Do I Really Need a SSD??

[stouthm]

I'm getting my wife ready for when I order a new computer, I drop hints a little at a time so that when I'm ready she knew it was coming. Don't want to drop the bomb all at once. Anyway, I'll have the computer built and my question is: Does a SSD really make that much of a difference? I will only put Trainz on it. If so, what size is recommended? I will be spending close to $2000 so if you had that amount to spend what would you put into it? Thanks.

 

[RRSignal]

I'm getting my wife ready for when I order a new computer, I drop hints a little at a time so that when I'm ready she knew it was coming. Don't want to drop the bomb all at once. Anyway, I'll have the computer built and my question is: Does a SSD really make that much of a difference? I will only put Trainz on it. If so, what size is recommended? I will be spending close to $2000 so if you had that amount to spend what would you put into it? Thanks.

Oh, yeah! It makes a difference. I'd suggest a 256Gb, maybe one of the Samsungs.

 

[robd]

If I were spending that much I would get 2 ssd's, one for the OS, the other for Trainz. I have that set-up and it's lightning fast! Go for it.

 

[clam1952]

Same here, 120GB for the OS and a 240GB for Trainz well worth the expense.

 

[PC_Ace]

Yes - an SSD makes a demonstrable improvement in the performance of TS12 I've found. Especially in the time it takes to do database repairs and loading/ closing sessions. Regarding size - the pricing sweet spot for SSDs these days is shifting from 128Gb to the 240/256Gb sizes. Consider the disk space your current Trainz installation(s) consume and add a factor of two (at least) for future expansion. If you put the OS on the same SSD as well, then the bigger the better. Cheers! PC

 

[steamboateng]

I agree with above, 2xSSD @ 120Gb each, minimum. Best overall performance; a 64 bit OS on one. Best Trainz performance; Trainz on the other. Include at least a 1Tb HDD for all the other apps and storage. $2k ought to cover it!

 

[johnwhelan]

And just to be contrary I'll suggest not that much. SSDs help get data off the hard disk without the rotational delays and the track to track head movement. However once Trainz has loaded what it needs from the hard drive it isn't very disk intensive so it won't make much difference to the frame rate, in the order of one frame per second when I bench marked it using TS2010.

It will make things lead much faster so loading / starting Trainz will be quicker etc. Scenery items will be found faster so there is a difference. Putting the operating system on an SSD does speed up what happens when you turn the computer on so that's good, however if you let Windows sleep then you'll need an area the same size os your memory on C: or the operating drive and these days it can often be 8 gigs.

The other thing to watch out for is how much space TS12 takes up. With downloaded assets my N3V folder is 165 gigs, you'll need room to do database rebuilds etc so putting Trainz on anything less than 240 gigs is a bit short sighted.

If you're spending $2,000 then Newegg,com has a 250 gig Samsung 840 for $170 which is worth thinking about. By the time various bits of software have installed themselves on C: plus the sleep area and a few Windows updates I'd go a min of 120 gigs SSD for the operating system again Newegg.com has the Samsung 120 gigs available for $95.

What to put in it? Well toms has a reasonable system to start with. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/build-a-pc-performance-overclocking,3437.html Note the use of a graphics card with a reasonably low power draw and a 520 watt power supply, the performance is still very reasonable. Typically with Intel servers we used to reckon the cost of the hydro over three years was greater than the cost of the server. That was using them 24/7 but keeping the wattage down helps keep it all cool and bit quieter. I'd go with a quieter case and these days a Liteon Blu-ray reader/ DVD burner.

Cheerio John

 

[stouthm]

Thanks everyone for replying.

@John - just checked my TRS12 folder and it's 80GB. Do you think I still need a 240 SSD? I'm leaning towards putting just TRS12 on a SSD and the OS on a regular drive. I very seldom turn my computer off and when I do it takes about 70 secs to boot, not a problem. I've had several computers built by the people at http://www.JNCS.com and have had great service with very little problems. I'll be going on their site again when I'm ready. Thanks.

 

[steamboateng]

Unless your on Trainz 24/7 a rational decision would be to put your OS on a SSD first for general computing, graphics, etc., then Trainz later when you can afford another. Check with your computer gurus, I think they'll agree.

 

[stouthm]

@ steamboateng - why a SSD for the OS when all I do is mostly check my e-mail and do a little surfing for computer parts. My system is 6 years old and I have no problems as far as speed is concerned. Click and it's there. Seems like a waste of money for those reasons. I can understand an SSD for TRS12, my system is just starting to bog down when running TRS12. Thanks.

 

[pdkoester]

I run two SSDs in RAID0 for the operating system, and two Western Digital VelociRaptors (1TB each) in RAID0 for the games and programs. Pretty quick this way. Lots of storage, too.

 

[johnwhelan]

Thanks everyone for replying.

@John - just checked my TRS12 folder and it's 80GB. Do you think I still need a 240 SSD? I'm leaning towards putting just TRS12 on a SSD and the OS on a regular drive. I very seldom turn my computer off and when I do it takes about 70 secs to boot, not a problem. I've had several computers built by the people at http://www.JNCS.com and have had great service with very little problems. I'll be going on their site again when I'm ready. Thanks.

You have 80 gigs now but it will almost certainly grow over time and typically you need scratch space when indexing the database etc. Switching on with an SSD for the operating system typically takes a third the time of a hard drive, the SDDs are in theory more reliable than a conventional hard drive, and when you want a bit of operating system loaded the SSD is much faster hence most people use the SSD on the operating system. If your budget is $2,000 allowing for a UPS I prefer CyberPower over APC at the moment, the low end APC UPSes don't work with some high efficiency power supplies, the operating system, a Blu-ray and an external hard drive for backups you should have enough cash left for a couple of SSDs, one for the operating system and one for TS12.

RAID0 sounds great but in reality the rational behind it is to cut disk head movement which isn't an issue with SSDs but if either disk dies you lose the contents of both drives.

Cheerio John

 

[johnwhelan]

@ steamboateng - why a SSD for the OS when all I do is mostly check my e-mail and do a little surfing for computer parts. My system is 6 years old and I have no problems as far as speed is concerned. Click and it's there. Seems like a waste of money for those reasons. I can understand an SSD for TRS12, my system is just starting to bog down when running TRS12. Thanks.

Are you running 64 bit Windows? ideally win 7? Is your memory at least 4 gigs and ideally 6 or more? Which video card have you got? You can probably stretch the existing system with a new video card that will get the performance back with TS12. It depends on the cpu and hard disk but the GPU is the normal bottleneck these days.

Cheerio John

 

[stouthm]

Are you running 64 bit Windows? ideally win 7? Is your memory at least 4 gigs and ideally 6 or more? Which video card have you got? You can probably stretch the existing system with a new video card that will get the performance back with TS12. It depends on the cpu and hard disk but the GPU is the normal bottleneck these days.

Cheerio John

First, thanks for hanging around. As I said, my computer is 6 years old. I'm running Windowa XP Home Edition SP3 (32 bit), Intel Core2 Duo CPU E8500 @ 3.16 GHz, 4 GB RAM and my graphic card is a NVida GTX 460 @768 MB. A good system 6 years ago. I agree with your suggestion that the GPU is the bottle neck.

Here's what I'm looking at and would appreciate your input. CPU: either Intel i5 3570K or i7 3770K. If I'm reading correctly what Tom's Hardware is suggesting is the i5 is equal to the i7 or better for the money. CoolerMaster PS @ 850 watts, RAM - 8GB DDR3-1600, Video card - NVida EVGA GTX 660 2048 mb with 960 cores, Drive 1 - Intel 520 SSD 180GB, Drive2 - WD 500G 7200, and Windows 7 HP (64 bit) for a price of $1760. Maybe a couple of extra fans.

Built and tested and have had no problems with this company. Had a problem with a bad PS and they replaced it with a stronger one at no charge.

 

[pdkoester]

I run RAID0 on the SSDs because it doubled the write and reading speeds, nothing to do with anything else. And, if it is going to fail, it could fail with one single or the RAID pair could have one fail, no difference. Be wise, backup the entire system to an image before you install applications and games. Then, have a network or internet (cloud?) based storage, even export to DVD, blueray, USB drive, whatever... to keep data from being lost. Simple.

Paul

 

[whitepass]

My old computer was the same as yours but with Win7. I now have Intel i5 3570K, 8GB RAM and my old GTX 460 @768 MB and I got about a 2x improvement in Trainz. Your GPU is dependent on size, I have a 1920x1200 and the GTX460 workes fine.

 

[steamboateng]

Conventional wisdom says a SSD for your OS first; for all the reasons stated above. In my case I'm into lots of grapghics; Blender, and PSP/Gimp, etc. I have hundreds of photos stored on The HD and rr plans and USGS maps for routes; I also get into videos, spend lots of time on Google Earth....
Having the OS on a SSD improves response time on all these and more.......

 

[johnwhelan]

First, thanks for hanging around. As I said, my computer is 6 years old. I'm running Windowa XP Home Edition SP3 (32 bit), Intel Core2 Duo CPU E8500 @ 3.16 GHz, 4 GB RAM and my graphic card is a NVida GTX 460 @768 MB. A good system 6 years ago. I agree with your suggestion that the GPU is the bottle neck.

Here's what I'm looking at and would appreciate your input. CPU: either Intel i5 3570K or i7 3770K. If I'm reading correctly what Tom's Hardware is suggesting is the i5 is equal to the i7 or better for the money. CoolerMaster PS @ 850 watts, RAM - 8GB DDR3-1600, Video card - NVida EVGA GTX 660 2048 mb with 960 cores, Drive 1 - Intel 520 SSD 180GB, Drive2 - WD 500G 7200, and Windows 7 HP (64 bit) for a price of $1760. Maybe a couple of extra fans.

Built and tested and have had no problems with this company. Had a problem with a bad PS and they replaced it with a stronger one at no charge.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/tahiti-le-7870-7930-benchmark,3401.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-geforce-gtx-650-benchmark,3297-2.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

I'm not a believer in over clocking, personally I run 6 gigs of memory but that's on a triple channel mother board, with dual channel you need to run 8 gigs, i5 or i7 I think it depends on the model, in general the i7 are slightly faster but there again would you notice it? Triple channel isn't much faster than dual channel by the way.

These days I might go with a larger hard drive, say one terabyte, the price difference isn't much, Toshiba took on some parts of Hitachi when WD took them over so are worth looking at. Check the warranties and go with which ever has the longest warranty. Do buy yourself an external USB drive for back ups.

Cheerio John