Single SSD as sole drive?

[Skott]

Probably a silly question but considering my knowledge of SSD drives is limited I'll ask anyway. Is there any reason not to use a single SSD drive in PC for the O/S and all the other apps, games, and etc.,? For example, if I get myself a new little lanbox and use a single 256Gb SSD as the only storage will there be problems? Aside from cost/expense of course. I hear things about trim and so forth but haven't really delved into it.

 

[Coup27]

Why would there be problems? I don't really understand your post. It's no different than running a PC with only one HDD, only much much faster.

 

[HutchinsonJC]

The only issue I see is limited storage space, but if you have another machine that matches your storage needs you shouldn't have any problems.

 

[postmortemIA]

most people (inc. me) don't do it because it is not cost effective. Stuff that I access daily or weekly I put on SSD. Stuff that I use once in a month or so, like installers and various media, I don't want to store on SSD. It does not save me much time. So instead 256GB SSD, you can get 80 or 128GB SSD and one huge 7200rpm drive.

 

[Charlie98]

It's just as reasonable as one HDD... you still have the issue of backups. If you had a small case with just the SSD, you could easily use a 500GB external HDD for backup.

If you don't have anything on it worthy of backup... then there's your answer.

 

[Skott]

Why would there be problems? I don't really understand your post. It's no different than running a PC with only one HDD, only much much faster.

Well, there was in the beginning debates about SSDs not lasting as long as mechanical hard drives and there was talk about the trim issue. Not really sure what was the problem there. I never paid it much attention. Something about how trim was needed or something. Like I said I dont know a whole lot about them so I asked the question.

 

[Skott]

The only issue I see is limited storage space, but if you have another machine that matches your storage needs you shouldn't have any problems.

This would be a little lanbox. Nothing but gaming purposes when away from home. I have a main desktop where all the more important stuff is stored.

 

[Skott]

most people (inc. me) don't do it because it is not cost effective. Stuff that I access daily or weekly I put on SSD. Stuff that I use once in a month or so, like installers and various media, I don't want to store on SSD. It does not save me much time. So instead 256GB SSD, you can get 80 or 128GB SSD and one huge 7200rpm drive.

I'am considering this but I've always been one of those types that just likes everything on one drive. A shame the SSDs are still expensive and not very large in nature.

 

[philipma1957]

I'am considering this but I've always been one of those types that just likes everything on one drive. A shame the SSDs are still expensive and not very large in nature.

go for it. get a 240gb or a 256gb ssd. and have an external backup drive.

 

[Coup27]

Simply put, unless your SSD has some server / database style intense workload, you do not need to worry about wearing your SSD out.

 

[dagamer34]

Most people would not recommend buying a larger SSD (i.e. 128->256 or certainly 256->512) if you're going to be storing a bunch of videos on the drive. It's not cost effective. But from a performance standpoint, there is no penalty.

 

[LokutusofBorg]

Longevity is not an issue. As long as you're running Windows 7, TRIM is not an issue.

If money was no object every one of my computers would have a single large SSD in them.

 

[philipma1957]

Longevity is not an issue. As long as you're running Windows 7, TRIM is not an issue.

If money was no object every one of my computers would have a single large SSD in them.

yeah a samsung series 830 512gb and an intel series 320 600gb would be nice.

 

[Jocelyn84]

It's just as reasonable as one HDD... you still have the issue of backups. If you had a small case with just the SSD, you could easily use a 500GB external HDD for backup.

If you don't have anything on it worthy of backup... then there's your answer.

go for it. get a 240gb or a 256gb ssd. and have an external backup drive.

This! I have a single ssd in my system, mainly because I'm addicted to silence, but I think it's a great way to go. I also have a big external, which gets hooked up maybe once a week for backups, or any other static data. All of my photos, music, videos, etc., are additionally stored via online storage/clouds, so there's practically no use for an internal mechanical drive.


Sent from my Samsung Epic 4G Touch using Tapatalk

 

[kmmatney]

You pretty much have to use a single drive in a laptop. On my work machine I have a 128GB SSD, and a 32GB SD card permanently installed where I store installers, downloads, etc...I also backup important files to the SSD (as well as to a WHS server)

 

[Old Hippie]

In the past 2.5 yrs. I've been using SSDs exclusively for OS drives.

But, for the last 10 yrs I've always had a small OS drive and everything else goes to storage.

My storage has grown to 6TBs but my OS drive is 768GB with only 60GB used.

 

[Burner27]

As for me, I would use an internal SSD as my sole and primary drive, yet I would regularly keep backing up my files on an external HDD. I still do not fully trust SSDs to last as long as HDD after the tons of complaints I heard/read about them.

Where have you been reading about these 'tons of complaints'? What brands specifically are you referring to? Are these complaints from one manufacturer or are you generalizing all SSDs to be unreliable as HDDs? Have you had a bad experience yourself with an SSD which has lead you to believe they are unreliable?

 

[alaricljs]

My laptop has a 128G M4 for Linux and a Win7 VM, I'm only using half of it tho. I got bit by the OCZ Vertex 2 previously so I am backing up the OS every week and backing up my home dir every 4 hours via snapshots and rsync.

My HTPC has had a Kingston v100+ 64GB for a few months now. I just finished installing Win7 on a 128GB M4 in my main rig last night. Neither system has HDDs inside the case. My main has a 500GB external that I dump my still & video SD cards to and with the move to SSD I added my infrequently used VMs there (Taxes VM, testing VM, ...).

For both HTPC and main I have an iSCSI LUN off my media server with all my games installed. Also have all my media available via CIFS. To top all that off I have a domain set up with roaming profiles and a 10GB slice off an SSD for the profiles and home dirs. The remainder of the SSD is the OS drive for linux (xen HV, 2 linux domUs, 1 XP domU).

So yeah, depending on your use case SSDs can be handy for all sorts of stuff When they're super cheap I might bother storing games on them, but until then I'm happy with my arrangement.

 

[Topweasel]

Where have you been reading about these 'tons of complaints'? What brands specifically are you referring to? Are these complaints from one manufacturer or are you generalizing all SSDs to be unreliable as HDDs? Have you had a bad experience yourself with an SSD which has lead you to believe they are unreliable?

Probably a combination of 1k SF drives, early OCZ SF2k drives, and the fact that even though they were supposed to have more writes in the older processes, people in 09 where seeing capacity disappear.

Also electronic issues were just a pain. In 2010, only Intel and Samsung had drives with a better then 10% return rate, a lot like OCZ were seeing 20% return rates. Anand even touched on this during a review mid last year on an OCZ drive. Where HDD's up until 2011 had something close to about a 3% return rate.

This part of the reason why when I was looking for SSD's I went with what seemed like the most reliable without going overboard as I could. It's why even though its a Tier down on performance most people look to and recommend a marvel based drive like the M4. If I was purchasing again I might look to getting a Plextor M3 instead of the Crucial M4. But in reality as long as performance isn't the only worry, its been pretty much only about a year and a half where any self respecting IT person would recommend an SSD for an OS drive. Even now you have to watch your step.

 

[smakme7757]

@OP. A single large SSD is perfectly fine, most laptop have the option to change out the primary drive with an SSD.

@MHD
My very first SSD died on me after 3 days. I was a skeptic, but the replacement drive has been working in the same laptop for nearly 2 years without a problem. Either way be it a mechanical HDD or an SSD a backup is always important.

 

[Jocelyn84]

@OP. A single large SSD is perfectly fine, most laptop have the option to change out the primary drive with an SSD.

@MHD
My very first SSD died on me after 3 days. I was a skeptic, but the replacement drive has been working in the same laptop for nearly 2 years without a problem. Either way be it a mechanical HDD or an SSD a backup is always important.

Which brand is the ssd that died?

Sent from my Samsung Epic 4G Touch using Tapatalk

 

[chin311]

I've been running a sole 120gb Intel 320 in my recent build since December.

Have a 2TB external for storage etc. Still have plenty of room, I'd say only limitation is not being able to keep tons of games installed at once. Not an issue to me really since I barely play one at a time as it is.

 

[happyboy]

If you are solely using the SSD as a storage device then that is simply stupid (not trolling), but if you are using it to run programs then that would be extremely beneficial for you. Buy a F3 for storage, its great and reliable.

 

[n7]

Always make backups of vital stuff, as SSDs can fail too.

Other than that, sounds good to me.

I've been using SSDs as my OS/applications/as-many-games-as-i-can-fit drives for years now.