SSD hard drive Vs HDD

[Viktor]

Which one is better

[Blueberry {JESUS IS LORD}]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Thinks2.0:

SSD is better than hhd because it's faster

not necessarily, in terms of speed, yes, but hdd is better for storage for long term

[Administration]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Blueberry {JESUS IS LORD}:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Thinks2.0:

SSD is better than hhd because it's faster

not necessarily, in terms of speed, yes, but hdd is better for storage for long term

exactly right.

HDD's are slow but still great for long term storage. I have HDD's configured from 20 years ago that still work and function properly as they should. NVME/SSDs are fast but not so great for the long term storage as they will eventually forget its data and self corrupt after a long time of not being powered on.

anything super important should not be saved to an SSD/NVME long term unless you dont care.


in the short term of things; multiple high performance nvme drives configured in raid0 is the best for gaming and workstation use. find a good motherboard with pcie bifurcation that supports raid and contains at least 3 to 4 nvme drive ports.

[Zero]

HDDs are best for long-term and reliable storage. SSDs are best for OS and games. Put your OS and games on an SSD and put your files on an HDD.

Also, when an SSD goes bad, there is no recovery of data, it's just gone. HDDs can be recovered from, depending on the extent of the damage.

[skOsH♥]

I love ssds

I love their transfer speed

They're fast as hell

[Start_Running]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Zero:

HDDs are best for long-term and reliable storage. SSDs are best for OS and games. Put your OS and games on an SSD and put your files on an HDD.

Also, when an SSD goes bad, there is no recovery of data, it's just gone. HDDs can be recovered from, depending on the extent of the damage.

HDD's also give a little more warning when things are about to go bad. Everyone who's been around them long enough knows the dreaded click of death.

[Cray]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Placenta Salad:

There isn't really a debate here. HDDs are an obsolete method of storage now.

There's a reason data centers still use hdds. ssd is good for random access speed. They also wear out faster, which may or may not matter depending on how much rw activity the system exposes the drive to. They cost more per unit storage, and may not match an hdd in serial/sequential access speed. ssds may consume less power overall, but that depends on what the system is doing with the drives. ssds don't care about physical impact and are practically impervious to influence from magnetic fields. ssds are usually the only sane choice for a laptop.

etc.

it's all about use case, otherwise hdds would be off the market and new ones wouldn't be produced to this day.

ssd for the os/system drive is a good idea though, but with the wrong software installed or incorrect os setup you may see it failing after a few years because the os or some programs are relentlessly hammering it with nonsensical tiny writes every 0.1 seconds for no good reason, wearing out the finite number of writes they have. an hdd might fare better in terms of longevity there.

anyway, there's no way i'd afford stuffing my entire game library on ssds, it would cost more than i care to throw at it, but a few hundred bucks' worth of hdds gets the job done admirably.

the games i play rarely go on the hdds, and those drives are asleep most of the time. they'll easily last a decade. a few years of unmodified windows on my ssd with the os + programs running free to do whatever they like and it was throwing enough smart errors that it could no longer be depended on for an os where data integrity is make or break.

tldr i'd say ssd for the os, turn off swapping and other stuff if you don't need it, and for the rest it doesn't matter if the load times don't bother you. if you can afford ssds and know you can replace them in a few years given the worst case scenario, go for it.

drawbacks to both, but hdds are so far always cheaper on the terabyte.

[Thinks2.0]

SSD Is great for gaming. The game takes Less Time to load.

[crunchyfrog]

There is no "better" as it depends on your purpose.

SSDs are great for fast access, but they used to be pretty poor for reliability if you read and write a lot to them. That has drastically improved, but it's stil a bit early to say for certain how they stack up versus mechnical drives. But they are expensive per Gigabyte.

So it entirely depends on what you want and how you use it.

If you want faster access, and money's no object go for it with SSDs.

But what many people tend to do (myself included) is to buy a smaller SSD and bung more permanent things on it, like your OS and leave it there. This means you boot up quickly with your regular programs and as you aren't delting and reinstalling stuff over the same space, reliability is good too.

Then you bung most of your games on mechanical drives.

I run a laptop by the side of my bed, and I have an SSD with the OS on, plus a few games that I want the best performance with (like 7 days to die and a couple of racing games).

I have an internal mechanical drive and two external USB3 mechanical drives too. I use these USB drives for many of the games I might install, play and remove more, videos, and audio work stuff.

[Start_Running]

Oprindeligt skrevet af crunchyfrog:

There is no "better" as it depends on your purpose.

SSDs are great for fast access, but they used to be pretty poor for reliability if you read and write a lot to them. That has drastically improved, but it's stil a bit early to say for certain how they stack up versus mechnical drives. But they are expensive per Gigabyte.

So it entirely depends on what you want and how you use it.

If you want faster access, and money's no object go for it with SSDs.

But what many people tend to do (myself included) is to buy a smaller SSD and bung more permanent things on it, like your OS and leave it there. This means you boot up quickly with your regular programs and as you aren't delting and reinstalling stuff over the same space, reliability is good too.

Then you bung most of your games on mechanical drives.

I run a laptop by the side of my bed, and I have an SSD with the OS on, plus a few games that I want the best performance with (like 7 days to die and a couple of racing games).

I have an internal mechanical drive and two external USB3 mechanical drives too. I use these USB drives for many of the games I might install, play and remove more, videos, and audio work stuff.

You'll certainly not want to have yopu swap/page file on your ssd drive.
Though I am planning on doing that m'self for performance reasons. A cheap second hand 120gb. that'll function as a swap and scratch drigve.
Games are certainly better left on hdd's . The load times can be readily mitigated by upgrading ram.

SSD's are better about their lifespans, but that lifespan will creep up on ye.

[MonkehMaster]

ssd for OS, games, programs.

hdd for storage.

for example:

mine has a 1TB nvme SSD for the OS and related programs, 1 250GB msata for paging file (in a sata enclosure), 2 1TB nvme ssd's for games (in an add-in pcie card), 1 1TB sata SSD for retro games, 1 4TB hdd for storage.

[Emma]

This thread was quite old before the recent post, so we're locking it to prevent confusion.