HDD for OS / Games? Advice..

mike2801.lee · 1 Apr 2009 at 15:33

I'm part way through building an i7 gaming / design rig, and am having trouble deciding on what HDD setup to use for my OS and Games / App installs (I will buy a 1TB Drive solely for storage purposes).

I hear great things about SSD's, but they are pretty pricy at the moment. I have also considered a WD 150GB Velociraptor, but again these aren't particularly cheap.

If I was to buy a couple of decent 7200 rpm drives and RAID 0 them (perhaps 2 x 160GB), would I be able to achieve similar performance to that of the Velociraptor? (I have an External 320GB Backup drive so i'm not worried about the risk factor).

If I was to fork out the extra cash on either a Velociraptor or an SSD drive, would it be worth it?

Also am I right in thinking that a 60GB SSD would not be enough for Vista and my various Games / Apps?... and if I was to install my games and apps on a seperate drive surely that would defy the point in buying an SSD in the first place (except for the speedier operation of the OS of course).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm getting the feeling that SSD wouldn't really benefit me that much, considering my needs, and my chosen hardware will already speed operations up a fair bit: (i7 920 3.8Ghz+ OC with the Noctua cooler, Asus P6T Deluxe Mobo, OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 1333Mhz, GTX 295).

What do you guys think?

Many Thanks,

Mike.

P.S - You wouldn't think that this was my first ever build would you? lol ^^ I've done a lot of reading, and it's quite a testiment to these forums, because most of what I now know came from posts here! Keep up the good work guys.

Fat Dog · 1 Apr 2009 at 15:52

Very similar setup here to your proposed rig, recently went from 74gb raptor to intel 80gb x25-m. Can't recommend it enough. Although the vertex drives are cheaper £/gb, as you point out 60gb isn't really enough, but 80 is, so really the comparison is 120gb vertex or 80gb intel, which means you have the better drive (intel) for less. Result.

Theguy · 1 Apr 2009 at 15:54

Personaly, what I would Mike (disagree if it doesn't suit you) but, if I had abit of extra cash I would buy one of those Vertex 30/60 jobs and just stick OS + Office on it. then get say a 1TB HD for your storage / Game needs.

Yes I know it isnt all Raidy but tbh I really do not think its worth the effort + extra cost...

mike2801.lee · 1 Apr 2009 at 16:05

Fat Dog said:
Very similar setup here to your proposed rig, recently went from 74gb raptor to intel 80gb x25-m. Can't recommend it enough. Although the vertex drives are cheaper £/gb, as you point out 60gb isn't really enough, but 80 is, so really the comparison is 120gb vertex or 80gb intel, which means you have the better drive (intel) for less. Result.

I'm sure the performance on that Intel 80GB X25-M is fantastic, however it does cost £321.99 which I can safely say is overkill for my needs and budget. Cheers anyway though.

mike2801.lee · 1 Apr 2009 at 16:11

Theguy said:
Personaly, what I would Mike (disagree if it doesn't suit you) but, if I had abit of extra cash I would buy one of those Vertex 30/60 jobs and just stick OS + Office on it. then get say a 1TB HD for your storage / Game needs.

Yes I know it isnt all Raidy but tbh I really do not think its worth the effort + extra cost...

I will be installing Apps such as 3ds Max, Maya, and Photoshop for my design work. Are you suggesting these should be installed on the 1TB drive or the SSD? Because I imagine that they wouldn't see any benefit unless they were on the Solid State..

Theguy · 1 Apr 2009 at 16:17

well yea as long as they all fit on it

the question you have to ask yourself is, is it worth the cost for the speed increase?

If you do have the extra cash I would still say dont bother tbh, thinking about it now..

alright so you may save your self extra seconds of wait but the extra cost is too much at the moment (for me anyway)

sorry iam changing my mind, I would say get your self a cheap (but fast ish) 7200 rpm for work + OS. and then a 1tb for other storage needs.

then say a few years down the line, when flash based is quicker + cheaper + comes in greater sizes, then have a look at it.

I would hate to buy flash based now and then kick myself 6months down the line when the price is halfed?

or you think... bugger it and treat yourself now with flash based.. heh

mike2801.lee · 1 Apr 2009 at 16:26

Theguy said:
well yea as long as they all fit on it

the question you have to ask yourself is, is it worth the cost for the speed increase?

If you do have the extra cash I would still say dont bother tbh, thinking about it now..

alright so you may save your self extra seconds of wait but the extra cost is too much at the moment (for me anyway)

sorry iam changing my mind, I would say get your self a cheap (but fast ish) 7200 rpm for work + OS. and then a 1tb for other storage needs.

then say a few years down the line, when flash based is quicker + cheaper + comes in greater sizes, then have a look at it.

I would hate to buy flash based now and then kick myself 6months down the line when the price is halfed?

or you think... bugger it and treat yourself now with flash based.. heh

I've got a couple of 7200 rpm sata drives in my current rig: Samsung Spinpoint P120 250GB and a Seagate Barracuda 160GB.

They are a couple of years old now but I haven't had any problems with them. You reckon it's worth salvaging one of these from my current rig to run the OS in my new one? (I'm not familiar with the life expectancy of HDD's).

I thought they would be too old to even consider as I've had them a while, but it seems that they are on par with current 7200 drive specs... except for the 8mb Cache

Theguy · 1 Apr 2009 at 16:44

hmm, if they are fast enough for your needs, why not use them and save yourself abit of cash?
what I think you should do is, measure the speeds of those 2 old harddrives you have. find out which 1 is faster and then use that as your work HD. what do you think of that idea?

mike2801.lee · 1 Apr 2009 at 16:56

Theguy said:
hmm, if they are fast enough for your needs, why not use them and save yourself abit of cash?
what I think you should do is, measure the speeds of those 2 old harddrives you have. find out which 1 is faster and then use that as your work HD. what do you think of that idea?

Sounds good, how would one go about measuring these speeds?

Theguy · 1 Apr 2009 at 17:03

HD tune, http://www.hdtune.com/
its freee

mike2801.lee · 1 Apr 2009 at 17:19

Theguy said:
HD tune, http://www.hdtune.com/
its freee

Well here are the results! Seems that the Seagate is slower but more reliable transfer rates than the Samsung.. Those dips aren't very encouraging..

Theguy · 1 Apr 2009 at 17:47

To give you something to compare to my 160gig HD which i use for windows,office ect.
comes out at:
Min: 12.9
Max: 73.4
Av: 58.6

Access Time: 19.6
Burst: 119.2
CPU: 2.3

Personaly I think we both need to find quicker OS drives