Large SSD hard drive on computer? Recently an experienced member posted a comment suggesting that rather than buy a new computer with a large resident hard drive (1tb), it might be...

genocolo Loc: Vail and Gasparilla Island

Recently an experienced member posted a comment suggesting that rather than buy a new computer with a large resident hard drive (1tb), it might be better to have a smaller hard drive (256gb) and then use external ssd drives for photos, movies etc.

Why would that be better than the one large drive? What are your thoughts and recommendations?

Thanks in advance

ejpeters Loc: New Jersey, USA

I originally had a 256GB SSD drive on my old computer. I had to make sure that nothing was stored on that drive other than the operating system. I replaced it with a 1TB SSD drive.
My new computer has a 2TB SSD drive and a 2TB Storage drive. I also have an external 4TB HD with all of my pictures stored on it.
I think the larger SSD drive is better and than having the smaller one. I don't have to worry about what I install and what drive it is on.

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

I store ALL my pictures on 2 external hard drives. To have all you storage on one is a disaster waiting to happen. That is what happened to me years ago. I would have 2 external drives (I filled my 5 TB and went to 2 8TB) drives with all my storage. When my drive failed, they wanted $1,000.00 to TRY to recover with a 10% chance. The odds are better and cheaper now, but why take a chance.

Just Fred Loc: Darwin's Waiting Room

The only benefit I can see is that the external drive is portable, so that if you buy a new computer you don't have to copy all the photos from the old to the new.

SSD drives are less prone to failure than the traditional spinning disk (they are not immune, of course). I think the real key with any disk is to make sure that you keep about 10%-15% of the total space free, so that the OS and applications have "breathing room" for temporary files, caches, etc.

Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA

genocolo wrote:

Recently an experienced member posted a comment suggesting that rather than buy a new computer with a large resident hard drive (1tb), it might be better to have a smaller hard drive (256gb) and then use external ssd drives for photos, movies etc.

Why would that be better than the one large drive? What are your thoughts and recommendations?

Thanks in advance

The SSD will be much faster and is therefore desirable for loading large programs. You do not need the speed to house static photos and documents. It would be expensive to have your computer retrofitted with large hard drives so that is why using external drives was suggested. Also if you buy a new computer in the future you can take your content with you. I use a 256 gb SSD for all my programs and have two 5 tb external drives. All photos I back up on both drives at the same time. One drive is set up by date: ex: 2021-5 for May of 2021. The other drive has folders of just about anything I photograph ex: Barnes and Mills -- Rivers, Lakes, and Streams -- Philadelphia -- New York -- Fireworks etc. This way if one drive dies, I can clone the other drive to the new one and still have a backup. If money is no object you could opt for two 2tb SSD external drives. These would cost almost as much as you paid for the computer but SSD drives are less likely to die than regular drives.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Another individual preference.
Everybody has one...

I replaced a going bad 1Tb system drive with a 2Tb hard drive.
I have two external 1Tb WD pocket drives (HDD) and a couple of old 500Gb internals (HDD) that I use for backup in a drive dock.
Many people are caught up with the nuances of SSDs. Speed, lack of movement sensitivity.
Good for them.
I guess I'm caught up with not throwing away good HDD drives.
Nor do I need instantaneous program loading.

I like having all my stuff on one drive, not spread over a few.

Again, MY preferences.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

From a performance, reliability and convenience perspective, the answer are large internal SSDs (one for apps, scratch and OS, and one or more separate drives for data) combined with an on-site external backup and an off-site DR (disaster recovery) copy. Regarding the size for your OS/Apps disk, I’ve found that 1/2 TB is plenty with about 50% available for future expansion, and I have a LOT of apps - 256 GB is too small. If you have enough m.2 or PCIe slots available, I’d put everything on multiple m.2 NVME drives (speed), but if you only have one slot, put the OS/Apps on the NVMe drive and the data on SATA SSDs.

Paul Diamond Loc: Atlanta, GA, USA

You must remember the First and most important guideline about SSDs. Performance for running software applications are adversely affected if you fill more than 50% of the capacity of your SSD. Half of a 256GB SSD is very little storage space for your operating system and most used applications.

My suggestion would be a 1 TB SSD for your operating system and important applications. Add an internal 2-5GB hard drive for storage and running less frequent, less important programs. And add two external 5GB hard drives for the storage of your images, copying the images onto both drives for protection against one drive failing.

Toby

SSD for the main HD is the only way to go. I bought a new computer with a 256GB and immediately changed it to 1T SSD. I use an internal 3T for extra storage and external drives for backup. The speed advantage from the SSD HD alone is a good reason to go to a SSD HD

rlv567 Loc: Baguio City, Philippines

genocolo wrote:

Recently an experienced member posted a comment suggesting that rather than buy a new computer with a large resident hard drive (1tb), it might be better to have a smaller hard drive (256gb) and then use external ssd drives for photos, movies etc.

Why would that be better than the one large drive? What are your thoughts and recommendations?

Thanks in advance

On my computer - Windows 10 - I have a 450 GB SSD Drive C: and a 1 TB second drive, which is enough for my purposes, when coupled with outside hard drive storage. I have lots of programs on Drive C:, using, maybe to use and evaluating. Basically, it's only software on C: (and things which reasonably need to be there), and that currently occupies 136 GB - I don't let it get much over that by keeping everything pretty much up to date. Obviously, if everything could be big SSD, that would be slightly better, but I can't afford it!!! - and what I am doing works very well and perfectly for me.

Loren - in Beautiful Baguio City

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

One more point when you load up your working drive you slow down your computer so storage off that drive will speed you up.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

TriX wrote:

...
... 256 GB is too small. ...
...

My backups of photos, docs, spreadsheets, and what-not are over 250Gb.

rlv567 Loc: Baguio City, Philippines

Longshadow wrote:

My backups of photos, docs, spreadsheets, and what-not are over 250Gb.

None of that (and others - downloads, music, software, videos, etc) goes on Drive C:!!! It all works just fine on a hard drive (spinner) second drive in the computer!!! - and actual (as desired) backups on external drives.

Loren - in Beautiful Baguio City

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

rlv567 wrote:

None of that (and others - downloads, music, software, videos, etc) goes on Drive C:!!! It all works just fine on a hard drive (spinner) second drive in the computer!!! - and actual (as desired) backups on external drives.

Loren - in Beautiful Baguio City

You're right! It will work on any drive. C:; D:; E:, ...

Personal preference, eh?

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Paul Diamond wrote:

You must remember the First and most important guideline about SSDs. Performance for running software applications are adversely affected if you fill more than 50% of the capacity of your SSD...

I think you’d be hard pressed to demonstrate/benchmark the idea that SSDs shouldn’t be run more than 50% full. Have you actually tested that? I have, on SSDs as much as 95% full (which is not good practice for other reasons), and the performance difference is negligible in my experience.