70gb is a bit to big for the ssd

[eqalidan]

I know how to split things symbolicly is there any way to move some things to my ssd so loadings faster while leaveing some of the other things on the hdd?
Movies only gets rid of 25gb of space.

[mimizukari]

Just buy a bigger ssd... gaming requires file sizes of up to sometimes even more than 100 gb

[eqalidan]

Originally posted by Yuiko:

Just buy a bigger ssd... gaming requires file sizes of up to sometimes even more than 100 gb

very few games have sizes that big that arent pure bloat
you got 25gb of tekken is what, 720p video thats compressed so bad it eats a bluray of data
you have the infamous titanfall, which had 35gb of uncompressed audio
but looking at tekken, it seems like most of the problem stems from all the files being packed into 5 files, honestly wondering why the files are that big for this game, probably going to have to play quite a bit more to find out

[zangaz]

Just install it on hdd, I have and the load times aren't so bad. I have it on 7200rpm drive

[Ariakas6]

I installed on hdd no problems on loading.

[Eternal Wanderer]

Well, I am not getting an SSD until they come in HDD sizes and affordable prices even if getting to that point might take forever. I advise the same to you. There is of course nothing wrong with having one for your several absolute favorite games though, if you can afford it.

[Henry Swanson]

I have had Tekken 7 installed on both my SSD and 7200 rpm HDD and the difference is minimal.

[poop]

The game is going to be getting bigger. More DLC on the way :)

Originally posted by SLAYER:

Well, I am not getting an SSD until they come in HDD sizes and affordable prices even if getting to that point might take forever. I advise the same to you. There is of course nothing wrong with having one for your several absolute favorite games though, if you can afford it.

What's so bad about $70 for 400GB SSD? That's like 2005 HDD prices. And considering SSDs didn't exist back then I think they're coming down in price much faster than HDDs ever did. And there's a good reason for that. Less parts. They're simply more efficient in every way. Keep your eyes on the prices, sales make these things irresistible. I got my 460 GB SSD for $64 at the store. My first SSD 120 GB was $140 LOL. It is faster than the big one though so I guess it's worth it. That's where Windows lives.

[Henry Swanson]

Originally posted by poop:

The game is going to be getting bigger. More DLC on the way :)

Originally posted by SLAYER:

Well, I am not getting an SSD until they come in HDD sizes and affordable prices even if getting to that point might take forever. I advise the same to you. There is of course nothing wrong with having one for your several absolute favorite games though, if you can afford it.

What's so bad about $70 for 400GB SSD? That's like 2005 HDD prices. And considering SSDs didn't exist back then I think they're coming down in price much faster than HDDs ever did. And there's a good reason for that. Less parts. They're simply more efficient in every way. Keep your eyes on the prices, sales make these things irresistible. I got my 460 GB SSD for $64 at the store. My first SSD 120 GB was $140 LOL. It is faster than the big one though so I guess it's worth it. That's where Windows lives.

Yeah, $70 for 400GB sounds really good to me! Buggers are expensive over here, average pricing would be around 120 euro's for 400GB, which would be around 140 dollars. $70 sounds like a great deal!

[unclassified]

you can delete the gallery movie files and safe space. i think it was something around 20-30gb

[Grottowalker]

Originally posted by Henry Swanson:

I have had Tekken 7 installed on both my SSD and 7200 rpm HDD and the difference is minimal.

esp when you are playing online games. disk drive speed is no where near as important if you are waiting for the other player to load

[eqalidan]

Originally posted by Grottowalker:

Originally posted by Henry Swanson:

I have had Tekken 7 installed on both my SSD and 7200 rpm HDD and the difference is minimal.

esp when you are playing online games. disk drive speed is no where near as important if you are waiting for the other player to load

I don't play games online,

Originally posted by Diogenes:

I just spent a few hundred £££'s on upgrading to 2 NVME SSD's. A 256GB WD Black NVME SSD, and a 512GB WD Black NVME SSD. They aren't that much now on Amazon. The biggest problem is finding a motherboard with 2 M.2 slots, that can accept 2 NVME SSD's. Even then, you have the option of installing a 1TB Sata drive. Sata's are generally a few £££'s cheaper than the M.2 SSD's these days, but not by a huge margin.

At some point, I'll take the 256GB NVME out, and replace it with a 1TB M.2 Sata 3 SSD. Put the 256GB drive into an M.2 converter card, and install it into a X4 PCIE slot. Keep the 512 NVME as a boot drive / mini games drive. That will also be replaced at some point, for a 1TB NVME SSD.

But seriously, you can get a 1TB M.2 ssd for little over £200 these days. That's what I would go for. NVME drives of the same spec, tend to cost twice as much as an M.2 Sata 3 drive.

There is a parity point where ssd speed does not get better, and its around 400mb read where nearly everything outside of a few exceptions seems to bottleneck, my os drive is a 500gb 960 evo, my game drive is a 4tb 5200rpm archive drive, the thing reads more then fast enough most of the time, it's writes where it bottlenecks itself. most games load off it fairly fast, or at least fast enough i'm not complaining, I just don't like sitting around waiting for crap to load when I know its able to load faster in a game where a loading screen happenes every 2 or so minutes.

as for the price of ssds, there are only a few ssds that you are over the 400mb read point where everything seems to bottleneck, and all of them cost the same as a nvme, or at least within 20$ of one.

[Diogenes]

Originally posted by eqalidan:

There is a parity point where ssd speed does not get better, and its around 400mb read where nearly everything outside of a few exceptions seems to bottleneck, my os drive is a 500gb 960 evo, my game drive is a 4tb 5200rpm archive drive, the thing reads more then fast enough most of the time, it's writes where it bottlenecks itself. most games load off it fairly fast, or at least fast enough i'm not complaining, I just don't like sitting around waiting for crap to load when I know its able to load faster in a game where a loading screen happenes every 2 or so minutes.

as for the price of ssds, there are only a few ssds that you are over the 400mb read point where everything seems to bottleneck, and all of them cost the same as a nvme, or at least within 20$ of one.

Truth be told, the only reason why I am going after NVME drives, isn't because of the speed. It's because I want to create a PC that doesn't have any Sata drives connected, via cables, to the motherboard.

I'm trying to build the smallest, most powerful PC that I have ever built. One way that I can do that, is to use the NVME connectors, in conjunction with NVME SSD's. I actually considered, at one point, getting an AMD Ryzen, with an integrated GPU, to help accomplish that task. However, from what I understand, the Ryzen's integrated GPU isn't all that good. It can barely keep up with a 1050Ti.

The way I see it, for online games, your just as well using 5400 RPM drives, because your not directly depending on HDD / SSD speed, any more than you are relying on the speed of the actual network. If the network is slow, the game will be slow. I'd rather use NVME's for offline, open world games.

Eventually, I'll just use a 1TB M.2 for my gaming needs. I'll archive everything else onto a 3TB Toshiba 7200RPM drive, which I will have connected to an external caddy. That drive is what I am using now, for gaming, and it's run flawlessly up to now.

Generally speaking, I haven't noticed that much difference in terms of speed, between an NVME drive, and a traditional SSD, in terms of game performance.

[Normalcey]

Originally posted by poop:

The game is going to be getting bigger. More DLC on the way :)

Originally posted by SLAYER:

Well, I am not getting an SSD until they come in HDD sizes and affordable prices even if getting to that point might take forever. I advise the same to you. There is of course nothing wrong with having one for your several absolute favorite games though, if you can afford it.

What's so bad about $70 for 400GB SSD? That's like 2005 HDD prices. And considering SSDs didn't exist back then I think they're coming down in price much faster than HDDs ever did. And there's a good reason for that. Less parts. They're simply more efficient in every way. Keep your eyes on the prices, sales make these things irresistible. I got my 460 GB SSD for $64 at the store. My first SSD 120 GB was $140 LOL. It is faster than the big one though so I guess it's worth it. That's where Windows lives.

$70 for 400gb ssd? That sounds way too low. Then again I live in Canada and our electronics are way above what the US pays.

[poop]

I said look out for sales!
Also, nothing fancy. Just an SSD that will max SATA 3...should be cheap.

[Diogenes]

Originally posted by Normalcey:

$70 for 400gb ssd? That sounds way too low. Then again I live in Canada and our electronics are way above what the US pays.

I'm looking at one right now, a 512GB Crucial MX500 Sata 3 SSD, that's priced at £90 on Amazon. It's not far off from what he said. There is also a Scandisk SSD Plus 480GB drive, for around the same price. A 1TB Sata 3 Crucial MX500 is going for £180.

Currency conversion doesn't seem to apply on items from imported into the UK, from the states, so if it's £90 here, it will probably be around $90 when the currency conversion has been applied.