New PC, strictly gaming

[NumbaOneStunna]

If you go with a SSD, make sure you disable hibernation and delete hiberfile.sys
With an SSD, Hibernation is useless because you boot so fast from a cold boot anyways.

The hiberfile.sys is the same size as the amount of ram you have. Therefore if you have 8gb ram the hiberfile is also 8gb.

powercfg -h off in a command prompt (run as admin)

[Ailos]

I strongly advise against a small SSD because 64 GB really is not a lot these days. You will probably be able to cram everything you need into 64 GB when you first unpack it, but the reality is that your Windows install, your drivers, your games and other random bits of crap need updating. That requires a lot of temp space (since a patch file needs to be downloaded completely before it is unpacked). And if you don't have temp space you don't get updates. If you don't get updates, you can't play.

Then there's the performance aspect of things. Hard drives need to be defragmented to keep them at optimal performance. Nowadays, Windows automatically does it for you in the background all the time, but remember way back when you had to do it yourself? And when you went to a friend's place to fix their computer, and you'd run the defragmenter, and the thing would instantly become so much more responsive?

Yeah, SSD's nature means that doing that creates a fair bit of garbage gibberish that has to be cleaned up. And just like defragmenting needs some spare space to let stuff be moved around, garbage collection algorithms become less and less efficient as the drive fills. So at 80% full, your 64 GB SSD will never even get close to it out-of-the-box performance.

A 64 GB drive today is used as basically, nothing more than a boot+addon drive. You can have windows and MS office on there, but that'll be pretty much it. Maybe you would be OK with JUST Win7 and PS2, but you really should NOT put anything more on there.

You're doing this because you want to save money now and buy more drives later to add space when you need it. The thing is, I think you'll need it about 2 weeks after you get everything together and start using it, and that's not really long enough for the prices to change as much as you think. So if you want an SSD, 128 GB is practical minimum. If you feel that $100 is too much to spend on that little space, but still want the performance, get a Hybrid Disk.

Otherwise, stick to inexpensive, low capacity platters until the price of a 128 GB SSD gets to where you think it's reasonable. Because at the end of the day, the only thing an SSD will improve for your PC is the boot and loading times; your framerate will be the same with any of these storage mediums.

[NumbaOneStunna]

Originally Posted by Ailos

I strongly advise against a small SSD because 64 GB really is not a lot these days. You will probably be able to cram everything you need into 64 GB when you first unpack it, but the reality is that your Windows install, your drivers, your games and other random bits of crap need updating. That requires a lot of temp space (since a patch file needs to be downloaded completely before it is unpacked). And if you don't have temp space you don't get updates. If you don't get updates, you can't play.

Then there's the performance aspect of things. Hard drives need to be defragmented to keep them at optimal performance. Nowadays, Windows automatically does it for you in the background all the time, but remember way back when you had to do it yourself? And when you went to a friend's place to fix their computer, and you'd run the defragmenter, and the thing would instantly become so much more responsive?

Yeah, SSD's nature means that doing that creates a fair bit of garbage gibberish that has to be cleaned up. And just like defragmenting needs some spare space to let stuff be moved around, garbage collection algorithms become less and less efficient as the drive fills. So at 80% full, your 64 GB SSD will never even get close to it out-of-the-box performance.

A 64 GB drive today is used as basically, nothing more than a boot+addon drive. You can have windows and MS office on there, but that'll be pretty much it. Maybe you would be OK with JUST Win7 and PS2, but you really should NOT put anything more on there.

You're doing this because you want to save money now and buy more drives later to add space when you need it. The thing is, I think you'll need it about 2 weeks after you get everything together and start using it, and that's not really long enough for the prices to change as much as you think. So if you want an SSD, 128 GB is practical minimum. If you feel that $100 is too much to spend on that little space, but still want the performance, get a Hybrid Disk.

Otherwise, stick to inexpensive, low capacity platters until the price of a 128 GB SSD gets to where you think it's reasonable. Because at the end of the day, the only thing an SSD will improve for your PC is the boot and loading times; your framerate will be the same with any of these storage mediums.

I have a 96GB and never run out of space, I always have at least 10gb free. I have Win7, Office 2010, Visual Studio 2011, Guild Wars 2 (10GB+), Lineage 2 (13GB), Heroes of Newerth, Battlefield 2142, Natural Selection 2, Endless Space, and more.

My brother does fine with his 64GB SSD also.

I have a 16TB NAS to keep all my data on.

To the OP, I would recommend getting a small SSD and traditional HD.

EDIT: Hell, even a 128GB SSD is only ~$120, just get a 128GB and call it a day.

[Pancake]

Originally Posted by NumbaOneStunna

EDIT: Hell, even a 128GB SSD is only ~$120, just get a 128GB and call it a day.

+1

Crucial is the best for this size
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820148442

or a Corsair 240gb for $195
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820233208

[Cavos]

OCZ Agility 3 180gb $107.49 I think i've found a winner. But I have never heard of this brand, and the read / write speeds are a bit different than Crucial. Mostly OCZ used Max Sequential Read of 525, Crucial Sustained Sequential Read 500. Same wording for Write, 500, 175 respectfully.

4k random read/write also different iops
35,000 / 50,000 for Ocz
40,000 / 35,000 Crucial

So it seems crucial is better for consistent reading, Ocz is better for writing data faster?

[Goku]

Originally Posted by Cavos

OCZ Agility 3 180gb $107.49 I think i've found a winner. But I have never heard of this brand, and the read / write speeds are a bit different than Crucial. Mostly OCZ used Max Sequential Read of 525, Crucial Sustained Sequential Read 500. Same wording for Write, 500, 175 respectfully.

4k random read/write also different iops
35,000 / 50,000 for Ocz
40,000 / 35,000 Crucial

So it seems crucial is better for consistent reading, Ocz is better for writing data faster?

Keep in mind thats on sale, so you may not find that exact price when you go and order. I still wouldn't touch any OCZ drive, your call of course though. Anyway I doubt you will notice a difference between any current gen SSD.

[Ganymede]

I also advise against SSD's right now, the prices are going to come down over the next few years and the sizes are going to go up dramatically and become affordable. Stick to a disk in the mean time and upgrade down the road.

and remember power supplies are not as much about watts as they are about amps. get a 600-650 that can carry 23-25amps.... Runs my 7970 fine. Just get a reliable brand PS.

[NumbaOneStunna]

Originally Posted by Ganymede

I also advise against SSD's right now, the prices are going to come down over the next few years and the sizes are going to go up dramatically and become affordable. Stick to a disk in the mean time and upgrade down the road.

Next few YEARS?
Thats the stupidest thing ive heard in this thread.
Thats like saying dont upgrade your processor or video card because the prices are going down in the new few years.

Lets consider the fact that during the Thailand flood hard drive prices skyrocketed and are currently about twice the price they were pre-flood. Yet SSD prices have continued to drop.

The SIZE of the SSD is not important, its the SPEED which makes them superior to hard disks. 128gb is plenty of space for a gaming PC. If you need space for media you can always still use a normal hard drive.

EDIT: Anyone who does not recommend an SSD for a gaming PC does not know what they are talking about and has never used one and seen the benefits. I would rather have a 128gb SSD than even a 128TB hard disk. (if one that size existed)

[Ganymede]

I am not here to flame and have used SSDs I am simply trying to help somebody on a budget save money to get a better build you dont need to have an SSD to run the game on max settings. He can save money by getting a disk HD and spend it on vid, processor, ram, things that matter a lot more. We dont do a lot of loading in planetside which makes an SSD not that helpful. Some games I may recommend it but not on his budget.

[NumbaOneStunna]

Originally Posted by Ganymede

I am not here to flame and have used SSDs I am simply trying to help somebody on a budget save money to get a better build you dont need to have an SSD to run the game on max settings. He can save money by getting a disk HD and spend it on vid, processor, ram, things that matter a lot more. We dont do a lot of loading in planetside which makes an SSD not that helpful. Some games I may recommend it but not on his budget.

the Price difference between a 1TB hard drive and a 128GB SSD is less than $10

Planetside 2 is an MMO and loads data in realtime when its needed. MMO's are the largest beneficiaries of SSD's.

[Rbstr]

If it comes down to anything important, like CPU, graphics or RAM. The SSD should be the first to go...well maybe after a sound card, depending on what your priorities are.

We don't know how PS2 is handling asset loading. PS1 loads everything when you change continents. We do know that it's not seamless between continents. We'll just have to wait and find out.

[Ganymede]

Originally Posted by Rbstr

If it comes down to anything important, like CPU, graphics or RAM. The SSD should be the first to go...well maybe after a sound card, depending on what your priorities are.

We don't know how PS2 is handling asset loading. PS1 loads everything when you change continents. We do know that it's not seamless between continents. We'll just have to wait and find out.

I agree my order of priority would be if I was building on a budget or not.

Power Supply>Motherboard>Processor>Graphics Card>Ram>Storage

[fb III IX ca IV]

So you live in Grand Rapids? Well, you're on the wrong side of the state, but if you ever go to Detroit, you can get an i5 3570k for $189, or an i5 2500k (arguably better for overclocking) for $169 from Micro Center. That's what I did when I built mine.

Originally Posted by Ganymede

I agree my order of priority would be if I was building on a budget or not.

Power Supply>Motherboard>Processor>Graphics Card>Ram>Storage

I would balance the processor and graphics card. No sense in getting an i7 and then having to use integrated graphics.

[Ganymede]

Originally Posted by fb III IX ca IV

So you live in Grand Rapids? Well, you're on the wrong side of the state, but if you ever go to Detroit, you can get an i5 3570k for $189, or an i5 2500k (arguably better for overclocking) for $169 from Micro Center. That's what I did when I built mine.


I would balance the processor and graphics card. No sense in getting an i7 and then having to use integrated graphics.

I was just trying to prove my point that the last thing he needs to be worried about is a SSD. I agree that processor and video card are essentially just as important and saying intergrated graphics is totally misleading my position. Just saying your processor is more important but very close to the level of importance of your vid card. But I get what you're saying.