How many SSD's do you own?


How many SSD's do you own?  

283 members have voted

  1. 1. How many SSD's do you own?

    • 1
      58
    • 2
      50
    • 3
      35
    • 4
      15
    • 5
      11
    • 6
      4
    • 7
      3
    • 8
      3
    • 9
      0
    • 10
      2
    • 11
      0
    • 12
      0
    • 13
      0
    • More than 14
      5
    • All of my computers have an SSD in them.
      46
    • I don't own an SSD yet.
      51


Recommended Posts

Pfffff... I have a boot SSD for win8, but to say that a normal platter harddrive is slow? Man.... we sure take speed for granted, my work OS is on an HDD (2.5" !!), startup time may be slow, after that, I bet it flies compared to most of the computers here (An SSD is not an excuse to not properly maintain an OS instalation)

 

Why do you think your HDD flies to compared to SSD installations? What exactly do you do to maintain on an OS installation to keep it fast for an SSD? The only thing I can think is potentially not having crapware installed (and even then it really isn't an issue for access to the disk -- more on that below). On an HDD you actually have to do defragmentation and making sure you don't have a ton of things running that are doing concurrent disk accesses.

 

Food for thought: take two brand new installations of Windows - one with an SSD and one with an HDD. Throw 16GBs of cloud synced storage on both (~10,000-20,000 files). On boot, the cloud storage SW will iterate through the files and check to make sure everything is up-to-date. On the HDD installation, it will take 3-5 minutes to verify all of the files and while that is occurring it will be impossible to do almost anything on the computer (without huge lags and slowdown) because the hdd head is currently rapidly reading other things for verification and does really poorly with rapid concurrent accesses. On the SSD installation, it will take 30-45 seconds and even while the files are being scanned everything will still run normally because you have very high concurrent access speeds.

Why do you think your HDD flies to compared to SSD installations? What exactly do you do to maintain on an OS installation to keep it fast for an SSD? The only thing I can think is potentially not having crapware installed (and even then it really isn't an issue for access to the disk -- more on that below). On an HDD you actually have to do defragmentation and making sure you don't have a ton of things running that are doing concurrent disk accesses.

 

Food for thought: take two brand new installations of Windows - one with an SSD and one with an HDD. Throw 16GBs of cloud synced storage on both (~10,000-20,000 files). On boot, the cloud storage SW will iterate through the files and check to make sure everything is up-to-date. On the HDD installation, it will take 3-5 minutes to verify all of the files and while that is occurring it will be impossible to do almost anything on the computer (without huge lags and slowdown) because the hdd head is currently rapidly reading other things for verification and does really poorly with rapid concurrent accesses. On the SSD installation, it will take 30-45 seconds and even while the files are being scanned everything will still run normally because you have very high concurrent access speeds.

Yeah... eh, I have cloud services, I seriously prefer redownload the data against that. Even so, that's a very atypical scenario. Seriously, HDDs are great as long as you keep the computer free of malware.

Yeah... eh, I have cloud services, I seriously prefer redownload the data against that. Even so, that's a very atypical scenario. Seriously, HDDs are great as long as you keep the computer free of malware.

HDDs are fine, but SSDs still have about 100x faster access times, so it completely fair to say that HDDs are incredibly slow in comparison.

 

I'm willing to bet if my PC at work had a SSD, I could get twice as much work done.  It's astounding how much time I waste waiting for things to load.

3 total, over my two computers.

 

There's two in my laptop, in RAID0. One in my desktop.

 

If you think the speed difference of an SSD isn't worth it you couldn't be more wrong. Windows moves into a whole new level of responsiveness with an SSD. Even with the cleanest of installs the difference is gigantic. Sure, you don't get the storage space, but there are traditional HDD's for that. Combine the two for the best of both worlds.

 

In my 13" laptop (my primary computer) I have these two Toshiba SSD's, each 64GB in RAID0 for a 128GB Windows drive. I keep all my software (besides some games) on it and it is fast, really fast. For my downloads, large games, photos and some VM's I have a 1TB Hitachi drive (5400RPM). I've had a dualboot with Windows 8 running off the HDD for a while (and 7 off the SSD) and the difference was enormous. Where the often-praised Windows 8 took over 40 seconds to boot I was up and running in 7 within 15 seconds. And the 8 install was a lot cleaner than the 7 install.

If you think the speed difference of an SSD isn't worth it you couldn't be more wrong. Windows moves into a whole new level of responsiveness with an SSD. Even with the cleanest of installs the difference is gigantic. Sure, you don't get the storage space, but there are traditional HDD's for that. Combine the two for the best of both worlds.

 

I've actually had people argue that they didn't notice any difference at all in their machine with an SSD. At that point, I just assume a person is being insincere and stop talking to them. I can't think of any scenario where that would ever be the case unless they never used their computer in the first place :D

I've actually had people argue that they didn't notice any difference at all in their machine with an SSD. At that point, I just assume a person is being insincere and stop talking to them. I can't think of any scenario where that would ever be the case unless they never used their computer in the first place :D

No kidding, if my mom can tell the difference...heh

 

Although SSHDs are pretty dang nice too, still not quite the same.

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...

Thought on my first SSD upgrade 

 

I just want to share my first personal SSD upgrade experience though i have installed for several customers. 
 
My specs are i5 3570K || GA-B75M-D3H || 2x 4GB Hyper X || 240gb seagate 600 ssd + Toshiba 1tb || Geforce GTX 660 windforce OC || Silencer mk iii 400W || Silverstone RL01 || WIn8 Pro 64 || AOC 21.5in IPS 1080p || Logitech F510 || Razer Abyssus

Only the SSD is newly added by cloning out the primary drive. 
 
I had my OS and programs on 320 gb WD black notebook hard drive. I did that for two reason one is to save money while buying the system second i always had a plan for SSD.
 
I ran out of storage but i want to still keep the Notebook hard drive primary because i can clone it to ssd when ever i want. So i bought a 1TB Toshiba drive and added for data.
 
Now my PC is ready for upgrade any time but i was waiting for the perfect deal.
 
First i have to tell what i do
1) Surfing (commonly 2,3 (All the time) tabs some time 4,5(Once in a day) but rarely (Once a month) 50 tabs when selecting photos from sites
 
2) Photoshop / Premier Pro / After effect. 
 
3) Games 
 
4) Skype for IM
 
I always keep my pc maintained in old days like clearing temp files and defraging. Thanks to the new OS which minimizes the maintaining tasks. All the start up items are i know and i need them. All the services running are needed for me. So simply i don't have a bloat ware. I never had a personal malware issue for last 12 years. I only had at the time of getting to know what is a PC when i'm studying O/L.  I always keep windows updated. 
 
Before I swap it with SSD i took the disk speed test on my WD3200BEKT and it is 
 
3y9u.jpg
 
Then my data drive 
 
obgz.jpg
 
 
After swapping the WD with Seagate 600 240 gb SSD
5cfv.jpg
 
So definitely now my disk is faster. 
 
But in real life for my present usage 
 
What are the pros:
SSD user pride
Less Noise
HDD light rarely blinks
 
Cons
Though Theoretically disk access speed has increased i don't say it is speed demon or sort of. I can feel it increased but not that much as i have read in sites. That may be the way i maintained my PC in the past. I don't find SSD worth for the price (With out a deal). For me it is not much of a increase. that include all my usage and star up shut down. Before i use gigabyte ultra fast boot option on F15 bios. 
 
I have a speculation the people say wow after SSD might be having lot of bloat ware or in the need of torturing the disk that they must have to. 
 
 
I'm still happy as i bought a top 240gb drive for very cheaper price on black friday. But i just thought to share my thoughts 

Technically one, my system has a 24gb boot SSD that gets me from cold to login screen in ~6-10 seconds, but after that it seems like the HDD does all the rest of the work

 

Will be getting a "real" SSD sometime soon 

  • 8 months later...

Just one on my desktop but love it so much that I want to get one for my old laptop, inject some new life into it. If anyone is on the fence about buying one, go for it! They're simply amazing. Going back to a platter disk even on a fast-ish computer hurts now :D

I happily own 2 SSD's in my Desktop, both rMBP's are SSD's and my new HTPC / SteamBox will be SSD. I also have 2 SSD's that were retired into external drives.

 

SSD is the only way going forward, ill have spinning rust for data I don't give a ###### about

I have two at home.

One in the desktop OCZ Vertex 2e as a 120GB OS drive.

One in my laptop (Dell XPS 15) that is a 512GB.

 

I use a regular hard drive at work and as i've been with an SSD for over 4 years now.

Doing stuff on a regular drive is so slow. I moan about it all the time.

Takes about 30 seconds to load Photoshop CC.

On the laptop it took about 3-5 seconds. :laugh:

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I think it depends on what you're looking for to do, and the time you have to spare. With my Dwarf 3, I easily spend 3-4 hour sessions; half an hour driving to an un-light polluted place, another half hour unpacking and setting up the smart scope + tripod for equatorial tracking, then 15 more minutes mucking around with settings and shooting calibration frames, spending a few hours shooting, merging with past photo sessions, etc. It's crazy how time flies and I often get home later than I expected. It's something I still need to set aside a good part of an evening to do, all in all. For one session, where you often need like four for best results when it comes to deep space objects. Even with a smart scope like Dwarf 3, regular non-astro photography is still way more approachable to people getting into photography. I find this is a time consuming niche no matter how I go about it. With practice, I can probably begin cutting time here but I think where smart scopes find their home is among people who love to shoot the night sky but don't have the spare time to go deep with the "navigator level" attunement to the night sky itself in addition to everything else. Having said this, _if_ you have even more time to spend on this hobby, it will probably be even more rewarding to do it more by hand and learn the skies and the details of how it all works.
    • I misread the title and thought Teams itself would be redesigned. Imagine having this one as a native WinUI app.
    • Dell, HP PCs ran into endless reboot, BitLocker recovery loops but Windows 11 isn't to blame by Sayan Sen Last month Neowin reported on a major issue on Dell systems wherein a bug in its official support tool was leading to endless blue screen of death (BSOD) and restarts. Following our report, Dell officially acknowledged its SupportAssist-related crash issue, confirming that the culprit is not Microsoft's operating system but rather a faulty version of its own remediation software. In a newly published support advisory, Dell stated that version 5.5.16.0 of Dell SupportAssist Remediation and Alienware SupportAssist Remediation can trigger blue screen errors and unexpected system restarts. The company notes that the problematic component operates independently of the main SupportAssist application, meaning users should not remove the primary SupportAssist software when troubleshooting the issue. According to Dell, the crashes are linked specifically to the SupportAssist Remediation service, which is bundled with SupportAssist OS Recovery Tools, and as such it has since released an updated version, 5.5.16.1, which is said to resolve the problem. Affected users are advised to first verify whether version 5.5.16.0 is installed by checking the Installed Apps section in Windows Settings. If so, Dell recommends updating SupportAssist OS Recovery Tools through either SupportAssist's "Update Software" feature or Dell Command Update. Dell also advises users to back up important data before performing the update and to ensure systems remain connected to power throughout the installation process. If you are still having issues though make sure to report to the Dell support forum. As it turns out though Dell is not the only PC maker currently dealing with update-related headaches as HP is also facing a separate but probably equally frustrating issue involving recent Windows Secure Boot updates that were released with recent Windows 11 Patch Tuesdays. Similar to Dell, HP also put up its own support article where it explains the issue. The company says that affected devices could hit a brick wall when booting as they run into a BitLocker recovery loop after the April 2026 updates. The problem appears to affect systems wherein the new UEFI Secure Boot CA 2023 certificates fail to apply properly. As such affected users will find themselves entering their recovery key over and over again despite the system otherwise functioning normally. HP says such PCs should be updated to the latest available BIOS version and configured with the necessary Secure Boot certificates before installing Microsoft's Windows 11 Patch Tuesday updates. Systems that are already experiencing the problem may require BIOS configuration changes to restore normal boot behavior. Admins can find information regarding that in the support article here on HP's official website.
    • Getting further away from the artistic study of mental disease that was the first game... (which never needed any sequels to begin with) But I get it, a company has to make money. And the second was at least visually impressive, if not in any other way.
    • If its the devs fault you would think Unreal would help M$ take full advantage of Unreal and work with them to fix the performance issues. Otherwise they are catching unwarranted bad press.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      246
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!