Cheap SSDs - tempting but worth it?

[mushroomface]

I've started to see SSDs really drop in value. Given I've a couple of older machines needing a new lease of life (business machines), would it be beneficial to get some or am I setting myself up for a fall?

Ignoring the really cheap drives, the best seem to be OCZ at £36 for 60GB but didn't these suffer from firmware issues?

I'm ashamed to say this all came about watching videos on YouTube with twelve year old kids comparing start up times between SSD and HDD...sigh!

Case in point -

 

[STdrez625]

really drop in value

really drop in price.(value increases!)
You dont state why you want an SSD, and what type of machine its for. ALso what is your budget? Your money may be better spent upgrding your Broadband, buying online storge, or even getting a new gfx card for playing faceBok games.

 

[MrR0b0T]

I have a couple of old laptops that I've upgraded with SSD's and must say it does give them a new lease of life.

Pick up a cheap drive and you won't regret it,

 

[Hinchley Grinch]

I have a couple of old laptops that I've upgraded with SSD's and must say it does give them a new lease of life.

Pick up a cheap drive and you won't regret it,

+1

 

[mushroomface]

@leera2 and @Hinchley Grinch - thanks, I've bought two OCZ 60GB drives. Will report back when they've been delivered. Now to find a decent disk mirroring solution!!

 

[T3C]

+1

+ 1 here too

 

[mushroomface]

Update as of 29th July 2012:

Bought two OCZ Agility 60GB SSDs (these - OCZ Agility (AGT3-25SAT3-60G) 60 GB | CheckoutSpy.co.uk).

I had heard mixed reviews about the firmware (as said above) but not had a single problem. Installed like a normal disk, mirrored the drives (most complicated bit) and fired the two (Vista and XP) machines up. As expected, the machines are much quicker and will probably last us a couple more years. I will probably clean them both down too and reinstall the OS to see if there are further gains to be had there (perhaps a future update).

Highly recommended, especially if keeping the old HDs as backup/extra storage (not that these machines had much anyway!). I can't say how much quicker they are - certainly twice as fast booting - but they've removed sluggish applications completely. On one machine Outlook had always taken an age to load, largely due to the number of emails in the PST, but now it opens like notepad would.

Certainly feeling much SSD love - just thinking about upgrading my laptop now!

 

[bobbymax]

I don't have an SSD yet, but this was recommended on another forum:

12 SSD tips to optimise your drive's performance | News | TechRadar

 

[EndlessWaves]

I don't have an SSD yet, but this was recommended on another forum:

12 SSD tips to optimise your drive's performance | News | TechRadar

2, 9, 10 and 11 are worth checking, the rest won't make any difference or may even slow stuff down.

 

[simplicity96]

You missed out No.3 there. There is no need for a paging file if you have 4 or more Gb of ram with todays computers. The actual paging file can easily corrupt causing all sorts of issues plus is generally hinderance rather than help.

And windows 7 in its infinate wisdom makes your paging file the same size as your ram. In my case it made a 24Gb paging file.... This is a silly size for a random accessed file.

 

[EndlessWaves]

You missed out No.3 there. There is no need for a paging file if you have 4 or more Gb of ram with todays computers. The actual paging file can easily corrupt causing all sorts of issues plus is generally hinderance rather than help.

I'd disagree, I doubt it'll 'easily corrupt' if the system has no other issues and you're more likely to run into the problems that come with disabling it on the average PC (applications crashing if you use all memory and certain applications refusing to run).

Default minimum size is to allow a full kernel and memory dump (memory size + 300MB) and default maximum size is three times memory. For hard drives these are sensible pessimistic estimates but they are a little large for a 55GB SSD so if you need the space it might be worth adjusting to 1GB minimum, ~5GB maximum or moving it to another drive.

Basically, it won't give you any performance advantage and may lead to mysterious errors a couple of years down the line so on a general purpose PC it's not a good idea to turn it off.

 

[simplicity96]

I'd disagree, I doubt it'll 'easily corrupt' if the system has no other issues and you're more likely to run into the problems that come with disabling it on the average PC (applications crashing if you use all memory and certain applications refusing to run).

Default minimum size is to allow a full kernel and memory dump (memory size + 300MB) and default maximum size is three times memory. For hard drives these are sensible pessimistic estimates but they are a little large for a 55GB SSD so if you need the space it might be worth adjusting to 1GB minimum, ~5GB maximum or moving it to another drive.

Basically, it won't give you any performance advantage and may lead to mysterious errors a couple of years down the line so on a general purpose PC it's not a good idea to turn it off.

Well on this I think we shall have to come to a 'Agree to disagree' stance I have seen the paging file corrupted many a time due to the nature of it and wouldnt have it used on my systems. I have only seen it make a real difference on lower powered systems with very little ram (1gb or in that ball park) as then the idea does come into its own, but again you run the risk of it causing issues of its own.

But this of course is on personal prefernce as each person sees these features as they want. My opinion is just from what ive seen over the years fixing computers, and it is only my opinion

 

[EndlessWaves]

I have seen the paging file corrupted many a time due to the nature of it

The nature of it?

 

[simplicity96]

Large file with constant read writes.