240Gb already, but one more would be nice to have. Never heard of this manufacturer so am not sure, on the other hand this looks dirt cheap.
Dunno. Did anyone buy anything from this Kingfast? Is it okay manufacturer or stuff tend to "break"?

What are you talking about ? 108 dollar is 99 euro.

A crucial mx100 256gb is 92 euro around here.

It's only $120 for the 850 EVO. I'd spend just a few dollars more from a known manufacturer than whomever that is.

Originally Posted by ilm
What are you talking about ? 108 dollar is 99 euro.

A crucial mx100 256gb is 92 euro around here.

92? Where? In local stores over here that model is min 120€.
You're however right, Crucial is the cheapest SSD out there, just checked the wide seller that (apparently) ships to all EU countries unlike bloody Amazon:
http://www.computeruniverse.net/prod…-ssd-mx100.asp
It's 97€ there.
I've paid much more than this for my Kingston almost a year back so this price, both Crucial and this Kingfast, looks too good to be true.

Toff, 850 EVO 250 is 117€ in this shop, and I agree with you, better to pay a few bucks more than to have the gadget farted fast. That's why I asked for Kingfast if anyone heard about them before.

They did have hiccup 2 years ago (somebody supplied them with counterfeit memory) but, apparently they aren't doing too badly now
http://www.thessdreview.com/daily-ne…Speed=noscript
http://www.thessdreview.com/our-revi…he-real-thing/

Read the comments under the articles linked. They are more up to date