Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    10,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Papi View Post
    Once you get into Samsung's 840 PRO with the 256GB or higher, youll get faster read/write than the 128GB.
    ...Yes and no.

    The read speeds, which is the important part of SSD's. Their main feature. Are all the same. 840, 840 Pro, 120-250gb, whatever.

    Write speeds are better on larger drives, and Pro drives, however are not the important factor, and a waste of money.

    Get the 840 non-pro.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by chazus View Post
    ...Yes and no.

    The read speeds, which is the important part of SSD's. Their main feature. Are all the same. 840, 840 Pro, 120-250gb, whatever.

    Write speeds are better on larger drives, and Pro drives, however are not the important factor, and a waste of money.

    Get the 840 non-pro.
    QFT write speeds only matter once, while read matters everytime you open something.
    nothing but empty space here bro. move along now.

  3. #23
    The Insane DeltrusDisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    15,371
    Quote Originally Posted by vesseblah View Post
    As big as you can afford, and put everything except your music and movie files on it. That way everything you do on the computer will run faster.

    120GB would be enough for what you're asking but I really don't recommend it since the price difference is getting rather small and you'll rather have more SSD space to install one more game year from now than not.
    Aye. I've noticed 120-128GB SSDs are often found for $1/GB or a little more, while the 240-256GB+ size SSDs are all typically under $1/GB, and it goes down when you go to higher capacity drives.

    @OP: A 120-128GB SSD will certainly fit your OS, and several games, and minor programs, I can attest to that. My Crucial m4 128GB SSD has WoW, Rift, Windows 7 Pro 64 bit, Path of Exile, Binding of Isaac, FireFox, Google Chrome, Steam, 3DMark, 3DMark 11, Unigine Valley 1.0, Unigine Heaven 4.0, Skype, and some other minor programs installed on it, which includes a number of smaller Steam games.

    I currently have 13.7 GB of free space, as well. ^_^

    Since I got back into WoW though, I've noticed a change in space used, and Skyrim is no longer installed, however I'm looking now into buying a 240-256GB SSD to pair up with my m4. (Not in RAID, no folks, I just mean have them both work together for ultimate computering.)
    i7-5820K | ASUS X99- Deluxe | Crucial 2x8GB DDR4 2133MHz | eVGA GTX 760 SC | Crucial MX100 512GB | Crucial M500 240GB | Crucial m4 128GB | Western Digital Blue 1TB | Western Digital Black 1TB | SeaSonic X660 Gold
    ASUS MX239H | Schiit Stack Modi + Asgard 2 | Sennheiser HD598 | Audio Technica ATH-AD700 | Presonus Eris E5 Studio Monitors | Blue Snowball Mic | Razer Death Adder | Corsair K70 | CyberPower 1500PFCLCD UPS

  4. #24
    Brewmaster Kiry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,255
    I have a 128G Crucial M4, love it. Would never go back to a traditional HDD. I have Win8, WoW (with all my addons), PoE (Path of exile), Firefox, etc on it. I have 40 gig free. All my "other games" and music and etc are on my HDD (secondary drive).

    If I were to get another, I'd get a larger one just so I can load one more game on it, that's all. Having the fast boot, load times, is just fantastic.
    Playing
    WildStar -Mechari Medic, Draken Stalker
    Diablo: RoS
    GW2 - Ranger

  5. #25
    Moderator Skarsguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Ravenloft usually
    Posts
    2,537
    I have a OCZ vertex 4 and have put some in other computers with no problems. Got a Crucial M4 in my wifes computer and it's good as well. The Vertex is a bit faster that's the only thing I noticed between the two and its only like 4-5 secs as most.

  6. #26
    The Insane DeltrusDisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    15,371
    Quote Originally Posted by Skarsguard View Post
    I have a OCZ vertex 4 and have put some in other computers with no problems. Got a Crucial M4 in my wifes computer and it's good as well. The Vertex is a bit faster that's the only thing I noticed between the two and its only like 4-5 secs as most.
    Somehow I doubt it is even 4-5 seconds. :P

    Unless you're trying to render some massive file, then sure. lol

    Might help to see what firmware the m4 is on, newer firmwares have pulled a lot of speed out.
    i7-5820K | ASUS X99- Deluxe | Crucial 2x8GB DDR4 2133MHz | eVGA GTX 760 SC | Crucial MX100 512GB | Crucial M500 240GB | Crucial m4 128GB | Western Digital Blue 1TB | Western Digital Black 1TB | SeaSonic X660 Gold
    ASUS MX239H | Schiit Stack Modi + Asgard 2 | Sennheiser HD598 | Audio Technica ATH-AD700 | Presonus Eris E5 Studio Monitors | Blue Snowball Mic | Razer Death Adder | Corsair K70 | CyberPower 1500PFCLCD UPS

  7. #27
    Immortal Notarget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Dark Side of the Moon
    Posts
    7,776
    Quote Originally Posted by chazus View Post
    ... and a waste of money.

    Get the 840 non-pro.
    That's your opinion and not a fact, however in this situation (OP) you're right there is not really any reason to get the pro version unless it's a really good deal.
    CPU: Intel i5-3570k (4.5GHz) MB: ASUS Z77 Sabertooth (uefi 2003)
    GPU: Asus 280X TOP (1130MHz/1750MHz) RAM: Corsair LP/LV white 8GB 1600MHz
    SSD: Samsung 840Pro 256GB + Crucial m4 128GB (040H) PSU: Seasonic 620M CASE: Corsair 500R (White/Black) Monitor: 1440p BenQ GW2765HT 1080p LG 237L-BN IPS
    Current build! ||Old Build || Bitdefender Total Security 2015 || AV-TEST 2014

  8. #28
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    10,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Notarget View Post
    That's your opinion and not a fact,
    I meant more a waste of money in this situation. Honestly, there's almost nobody here on these forums who would benefit from a Pro drive. It really is only useful in perhaps a... Professional situation? Get it? Pro? >.> Anyway, yes, it has a use. Just not for gaming. I don't even think it would be useful for streaming/rendering, since the bottleneck at that point would be the HDD.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  9. #29
    Bloodsail Admiral Killora's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    BFE, Montana
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by chazus View Post
    I meant more a waste of money in this situation. Honestly, there's almost nobody here on these forums who would benefit from a Pro drive. It really is only useful in perhaps a... Professional situation? Get it? Pro? >.> Anyway, yes, it has a use. Just not for gaming. I don't even think it would be useful for streaming/rendering, since the bottleneck at that point would be the HDD.
    I really cannot think of a situation where the extra write speed on an SSD would be worthwhile. Maybe on some data partition servers that are constantly writing data in some form, but you can't really use SSD's for those. Not enough storage space and it would wear the SSD down extremely fast.

    So, honestly? there is no useful scenario in the consumer world for the 840 pro. It won't benefit whatsoever for anything short of transferring files between 2 ssds...But who in the world would be doing that enough to warrant the price difference? The standard 840 write speeds are plenty fast enough for anything, and are still significantly faster than a harddrive.

  10. #30
    The Insane DeltrusDisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    15,371
    So what you guys are saying is that MLC isn't worth it over TLC. ;o

    Dare you suggest that?
    i7-5820K | ASUS X99- Deluxe | Crucial 2x8GB DDR4 2133MHz | eVGA GTX 760 SC | Crucial MX100 512GB | Crucial M500 240GB | Crucial m4 128GB | Western Digital Blue 1TB | Western Digital Black 1TB | SeaSonic X660 Gold
    ASUS MX239H | Schiit Stack Modi + Asgard 2 | Sennheiser HD598 | Audio Technica ATH-AD700 | Presonus Eris E5 Studio Monitors | Blue Snowball Mic | Razer Death Adder | Corsair K70 | CyberPower 1500PFCLCD UPS

  11. #31
    If the actual, real-world-application difference between two products is, to all intents and purposes, zero then go for the cheaper option unless there are other, non-performance reasons to get the expensive one (warranty, reliability, manufacturer bias etc).
    Intel i5 2500K (4.5 GHz) | Asus Z77 Sabertooth | 8GB Corsair Vengeance LP 1600MHz | Gigabyte Windforcex3 HD 7950 | Crucial M4 128GB | Crucial M550 256GB | Asus Xonar DGX | Samson SR 850 | Zalman ZM-Mic1 | Western Digital Caviar Black 2000GB | Noctua NH-U12P SE2 | Fractal Design Arc Midi | Corsair HX650

    Tanking with the Blessing of Kings - The TankSpot Guide to the Protection Paladin - Updated for Patch 5.4!

  12. #32
    Moderator chazus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    10,869
    Quote Originally Posted by DeltrusDisc View Post
    So what you guys are saying is that MLC isn't worth it over TLC. ;o Dare you suggest that?
    Honestly? Yes.

    The only reason MLC and TLC we're (in real world application) different, was on the much smaller drives (16-32gb) where the cell count was so small that you could actually burn a drive out a small TLC with normal use inside the normal hardware replacement cycle.

    Right now, that barrier no longer exists, and likely won't for several years. If ever. As long as TLC's keep getting larger, their 'shorter' lifespan will get larger and longer. And even if it somehow did become an issue, by that time newer, more robust technology will have resolved that issue inherently.
    Gaming: Dual Intel Pentium III Coppermine @ 1400mhz + Blue Orb | Asus CUV266-D | GeForce 2 Ti + ZF700-Cu | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 | Whistler Build 2267
    Media: Dual Intel Drake Xeon @ 600mhz | Intel Marlinspike MS440GX | Matrox G440 | 1024mb Crucial PC-133 @ 166mhz | Windows 2000 Pro

    IT'S ALWAYS BEEN WANKERSHIM | Did you mean: Fhqwhgads
    "Three days on a tree. Hardly enough time for a prelude. When it came to visiting agony, the Romans were hobbyists." -Mab

  13. #33
    Moderator Skarsguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Ravenloft usually
    Posts
    2,537
    Quote Originally Posted by DeltrusDisc View Post
    Somehow I doubt it is even 4-5 seconds. :P

    Unless you're trying to render some massive file, then sure. lol

    Might help to see what firmware the m4 is on, newer firmwares have pulled a lot of speed out.
    Just bootup times and loadscreen times is the only thing I look at me and wife have the same setup except our cases and ssds she has the 128 M4 and I have the 128 Vertex 4 and the load times are noticeable but like I said 3-4 seconds max usually around 2-3 usually. Oh and no problems with my SSD at all it hasn't F'ed up yet anyways.

  14. #34
    Pandaren Monk skatblast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,949
    Quote Originally Posted by vesseblah View Post
    Short version:

    - Intel is expensive but reliable
    - OCZ is cheap but has relatively high failure rate (more of these break during first six months than any other brand but you get replacement fast), older models also had major problems requiring flashing the software on the drive which is also why people are avoiding these now
    - Crucial M4 and Samsung 830/840 models have good balance of price and no reported widespread problems or abnormally high failure rates
    - Corsair has confusing amount of models from cheap and slow to expensive and fast, also some older models had the firmware problems mentioned with OCZ

    All other brands are so small/random that there simply isn't any data available.
    \

    What about kingston? Theres a shell shocker on one of there drives tonight

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820239045

  15. #35
    Bloodsail Admiral Killora's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    BFE, Montana
    Posts
    1,098
    I have a kingston hyperX, and so far it's been great. Though, i spent way too much on it (it was the original hyperx, with 5k program/erase count rather than 3k) at about $200 for 120gb...like a year and 5 months ago.

    I'm not sure about the hyperX 3k, but i imagine it doesn't have quite the endurance as a 840/m4 ( i believe these both have a 5k erase count?. ) and is slightly more expensive.

  16. #36
    Bloodsail Admiral Stevegasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    1,057
    I would go as big as you can afford. I have a 64 myself, and while it was okay at first, the OS drive grew to fill it. All I install are programs that startup with the OS and programs that like to run in the tray and such. My brother's laptop has dual 512s. Runs pretty slick.

  17. #37
    I had a 60GB, but it was too small, with Windows and WoW i didn't have enough spare space to download updates.

    After i upgraded to a 120GB it has been sweet.

  18. #38
    Herald of the Titans
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    all over the world
    Posts
    2,503
    i have that ssd you are talking about the samsung 120 gig and its pretty decent. i have windows 7, swtor, lol, and starcraft 2 installed on it along with a few other essentials, vent, mumble, skype and still have around 35 gigs left. load times were a bit quicker in swtor but thats about it. lol isnt very demanding at all and it already loaded pretty fast. i havent actually played any sc2 since i got the ssd so i cant really comment.

    i bought the 120 gig because at the time it was only like $90 and i had a $20 coupon from newegg so it really only cost me like $69.99 and while i think thats a pretty good deal i dont think, knowing what i know now, i would spend $100+ on an ssd. while im happy with it since its knocked off anywhere from 10%-20% loading times in some games it really isnt that big of a deal to me.

  19. #39
    The Insane DeltrusDisc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    15,371
    Quote Originally Posted by Samurai View Post
    I had a 60GB, but it was too small, with Windows and WoW i didn't have enough spare space to download updates.

    After i upgraded to a 120GB it has been sweet.
    Moving pagefile, search index, and turning off hibernate can open up a LOT of space.

    AKA take your RAM and multiple it by two, add maybe a GB or two and that's how much you could free up...

    http://lifehacker.com/5802838/how-to...fe-of-your-ssd
    i7-5820K | ASUS X99- Deluxe | Crucial 2x8GB DDR4 2133MHz | eVGA GTX 760 SC | Crucial MX100 512GB | Crucial M500 240GB | Crucial m4 128GB | Western Digital Blue 1TB | Western Digital Black 1TB | SeaSonic X660 Gold
    ASUS MX239H | Schiit Stack Modi + Asgard 2 | Sennheiser HD598 | Audio Technica ATH-AD700 | Presonus Eris E5 Studio Monitors | Blue Snowball Mic | Razer Death Adder | Corsair K70 | CyberPower 1500PFCLCD UPS

  20. #40
    I had the same problem as You. I don`t know which size should I take. So I simply count all storage that will be taken by programs. This is what result I get:
    - first of all OS, its around 20 GB installed AND you`ll need around 15-20 GB for temp files. Temp files get from installed programs, even those You delete and if You won`t format a disk regulary - as I do , I have Win Vista updated to win 7 ,and I was never formatting my disk for 5 years ! ,and this files takes at my HDD 15gb atm - you need this spac + pagafile.sys around 4gb + 4 GB for hybernating sysystem files if You use this function,
    - than around 5 GB for all programs, drivers etc

    At this point You have used 45 GB, so if You want take 120 GB , it 75 Gb of free space . WoW with 5.4 will take around 25 GB for shure ,so at this moment You have around 50 GB of free space .

    NOW is beggining the most important calculate... If You are a hardcore player and Your guild want You to be on PTR -t test bosses before next content You need another 25 GB ,which leave You with onlny 25 GB of Free space ( but IMO you can install a ptr on HDD one ) ! ,and if You want to play at any other game like D3, SC 2, or some FPS like MoH ,CoD , Far Cry , Crysis or games like Hitman GTA and any other 2011-2013 release games you need to book another 20 GB for each .

    So if You won`t play at PTR or You`ll instal it on HDD it leaves You with 50 GB of free space - so at this point You can install 2 new games and it should be around 10 GB of free space - its going to be tight... but not so bad.

    Best choice would be 120 or IMO 160 would be the best,and 250 is too much if You dont use programs like photoshop or movies programs,graphic ones or scientic like Matlab etc.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •