SSD for OS/Programs/Pagefile - What size to get?

Hey all,
I am in the process of upgrading my hard drive setup on my system and am planning to purchase a SSD soon.
Once purchased, I plan to go with a 3 disk setup. I see this calls for the OS, programs and pagefile to go onto the SSD. I'm trying to figure out if a 128GB SSD would be large enough for this, or if I should go with a 256GB.
Currently my computer is showing 82GB used on my C: drive. I'm pretty sure I only have OS/Programs on this drive (and I've never messed around with Windows pagefiles so I'm assuming that's on there too). I've been pretty careful to not let random files float around on my C: drive, and after some quick checking around I didn't see anything out of the ordinary. (I did however find an "appdata" folder that was ~20GBs). Is this pretty much par for the course when you have the programs on this drive? Or should this be on another drive?
With a 128GB drive, it's my understanding that after formatting, you really only have ~119GB. And is there some sort of guideline out there for keeping a SSD somewhat open for optimal performance? If it's something like "25% should be kept free" then I suddenly only have ~89GB to work with. Being at 82GB already makes me wonder if I'm cutting it too close. Especially if I decide to install more programs down the line (C4D, 3DsMax, ZBrush, etc).
Thoughts on what you all would do? Would it be ok to maybe move the pagefile to another HD (even in a 3 disk setup)? I'm not even sure how large my current pagefile is at the moment, so I don't know what that would get me. Is there even an issue filling up a SSD past 75%? If not, then I'm probably worrying over nothing.
Thanks!

128GB is a great size for a boot drive (OS, programs). if you have other drives putting the pagefile on rotating drive is probably optimal, but you could put in on the boot SSD as well. There are those who say it is a total no-no to put swap on a SSD but there are millions of laptop users with single-drive SSD systems and they seem to work just fine!
Regarding how full can a SSD get, you can fill them more than a traditional drive since they do not get fragmented.
Regards,
Jim

Similar Messages

  • For h.264 encoding, what size does the project need to be to avoid black bars on the top and bottom.

    For h.264 encoding, what size does the project need to be to avoid black bars on the top and bottom. I am exporting the mp4 to Brightcove.

    Hi there,
    Which version of Adobe Captivate (If it is Adobe Captivate) is it and which Operating System is it?
    Thanks.

  • I do not own an adobe product and want a one-time payment licence for students and teachers, what should I get?

    I do not own an adobe product and want a one-time payment licence for students and teachers, what should I get? There are so many licenses to choose from and at least 3 lightroom licenses for students.

    If all you are looking for is Lightroom, I would suggest going to your campus computer store. The computer store where I worked had Lightroom in stock. If your store doesn't have it in stock they can order it for you. There is really only one Lightroom 5 license that comes with the standalone version, student or otherwise. The program is identical either way. Licensing for the creative cloud is handled through the web and the payment method, But you aren't concerned about that.

  • If you traded in your mac mini for a windows pc, what would you get?

    I have a late 2009 Mac Mini and am just chafing to upgrade. It's slow as molasses.  But at the same time, I'm not willing to pay full price for 2012 model, and Apple is way behind in releasing an update. In fact I'm hearing speculation that Apple may be just discontinuing the Mac Mini.
    I don't know... But I'm getting tired of waiting. And getting a different model of Mac doens't work for me, because I want to use my own screens. (I'm running two large screens in "portrait" mode.)
    Also, I have a Windows 7 PC at work, and I've come to realize that I don't mind Windows 7 and don't see it as intrinsically better than the Apple OS. In fact Windows & has generally been mariginally more stable, and a lot faster then the OS on my Mac. In fact I got both systems around the same time and the Windows 7 system did better with less RAM and is "aging" better.
    HOWEVER, what I really love about the Mac Mini is how QUIET it is. I have it in my bedroom, next to my bed, and it's noise is barely noticeable. So I guess I should look into seeing if there area any desktop PC's that are as quiet.
    Have you considered switching back to a PC, and if you did what would you get?

    I moved away from Apple in 2007 and have never looked back !
    I use the ASRock Vision X 420D  http://www.asrock.com/nettop/Intel/VisionX%20Series%20(Haswell)/ 
    Its the same size as the current Mini but a bit taller - BUT it is FULLY user upgradeable and about the same price once you make a mini upto the same spec.
    I run Windows 8.1 on it and love it - yes there are lots of people bleating on about the 'metro' style of Win 8 but if you configure it (which has been a feature from launch, not a 3rd party hack) you never have to see the metro interface and you have a standard desktop.
    As to woodmeister50 comment of : Also, with Win8, many third party add on companies have dropped support etc. is that not the same for Mavericks ?!
    Custom mini
    ASRock Vision X 420D, 16Gb Ram, 3x 512Gb SSD, AMD Radeon R270X, WiFi (n, ac)

  • Looking for suggestions for a new display: What size, resolution and refresh is recommended?

    I've been using my laptop display, 15.6" and its just too small. I figured I'd purchase a display to plug into the laptop. I'd like suggestion on specs. I figured a 20 to 23 inch would work ok but I've seen some folks with dual screens. Lastly, I have no understanding of resoution, refresh rates to look for or brands to either look at or stay away from.
    Any help would be great.
    Thanks.

    The good news is that you don't need to worry too much about the specs -- just about any monitor you purchase will be OK.  First choose a size that fits in you work area, then pick the monitor from that range of products that has the highest resolution and refresh rates -- the monitors will all have very similar specs.
    I've been using PCConnection
    http://www.pcconnection.com/
    as my primary source for computer purchases for over 12 years and highly recommend it.  They have user's comments for most of their products, so you can get a feel for the satisfaction level of the products.
    I've never understood the value of having dual monitors, unless one needs to have a couple of real-time monitoring apps open at the same time for instant feedback about the data....
    Ken

  • Select Options for my program and i need to get the code from coding wizard

    Hi Experts,
    i am new to Webdynpro programming.
    i want to use Select-options in my component. and also please tell me how to use coding wizard,
    Please let me know if you need any information.
    Thanks in advance
    Lava.

    Hi Lava,
    To create select options we have to use the existing component WDR_SELECT_OPTIONS.
    For using this component in our WebDynpro component we need to specify this in used components tab in our WebDynpro component.
    check the standard components WDR_TEST_SELECT_OPTIONS .
    Also refer the following links.
    [https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/60811d03-b69e-2b10-cd86-ad2790e44ecc]
    Saptechnical->tutorials->webdynproabap->select options
    Regards,
    Radhika .

  • In the market for a new iMac - -What should i get???

    Im planning on getting one of the new iMacs, yet I am very on the fence about which one I should get- the 20 inch or the 17 inch.
    Which will have the better graphics, and by how much?
    How much faster will the 20 inch be? (Both would be with 1gb of ram)
    Does the 20 inch look bulky and clunky compared to the 17?
    Any help is appreciated, thanks.

    It really depends on what you like, and how much money you can shell out. I would recommend looking at and using them in person at a local apple store if at all possible. I doubt the speed difference is noticable. Also, if you are using a monitor larger than 17 inches now, you might be disapointed with a 17 inch. It seems to be a much harder adjustment going from a big screen to smaller screen than small to big. I went with the 20 inch because right now I use a 19, and whenever I have to use anything smaller it drives me insane and i feel like I have no work space. Most people are perfectly happy with a 17 inch if they don't care about screen realestate or are not used to working on anything larger. I'd say go with the 20 if you can afford it, but if the screen size is not an important factor, you'll probably be happy with a 17.
    40GB ipod, imac G5 20 w/isight (just ordered), Dell XPS   Windows XP Pro  

  • Is it at all possible for a program off the computer to get password information from the password manager?

    With all of the discussion about needing an "external" password manager (outside the browser), and recent demonstration about how much information can be gotten about web browsing, IP addresses, physical location (at least down to the city), etc., I am concerned as to whether it IS safer to use a 3rd party password manager instead of the one in Firefox.\
    ed

    If you use a Master Password that is sufficiently strong then you should be safe.
    * https://support.mozilla.org/kb/create-secure-passwords-keep-your-identity-safe
    * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Password_strength
    *https://www.microsoft.com/security/pc-security/password-checker.aspx
    If you do not use a master password then having access to key3.db and signons.sqlite is sufficient to have access to the encrypted names and passwords by placing the two files in a Firefox profile folder.

  • What size SSD? Swapping Optical Drive for gen. storage.

    I'm planning on buying a smaller SSD and was looking for suggestions on the best size to buy. I have a 13" Late 2011 Macbook Pro, i5. 8gb RAM. 500gb HDD.
    What I'm doing is replacing my 500gb HDD and moving that to my optical bay just for general storage. I'm going to set up my new SSD as the boot drive. I want to boost my performance for as little money as possible. I know that I can put 16gb RAM in and get significant improvement, but really want to get rid of the HDD as the boot drive. I'm leaning toward getting either the 44gb or 60gb Mercury Electra 6G SSD.
    Any suggestions on what size would be best for what I want or any other suggestions are welcome.

    I suggest that you get at least a 240 GB SSD. SATA3, of course!
    Larger SSDs are generally much faster, and the price is now dropping (to the point that I have just purchased an 1Tb Crucial M500 SSD for less than 400 €). The price difference between a 64 GB SSD and a 240 GB SSD is now minimal, and you will enjoy more space!
    Two years ago, as soon as I purchased my late-2011 MBP, I immediately did the same, moving the original 750Gb HD to the optical bay, and installing a 240Gb Vertex-2 SSD in the main bay as system disk.
    The space was just enough, as I have Bootcamp and Windows 7, too, so I divided it half-and-half, and a 128Gb storage is just barely enough for either OSX and Wndows-7 64 bits Pro...
    You could survive with a 128 GB SSD if you do not need Bootcamp. Indeed, I always recommend to install Bootcamp and Windows 7 to all Mac owners, so you get the best of the two worlds. I love OSX, but for certain tasks Windows is still vastly superior (using Autocad, for example)...
    Curiously, instead, I prefer OSX for Office...

  • Recommend me SDK for game programming

    I need a 3D SDK with audio support. Obviosly it would be Java3D. But i've heard it uses much memory, and it's complicated.
    What do you think about j Monkey Engine ?
    Or is Java3D the right choice for game programming ?

    You'll probably get better responses on the game programming board
    http://forum.java.sun.com/forum.jspa?forumID=406

  • HOW MANY SSDs ARE OPTIMUM FOR USE WITH CS6, AND WHAT SIZE?

    I HAVE A NEW HPE h8-1241, 16GB RAM, 2TB HD, NVIDIA GE FORCE WITH CUDA.  ADOBE RECOMMEND SSDs, BUT IS INEXPLICIT AS TO SIZE AND NUMBER.  WHAT HAVE YOU FOUND TO BE BEST?
    CARL

    What I'd do with them, assuming they're modern drives (e.g., with Sandforce or Indilinx controllers inside that do wear-leveling) is to set them up as a RAID 0 array, then install Windows on the array and run everything off the one big drive C:.  That's what I do with my 4 drive array. 
    I also have spinning drives in my system and after a lot of testing I found that because the SSD array offers near-zero latency as well as gargantuan throughput, it's best to run everything from it - Windows system, swap file, Photoshop application, Photoshop image files, Photoshop scratch. 
    This seems to go against the advice you find all over to use a separate volume for the Photoshop swap file but SSD simply changes the rules.  Now with a RAID array you will have your maximum throughput and all your free space available at once for anything that needs it, and THAT is precisely what speeds your entire computing experience up.
    Plus, if you find the space you've allocated restrictive in the future, you could add drives to your array in the future.  At that point you could either restore a system image onto the larger array and expand the partition, or reinstall everything to take advantage of the additional space.  Or you could stretch yourself a bit and add more drives now, to make your system more future-proof.  Systems always run best if you don't fill up all the space available (i.e., have a lot of free space).  You never know when Photoshop is going to create a 200 GB scratch file (I've seen it happen)!
    Some motherboards have the ability to build RAID arrays using on-board SATA connectors, and indeed some people do that.  The Intel ICH series of controllers in motherboard chipsets can deliver impressive performance.  However, because my motherboard only offers SATA2 (3 gigabits/sec) connectors, I chose (after some research) a HighPoint 2720SGL PCIe RAID controller, because it's fast and (more importantly) it's rock solid reliable.  I'm not sorry I chose that part.
    Not long ago it was ridiculous to think of building a system around a multiple SSD array, but the prices have fallen so far - even in the past months - that it's practical.
    Just now I looked:  You can buy an OCZ Vertex 4  256GB drive for $185.99 at Amazon.com.  That's one of the fastest drives I'm aware of now, and needs the least special care.  You just plug it in and use it.  A 512 GB array would be $372, and a 1TB array would be $744.  Give them a few months more and the prices will probably be well under 50 cents a gigabyte.
    -Noe

  • What size for OS/apps SSD and scratch disk SSD ?

    Hi !
    I need a SSD for my OS with the full CS6 Cloud and few others apps (but no games, pictures, songs or other personnal stuff),
    that's mean between 70 and 80Gb. So I think I'll need only a 128Gb for that.
    I also need a scratch disk, so despite I prefer a fast and large disk like the Barracuda 3Tb, I read it will be better to take a SSD.
    My workstation is a 6x core, with 64Gb RAM, and 6x HDD for projects, render and footage (4K R3D and 1080p PRORES).
    My questions are :
    1) OS/apps SSD :
    Even if I only need 80Gb (or a few more like 90Gb max) of storage, do I need to take more than 128Gb ?
    Is it possible that the OS fill my disk with lots of temporary files ?
    And the same for Photoshop, Premiere, After Effects or others apps ?
    I know those apps will use the scratch disk, but maybe others temporary files will be write on this OS/apps drive ?
    2) scratch disk SSD :
    Like I said, I prefer larger drives, but as I understood, SSD will be better for preview and temp files,
    and actually I'm working with 4K R3D footages and 1080p PRORES.
    So do you think 128Gb will be enough for a scratch disk, to use with CS6, Blackmagic Resolve, and others 3D apps, like Maya ?
    Of course I can empty them regularly.............. but is it enough ? Or 256Gb, or higher will be better ?
    Or just a fast WD Velociraptor 1Tb or even a cheaper Barracuda 3Tb hard drive will be good enough ?
    Thanks guys.

    Thanks for your fast reply.
    But, I'm confused.... if the OS and the apps can fill my disk with lots of temp files, how a 128Gb can be enough ??
    Maybe you mean that those apps will fill the SSD with "hidden" files, but not reach the limit of 128Gb ?
    About Windows, I didn't knew I could make a scratch disk only for this temp files.
    Do I have to put the Windows temp files in the scratch disk also ?
    And you don't think a Velociraptor with 1Tb will be a good solution between the speed of a SSD and the size of a HDD ?
    My drives (alone or in RAID 0) are directly connected from the motherboard P9X79 PRO, trought the X79 chipset, and the Marvell chipset.
    But I read that the Marvell chipset has only 500Mb/s in total bandwitch divided between the 2 drives..... I'm not really sure....
    but even if it's true, I don't think the OS/apps will take a lot of bandwitch (except when I'll start an apps),
    and it will surelly let the full bandwitch for the scratch disk. Don't you think ?
    4 drives are connected to the X79 chipset :
    - 1x SATA 6Gb/s - Barracuda 3Tb (projects)
    - 1x SATA 6Gb/s - Barracuda 3Tb (renders)
    - 2x SATA 3Gb/s / RAID 0 - Barracuda 3Tb (footages)
    - 2x SATA 3Gb/s / RAID 0 - Barracuda 3Tb (footages)
    2 drives will be connected to the Marvell chipset :
    - 1x SATA 6Gb/s - SSD (OS/apps)
    - 1x SATA 6Gb/s - SSD or HDD (scratch disk for CS6 and other "video" apps)

  • What is the best way to use a SSD for Photoshop/photo editing?

    Computer hardware newbie here: I do a significant amount of photo editing work and for a very long time I've experienced Photoshop, Bridge and Photomatix crashing constantly (usually due to insufficient RAM) or just generally taking forever (Bridge took forever to load the thumbnail/preview extractions in a folder full of images, Photoshop took forever to save images and Photomatix took ages to load/merge a set of bracketed photos).  Here are the typical error messages I'd get: http://pastebin.com/J9byczse
    As a professional photographer, constantly running into that sort of thing is quite aggravating, so to hopefully avoid ever having to deal with that again I invested in a new custom built computer.  It's Windows 7 Professional 64 bit with 32GB of RAM and a 240GB SSD; I'm using the 240GB SSD as my boot drive/OS, all of my programs are installed there, and the page file.  My photos and data are stored on several HDDs.  I have yet to install any of my photo editing software (Photoshop CS6 Extended, Lightroom, Photomatix etc) to the new computer yet since I'd like some advice first.
    My basic question is this: what is the best way to take advantage of the SSD (and the computer in general) when it comes to my photo editing software?
    Specifically...
    1. If I have a folder of photos I'm working on, should I move it to the SSD and then work on them from there in order to take advantage of the speed of the SSD?  Would this make any difference in terms of speed if the photos are located on the SSD vs. an internal/external HDD?
    2. Most of what I've read online seems to recommend two separate SSDs, one for installing/booting the apps and one for cache/scratch.  Does it matter if I use my 240GB SSD for both?
    3. This is a fairly new computer and the SSD is already almost half full (102GB used, 120GB free) *WITHOUT* any of my photo editing software installed yet.  I'm concerned about how fast that remaining 120 GB may fill up.  As it fills up will I lose the speed advantage of the SSD vs. a regular HDD?
    4. Sort of similar to #3, but should I bother moving any of my other non-photo editing programs/caches off of the SSD to a HDD and would there be any major difference in the speed/lifespan of the SSD if I did so?  It's mostly Firefox and Chrome and their caches that I'm concerned may be a problem if they remain on the SSD.
    Thanks for any help!

    If you have an SSD you can run the cache and programs on the same drive.  However, many recommend a scratch disk size of 100-200 gigs so that will not work here unless you opt for a larger SSD.  Otherwise an internal spinner is recommended that does not contain the program files, or idealy any other files that may want to get acessed at same time (only one read/write head per drive).
    With 32 gig of RAM you may not need the constant use of the scratch drive unless working on large images with lots of layers.  So see no advantage to moving folder to SSD for temp work environment.
    From what I read the new crop of SSD do not have the wear problems of the older versions.

  • Size of SSDs for Photoshop CS5, LR3, Windows 7

    Looking at configurations to build a new desktop,  I've been reading so many articles on using SSDs for PS CS5 that I'm now confused.
        I'd like to use one drive for OS & programs and a 2nd for a PS scratch disk.  I'm looking at 80GB or 120GB to fit my budget.  Will either of these sizes be suitable for the two drives. I've noticed that Intel just dropped their prices today and added the 120GB drive. 
        I would like to use WD hard drives for a storage drive and another for a  working drive (4 internal drives total) as the computer functions for family Internet, too.  Now, I store my main Lightroom catalogs and photos on an external drive so I can move them between my desktop and laptop.  My PS interests usually lie in collages of 6-8 photos (layers) and stringing photos together for landscapes.  Lightroom does a lot of my editing adjustments other than that.  I'm looking at 8MB of RAM for now, again for the budget.
        What do you suggest?

    Ok, SSD's and photoshop...
    there are a lot of differnet ways to handle this question none of them are easier then the other ..
    I just did this like a month  ago and here is what i did. *** note** Now i am not suggesting you follow my steps, but you can do something similar at a much lower price range
    I have an OCZ RevoDrive 110 gig SSD as my primary os drive and program files directory.
    second drive set is a pair of 10krpm 300gb raptor drives striped for a 600 gd data drive.
    I have a 2x 2TB hard drives that are my archives but i keep them off line.
    Now here is where it gets complicated.
    You want to write to your SSD as little as possable for longevity of the drives mostly. so first thing is you want no swapper, no automatic defragmentation and several other SSD spacific settings like hibernation etc, if you have been doing the research you already know all this.
    Now i took that and went a step even further and this is not something you would want to do unless you are extreeeemly confortable with playing around with OS configurations.
    I during the OS build set all my user directories, program data, set the swapper to the Physical data hard drive set as well as the PS scratch disk, Internet caches etc..
    This make it so that my primary boot and program files drive never gets written to unless there is an update or i am installing something.
    The second Physical drive handles all the changing data. User profiles, personal settings, desktop, etc.
    This does a number of things for me, everything launches and runs extreemly quickly it takes seconds for boot to dektop apps launch with out hesitation. It alows me to use a smaller SSD to house all my applications and OS while not restricting my ammount of data i can keep on my desktop or documents folders.
    I have only used 35 gigs out of the 110 gig ssd installing all my apps and os including several very large games.
    If i had to do it again i would do it exactly the same way.
    Now, if you are not so confident in your OS skills and simply want an SSD for the extreme speed it will provide you.  I would still suggest only using a single SSD and use a second physical drive.
    Several reasons, its a heck of a lot cheaper.
    Place your scatch disk, your OS swapper file (ssd does not need a swapper file but unless you have an ungodly ammount of memory you should always have one some place), temp directories and internet explorer cache locations onto the physical drive. Also to store your data on it.
    SSD are too expensive to use for data storage or swapper/scratch drives at this point and it does not buy you anything speed wise using it as cache or temp folders. additionally when you are simply storing images you don't need that extreemly quick you will not see a noticable difference opening a photo on physical hd or SSD its just not that much data.
    One last thing, unless your in an extreem rush, i would wait 6 months.  with SATA 3 and USB-3 coming around and already showing on most new motherboards, newer faster SSD's and physical drives will be making their way to the market pretty quick.

  • What Size Drive for Media Cache?

    Hi there,
    I'm about to edit a large project (5TB of 4K RED footage and counting) on a laptop and am intending to use the setup below for disks. Ideally I would have gone for a "4 disk" setup, but I've maxed out my eSATA connections and would have to use USB for anything else. If coincidentally you can see any problems with this configuration please let me know!
    Disk Setup
    C Drive 750GB (OS, Programs)
    3x 2TB Drives in eSATA docking stations (Media, Projects)
    Second internal hard disk (Previews, Media Cache, Exports)
    I'm intending to install a second hard drive in my laptop to use for the  Media Cache. What size/speed drive should be used for this purpose?
    Thanks!

    barker85 wrote:
    Well I needed a field laptop and couldn't afford a new desktop on top of that. Haven't had any problems at all so far - perhaps I'm overlooking something?
    Perhaps only that the predominant holy grail on this forum is achieving a high PPBM score, not necessarily edit 4K.
    I've worked with 2K and 4K files on very slow machines, and I am not an editor - a systems integrator.  It's being done.
    Personally, I wouldn't dedicate a disk or a volume to media cache and DB - I believe that money is better spent on the main media volume's speed and capacity.  People who have done it on modern (not old) systems haven't reported much of a performance boost.  But if you find otherwise, I'd love to hear about it.
    In your case, since you don't seem to plan to have a relatively fast main media volume (e.g. an eSATA RAID0), a separate drive for media caching and database may have a performance benefit.  The size of it depends on the size of your projects, how complex your project and timelines are, how much rendering they require.  Usually even a small disk (under 100GB) will do just fine for the purpose; the current "sweet spot" is around 256GB SSD and 500-750GB 7200rpm mechanical drive.

Maybe you are looking for