Minor SSD question.

[Robby]

Hello!

So, I've been trying to squeeze in a couple of upgrades for my PC in the recent days now that I've temporarily acquired my "own" cash. I managed to boost my RAM from 6GB to 10GB, but now the next upgrade is the one I have questions about.

I'm planning on getting an SSD at about 64-128GB, SATA III, which I plan on using as the "OS disk". Everything Windows related will be on that SSD, and then I have the 320GB HDD I have now as a "misc" disk, where I keep everything else non-Windows related. My current concern with an SSD is if my motherboard would be capable of supporting it.

Before you tell me, I'm aware that SATA connections are backwards compatible. SATA III disks work fine on SATA II, albeit a little slower (which doesn't matter). I just need to know if my motherboard supports it. I've already looked on Google and stuff, but I've found no positive way of discovering whether it's supported or not.

My mobo's model is "GA-MA785GT-UD3H (Socket M2)". Any help would be appreciated!

[Googolplex]

Support for
"6 x SATA 3Gb/s connectors supporting up to 6 SATA 3Gb/s devices"

So it will work, but due to S-ATA II limitation of 3 Gb/s the SSD may could not use its full bandwidth. But it will be even much faster than any HDD.

[plutomaniac]

The mobo supports SATA II and RAID functionality, so it should support AHCI mode. Check the BIOS, you should see an option to select between IDE/AHCI/RAID. For one SSD you need AHCI. As you said, if you get a SATA III SSD it will run at 3Gb/s speeds (SATA II). As far as size is concerned, 64GB is very little even for windows + basic programs nowadays. You need at least 128GB in my opinion.

[Robby]

Yeah, I can manually select the modes in the BIOS for the HDD when I boot it. The reason I said 64GB SSD is because, for a start, my cash is still a bit limited (things in Romania tend to be pricier) and I think it may be just enough. I mean, Windows 8.1 I have on a 40GB partition, and I still have about 17GB left on that partition. It would be about 23-25GB if I wouldn't have some video files right on my desktop. So I "think" 64GB should be enough, I could easily install any other program on a different disk, and I would only install programs on the SSD which I use, like, all the time (which is like 3). But if you say 128GB should help, I'll see about it.

As for the speed reduction, it wouldn't bother me, as an SSD at slower speeds is still faster than an HDD anyway. And I mainly want to get the whole "everything on one HDD" problem off the PC. It's starting to kill me when it takes a really long time for everything to boot.

At least the main question is solved, so thanks for that!

EDIT: Just in case, the SSD is planned JUST for Win8.1, and nothing else, except maybe for a few (like 3) programs. That's it.

[Mudbill]

Even if you have the SSD just for your OS, there are many files that will be required to run on it. Many programs don't give you the option to install outside the main Program Files folders, and C: also contains AppData, dump files, TEMP folder, scratch disks, registry and many other essential system components that grow over time. I'm surprised you managed to keep 20 gig free from your partition, unless you've only used Windows for a few weeks. After a year, it should easily outgrow 50 gigs from daily use (unless you tend it). Keeping at least 10% free space from your SSD will also be crucial for its speed.

Now, it IS possible to change where many system components are located, like the dump files location, TEMP folder and the like. For SSDs, it can be a good idea to change at least TEMP, as many read/writes can shorten its life span, though today that isn't much of an issue anymore.

[Robby]

I've been using Win8.1 on my 40GB partition for almost 5 months since a reinstall (right now I have 15.51GB remaining on it). I've gone ahead to disable any Windows features I won't need, and I use Treesize to see what's using up my space every 2-4 days. If it's something not required (like temp files, crash dumps, etc), then I usually delete them when I'm sure I won't make use of them

Win8.1 in itself has a minimum of 20GB space requirement that slowly expands, I'm aware. I also know about the 10% deal, but 64GB in itself should be relatively enough. If not, I can always improvise some way, but still, it's an SSD, which would help.

[Mudbill]

Well, the market is expanding, and 64 GB has been fairly low for a while. Getting one might not be a good investment. A 128 one will surely last you longer, and with more reusability.

A search around my local web stores shows the price difference isn't very big. The cheapest 64 GB one I could find was 436 NOK (~50 USD) where most were averaging around 550 NOK (~63 USD).

The cheapest 128 GB SSD I found was 516 NOK (~59 USD), where most were averaging around 800 NOK (~92 USD). I got a 120 GB one myself not long ago which cost me, I believe, 795 NOK.

The cheap 128 one I found is called SanDisk Z400s 2.5" SSD - 128GB if you wanna look it up.

Keep in mind these are Norwegian prices, so they're bound to be more expensive than most other places because we have crazy taxes and import costs.

[Yuhaney]

Personally I would recommend getting 128 GB at least.

I'm planning on getting an SSD at about 64-128GB, SATA III

I very quickly checked some prices and there is Kingston 240GB HyperX Savage SSD (SATA III) around 100€. SSDs have gone down in price a lot the past few years.

[Googolplex]

Greater SSDs don't have just more space. They are faster and have more lifetime, because there are more cells that can be addressed at same time and that means less usage per cell.

[Robby]

Righto, 120GB it is for me. Down there's the link for one SSD I found at 120GB.

http://www.pcfun.ro/ssd/integral/p4-seri...i-25-inch/

This may be one I'm planning for the moment. One thing I ain't sure of is how it's 2.5 inches, when my HDD is 3.5 inches. Is that something I shouldn't worry about tho?