# Advice: Real Benefit from Faster SSD?



## Viruzz (Jul 4, 2015)

Guys,
Im thinking of getting Samsung SM951 M.2 128GB SSD (as Win10 OS only drive) for my next build. (This is so called new Generation of SSDs, 600MB Write, 2000MB Read)
right now I use Samsung 840EVO 128GB.

Basically what im asking if this upgrade is going to be felt in day to day not just benchmarks.
My boot cant get any faster because I have encryption password on boot and after that it takes like 2 second and its already windows password screen.


Thanks


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 4, 2015)

IMO, all SSD's are fast enough for your real world use, and you'd hardly notice.  The one area you might notice a difference is in large file write speeds.  

Really though, you're best off buying a higher rated SSD and as large as you can.  Then buy the one of those that is on sale.

Others will differ of course, but that is how I view it.


----------



## Viruzz (Jul 4, 2015)

rtwjunkie said:


> IMO, all SSD's are fast enough for your real world use, and you'd hardly notice.  The one area you might notice a difference is in large file write speeds.
> 
> Really though, you're best off buying a higher rated SSD and as large as you can.  Then buy the one of those that is on sale.
> 
> Others will differ of course, but that is how I view it.




I dont really need the size, its OS only SSD and right now I have 42.5GB free out of 128GB.
for game installs I have another SSD and thats the one size is where balance of size and read speed important

What i want to know if ithe speed difference compared to 840EVO will be "feelable", im not a programer nor I compress music or videos, im sort of hardware geek that likes to buy fast hardware but not to show-off, only what its really needed and I dont need to take a loan for.
Also I like my browser to keep 120-150 tabs open, I also like when I click an icon to have an instant effect, 'one click one load' but if the new SSD is faster but I have to use a benchmark to know it is not really worth the money investment. what do you think?


----------



## silkstone (Jul 4, 2015)

I run 3 machines with SSDs of varying age and capacity. I see no difference in day-to-day usage between the 3.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Jul 4, 2015)

Viruzz said:


> Also I like my browser to keep 120-150 tabs open,



That is some serious browsing. I wouldn't think the upgrade would be noticeable unless your current SSDs are degrading. Also some of the 840 EVOs had a new firmware that came out to fix read speed degradation from repetitive error checking building up. You should read about it if you haven't. It was a strange but easily fixed issue.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 4, 2015)

Well I have messed around with different speed SSD's, raid, etc and here is what I have seen.

You really get to a point that the difference is so unnoticeable that it won't make a difference especially where the OS is concerned.  I have two machines now that run Raid 0 SSD's and comparing them when they did'nt run raid SSD's is showing very little differences even though their read and write times are significantly higher.

The differences I have noticed are in games like bf4/hardline where the load times are a bit lower and some apps like Adobe are a little faster.  But on a day to day basis the OS does not show any differences.

So for your situation, I doubt you would see much if any difference.


----------



## Viruzz (Jul 4, 2015)

DaedalusHelios said:


> That is some serious browsing. I wouldn't think the upgrade would be noticeable unless your current SSDs are degrading. Also some of the 840 EVOs had a new firmware that came out to fix read speed degradation from repetitive error checking building up. You should read about it if you haven't. It was a strange but easily fixed issue.



yep the new firmware is awesome. I always liked the EVO series but right now its perfect


----------



## Viruzz (Jul 4, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> Well I have messed around with different speed SSD's, raid, etc and here is what I have seen.
> 
> You really get to a point that the difference is so unnoticeable that it won't make a difference especially where the OS is concerned.  I have two machines now that run Raid 0 SSD's and comparing them when they did'nt run raid SSD's is showing very little differences even though their read and write times are significantly higher.
> 
> ...




Thanks thats sound logical.
BTW the SSD i was talking about has 600MB (all the other models in this series have 1200Mb write) Write and 2000MB Read. Its new generation of SSDs,


----------



## Steevo (Jul 4, 2015)

GhostRyder said:


> Well I have messed around with different speed SSD's, raid, etc and here is what I have seen.
> 
> You really get to a point that the difference is so unnoticeable that it won't make a difference especially where the OS is concerned.  I have two machines now that run Raid 0 SSD's and comparing them when they did'nt run raid SSD's is showing very little differences even though their read and write times are significantly higher.
> 
> ...




I second this after having a SSD array and now just a single drive. It takes about 1 second longer to start windows and that is about the extent of what I notice in difference.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 4, 2015)

Viruzz said:


> Thanks thats sound logical.
> BTW the SSD i was talking about has 600MB (all the other models in this series have 1200Mb write) Write and 2000MB Read. Its new generation of SSDs,


That is pretty high but still for just OS use you will probably not see much if any difference.  Its great for programs where they take forever to load (Like games) but the OS run into their own limitations (Which include the systems themselves at times) which will cause the system to not feel like much of a difference.

In my opinion, 400 is about the sweet spot on performance for read when your just using the OS and the startup apps. Beyond that speed I cannot see much differences or enough to matter like @Steevo said even though my new Raid 0 array on my desktop can read up to around 800 (Up from 500) except in loading games/apps.


----------



## kn00tcn (Jul 4, 2015)

i was hoping to read about SSD benefits as a mechanical user, but you're already on an SSD... not sure how this is much of an upgrade other than taking up a lot less space


----------



## AsRock (Jul 5, 2015)

I found raid pointless with them, just try to get a good drive to start with and all should be good.  I my self would get another Samsung 850 evo and even if i had a M.2 slot i don't believe i would bother with it as it's more hype than any thing.

Even SATA 2 SSD's are good enough for the most part you wont notice shit unless running benchmark crap.  My 2 Intel x-25m sata 2 G2 drives are just as good as all the other i use and only real difference is in benchmarks.


----------



## Viruzz (Jul 5, 2015)

kn00tcn said:


> i was hoping to read about SSD benefits as a mechanical user, but you're already on an SSD... not sure how this is much of an upgrade other than taking up a lot less space



The benefit vs mechanical is obvious, just ask any SSD user. I will never go back to installing an OS on mechanical drive, that feels like antiquity. 
Same with games, if you play and dont like long loading times, SSD is a must.

Everything just loads up


----------



## MilkyWay (Jul 5, 2015)

Nah you'll get slightly faster speeds when copying files but that's about it, the general snappy feeling is just about the same unless its a really older model SSD. Would think having faster and enough ram to have 150 tabs open in a browser would be more beneficial.

Im pretty curious though as to what sites you have open as 120 tabs, i just bookmark shit and open it as i need too.


----------



## Viruzz (Jul 5, 2015)

MilkyWay said:


> Nah you'll get slightly faster speeds when copying files but that's about it, the general snappy feeling is just about the same unless its a really older model SSD. Would think having faster and enough ram to have 150 tabs open in a browser would be more beneficial.
> 
> Im pretty curious though as to what sites you have open as 120 tabs, i just bookmark shit and open it as i need too.




I bookmark but then i forget about them, so i everything I visit often i keep in tabs, also sometimes I read something and it has a link i click on it and read and then it has another link and so i chain open 10-30 tabs


----------



## linoliveira (Jul 7, 2015)

man you seriously need this: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/onetab/chphlpgkkbolifaimnlloiipkdnihall
whenever you click the button it collapses all tabs into one list, and you can have multiple lists of tabs.
I for one was like you, but my memory was complaining a lot, so i found this pretty useful


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 7, 2015)

I still think the best and most affordable option for casual users who want a bit more is:

Some cheap but fast SSD (basically any 128GB drive) + eBoostr program

It shouldn't cost more than $100 total and it'll give you SSD like performance with capacity of the HDD. I have a 32GB SSD paired with 2TB HDD and the performance is amazing. Super fast boot and super fast games loading.
If you're going for SSD, you either go full SSD or don't even bother. Plus, when you go full SSD you can simply use the SSD as boot drive and the second SSD for data/apps/games/everything else.


----------



## kn00tcn (Jul 8, 2015)

Viruzz said:


> The benefit vs mechanical is obvious, just ask any SSD user. I will never go back to installing an OS on mechanical drive, that feels like antiquity.
> Same with games, if you play and dont like long loading times, SSD is a must.
> 
> Everything just loads up


but... why should i care about a few seconds loading times when i'm trying to get the most fps in game as possible? with limited budgets, that makes the gfx card more important... i have to see it to believe it of course, maybe one day (i am actually interested in M2 so i dont have to deal with case/cables, but that has to wait until i get a mobo with M2)

but anyway the point is i was surprised that this thread is about a good SSD to another SSD, it's not even a crappy SSD or a malfunctioning one (that recent samsung issue) so it caught me off guard


----------



## HWTactics (Jul 8, 2015)

kn00tcn said:


> but... why should i care about a few seconds loading times when i'm trying to get the most fps in game as possible?



Because while spending $80 extra on a video card speeds up games by maybe 5-10%, putting that $80 into an SSD makes _everything _noticeably faster, game load times included.  You truly do not know what you're missing out on.  

My $.02 on the OP's question is that any 280MB/s+ read SSD will be already orders of magnitude faster than a mechanical drive, so as long as you have the capacity you're in a good place.


----------



## kn00tcn (Jul 10, 2015)

HWTactics said:


> Because while spending $80 extra on a video card speeds up games by maybe 5-10%, putting that $80 into an SSD makes _everything _noticeably faster, game load times included.  You truly do not know what you're missing out on.  .


which games? the TPU reviews show no difference between different SSDs even though there are variations in windows/photoshop/etc loading times (in fact, the games TPU has are several times longer than the whole OS! makes me conclude they are cpu+gpu intensive while loading)

5-10% permanent framerate increase is a lot... you're playing a game, it only loads once (or sporadic map load)


----------

