|
Nill posted:I have the basics covered (partition 4k aligned, TRIM working, etc.) but should page files still be offloaded to spinning discs? Indexer & sys restore disabled? I never understood most of the tweaks recommended. Maybe back when SSDs maxed at 32GB, because they were awful back then (something like a simple install of Windows XP would throw errors, because the SSDs couldn't take so many small writes so quickly). Yeah, try to 4K align your drive. Linux, macOS, and Vista SP2 and newer already does this, so it's probably only something you have to worry about with older operating systems (original Vista release, XP, Win 2000, 9x, etc.). Other than that, you want all the heavy-writing and abusive poo poo pounding away on the SSD. That's what it's there for. Installing a new SSD and then disabling performance-enhancements and putting all your stuff on an old spinner sorta defeats some of the purpose of upgrading to an SSD. I work with crazy-insane old hardware and operating systems. Lots of Windows 2000 and Windows XP boxes, and even stuff like OS/2 Warp, Windows 95, and Windows NT 4.0. I will 4K-align the OS partition on the SSD and that's it. Average work-load on these systems will take 20-50 years before the SSD suffers any write-exhaustion. Older operating systems didn't need a bunch of "tweaks", and newer ones certainly don't, either.
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 13:31 |
|
|
Yeah, that's what I gathered. Probably the only thing that still confuses me is the esoteric interactions between physical/logical sectors, clusters, and NAND page sizes. (512e vs 4k vs new drives with 8k pages, etc.) When a chip's 8k page is reporting 4k clusters with emulated 512 byte "physical" sectors to the os, does anything really matter? ie: If my new drive was cloned from a 512 byte file system is converting the partition to 4k sectors a hoop worth jumping through when the 512 byte sectors are already aligned properly?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
All the modern cloning software does this.. I think you can just clone away and use the thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 00:47
|
|
|
Not sure if this is the best place to ask, sorry if not. I've flicked back a few pages and checked the OP but didn't see anything. What's the best method for cloning an SSD? My son's run out of room on his 250 so I've got a new 500 and I'd really prefer not to reinstall all of his poo poo if possible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
Digital Jesus posted:Not sure if this is the best place to ask, sorry if not. I've flicked back a few pages and checked the OP but didn't see anything. What's the best method for cloning an SSD? My son's run out of room on his 250 so I've got a new 500 and I'd really prefer not to reinstall all of his poo poo if possible. Which brand is it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
Both drives are Samsung 850 EVOs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
Digital Jesus posted:Both drives are Samsung 850 EVOs. Samsung has a migration tool that should do the trick. http://downloadcenter.samsung.com/content/SW/201710/20171030115320828/Samsung_Data_Migration_Setup.exe
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12165/the-crucial-mx500-1tb-ssd-review/4 Finally a non Samsung SATA SSD that doesn't suck in a while. Oh, and there's one more tidbit to share: https://www.usenix.org/conference/fast16/technical-sessions/presentation/schroeder quote:We see no evidence that higher-end SLC drives are more reliable than MLC drives within typical drive lifetimes...over 6 years of production use in Google’s data centers Palladium fucked around with this message at 04:23 on Dec 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
redeyes posted:Samsung has a migration tool that should do the trick. http://downloadcenter.samsung.com/content/SW/201710/20171030115320828/Samsung_Data_Migration_Setup.exe Well poo poo. I didn't think to look for a simple obvious solution. Thanks man! E: that worked perfectly and took no time, thanks again. Digital Jesus fucked around with this message at 06:26 on Dec 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
Is OP still up to date on recommended models? Probably gonna grab a Samsung 850 pro as a second drive for my laptop.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
Armacham posted:Is OP still up to date on recommended models? Probably gonna grab a Samsung 850 pro as a second drive for my laptop. It's missing WD Blue as a recommendation, but otherwise yes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
That new Crucial MX500 seems quite good now too, on par with Samsung 850s, barring any issues that might come up because it's a brand new drive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
I thought there have been plenty of faster SSDs, but they’re nowhere near Samsung’s longevity/speed price ratio yet. That’s why Samsung’s are always recommended over other brands.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Yep, I perused the current market but quickly decided on Samsung for those exact reasons. Didn't hurt that the local Microcenter had them on sale either so I was able to pick one up and clone my dying drive the same day.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 21:57
|
|
|
nielsm posted:It's missing WD Blue as a recommendation, but otherwise yes. No it isn't, the x400 is listed  Updated
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
kloa posted:I thought there have been plenty of faster SSDs, but they’re nowhere near Samsung’s longevity/speed price ratio yet. That’s why Samsung’s are always recommended over other brands. Samsung was so dominant before the MX500 because the reputable brands like Crucial are only slightly cheaper but also slower than the Evo lineup, and nobody really cares about the unreputable ones like Adata and Kingston.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 04:20
|
|
|
NewEgg has the 500GB Samsung EVO for $129 right now
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
I have a Samsung 850, bracket, and SATA cable on the way to me from amazon and will be here tomorrow. I basically want to just install games to this to help them run better and wasn't planning on moving my Windows install to it. After putting it in my tower physically, is there anything I need to particularly do? How easy is it to move Windows over to the SSD and is it worth it? I have a 1TB HDD already in the system. I am relatively dumb with computer things (what's a bios?) and just don't want to gently caress up my system. :/
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Install everything on the SSD Use macrium reflect to image the old drive to the new one
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Installing the games to it is the least helpful way to go. Clone your OS to the SSD with Macrium or the Samsung migration tool. It will help games load a bit faster but that is a secondary consideration.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
The HDD is only 250GB and I obviously can't move everything. OS should be moved first and then other applications?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Is the SSD significantly larger than your current used space on the HDD? If yes, just use Samsung's migration tool to clone the HDD to the SSD, take out the HDD, and enjoy a much faster computer. If you can't comfortably fit your current install on the SSD, consider if you could offload some data (documents, photos, music, video) to external media and make a direct migration possible that way. Otherwise, yes you could have it as secondary storage in the computer, but you aren't going to get the full advantage if you don't run your OS from the SSD. If you just want to use it as secondary storage, then after physically installing it, hooking it up with SATA data and power cables, boot up Windows, and open the Disk Management console. If you're on Windows 8 or 10, the easiest way is to right-click the Start button and pick it from there. You should see the empty, unpartitioned disk there. It should be easy enough to figure out how to create and format a partition for the full disk space from there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
I'm a dumb dumb and didn't even think of moving videos/pictures etc to external storage. So if I do a direct migration, what happens to the HDD? Do I just have it available as a different storage device?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
After cloning the entire HDD to the SSD, you have two (initially) identical system drives. The first thing to do is disconnect the HDD and test if you can boot from the SSD, and everything works as it should. If it does, and things are stable, the HDD can either work as a backup (if you put it somewhere safe), or you can format it and use as extra storage. If the system can't boot from the SSD after cloning, you can just hook the HDD back up and be back to where you started.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
nielsm posted:After cloning the entire HDD to the SSD, you have two (initially) identical system drives. The first thing to do is disconnect the HDD and test if you can boot from the SSD, and everything works as it should. If it does, and things are stable, the HDD can either work as a backup (if you put it somewhere safe), or you can format it and use as extra storage. Yeah, I usually run a Disk Clean up wizzard on the SSD after booting. Also generally delete and re-create a system restore point. For some reason sometimes cloning causes the system restore to think the main HD is gone and it wont automatically turn it back on. Worth checking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2017 23:12
|
|
|
Is a WD Black PCIe Gen3 x4 NVMe a good SSD choice or should I stick with Samsung 960 EVO? [e] https://www.wdc.com/products/internal-ssd/wd-black-pcie-ssd.html#WDS512G1X0C Boozie fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Dec 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Boozie posted:Is a WD Black PCIe Gen3 x4 NVMe a good SSD choice or should I stick with Samsung 960 EVO? I believe the black and blue use SanDisk x400 technology which is a good ssd as far as testing has shown.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
SlayVus posted:I believe the black and blue use SanDisk x400 technology which is a good ssd as far as testing has shown. I don't think the NVMe versions have anything to do with the x400.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Boozie posted:Is a WD Black PCIe Gen3 x4 NVMe a good SSD choice or should I stick with Samsung 960 EVO? https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1919?vs=1978 (AT doesnt have the 500gb 960 Evo, you can change it to the much slower 250gb 960 Evo and the results are pretty similar) Price seems to be about $50 different, but Newegg has a $10 code going so the difference is down to $40.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Cygni posted:https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1919?vs=1978 Have access to 20% off WD drives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
The WD Black carries a five year warranty to the 960 EVO's three. It comes down to whether two years of extra coverage is worth more than a noticeable - 3200/1800 (EVO) vs. 2050/800 (WD Black) - loss in performance at the 500/512GB SKUs. The EVO also performs way better in terms of IOPS performance (330K R/W 4K/QD32 on the EVO to 170/130K on the Black).
BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Dec 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2017 00:48
|
|
|
If you ask me the real world differences between those two NVMe drives will be zero in like 99% of workloads. But then again I'm speaking as a SATA3 peasant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
I've been seeing these crop up lately and have no idea 1) how to install them and 2) what their advantage over a normal SATA SSD is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Q8ee posted:I've been seeing these crop up lately and have no idea 1) how to install them and 2) what their advantage over a normal SATA SSD is. They install in the M.2 slot many newer motherboards and laptops have. The advantage of NVMe SSDs are 5x-10x faster read/write speeds than SATA is capable of, and capable of serving many more requests per second. Overall just much faster. Didn't some people report than Windows' disk caching made NVMe access slower than with cache disabled?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
Q8ee posted:I've been seeing these crop up lately and have no idea 1) how to install them and 2) what their advantage over a normal SATA SSD is. They're faster, on paper, provided your MOBO chipset supports the 4 channels on the M2 slot. SATA 3 (6Gb/s) is limited to 600MB/s, with real-world somewhere around the mid 500s. Whereas that drive claims "up to 2,800MB/sec read & up to 600MB/sec write".
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
ahahaha holy poo poo this is so much faster. windows booted up in like, 8 seconds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 00:48
|
|
|
it's fucken off the chain
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
Capsaicin posted:ahahaha holy poo poo this is so much faster. windows booted up in like, 8 seconds. you'll go from barely ever turning your PC off, to always turning it off. I like to blow my friend's mind by saying I gotta restart quick, and I'm back in like 10 seconds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 10:58
|
|
|
I have a pretty old computer, like 7 years old, with an Intel 80GB SSD as primary. Looking to upgrade the drive, but do I need to worry about the motherboard not supporting the SATA III protocol? It's this motherboard, which talks about eSATA, but nothing else: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002N2Z0JY/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 12:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 13:31 |
|
|
baquerd posted:I have a pretty old computer, like 7 years old, with an Intel 80GB SSD as primary. Looking to upgrade the drive, but do I need to worry about the motherboard not supporting the SATA III protocol? It's this motherboard, which talks about eSATA, but nothing else: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002N2Z0JY/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1 SATA III drives are backwards compatible, they'll just operate ~300/300MB/sec.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2017 13:02
|
|