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

  • 4 months later...

About!!

 

Sorry, but there is no "about".  You either own them or not.  If I have 5 SSD's I don't own about 6 SSD's.

 

Going by your list (figuring 1 in each PC) you have 15.

 

That isn't "about 11"

 

Ok, so I did another inventory count. I'm still probably forgetting some in this list. But this is just what I could think of off the top of my head.

 

Parents laptop in their Kitchen 64GB SSD(my ssd drive)

All in one Touch screen PC on Kitchen Table 30GB SSD

iMac 27ich i7 16GB 128 SSD

Main 4 Monitor Workstation 128GB

Couch i7 msata 256GB

Server 128 SSD

Quickbooks Laptop  64GB SSD

PC in Theater 64GB

Laptop in car 32 GB SSD

Macbook Pro i7 128GB SSD

Living Room TV PC 128GB SSD

Acer Tablet 64GB msata

Intel NUC Msata 64GB

Intel NUC Msata 64GB

Windows Vista 64bit 64GB Sysprep Drive

Windows 7 64bit 64GB Sysprep Drive

Zelmen HD enclosure USB 2.0 64GB SSD

Zelmen HD enclosure USB 2.0 64GB SSD

Zelman HD Enclusure USB 3.0 64GB SSD

Spare Cosair 64 GB SSD

Spare kingston 64 GB SSD

Spare Msata 64GB SSD

------

64GB SSD I had laying around that I gave to someone in a laptop  last month

 

None yet -- I still don't quite trust an SSD.

You are completely missing out. My first SSD experience was terrible - OCZ Vertex 60 GB purchased in 2009, died in 4 months. Every other SSD I have purchased since has not died yet. There's absolutely nothing to lose. If you are scared, that just means you don't do proper backups in the first place. 

 

I can't imagine booting on a HDD any more. I only have 3 active HDD's in my house (2 in the NAS, 1 in Xbox One). All my systems have had SSD boot drives since 2009, wouldn't have it any other way. Just remember the slowest component in computers is usually the spinning disk drive  :)

  • 2 weeks later...

Hmmm.. upon scanning the entire 8 pages, I don't see anyone using 1TB SSD yet.

 

I have 1x 128GB SSD (very old)... recently upgraded to 1TB SSD... And I am using this 1TB drive for OS bootup drive.  The 128GB SSD is sitting around somewhere... will put it in another PC soon...

Hmmm.. upon scanning the entire 8 pages, I don't see anyone using 1TB SSD yet.

 

I have 1x 128GB SSD (very old)... recently upgraded to 1TB SSD... And I am using this 1TB drive for OS bootup drive.  The 128GB SSD is sitting around somewhere... will put it in another PC soon...

That's because it's beyond what most people would like to spend on a drive (granted SSD's are always coming down on price). People buy smaller SSD's to use as boot drives, and store data on traditional large HDD's where price/GB is less. I have a 256 GB 840 Pro as a boot drive on my desktop, which is enough for Windows 8 + my programs. I have other dedicated SSD's for Steam + games + other apps.

Never owned a SSD. Don't really see the need for one.

 

 

its incredible how slow everything feel without it, after you have used SSD for a while.   i cannot stand being on older computers without ssd.   feel like snail pace.  frustrating. 

 

then again, i used to not mind the 4 to 10 minutes windows xp boot time on my desktop and my laptop. it was the norm at the time (2000).  expected.

 

so whatever floats your boat.  until you use it for a while, you don't think it matters.  after you do, you will.

I've 4 (since people were counting tablets, I counted my phone as well).

 

1x 256GB Sandisk in my server

1x 512GB Crucial in my laptop

1x 32GB Samsung in my tablet

1x 32GB unknown in my phone.

 

I'd love to have one in my desktop as well, but it'd be wasted since my desktop is old and only has 3Gbps SATA.

Desktop PC [Windows 8.1, 64-bit] :

  1. Intel SSD 510 Series, 120 GB (operatingsystem and programs).
  2. Intel SSD 520 Series, 240 GB (games and personal files).
  3. Intel SSD 335 Series, 180 GB (currently Arch Linux for testing)

 

Server/gateway [Arch Linux, 64-bit]:

  1. Intel SSD S3500 Series, 160 GB (Device 0/1 in BTRFS RAID1).
  2. Intel SSD S3500 Series, 160 GB (Device 1/1 in BTRFS RAID1).

HTPC [Windows 8.1, 64-bit]:

  1. Intel SSD 510 Series, 120 GB.

 

As you can see, most SSDs are older models and I only plan on adding more to the server at a later date (room for twelve 2.5" drives). I can't imagine using a HDD anymore, their access times and speeds are just too bad. I don't own any HDDs, the last one I had was in my previous desktop which I gave to my dad when I upgraded several years ago. The RAID1 in my server is recent, I bought another S3500 and upgraded from plain to RAID1 on the fly (online and mounted as /). BTRFS seems to be working pretty good, no need for partitions except for EFI system partition on the first drive (which is mounted at /boot). I've not had any bad experiences with my SSDs but I've only used Intel SSDs so far and I don't think I'll buy other brands any time soon with the exception of maybe Crucials latest series of SSDs.

its incredible how slow everything feel without it, after you have used SSD for a while.   i cannot stand being on older computers without ssd.   feel like snail pace.  frustrating. 

 

then again, i used to not mind the 4 to 10 minutes windows xp boot time on my desktop and my laptop. it was the norm at the time (2000).  expected.

 

so whatever floats your boat.  until you use it for a while, you don't think it matters.  after you do, you will.

 

I've never had to wait 4-10 minutes on any of my computers. But then again, I never really shut them down unless I needed to. My 2009 iMac takes max 2 minutes.

 

I've wanted to put a SSD in my iMac, but nervous about taking the screen off. What's normal boot times on a SSD?

I've never had to wait 4-10 minutes on any of my computers. But then again, I never really shut them down unless I needed to. My 2009 iMac takes max 2 minutes.

 

I've wanted to put a SSD in my iMac, but nervous about taking the screen off. What's normal boot times on a SSD?

 

 

i have a password screen on windows, then other loading, so your result may wary.

 

but i think it takes less then 30-35 seconds for me to boot up.  usually about 10-15 second to password, and 5-15 second after.  it damn fast.

 

 

 

speed increase is noticeable in other areas too, you know. if you primary boot partition is SSD, everything starts up faster. opening a program.

loading office, photoshop and pretty much every other tool is close to instant, instead of a delay you have to wait.

 

and don't get me started on gaming.    the games that give you tips to read on loading screens.    i never manage to read even a quarter of the tip... it always finishes up loading in seconds. instead of minutes.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • AMD RX 9070 GRE AI, Blender benchmarks vs 9070 XT, 7800XT, Nvidia RTX 5070, 4070 by Sayan Sen Earlier this week, we shared the first part of our review of AMD's new RX 9070 GRE. It was about the gaming performance of the GPU, and we gave it an 8 out of 10. As a follow-up, similar to how we did with the 9070 XT and non-XT, we are doing a dedicated productivity review for the RX 9070 GRE as well, where we compare it against the 9070 XT, 9070, 7800 XT, as well as Nvidia's 5070 and 4070. This will include AI, rendering, compute, and more benchmarks. AI performance, especially, is a very important metric in today's world, and AMD also promised big improvements thanks to its underlying architectural improvements. We will be pitching it against the data we already have for the RX 9070, and RX 9070 XT, but also the Nvidia 5070 FE, MSI GeForce RTX 4070 VENTUS 2X 12G, and Gigabyte Radeon RX 7800 XT GAMING OC 16G as they are in a similar price class, but also because we do not have a comparable 5060 Ti card lying around here that we can compare it against. Before we get underway, this is a collaboration between Sayan Sen and Steven Parker, who lent me his test bed. Also, there was no editorial input from AMD. First up, the specs of the RX 9070, 9070 XT, and 9070 GRE, which were given to us by AMD: Radeon RX 9070 GRE Radeon RX 9070 Radeon RX 9070 XT Boost Clock: Game Clock: up to 2.79GHz up to 2.20GHz up to 2.52GHz up to 2.07GHz up to 2.97GHz up to 2.40GHz Stream Processors 3,072 (48 CU) 3,584 (56 CU) 4,096 (64 CU) Ray Accelerator 48 56 64 AI Accelerator 96 112 128 ROPs 96 128 Texture Mapping Units 192 224 256 Memory 12 GB GDDR6, 18Gbps Clock, 192-bit Bus 432 GB/s 16 GB GDDR6, 20Gbps Clock, 256-bit Bus Effective Memory Bandwidth: 640 GB/s Infinity Cache 48 MB (3rd Gen) 64 MB (3rd Gen) Card Bus PCI-E 5.0 X16 Output 2x HDMI 2.1b 2x DisplayPort 2.1a Power consumption 220W 304W Recommended PSU 650W 750W Slot width 2x 3x Price (SEP) $549 $599 As you can see from the specs above, it is less than the standard RX 9070 in every way that counts, except for slightly higher Boost and Game clock speed. Design Moving on, the RX 9070 GRE we were given is an XFX Swift triple-fan, dual-slot design with two 8-pin connectors. At 30cm (self-measured), it will fit in most systems easily. There is no RGB either. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE by XFX from all angles. Test system Our test system consists of the following: Lian Li O11 Dynamic Mini V2 Flow (Amazon|Newegg) ASUS Z890 ProArt Creator WiFi (Amazon|Newegg) Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus (Amazon|Newegg) Thermal Grizzly KryoSheet - 44x37 (Amazon|Newegg) 2x 16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB (7200 MT/s in XMP) (Amazon|Newegg) Sabrent Rocket4 Plus 2TB SSD (Amazon) Windows 11 25H2 (Build 26200.8246) AMD shared a press driver based on the recently released Adrenaline 26.5.2 that we were required to use. We now move on to our benchmarks. First up, we have Geekbench AI running on ONNX. For some reason, the 9070 GRE does exceptionally well here in both half-precision (FP16) and single-precision (FP32). It manages to beat the RTX 5070 and RX 9070 non-XT, and is only behind the 9070 XT. Since Geekbench runs in short bursts instead of continuously hammering the graphics card, it seems the GRE's faster boost clocks are helping here. Next up, we move to the UL Procyon AI test suite, starting with the image generation benchmark. We chose the Stable Diffusion XL FP16 test since it is the most intense workload available on Procyon. The Nvidia cards do very well here, as even the 4070 out-muscles AMD's best fairy easily. The positive thing about the GRE is that it gets quite close to the 9070 non-XT in this test; this indicates that the VRAM does not play a very big role here, as SD XL relies on float16 (FP16). So this is something to keep in mind again. If you wish to work with float32 AI workloads, graphics cards with larger than 12 GB buffers would likely emerge as victors. Regardless, the gains are still massive on AMD's 9000 series compared to the 7000 series. Following image generation, we move to the text generation benchmark. This is one test where the 9070 GRE struggled, quite a lot. It seems that the 12 GB VRAM and lower memory bandwidth of the new Radeon 9070 GRE are hurting it quite a bit; the split is massive, especially in a test like Llama2, which packs 13 billion parameters. As such, in all the tests, the 9070 GRE is the slowest of the lot. Next, we tried Blender, and here the AMD GPUs were beaten by Nvidia. Rendering is something the Green team has always had a lead over the Red side, and it has not changed so far. On the positive side, though, the 9070 GRE shows significantly better results than the 7800 XT, which means AMD is on the right path. Catching up to Nvidia, though, will require a lot more effort. And we hope HIP and ROCm can keep improving. Wrapping up AI testing, we measured OpenCL throughput in the Geekbench compute benchmark. The RX 9070 GRE alongside the 9070 did not fare well here at all, even falling behind the 7800 XT. Interestingly, even the RTX 5070 could not beat the 4070 on OpenCL, so perhaps this suggests that OpenCL optimization may not have been a priority for either AMD or Nvidia in the modern era. Conclusion We reached the end of our productivity performance review of the 9070 GRE, and we have to say it's a mixed bag. Unlike the 9070 and 9070 XT, the GRE excels in some areas while losing ground fairly easily in others. Similar to how it happened in gaming, any time the card's memory subsystem gets hammered, it tends to fall behind the others. This was the case with text generation, wherein we saw the VRAM sometimes hit its maximum available 12 GB of usage with larger model sizes. So what do we make of the RX 9070 as a productivity hardware? It can certainly be used, but you have to know it has its limitations. For those looking for a GPU that can deal with more, AMD recently unveiled the Radeon AI PRO R9700, which is essentially a 32 GB refresh of the 9070 XT with some additional workstation-based optimizations. On a similar note, the new Ryzen AI Halo platform is something you can consider if you want to set up a local AI processing station. Considering everything, we rate AMD's Radeon RX 9070 GRE a 7.5 out of 10 for its productivity performance. Price is less of a factor for those looking at productivity cases compared to those considering the GPU for gaming, and as such, we felt it did quite decently on many occasions and can be handy if you need a 12 GB GPU and, for some reason, don't want to get Nvidia. Purchase links: RX 9070 / XT / GRE (Amazon US) As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Does anyone here know if these updates are integrated into the UUP dump isos?
    • Motrix Next 3.9.4 by Razvan Serea Motrix Next is a modern, open-source cross-platform download manager built as the official next-generation successor to the original Motrix project. It has been completely rewritten using Tauri 2, Vue 3, TypeScript, and Rust, while still relying on the powerful Aria2 download engine for high-speed multi-protocol transfers. The app supports HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, BitTorrent, ED2K and magnet links, offering advanced features like multi-connection acceleration, task scheduling, bandwidth control, and batch download management. With a significantly reduced install size (around 20MB), it focuses on being lightweight, fast, and resource-efficient compared to traditional Electron-based download tools. Designed for Windows, macOS, and Linux, Motrix Next delivers a clean, modern UI inspired by Material Design 3 principles, with smooth animations and a minimal workflow. It improves usability through better download organization, system tray integration, and enhanced torrent handling including selective file downloads and tracker management. Motrix Next features: Multi-protocol downloads — HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, Magnet, .torrent, ED2K, and Metalink tasks BitTorrent — Selective file download, DHT, peer exchange, encryption controls, metadata caching, GeoIP peer flags, and tracker probing Browser extension integration — Embedded Extension API with independent authentication, download confirmation, smart auto-submit, filename hints, referer/cookie forwarding, and real-time controls (Chrome Web Store · Edge Add-ons) Safe filename handling — Content-Disposition, RFC 2047, non-UTF-8, percent-encoded, and extensionless URL resolution with path traversal sanitization Download organization — Favorite and recent folders, optional file-type categorization, stale-record cleanup, and completed history backed by SQLite Concurrent downloads — Independent controls for active tasks, HTTP connections per server, segments per file, and BT peer limits Speed control — Global and per-task upload/download limits with day-of-week and time-of-day scheduling System integration — Tray operation, optional tray speed display, macOS Dock badge/progress, protocol handlers for magnet://, thunder://, and motrixnext:// Lightweight mode — Destroys the WebView on minimize-to-tray while Rust keeps the engine, task monitor, notifications, history, and extension routing alive Notifications and power options — Native task start/complete/failure notifications, keep-awake during downloads, and optional shutdown after completion Network controls — Scoped proxy support for downloads, app updates, and tracker updates, plus system proxy detection Auto-update channels — Stable, Beta, and Latest Across Channels policies with separate download and install phases Diagnostics — Structured logs, exportable diagnostic ZIPs, database integrity checks, automatic DB rebuild, and Linux GPU rendering fallback Personalization — Light/dark/system theme, 10 color schemes, 26 languages, and first-launch system language detection Motrix Next 3.9.4 changelog: Motrix Next 3.9.4 promotes the 3.9.4 beta cycle to stable. This release refreshes bundled engine binaries, improves task detail readability and copy actions, expands link handling for magnet and ED2K workflows, polishes responsive navigation and text wrapping, updates browser extension documentation, and refines network preference controls. New Features Task Detail copy actions — Added copyable values for task metadata and reusable render functions for long text fields. Magnet and ED2K lifecycle support — Added task lifecycle handling for magnet and ED2K links. History cleanup for deleted tasks — Deleted tasks can now remove matching history records. User-Agent management — Added user-agent management and improved related network preference controls. Browser extension documentation — Added the Firefox Add-ons link for the Motrix Next extension. Improvements Engine binaries — Updated bundled binaries for supported architectures. Task Detail readability — Long task names, URLs, tracker values, and copyable metadata now render more clearly. Deletion messaging — Refined localized task deletion text for clarity and consistency. Text wrapping — Improved URI input wrapping and task name multiline display. Navigation layout — Improved sub-navigation responsiveness. Disk allocation default — Changed the default file allocation method to trunc. Proxy controls — Improved proxy button styling in network preferences. Download: Motrix Next 64-bit | ARM64 | macOS ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Links: Website | macOS / Linux | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NVIDIA officially supports Ubuntu, as linked above with the GeForce NOW Hands on I did in collaboration with Paul Hill.
    • TO be clear I am not running linux today, however I keep thinking about it. And I want to make sure there are minimal obstacles if I decide to make that switch in the coming months.
  • Recent Achievements

    • 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
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      244
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      66
    5. 5
      +Edouard
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!