Went back to using HDD from SSD.

[Mclairs83]

inb4 thread lock. Everyone will have different storage needs, and hence different solutions that work for them. This is a fact that will never change, why can't people just recognise this instead of trying to tell others what they should do? I don't agree with the OP but this thread is going OT.

well. to be honest, especially coming from AS1 where he used to help ppl build computer.

he tells people. hey, use HDD la. when u in windows, applications all run at the same speed. just only boot up faster.

seems like he suffer from some memory loss which i'm shocked.

 

[Mclairs83]

What... There's no reason why one cannot store huge amounts of data on his own primary drive? Like that all ssds should be capped at 120gb and a hard drives must be in a nas...

I myself have 2 ssds, 3 hdds and another 3 hdds in an NAS.

well, to rephrase. if you have little space in ur SSD or can't afford a big one, get a mechanical HDD and store all ur data there.

 

[yosemi]

The only main difference is boot up and shut down time in my opinion. Once inside windows, cant really feel any real world difference even when doing video rendering or real time photo editing work.

So now with 4TB of space as well as another 4TB as scratch drive, what is space constraint.

also the hdd clicking sound when loading..

 

[Rock-kun]

there is such thing called external drive. just in case you can't think at that moment.

Only a completr moron will compile source code over USB.

 

[Mclairs83]

Only a completr moron will compile source code over USB.

Still don't get it? Nvm. I give up. I think a complete moron suits u better.

Sent from OnePlus ONEPLUS A3000 using GAGT

 

[watzup_ken]

Chill folks. I think everyone is entitled to have their own opinion. No need to get hard up over this man. The thread don't change my mind about SSD. At the end of the day, it really boils down to individual's preference and needs. AS1 may need more storage and not looking at speed. Nothing wrong with that if it is within his expectations.

 

[ragnarok95]

well no problem.

i do as well. got 500gb and 960gb to play around with. SSD nowadays are affordable. unlike the times where i bought my first SSD Intel X25M 80gb at $375.

people still say i'm crazy.

Yap. Just store. Yolo la.

 

[jnashville]

Ssd confirm plus chop wins hdd hands down be it for gaming or business use.

Business usage esp doing Outlook where indexing happens alot... my customers using HDD complains on the sluggish performance..switch to ssd, so much faster.

 

[hawthorne]

Ssd confirm plus chop wins hdd hands down be it for gaming or business use.

I used to install my Steam games on SSD. Recently moved them to all to HDD. Really can see the difference. on SSD, when moving from stage to stage (or points where the game needs to load from disk), SSD is almost instantaneous. For HDD, u can really see the loading bar and really need to wait and wait.

It becomes very irritating when u jumping ard from areas and u need to load this and load that.

 

[FroztSpectre]

My World of Warcraft loading screen went from 3minutes to under 15secs with SSD lol.

Made so much of a difference that i decided to get a 750GB SSD for my other games too.

 

[trento]

Yes use at home not much difference. Ssd more for mobile use cos it doesn't have moving parts n also boot faster.

I currently have 256ssd n 1tb hdd. Will follow yr config if need more space

 

[trento]

My World of Warcraft loading screen went from 3minutes to under 15secs with SSD lol.

Made so much of a difference that i decided to get a 750GB SSD for my other games too.

Mine like crysis 3, alien isolation, metro etc all boot from hdd. Under 30 secs for sure

 

[Encrypted11]

well no problem.

i do as well. got 500gb and 960gb to play around with. SSD nowadays are affordable. unlike the times where i bought my first SSD Intel X25M 80gb at $375.

people still say i'm crazy.

Moi 1st ssd samsung 830 256GB at slightly above $300. Got a second 830 but 128GB at amazon bf 2012 sale US$69.99 (considered killer deal back then) at about 1.25 sho addicting .

Nowadays a 850 pro with 10 year warranty now sitting about at this price range with 1/2 the cost per GB of my 830 256GB with no warranty back then.

 

[Mem2003]

Speed Performance tested (Desktop)

1) using Window defender on win 10 Pro 1607
[Boot fr SSD Plextor PX256M5P]-SATA3
1a) custom scan C: (256GB SSD) 30.6GB in 14min => 36.42MB/s
1b) custom scan D: (4TB HUS HDD) 135GB in 53min => 42.45MB/s
SSD boot---can't see what files is being scanned.


2) using Window Security Essentials on win 7 Ultimate
[Boot fr 4TB HDD HUS 7K4000 partition as 2drives]
2a) custom scan C: (4TB HUS HDD) 135GB in 60min => 37.5MB/s
2b) custom scan Q: (256GB SSD) 30.6GB in 14min => 36.42MB/s
HDD boot---can see what the files/directory/etc is being scanned.



SSD spec as Read 5xxMB/s and Write 5xxMB/s
SSD custom scan speed will be similar if use 850Pro 512GB
while HDD spec as 100MB/s -200MB/s or greater for newer HDD


Suspect Bottleneck in hardware bus transfer?


Added info: HDD (1st partition) Contains ONLY boot OS/ system/program/apps/etc
install programs/files/etc and No video/photo files.
All big video/ photo are in 2nd partition-HDD(DATA area).
FYI: if select Custom scan, it will include all files in that drive to be scanned.

===============
Agreed boot up is faster using SSD vs HDD.

 

[LiLAsN]

Buying cheapskate SSDs like you do buying cheapskate HDDs. What do you expect? LoL
It's okay for being ignorant. But no need to make a fool of yourself by telling the whole world about it.

 

[hlots123]

Speed Performance tested (Desktop)

1) using Window defender on win 10 Pro 1607
[Boot fr SSD Plextor PX256M5P]-SATA3
1a) custom scan C: (256GB SSD) 30.6GB in 14min => 36.42MB/s
1b) custom scan D: (4TB HUS HDD) 135GB in 53min => 42.45MB/s
SSD boot---can't see what files is being scanned.


2) using Window Security Essentials on win 7 Ultimate
[Boot fr 4TB HDD HUS 7K4000 partition as 2drives]
2a) custom scan C: (4TB HUS HDD) 135GB in 60min => 37.5MB/s
2b) custom scan Q: (256GB SSD) 30.6GB in 14min => 36.42MB/s
HDD boot---can see what the files/directory/etc is being scanned.



SSD spec as Read 5xxMB/s and Write 5xxMB/s
SSD custom scan speed will be similar if use 850Pro 512GB
while HDD spec as 100MB/s -200MB/s or greater for newer HDD


Suspect Bottleneck in hardware bus transfer?



===============
Agreed boot up is faster using SSD vs HDD.

guessing only, maybe av scans not the entire file but certain parts only (eg starting portion?) - depending on analyst knowing where malware code is commonly found

so if ur hdd is 135gb full, but made of fewer large movie files (example)
vs
ur ssd is 30.6gb full, but made if many many small system files (example)

the av may actually need to do more work scanning & analysing the smaller files in ur ssd...?

---------
edit:
scratch dat, the limiting rate is probably the av engine's analysis rate
the case where hdd scan rate is higher than ssd scan rate, maybe due to above guessing tat it contains more large movie files (example) tat only got the starting block analyzed & the rest skipped...?

 

[BiomedicalPasta]

Isit easy to install multiple ssd? i have 1 but planning to get another one.
load games with ssd is fast.

 

[Encrypted11]

guessing only, maybe av scans not the entire file but certain parts only (eg starting portion?) - depending on analyst knowing where malware code is commonly found

so if ur hdd is 135gb full, but made of fewer large movie files (example)
vs
ur ssd is 30.6gb full, but made if many many small system files (example)

the av may actually need to do more work scanning & analysing the smaller files in ur ssd...?

Good point actually. Random small files read and write at far different rates compared to sequential copies of large files.

With the probable difference in contents of both drives (OS, applications, many small files) vs. moderate to large sized media files aren't the best ways for drawing comparisons.

It's like comparing an decompression of an application's archive (e.g. graphics driver installation file) vs. an archive containing a thousand photos. Comparatively, the process will be a lot more slower for extracting the former's archive if you compare the relative file sizes.

 

[MrAwesomeX]

This debate should be move to edmw .
Even a random gpgt post is better than this ssd doesn't make a big diff over hdd nonsense.

 

[hlots123]

Good point actually. Random small files read and write at far different rates compared to sequential copies of large files.

With the probable difference in contents of both drives (OS, applications, many small files) vs. moderate to large sized media files aren't the best ways for drawing comparisons.

It's like comparing an decompression of an application's archive (e.g. graphics driver installation file) vs. an archive containing a thousand photos. Comparatively, the process will be a lot more slower if you compare the relative file sizes.

i missed dat in his 2nd comparison, his hdd is actually the boot drive containing system files too
also the scan rates are really all quite close, so guessing the av scanning engine is the limiting rate...