Technical question about SSD versus HDD

[Blonde Ranger {GB}]

im assuming that "HDD" means non SSD drives...

I have got myself a new rig and treated myself to an SSD drive since i heard thaty they are faster and better and will help to run games better. i have a secondary HDD drive in my rig too - thats for storage and stuff.

Sincethe SSD is pretty tiny, storage-wise, i have the OS (win 10) installed on it as well as Steam, and Fallout4 (and soon all the mods and NMM that i will install). the other games are in a steam library the second HDD

my question is this:
if i was to run Fallout 4 via the HDD (as in transfer FO4 to the HDD library instead of the main SSD), would it make a difference when i play the game? performance and stability difference is what im mainly after.

i know my new processor and RAM would make a difference (my graphics card is ok for the job, too), but im not sure about whether the SSD will be involved if i launch from HDD

Yeah, I could just transfer to HDD and find out, but I would rather find out from people more savvy than me before i start messing about.

hope all that makes sense, and i hope you all are enjoying the holidays!

:D

[Tax evasion]

Not an expert.
A faster storage means that the information is accessed faster.
So, technically, a faster storage means faster loading times (in short).
If you happen to move your game from your SSD to your HDD, you'll theoretically experience longer loading times.
How much longer ? Who knows. It won't take half an hour. Perhaps 0.5s longer, 1s longer, 5s longer, depends on the quantity of information needing to be accessed.

[Incunabulum]

Originally posted by Blonde Ranger {GB}:

im assuming that "HDD" means non SSD drives...

:D

It means Hard Disk Drive - SSD means Solid State Drive.

The difference is that SSD's are significantly faster transfering data to and from them - load time are lower is the practical takeaway.

Of you move FO4 to the HDD then, if you play vanilla, you won't experience much in the way of increased load times (because the game has a 'minimum time' for the loading screens), but if you mod it - especially with a lot of texture mods - it will increas the load times significantly, especially when moving from an interior to the open-world.

[danconnors]

Don't move ANY part of your FO4 game off the solid state device. The SSD is orders of magnitude faster than a regular hard drive. My next computer will have NO HDD on it. Their time is over.

[bunny de fluff]

Originally posted by Blonde Ranger {GB}:

my question is this:
if i was to run Fallout 4 via the HDD (as in transfer FO4 to the HDD library instead of the main SSD), would it make a difference when i play the game? performance and stability difference is what im mainly after.

of course it would, your game will be more prone to stuttering issues for one. Load time will get exponentially higher the longer you play secondly.

[Swagmaster Love 🇪🇺]

It honestly depends on your rig and your standards.

Fallout works okay on an HDD.

As for the general comparison of SSD vs HDD, yes moving Fallout 4 to the HDD instead of the SSD will make a significant difference. Whether youre bothered by the difference or not depends on you.

Afaik a quality 1tb SSD is currently priced at around 100€.
Consider going for more space soon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqoKUFGjFR0

[Blonde Ranger {GB}]

wow! huge thanks to you all.

every comment confirmed what i suspected. I had lags and long load times in certian areas using HDD - that was my main bugbear.

and yeah, bigger SSDs are a little out of my budget for the moment, but im saving for one!
ill have to hope that all my mods (i have a LOT!) will also fit on the SSD lol
...
.... unless....
unless i can figure out how/if i can run NMM and installed mods from my HDD while still keeping Fallout on my SDD.

oddly enough, its quite refreshing to have a game where i am actively involved in tweaking/fixing/figuring out technical stuff. its giving my ageing brain a workout!

[Ilja]

Originally posted by Blonde Ranger {GB}:

unless i can figure out how/if i can run NMM and installed mods from my HDD while still keeping Fallout on my SDD.

Better yet, ditch NMM and use either MO2 or Vortex. You can then use virtual drives for content.

I am using 3TB HDD as my storage drive for mod downloads (etc.) I am installing mods from there to SSD (though of course running mods from SSD and not from HDD) through virtual folder, keeping the whole Data folder clean from files.

If you want to keep your drive out of trouble and have fastest starts, then I can recommend picking up MO2 or Vortex. The initial loading event can get a bit longer, due to virtual drive doing it's thing. Everything else is far faster. Conflicts for loose files is also easier to manage.

Just something to think about. If you are still fine with (out of support) NMM and it's bugs, then keep running it. I would strongly recommend swapping to more up to date manager soon, at least when you next time restart the gameplay.

[reaper three one]

have you looked into caching from your hdd to your ssd that is what i have my rig set up as and it runs the game nicely and saves me space on my ssd it also helps to have a good hdd i use the newest series of wd hdd black 4 t

[ƎϽ∀ƎԀ]

I made quite a few comparisons with friends while playing ESO. With the same game settings graphics wise, on average SSD loaded the game from the desktop icon 15 to 20 seconds faster and zone changes were 5 seconds faster than an HDD. Ingame fps was no different with similar computers. I havent done any comparisons with other games. My opinion, the lifespan and faster access of the SSD isnt worth the extra cost.

[Swagmaster Love 🇪🇺]

Originally posted by Gamcull:

I made quite a few comparisons with friends while playing ESO. With the same game settings graphics wise, on average SSD loaded the game from the desktop icon 15 to 20 seconds faster and zone changes were 5 seconds faster than an HDD. Ingame fps was no different with similar computers. I havent done any comparisons with other games. My opinion, the lifespan and faster access of the SSD isnt worth the extra cost.

Newer generations of SSDs don't have the same issues when it comes to reduced lifespan.

[danconnors]

Having no moving parts you expect a SSD to last longer than a mass of whirring platters. Having no moving parts, soon the SSD will be cheaper than an HDD. The dissappointment to me is that I have a one terabyte SSD, and it's only a fraction used. The one terabyte HD is completely unused, which is why I say my next computer will not have an HDD. They are a thing of the past, like a Swiss watch.

[ƎϽ∀ƎԀ]

Originally posted by danconnors:

Having no moving parts you expect a SSD to last longer than a mass of whirring platters. Having no moving parts, soon the SSD will be cheaper than an HDD. The dissappointment to me is that I have a one terabyte SSD, and it's only a fraction used. The one terabyte HD is completely unused, which is why I say my next computer will not have an HDD. They are a thing of the past, like a Swiss watch.

Yup. Because thats the way things are done today. Take something reliable that lasts decades (HDD)(company says"Gee, we arn't selling enough of these"), make a minor improvement (speed and size), make it last 1/2 as long and make it 2x the price.

[danconnors]

Not really. Not in electronics. In the 1960's a 25 inch color television still had vacuum tubes in it and cost around $500.00. They broke down frequently, and television repairmen were a pretty frquent sight. Fast forward over half a century, and for 500.00 you can get a 50 inch color television. They have no tubes, not even a television tube. Instead of having 5 or 6 stations to choose from, you can have thousands. Admittedly you probably still won't find anything worth watching, but you can't blame the TV's for that. The television will probably not break down. You will end up throwing it out when you get a newer and bigger version.

I won't miss hard drives when they get packed into museums, because they'll be replaced by something far better and more capable.

[Swagmaster Love 🇪🇺]

Originally posted by danconnors:

Having no moving parts you expect a SSD to last longer than a mass of whirring platters. Having no moving parts, soon the SSD will be cheaper than an HDD. The dissappointment to me is that I have a one terabyte SSD, and it's only a fraction used. The one terabyte HD is completely unused, which is why I say my next computer will not have an HDD. They are a thing of the past, like a Swiss watch.

Just pay close attention to what SSD you buy in that case and what tech they use.

SSDs all have a limited use until they die.
A modern, quality 1-2 TB SSD, will basically outlast your lifetime via regular use.
Samsung produces some amazing SSDs.

Backup important data though.