Which is better to use SSD or HDD?
Thank you.
SSD or HDD
-
lilgreenback
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:28 am
Hi SSD are a lot more expensive than HDD in relation to the GB per £ as you will be aware but the prices are quite reasonble for the smaller sized ones. If you were building a PC only for trading then a 120 or 160 GB disk would probably be fine with only the Operating System and your essential data info on it. You could always have USB or additional internal HDD to transfer stuff to it. The ssd would give really fast data transfer to and from it.
One thing I have found really easy to fit and very effective is water cooling the Corsair H50 ready built kit is brilliant, low noise excellent cooling and very stable the computer I mean. The only thing is that you need to take the motherboard out to fit a fixing plate on the back but it then just bolts through.
I know this digresses a bit from your original question but if I was fitting a solid state drive I'd look at a new system and cpu, mboard etc. Just a thought.
One thing I have found really easy to fit and very effective is water cooling the Corsair H50 ready built kit is brilliant, low noise excellent cooling and very stable the computer I mean. The only thing is that you need to take the motherboard out to fit a fixing plate on the back but it then just bolts through.
I know this digresses a bit from your original question but if I was fitting a solid state drive I'd look at a new system and cpu, mboard etc. Just a thought.
SSD will improve OS boot time and file transfer operations (SSD to SSD). Also it will increase the speed at which your system can pull data into RAM from SSD storage.
If you using small programs (which cumulatively fit inside your physical address space(amount of RAM)) then after the initial load into RAM you won't get any performance gain. (Unless you have a chronically small amount of ram and you are riding your swap file). More ram will (usually) provide a much bigger performance increase over ssd.
If you have the cash get tons of ram and ssd. If your on a budget max your ram and live with the increased os boot and file transfer times you get with a SATA drive.
If you using small programs (which cumulatively fit inside your physical address space(amount of RAM)) then after the initial load into RAM you won't get any performance gain. (Unless you have a chronically small amount of ram and you are riding your swap file). More ram will (usually) provide a much bigger performance increase over ssd.
If you have the cash get tons of ram and ssd. If your on a budget max your ram and live with the increased os boot and file transfer times you get with a SATA drive.
-
CaerMyrddin
- Posts: 1271
- Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:47 am
I would say both. If you are looking fot the best price per GB, HDD are unbeatable and they make sense to store large amounts of data.
If you want pure performance, SSD are the real deal. They will get your system flying, with really low times to load aplications.
I have both btw
If you want pure performance, SSD are the real deal. They will get your system flying, with really low times to load aplications.
I have both btw
-
JollyGreen
- Posts: 2047
- Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am
SSD will make a good improvement over standard HDD but you will still get the SATA bottleneck which can be annoying at times.
You could go the whole way and use a PCI-E drive which fits onto the mpotherboard in a way similar to a graphics card. This gets you away from the SATA bottleneck and can give read/write speeds twice as fast as those offered by SSD. Again you would need to ensure you have a spare PCI-E slot.
You could go the whole way and use a PCI-E drive which fits onto the mpotherboard in a way similar to a graphics card. This gets you away from the SATA bottleneck and can give read/write speeds twice as fast as those offered by SSD. Again you would need to ensure you have a spare PCI-E slot.
