Is it still worth having a separate game drive with how fast nvme is?

GregI

GregI

GregI

Associate
Joined
10 Dec 2007
Posts
1,778
I'm from a time when it was heavily advised to have your games on a separate hard drive from your Windows install. We're talking XP era.

With things like DirectStorage approaching and the ridiculous speed of these nvme 4.0 drives, do you think it's still needed for optimal performance?

Say a 500GB Windows nvme and another 2TB nvme for game installs being my idea.
 
SSD were very expensive back then hense why people would just get a small SSD for the OS then a large HDD for game storage.

Nowadays it generally makes more sense to just buy 1tb+ drives especially with M.2 where your limited by how many drives you install so have so wasting an M.2 port with say a 250gb isn't a good idea unless your really strapped for cash.
 
No not anymore.

Just get a large nvme drive on your motherboard, even 2tb now not so expensive.

I have 2 in mine, 2tb main nvme and second 1tb sata SSD from my previous build.

Basically don't even use the second sata SSD now, but I mean it wasn't going to do anything else so put it in.
 
I've got a 1tb sn850 as my main os+games drive and a 2tb sn750 as my media drive.
Depending on your internet speed (I've got 500Mbps fibre), re-downloading games isn't a big chore.
And besides how often does one reinstall windows anyway? I've done it twice in the last 10 years (upgrading windows 7 to 10, and now 10 to 11)
 
Even in HDD time separate drive for games was substitute for enough RAM:
After initial boot/load up disk usage of OS has always been small, except for page file use because of insufficient RAM.

And with any SSD, including SATA SSDs, normal non-paging file disk usage of OS is completely insignificant.


GregI said:
Say a 500GB Windows nvme and another 2TB nvme for game installs being my idea.
Click to expand...
Wasting one of the very limited M.2 slots for tiny OS drive has absolute zero sense.
At least SATA SSD for OS wouldn't waste limited slots and wouldn't make real difference to usage.
Except maybe if rebooting PC every ten minutes.
 
mickyflinn said:
Personally like games on a seperate drive so you don't have to download again if doing a fresh install of Windows.

What case did you get in the end ?
Click to expand...

Almost certain on the 4000D Airflow was just seeing if a price drop was gonna happen since I still need to wait on other parts anyway. Managed to get the SN850 2TB Heatsink version for £264 by wating a couple days so seeing if my luck holds out on the case side too.

Even when I try to look at alternatives the 4000 series just always comes out on top. The Lancool II Mesh Performance gets mentioned along with it but things put me off it like having to buy the front panel usb-c separately where as the 4000D Airflow has it as standard. It also has this weird glass back panel so you can look at your cables being hidden by other covers it just seems a mess to me.

The case that comes closest for me to consider seems like the Lancool 215 but again it just seems to lack the oomph of the 4000D Airflow in every aspect. Again lack of usb-c front panel but atleast they didn't put a glass side panel this time. What is putting me off choosing the 215 is everywhere I look, it's always associated with "budget" in the title or description of the product. Might just be me but I would feel kind of tacky putting over £2,000 worth of parts in a case people deem as "budget". It seems like everyone views the 4000D series as high value/premium and I have seen multiple builds of people putting £3,000+ components inside it. Can't say the same for the 215.
 
I have my OS and some games on Samsung 980 Pro 1TB, and some other games on a WD SN550 1TB. I did some experimenting moving some games between drives and doing simple tests for loading times and FPS. Games with very long loading times (e.g. Rust) usually load quicker if they are on the Samsung, once in game the fps is the same regardless of which drive the game is loaded from.
 
I've been running a single drive for a long time, however, since my re-case I've now got 2 nvme drives on my board, OS and Games/Data, I haven't noticed any difference but if you ran both option side by side then you would see an increase in performance.
There's videos on this exact thing on YT.
 
Joxeon said:
SSD were very expensive back then hense why people would just get a small SSD for the OS then a large HDD for game storage.

Nowadays it generally makes more sense to just buy 1tb+ drives especially with M.2 where your limited by how many drives you install so have so wasting an M.2 port with say a 250gb isn't a good idea unless your really strapped for cash.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, the problem with m.2 is most motherboards only have two slots so having a small drive just for Windows is a bit of a waste. I put games on Windows drives now.
 
One of the other guys makes a good point, I have an m.2 for my OS and any programs I want installed but offload my games onto secondary SSD's purely so when I do an OS reinstallation I can keep my game libraries separate and just point game clients back to them. Although having a big enough m.2 you could just partition your it off and shove your games there.

Also comes down to case and aesthetics, I have 4x Large capacity SSDs which you cant see as they are in dedicated bays so my build stays clean, if I was using a case that didn't give me that option I would lean more towards the high capacity m.2 with dedicated partitions as good quality units are now fairly cost effective, all about preference and what suits your build imo :)
 
I use SATA trayless caddys on my PC - both 3.5" and 2.5"
I use a 500GB SSD (Windows + Applications) coupled with a 3TB HDD (files + folders) for work.
Then after work, I remove both those drives and slide in a single 1TB for gaming.
I have four 1TB drives (different generations bought over a three year period) each with their own install of Windows + drivers + games (Flight Simulators / Steam / GTAV & RDR2 / Far Cry Series)
This allows me to run the best drivers for each game without affecting the others, but in retrospect it's more Windows installations to manage so if I was doing it today, I'd probably try and manage with a single large SSD for games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom