New Computer Build(s) #3

[2005]

I got my memory kit stable at 2933 mhz after a fair amount of tweaking, won't got an inch further though. Kinda shitty....


I'll be doing some benchmarks soon.

[Directive]

Why can't I have a great machine for more than a few months without being considered outdated. Sorry for the outburst.

[2005]

I wouldn't consider your machine outdated... your running a 4th gen i5 processor, plenty of ram and a very capable GPU. I'd say the only real upgrade to make your machine quite capable would be an SSD. That machine should stay plenty powerful for at least 2 or 3 more years. Our usages are basically the same, I do work from my machine... but it's basically a thin client... it's just used to connect to my virtual machine hosted by amazon. My new machine should be fine for at least another 5 years.... I need a GPU upgrade now and will need one maybe in another 3-4 years but this should last quite a while.

But yea, it happens to everyone. You either spend a decent chunk of change every two years or you run the wheels off your machine and make major upgrades every 5 years or so.

[Directive]

Been looking into SSD's for a few years. Waiting for the $$$$ to go down more. Looking to get at least a 1TB drive for a swap of my main HDD. Leave the other 2 raids as backups.
By the way, thanks for the compliment on my machine. These upgrades are getting expensive at the getgo. Like the new smartphones starting $800 to &1000. For a damn smartphone? That's crazy talk.

[palmboy5]

You shouldn't need a 1TB SSD (I certainly don't, though $$$$ wasn't much of a factor for me when I got mine), at that point you're using some/most of it to store large files that are unnecessary to have >100MB/s for..

If you follow the usual layout of
SSD: OS and Programs
HDD: Everything else

Then you'd need MAX like a 512GB SSD. I'd argue a 256GB would be enough for most people.

[Directive]

My C drive has a total of 905GB. I am using 379GB of that. My Pictures, Music and Videos folders use 286GB.
My question is, why wouldn't I use the SSD as I would SATA?
Is there a reason or just to save money?

[palmboy5]

So.. OS and programs take up 93GB for you. That 93GB is the only data you need fast access speeds for, which make them the only data that benefit from being stored on an SSD.

By all means if you want to pay for enough SSD storage to hold more than just OS and programs, go for it. But you are "Waiting for the $$$$ to go down more" so yes it's about saving money. Best way to save money is to not pay for capacity you don't need. A 128GB SSD would be cutting it a bit close with the 93GB existing usage, so 256GB would be the next logical step.

This is an option: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00OAJ412U

[Directive]

ok, I understand. Just wanted to make sure the reasons weren't about the SSD not handling being used for storage.
Then I would go for the 256 or 500 SSD.

[palmboy5]

Well, "not handling being used for storage" is still a real consideration too.

HDDs are definitely better for storage: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/2 ... hout-power

Statistically you won't notice bits of information corrupting on your SSD (it just as likely happens to unused sectors anyway), so it's not some dooms day event. If you consider flash drives, they're also SSDs but I'm sure you wouldn't notice anything missing on your decade-old flash drives.

Keep your SSD powered on and keep it cool and you'll probably never notice an issue.

[Directive]

Will one marked "for Laptops" work on my tower?
https://www.bestbuy.com/site/samsung-85 ... Id=1662009

[palmboy5]

Mhm, it makes no difference desktop vs laptop, they're not different for this. Likewise, desktop SSDs can fit in laptops!

I recommend fresh installing the OS on the SSD btw, don't just migrate the HDD to SSD.

[2005]

Storing files like music, pictures and movies won't benefit from the faster SSD speeds. It's just because a regular hard drive is already
more than fast enough to use or work with that type of data. Its like bumping the speed limit from 65 to 150. If your car can go 150
then your in for a much faster drive to work, if your car can't go over 150, well your ride to work remains unchanged. That music, photo
ect data can only go 65 so to speak.

Things like how fast programs load, the OS loads, and program / game performance can greatly be affected by slower read / write speeds
on mechanical hard drives. SSD's greatly improve the "feel" of a laptop when booting up or lauching/using programs. Games load much
faster, levels load faster....

That 1TB drive is plenty of good storage space. I'd keep all things like word docs, music, pictures, movies and so on over there on the 1TB.

Install windows and the apps/games on the SSD. I'd probably recommend 256 (ish) GB storage size. I know samsung EVO line is 250/500GB
and their PRO line is 256/512. I don't think you need a pro, any decently performing SATA based SSD will do you very well. I like the EVO's or
the Crucial MX3 series drives. If I had to pick a favorite, I'd probably say Samsung.

[Directive]

OK, I got it. I would go with the EVO.
Just one more question, Why the recommendation for a new install as opposed to a clone?

[palmboy5]

Cloning from an HDD to SSD is potentially problematic if not enough care is put into it.

For example, Windows might not realize it's now on an SSD and will not turn on TRIM (important for the longevity of the SSD) and will also will not turn off defragmentation (which is irrelevant to an SSD and puts unnecessary wear on it).

A fresh Windows install automatically detects the hardware type and applies necessary settings, with the added benefit of having a clean slate, which is why I recommend it.

Besides, you're not wiping anything. You still have all your data on the original OS HDD and you can grab anything you've missed at any time. You can even choose to boot back into the HDD's installation to check on, say, what settings you had in a game.

[Directive]

I realize I wouldn't miss anything. I didn't know about the TRIM and defrag. Good thing I asked. Thanx.