What is best "C" drive

vbimport

#1

I have a SSD 240mb C drive, need to update to a bigger drive, what is the best one to get. Please give in simple language. I do not know enough about the different type of drives so graphs and all of that will not help me.
My computer tech says get something like the Samsung 850 EVO SSD 1TB. well that is $500. not a big problem. however a 2TB 7200rpm desktop HDD is only $85.
Told that the HDD will only last about 2 years. I am not a gamer so speed is not that much of a consideration.
Coolcolors we are not the best of friends, but I do respect your knowledge on these things. Cholla, everybody, just plain language

Thanks
Marty


#2

I’m pretty sure that going from a SSD to a HDD will leave you unhappy in the speed department.

The Samsung 850 EVO 500GB is a decent compromise for size vs cost. I have 2. :flower:

If you need storage space, using a second physical drive just for storage is the best option.


#3

I put nothing on my C Drive that is not absolutely necessary
So I have on my main computer 1 SSd that is 240 GB
The rest of my computers have either SSD Drives that are only 120GB
or Desktop HDD’s that are only 160GB

As far as HDD only lasting 2 years I can tell you I still have some that have been doing just fine for 7 years and still working.

Unless you have no room to put 2 drives then i would probably go with the 2TB HDD if you need the room and are not worried about the extra speed you get with the SSD’s
JMHO


#4

I agree with the above… Which means you have options. :stuck_out_tongue:

That said, which SSD do you currently have?


#5

Hi Marty ,
Thanks for the honorable mention. There are many here that know a great deal more about drives than me . Dee for one .

I also don’t have even one SSD & for the present don’t plan to.

I’m assuming you are working with a desktop & have a bay for a second drive.
Since you have an SSD already. If it seems to be working well I would keep using it for your OS. They are supposed to be faster. I would move everything non OS to a second drive.
One of the harddrives in my desktop is a WD green 500 GB . It’s been in service about 4 years now . It has my W7 OS on it. It’s fast enough for me.
This desktop also has the stock Hitachi 256GB it came with it has my Vista OS on it. It’s been in service about 8 years.
I also have an old IDE harddrive on my desktop it’s 125GB & has XP Pro on it.
Not sure how old it is but older than the others.
I also have the same type WD green as an external USB in an Rosewill enclosure.
I have a Verbatim 500GB that I bought as a ready to go External.It’s actually a Samsung. It’s also about 8 years old.
I have a Seagate 1TB in a Rosewill USB dock . I don’t use it much kind of my old stuff storage . Seagates don’t have that good of reputation anymore so I probably wouldn’t get a Seagate.

My old IBM computer has an 80GB WD IDE with XP Pro on it .
It’s about 10 years old.
The IBM still has it’s original Hitachi 13.5GB with w Windows 98 SE on it.
It’s a 1999 so 16 years on this one . HDSentinel shows it to still be in good condition . The author of HDSentinel was glad that I could use his software on a drive this old & send him a report on it . One of the reasons I won a lifetime license for HDSentinel.

[B] I’ve been lucky & have never had a harddrive fail.[/B]

I would look at a WD Green harddrive . I would also stay 1 TB or under for a hard drive . For myself I like a 500GB . Just get an enclosure & another drive when you need more storage. It’s not likely all would ever fail & if one goes you will lose less.


#6

Going from SSD to HDD is a bit like going back to floppy drives; you’re not going to be happy with the speed. I second what CDan suggests: Get an SSD as main drive (the Samsung is probably fine), and if you need the extra space and have room for it then also get a big HDD for storage.


#7

SSHD may be a possible solution, it’s a HDD with a built in SSD cache (you can get software that does this with separate drives).
The most commonly used data is accessed from the SSD cache.

Drawbacks? the SSD cache is not massive, more like 32GB or something, so it’s actually better to place frequently used files on separate SSD (the C drive) and move less speed critical things - your downloads, media files etc. to HDD.

A 1TB SSD is for people who only want one drive, or can’t be bothered splitting things up - it is a big investment.

I’d say the 500 / 480 is probably the sweet spot for price vs size.

One brand that destroyed their reputation is Kingston, after some bait & switch where later versions of the same model used inferior performance flash memory.

OCZ, on the other hand, under new ownership, challenged kitguru to destruction test 5 ARC series drives - all exceeded their warranty data limit by an impressive amount


#8

Thanks all for input, I have a Samsung 830 series 256gb for the C drive, Storage is not the problem, 2tb western digital usb, 500gb MY Passport, and a 250gb Passbook usb. All data goes to one of the USB External Drives. All programs that I can, are put on external drives. It is just that some programs (one I won’t mention here) requires it to be on the C drive and then requires 100gb free in order to work.
Oh, and as far as speed goes would it really slow down so much that I would know it, remember not a power user. Just an old man that went to collage 30 years ago when the OS was DOS 3.1 and you had to boot off of a 51/4 disk.
Think I will look into the 500gb SSD

Marty


#9

Booting would be slower. Apps would open more slowly. It’s the curse of SSDs; with a good one (like your Samsung 830 Series drive), returning to magnetic storage does become more sluggish in day to day actions. Even applications that use all of your RAM can’t overcome this limitation.

And if you are regularly using apps that require multiple gigabytes of working space (and write/read all of it in big chunks), you would definitely see a decrease in performance. But if you find you’re limited by the speed of your CPU for those apps as it is, there’s a chance magnetic media might not matter. Or you may find that the process still slows down.

If you have the money, stick with an SSD. The easiest thing is to stick with the Samsung brand; they seem to have most of their bugs worked out by now, and the 850 Series is maturing by this point, so most major issues will have been discovered (and patched) by now.


#10

Thanks Albert, I guess that will be the way, can you RAID SSD’s? If so can they be different sizes? Still Samsung but say my 256 with a 500? My last computer I used a RAID 0(zero)

Thanks


#11

Hi Marty , For you the 500GB SSD will probably be fine .
Large enough to handle the extra 100GB you need it to .
Since you have a lot of extra storage on drives where you don’t need the speed of an SSD . I don’t see why you would need a larger SSD .

I’m not opposed to SSD & most likely my next computer will come with one if I decide to get an already assembled PC. That’s probably 2 or 3 years down the road.
That will give me some time to see if people are having SSD failures & what brands have the best longetivity .

Albert says the Samsung"s have proven to be one of the most dependable brands .
My Samsung external harddrive has proven to be very durable .
Meaning I’ve used it a lot.
I also have a couple of Samsung DVD drives which also seem to be good.
I even have a Samsung Boom Box circa 1995 I use in my computer room.
Plays cassettes & CDs . Still sounds good to me. Keeps the computer form having to play CDs.

Marty I have to ask & maybe you posted this somewhere else .
Who is " Little Waddle Butt " .
I assume this was a pet. You have my sympathy . When you get to be as old as me & you are older you’ve usually had a lot of pets pass away.
I’ve had two cats pass away during this year. One 16 & the other probably about the same . The second one I got as an adult so the age is an approximation.
Jazz & Cotton .


#12

If you RAID 0 two SSDs of different capacities, you will get 2X the capacity of the smallest capacity SSD, in your case 2X 250GB. With RAID you also add complexity, and you double the chance of losing data. If one drive fails in the RAID 0 array, you lose the data on both.

So a single 500GB 850 EVO should fit your needs well. If you think you will require greater endurance from the SSD, then the 850 Pro, or the OCZ Vector 150 would be a better choice.

Out of these three, the OCZ Vector 150 gives the best sustainable performance. That is the performance of the SSD once you have written to all the NAND. Unfortunately, this performance comes at a price.


#13

[QUOTE=cholla;2756745] Marty I have to ask & maybe you posted this somewhere else .
Who is " Little Waddle Butt " .
I assume this was a pet. You have my sympathy . When you get to be as old as me & you are older you’ve usually had a lot of pets pass away.
I’ve had two cats pass away during this year. One 16 & the other probably about the same . The second one I got as an adult so the age is an approximation.
Jazz & Cotton .[/QUOTE]

I just had to put my little Dog down, she was 16. but had been such a fighter, and she was mine. one of those times when Dog and Man hit it just right, I did not know that it would show on all of my post. I just put that there Last night…
Thank you Cholla

Marty


#14

[QUOTE=Dee;2756752]If you RAID 0 two SSDs of different capacities, you will get 2X the capacity of the smallest capacity SSD, in your case 2X 250GB. With RAID you also add complexity, and you double the chance of losing data. If one drive fails in the RAID 0 array, you lose the data on both.

So a single 500GB 850 EVO should fit your needs well. If you think you will require greater endurance from the SSD, then the 850 Pro, or the OCZ Vector 150 would be a better choice.

Out of these three, the OCZ Vector 150 gives the best sustainable performance. That is the performance of the SSD once you have written to all the NAND. Unfortunately, this performance comes at a price.[/QUOTE]

Thanks Dee, That’s not that much of a problem, I am on a fixed income, but I also pay my self an allowance.
My tech is talking about the Samsung BLACK.
I am a storage nut, but that is all external drives, I have always kept my “C” drive as clean as possible.

Will look into the OCZ drive and see what it looks like

Thanks
Marty


#15

Thor, your computer-tech’s recommendation for a 4-times-larger SSD is curious to me. I’ve installed dozens of your 240-256Gb capacity class onto a variety of users’ computers, and the only ones that surpass a 100Gb threshold are (1) users who continually experiment with new software without uninstalling unused products, or (2) tax and accounting package users whose proprietary software forces all the data-files to be stored with the Program Files, as many DOS programs did 30 years ago.

As for fixed budgets, we’ve been using refurbished Hitachi (HGST) UltraStor 2Tb 7200 drives (from GoHardDrives for $50-65). This isn’t a recommendation for them because our 100% success has only been for the last 3 months. Since we’ve never had drive failures (out of 120 purchases), we can’t attest to their replacement behaviors but we anticipate failures because these are older drives “refurbished”. I recommend buying two with a consideration of receiving a DOA or quick death unit, and if not, then using the second unit as a clone to the newly installed C: Drive.

(This reseller has SATA2 as well as the slightly faster-throughput SATA3 drives. Our success with both has been total but the SATA3 drives will offer drive-to-drive COPYs that are 10-15% faster.)

Samsung “blacks” are probably the Samsung PRO models as opposed to their gray EVO models. We also use Crucial SSDs, OCZs and Samsungs. I like the Samsung software toolkits because it can provide a decent level of automating a tedious settings process for best performance, but all of those settings can be changed in Windows for any other SSD, too.


#16

Thanks Uh Clem, that is something else to think about, Hitachi is a good manufacture.

Thanks Marty


#17

Most regular hard drives will last about 5 years, I had one that was over 10 and still worked, and a poor quality one that barely made a year once I finally installed it.
My boot drive is a server grade Western Digital 500 gig and that works fine for the OS and some programs. Everything else is spread out between other 500 gig drives, a 2 tb, and a external USB 3.0 plus a couple more in the living room for media captures.
A SSD is going to be a lot faster, who knows how long they will last.
Like said 500 gig should be more then big enough, you can always add more drives to hold everything else you collect and use.
I turned on the drive test stuff in the bios and it’ll usually give a warning when a drive starts to die so you can transfer things before it does.


#18

Thanks Dartman , I am leaning toward the 500gb SSD


#19

Has anyone already asked which motherboard you have? I’d like to know what SATA controller will be used to connect the drive.


#20

[QUOTE=Albert;2756839]Has anyone already asked which motherboard you have? I’d like to know what SATA controller will be used to connect the drive.[/QUOTE]

Intel DX79T0LGA2011/SATA3&USB3/A&GB ATX CROSSFIRE&SLI, I got that right off the sales invoice

Marty