Login

russian armor

Getting new SSD

14 Jan 2015, 07:46 AM
#1
avatar of AmiPolizeiFunk
Admin Black Badge
Patrion 15

Posts: 16697 | Subs: 12

Once you go SSD, you never go back. I need an SSD in each rig! I have a 120GB OCD Vortex II (yeah it's 5 years old) in my machine that I will move to my son's machine.

I wanna get a new SSD for my rig. Any tips or suggestions? I want at least 256GB maybe more.
14 Jan 2015, 07:51 AM
#2
avatar of Flamee

Posts: 710

This is so true. SSD has risen to the TOP-3 most important component inside my rig.

My suggestion: Crucial MX100 256GB 550/330 (if you're looking for 256gb of course :) )

This is quite cheap in Finland at least (around 100 euros) and you can check yourself some tests. I will attach to spoiler my (Finnish) google search and you can see that all first 4 tests are atleast 4 out of 5 stars.

14 Jan 2015, 07:58 AM
#3
avatar of AmiPolizeiFunk
Admin Black Badge
Patrion 15

Posts: 16697 | Subs: 12

Yeah I can get 256GB for around 100 EUR in Germany too. It's amazing that they're so cheap now. Is there anything I need to consider? Is 256GB big enough? Are there docking issues at all any more? All work w my SATA 2 ports?
14 Jan 2015, 08:03 AM
#4
avatar of somenbjorn

Posts: 923

I have a Corsair and a Kingston in mine. Both works nicely. For regular use by gamers and the occasional professional use you can't really go wrong. Performance differences between makes are often not large enough to be really noticeable. Or more correctly, unless you are loading a lot of stuff from a big database, other stuff will bottleneck way before your drive. An extra 40$ on performance isnt worh it.


So the question becomes more about quality and in that department Kingston is probably your best bet.
14 Jan 2015, 08:06 AM
#5
avatar of Flamee

Posts: 710

Well it depends of course for which purposes you need your SSD. I have 128GB SSD for OS and it's enough. This 256 which I bought 6 months ago is for games (CoH2 of course) and I still have more than half to go.

But this is in my opinion enough for OS and most important programs and even few games.

For SATA 2, don't know actually. From the site where I bought it, it says that SATA 3 is the interface. I'm not sure if this is the requirement though..
14 Jan 2015, 08:28 AM
#6
avatar of tuvok
Benefactor 115

Posts: 786

Sata 2 is fine, you won't max out the sequential read/write potential of the drive (reading/writing large files) but you still get the awesome random access (os tasks, opening/loading programs/games) boost of ssds, which is the main reason they make the system snappy.

I went ssds in 2008 and never looked back but started out small because price was very high back then, I even had a 40gb drive for OS only and it was indeed fine (disabling hibernation and paging in windows can free up up to 30/40 gb but you'll need 8/16gb or ram for the second, depending on your workload). 128gb is ok if you only plan on having a handful of big programs/games while 256 will give a lot of breathing room (using them when >90% full will make performance much worse so take that into account).

If you do something disk heavy (for example you use it to save your video editing files, even temporarily or as a cache) consider buying more business-oriented drives (ssd cells slowly wear out when you rewrite them and they use more durable cells). Samsung is a personal favourite (840 & 850 series) but there's plenty of good ones out there, Anandtech is my favourite reading when it comes to ssd http://www.anandtech.com/tag/ssd
14 Jan 2015, 08:55 AM
#7
avatar of Mirage357

Posts: 341

As a techie I can quite simply say that I agree 100% with somenbjorn, quality between SSD's, are to such a small degree that the average computer user or even gamer would never notice it. You basically have free reign in this department to shop around and buy what you can for the best price.

I can also tell you (if you weren't already aware of course)that SATA is reverse compatible, SATA 3 disks will work with SATA 2 ports and vice versa. If running in this kind of formation the read write speed will always be the lesser.

I personally run a pair of Samsung 840 EVO's (my favorite too tuvok :thumb:) for dual boot Win7/8.

Before I got Win8 for work requirements I used to have them raided for kicks :thumbsup:
14 Jan 2015, 11:37 AM
#8
avatar of Twister
Honorary Member Badge
Patrion 39

Posts: 2072 | Subs: 1

I just upgraded my rig (the hardware should arrive on Saturday :hyper:) and I almost went for the 840 EVO as well, but then I found out that they use the Turbo Write technology. It basically uses a 3GB cache to boost the write speed (and get 520 MB/s), but when the cache is full you get the regular speed write (270 MB/s).

In the end I went for the Crucial M550 256GB which was 15€ cheaper. From what I've read it's faster in almost every way and doesn't use the Turbo Write stuff :p
14 Jan 2015, 12:40 PM
#9
avatar of Mirage357

Posts: 341

Well that's kinda correct, the cache changes as drive capacity increases, 3GB for 120 and 250GB, 6GB at 500GB, 9GB at 750GB and 12GB at the top-tier 1TB model. Setting them in Raid formation will step you up, so two 840's Raided your looking at almost double the cache. (Not sure why but apparently for some reason it's not exactly double)

The question is though how often do you write that much data to the exact same directory on the SSD?

You might perhaps hit that cache buffer when installing high end games, moving music, movies, or TV series around, but generally you will not see it hit the cache buffer.

As for speed read/write speed yes the crucial performs better at 250GB capacity compared to the 840EVO 250GB. But as you step up to EVO 500GB capacity you see the drives performance begin to outweigh SATA3's 6GB/s transfer rate. When setting them in RAID0 formation the drives actually work to a point where they clear the cache just as fast as it can be filled with SATA3's transfer rate, as part of each drive is considered idle.

TL;DR

In short YES Crucial M550 256GB is a great drive (we sell them), if not the best on the market at the 250GB capacity. If your looking to step up in size and build a monster look into 840 EVO's in RAID0 configuration. :thumb:
14 Jan 2015, 13:13 PM
#10
avatar of Mithiriath
Director of Social Media Badge

Posts: 830 | Subs: 3

If you want the best any price take an Intel SSD 730 (5 years warranty) or a Samsung 850 Pro (10 years warranty).

If you want a good value for money you can take a Crucial MX100 or a Crucial M550 or a Samsung 840 EVO if it's cheaper (all 3 years warranty).


14 Jan 2015, 13:45 PM
#11
avatar of AmiPolizeiFunk
Admin Black Badge
Patrion 15

Posts: 16697 | Subs: 12

Now the great info is starting to flow. Thx guys! :D

So more specifically... I'll be using the single SSD for my OS, games, broadcasting, and adobe photoshop/premiere/illustrator. I need a bigger one (currently on 120GB, looking to go at least 250GB or more) because I'm thinking that it would be nice to be able to record OBS broadcasts locally to the SSD. My current SSD is 90% just with OS, 3 games (COH2/SC2/dota2), and Adobe stuff.

When I record broadcasts from OBS to my drive, I want to use 1440p. Then u/l to YouTube. It would also be nice (tho I don't know if my rig can handle it) to broadcast to twitch and record the the SSD simultaneously. I haven't really calculated how much space it takes to do say 1 hour at 1440p yet. Anybody know?
14 Jan 2015, 14:09 PM
#12
avatar of Romeo
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5

I have a 1:06:00 video at 1080p that's about 1.73 GB so at 1440p probably like... 2.5ish?
14 Jan 2015, 14:53 PM
#13
avatar of IpKaiFung
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2

It would also be nice (tho I don't know if my rig can handle it) to broadcast to twitch and record the the SSD simultaneously.
You'll need a very fast CPU (one of the current i7s) and buckets of RAM (32GB)
14 Jan 2015, 15:49 PM
#14
avatar of DasDoomTurtle

Posts: 438

lol I just went straight for hybrid drives when they came out....ssd speed with the cost of hdd storage :)
14 Jan 2015, 16:04 PM
#15
avatar of AmiPolizeiFunk
Admin Black Badge
Patrion 15

Posts: 16697 | Subs: 12

You'll need a very fast CPU (one of the current i7s) and buckets of RAM (32GB)


12GB ram not enough huh?

Well it could be time for me to look into a dual-PC streaming setup again. My son's rig will now be as good if not better than mine, so that becomes a possibility. Seen any 1440p capture cards on the market yet?
14 Jan 2015, 16:15 PM
#16
avatar of Mirage357

Posts: 341



12GB ram not enough huh?

Well it could be time for me to look into a dual-PC streaming setup again. My son's rig will now be as good if not better than mine, so that becomes a possibility. Seen any 1440p capture cards on the market yet?


Nah I'd be going 32GB RAM or up.

Not sure if you'd want to stream in 1440p. It can get pretty awkward when it comes down to it. Loads of people were using 2x720p top and bottom to achieve it. I think that's still the primary way of doing it. though I haven't looked into it for a little while now. I can't speak for the rest of the world but the only ones available in Australia that record well in 1440p are from black magic. Hope you've got garbage bags of cash for one of them.

Not to mention (forgive me if this has changed) Youtube reprocesses anything you upload to 30fps so technically it isn't really worth recording it above 30fps unless you want to for other reasons.
14 Jan 2015, 16:19 PM
#17
avatar of IpKaiFung
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1708 | Subs: 2

seen a few from black magic https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/uk/products/decklink however they are very expensive and also black magic cards can be a swine to get working at times.
14 Jan 2015, 16:34 PM
#18
avatar of tuvok
Benefactor 115

Posts: 786

Not to mention (forgive me if this has changed) Youtube reprocesses anything you upload to 30fps so technically it isn't really worth recording it above 30fps unless you want to for other reasons.

Youtube now supports 60fps videos!
I think that he could stream and record easily with a dedicated capture card?
14 Jan 2015, 16:39 PM
#19
avatar of AmiPolizeiFunk
Admin Black Badge
Patrion 15

Posts: 16697 | Subs: 12

I don't want to stream in 1440p. I want to record locally in 1440p, and stream at 1180p (or whatever it is after the ratio I apply) as usual (twitch can't handle my 1440p upload).

*1152p after 1.25 res downscale
14 Jan 2015, 16:41 PM
#20
avatar of Mirage357

Posts: 341

jump backJump back to quoted post14 Jan 2015, 16:34 PMtuvok

Youtube now supports 60fps videos!
I think that he could stream and record easily with a dedicated capture card?


Oh sweet. Youtube is like relic, they can sometimes take a while to sort things out.

Yeah definitely with dedicated card, not sure how many are on the worldwide market that will do it at 1440p though. If I was at work I could look up a more definitive answer, but I just can't do it from home. i do know majority are expensive
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 23
unknown 22
unknown 19
Germany 967
Russian Federation 2
Poland 1

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

835 users are online: 835 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49112
Welcome our newest member, Buchh647
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM