add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

120gb ssd suddenly not good enough?

Ryan_Lion

59 months ago

OK this is probably a dumb question but as I've been reading up more on various things I've come across this idea that a 120gb ssd suddenly isn't no longer a good standard and that people should start going up to at least 240-250.

I've even come across one Reddit user who actually said it makes him literally angry that people spend a chuck of cash and only get 120 ssd. Now I personally don't get that and maybe I need it explained to me.

For example I have http://pcpartpicker.com/user/Ryan_Lion/saved/Lk8bt6 this build in my saved parts list (was originally a Asus Strix in there but it's out of stock right now so the EVGA is filling in the slot) which I plan to build once I get up the funds. Everything about this build seems perfectly fine to me. A 4770k, a 970, plenty of storage (from my perspective) and 16gb of ram (for editing and content creation) Plus it's all within my set $1500.

Now though I'm hearing that you need to go higher on the ssd and that just doesn't make sense to me plus it breaks my budget Z(AND YES when I say $1500 I MEAN $1500 not $1500.01 or higher) (Sorry but that kinda thing gets to me)

So please straighten this out for me?

And try not to judge my saved parts list, I'm just using it as an example

Comments

  • 59 months ago
  • 2 points

120gb is more than sufficient to put windows on and a few key programs. you will need an additional normal hard drive though if you plan on saving games and movies

when people are putting builds together you will often see a 120gb ssd and a 1tb hard drive

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

If you need 240GB of storage for applications and your OS, go for it. Otherwise 120 is more than enough, based on my experience.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Thanks for the reply but I'm not the one saying that I need 240. I'm with you 120 is fine.

What I'm saying is that some people have started this weird thing where it seems like they're doubling up everything that was once considered standard.

For example someone show off a 1tb and 120gb build they say get 240ssd and 2tb even though I think it's unnecessary.

Maybe it's just certain people though, i don't really know.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

For example someone show off a 1tb and 120gb build they say get 240ssd and 2tb even though I think it's unnecessary.

Why bother at what others choose? 1TB maybe a requirement under heavy workstation loads, multiple-apps churning lot of data each week. And, also due to extreme throughput demands. Note that it doesn't take a long time to fill up unless there is a network/backup storage solution.

Look at what you need by answering a few Qs like:

a) Single OS or Multi-boot or Host OS loaded with VMs?

b) What applications to be used?

c) Typical PC usage (surfing/movies) or office-like usage (apps like MS office)?

d) Is it for software development? any Design tools for say hardware design?

g) Lot of Games?

f) have an external HDD/SSD storage? regular optical backup?

You can easily deduce whether 120GB or 1TB meets your requirements down the line, say for an year or two.

  • 59 months ago
  • 2 points

What I meant by saying that I thought it was unneccasaryy wasn't in a way to judge other peoples choices.

I meant I didn't understand why people would look at another persons build and tell them "that's not good enough" essentially.

I'm more worried about those people who are trying to do their best and get crapped on for it then I am myself.

I can adjust, if you look at my saved build list you'll see that I have adjusted, other people can not, and they shouldn't have their builds taken apart (figuratively) by others just for that.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

"that's not good enough"

Yes, mean people are everywhere - idiots who whine/moan/complain/jealous/unhappy of almost every thing (or almost everyone) be it about PCs, Cars, Electronics, Jewellery and what not.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Mean people yes, idiots, eh depends.

Not everyone who complains about everything is being dumb about it.

I live in a place where anytime you kinda have to take any deals you can, because since I'm in a small town it means less haggling when it comes to purchases.

Or that you all you have near you is a best buy sigh

[comment deleted]
[comment deleted]
  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Those people are maybe looking at price per GB for office type/general use solid state drives.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

I dunno, maybe it's just the bigger=better mentality?

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

When I was looking at making a bluid it was a choice between geting a SSD or a better GPU.

I got a better GPU and i have not even got a ssd what so ever. No regrets.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

I know I can survive with a 120GB SSD on my laptop, I just use it for regular stuff now.

120GB on my PC might become annoying eventually, which is why I went for a 256GB. I've had it for 5 months now and I've only used up around 100GB, everything else is on my HDD's.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

I'm rather new to this all. But I went with 232 GB as my boot drive. So far I am at 131 GB with OS and any other component drivers/files/etc. If you can manage and not have many programs installed onto it, then 120 might be enough.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

I have a Crucial 256GB, and once my OS and all of my files were on it, I had 70 GB left. Right now, I hover around 65-70 GB free storage if I clear my downloads ~once a month and watch how much I download. That's 22 games (no single game above 15GB), an OS, and 3D modeling programs, plus all of my synced google drive. I think that 256 is a happy medium between 120 and 512, but it all depends on what you use the PC for.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Hmm well usually you have better price per gb at 240 and they have a little bit faster read/writes. Other than that I dunno

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Wow thanks for all the replies everybody, I never expected to get much attention to this question.

I appreciate all your takes on this subject but I'd have to say it seems like Dimwit is with the opinions that I've been reading up on.

It's cool to see that some of you still manage with 120gb though, even if you have to move stuff around.

I may have to rethink my own build now, hum starts thinking

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

120gb is a little constraining. I means you won't have much room to install programs to your OS drive. That being said, 120gb SSD is what I am rocking :), and I have 7GB free lol.

Basically windows takes up a chunk, and more over time as you apply service pack updates. If you have 120gb then you actually won't be able to use more than 114GB or so. Then think about the nearer to system level programs you might not have a chance, or preference to install to your data drive. Antivirus, Downloaded Windows Features, video card drivers, etc. It just adds up over time. So I can certainly understand the suggestion to start out larger, but only if you have the budget.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Yeah I already changed my saved list around a bit in order to get a 240gb ssd in my rig.

Now if only I already had the cash to build it. sign

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Lets see it...maybe we can offer some advice as to where to cut.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

What my saved build list? It's already linked up top on the first post.

Fair warning if you look at it later that it might already be changed around from what it is now.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Log out and try the link. It says: "This part list is private." ;)

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Ah that's my fault, sorry.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

There is a practical reason to go bigger that involves speed, since higher capacity drives have more nand modules and more lanes leading to them, you can use more of those lanes to read and write data on the drive, especially the write performance, which can as much as double jumping from a 120gb model to a 240gb. Additionally, when people mention SSD's slowing down as they get more full, this is in reference to it's write speeds, particularly sequential write. There is little if any impact on the drive's ability to read what's already on there.

Why should you care: well it's up to you. Some people go all solid state and work off of SSD's for content creation, since it loads to RAM significantly faster than off an HDD, and some people have an isolated SSD just for their OS and apps. It really depends on you.

I've got a 240gb SSD mainly for the additional lanes, but also since it was my only drive for a while. I've since gotten an HDD (1TB WD Blue) to store captured footage for youtube while my SSD still holds my OS and games. I would like to eventually move my games to another 240gb SSD, and if possible get another for working current projects off of. None of this is necessary however, it's just my preference. I've gotten a 120gb SSD for my girlfriend, for her OS and games (~50gb of the Sims), and assorted various stuff, and it works fine for her.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Yeah this seems to be the same opinion I'm finding elsewhere as well.

It's all good for me though as the crucial 256gb is what I plan to get, it's really great and affordable.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Good on you, Crucial MX100 is a great drive, sort of makes their M550 line redundant, but that's a whole other conversation.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

The whole point of MX100 is a replacement for the 500-550 series I believe.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

The M550 line was released only a few months before the MX100 line and was indeed suppsed to replace their M500 line, however was also a touch faster than competing 840 Evo's. The MX100 line was marketed as a budget line the performs marginally worse than M550's, but performed so well in the market that they rendered their more expensive brothers pointless.

  • 59 months ago
  • 1 point

Oh OK, but it's still true that mx100 will replace the 500 line I believe.

The 500s are all slightly less gigabits then the 100 (120 vs 128 at the very lowest end) and 100s are so down in cost that the 500s are made pointless.

  • 59 months ago
  • -1 points

What's happening is that the price has dropped with the 256gb MX100 to the point that a 120gb is pointless. 120gb is marginal at best. It will have to be monitored constantly for space hungry files. If you don't configure it properly or have this as your only drive it will fill up in a blink of an eye. Add to that that the 120's are much poorer drives in general to 240/256's and the attitude that 120 is not good enough is understandable.

BTW anyone expousing the opinion that 40/60/90 gb as being "enough" is just delusional.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube