hanss Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 All, I am looking for advice to increase the FPS by installing a new SSD. My set-up is 2x 500 GB M2 SSD plus a 3 TB harddisk. I have windows 10 and REX on 1 SSD, P3D on the other occupying almost 300GB. Addon Scenery and ORBX scenery on the Hard disk linked from P3D. I have a NVIDIA 1080Ti and a i7-7700 processor. It works all right with TE Netherlands out when I fly a heavy aircraft like the DC-8 in and out of Amsterdam or London. If I don't switch TE Netherlands off, I still can fly but with very low framerates; studdering when scenery is being be loaded. I had to go this way of using the harddisk because the SSD was too small to contain all the scenery plus P3D. I would like to fly even heavier aircraft and I think I need to get rid of the link from the SSD with P3D and the harddisk. I am considering to buy a 2 TB SSD and connect it with the Motherboard via a SATA cable. I will the use this SSD for both the scenery, AddOn and ORBX, and P3D. I don't have a slot directly on the motherboard left. The harddisk will then be used for other not flight related files etc. My reasoning is that everything which is needed during a flight is on the same disk and should therefore give a vast improvement in fps , i.e. better performance. Am I right in my reasoning? Is this the best way to go? Thanks in advance for your advice Regards Hans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack the Swede in Spain Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 Sorry, but installing an SSD will NOT increase your fps, just speed up the initial loading time of the sim. Jack the Swede in Spain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Terry Posted July 31, 2019 Share Posted July 31, 2019 I would still buy the 2TB SSD Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominique Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 As Jack said, you won’t have any FPS benefit from a SSD but loading time will be much better. Keep in mind that a SSD demands to be less than 90% full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack the Swede in Spain Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Just a remark. A 4 TB "normal" HD is half the prize of a 2 TB SSD. Tested my SSD vs HD and P3D loading time and it took about 2,5 minutes longer to load from HD. I am retired so I have the time to wait. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominique Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Just now, JJJackson said: am retired so I have the time to wait. Jack Well, that is a very questionable conclusion . The more we go, the less time we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ifrevets Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 7 hours ago, dominique said: Well, that is a very questionable conclusion . The more we go, the less time we have. Very wise observation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanss Posted August 3, 2019 Author Share Posted August 3, 2019 All, Thanks for your replies. By loading times you mean initial loading times not during flight. So what you are saying is that loading during flight from a HD, which is separate from the SSD P3D is on, is as fast, or slow, as loading from the same SSD with P3D installed? Am I correct in this conclusion? Regards Hans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cooper Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 Hello, loading data from an SSD is always faster than from an HDD, however the point here is that an HDD is more than adequately fast to load the scenery during a flight, so there will be no discernable difference in performance once the simulator is running. A bit like a 50 cc motorcycle and a 1000 cc motorcycle, the one is much slower than the other but if the need is only to maintain 50 kph, then both are enough and the extra speed available is never used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanss Posted August 3, 2019 Author Share Posted August 3, 2019 Hello Nick, Great. Thank you very much. That is exactly the answer I was looking for. Regards Hans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W2DR Posted August 4, 2019 Share Posted August 4, 2019 This is some info I posted in an earlier thread. The only thing I'd add is to say that all of the external drives were mounted in a USB3 docking station. All mileage is, of course, variable. Here's my admittedly unscientific look at FSX load times with varying drive configurations. These times are the average of three executions of FSX for each scenario. I see no reason why the results for P3D wouldn't trend the same.The only add-on is a complete set of ORBX scenery. I saw NO difference in in-game performance no matter which drive was being used. My bottom-line? You can run FSX/P3D from any drive you chose and the only penalty is going to be the initial load time. But, you may already know that......... Internal SSD Reference External SSD + 54 seconds Internal HDD - 7200 RPM +112 seconds External HDD - 10000 RPM +157 seconds External HDD - 7200 RPM +201 seconds External HDD - 5400 RPM +236 seconds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hanss Posted August 5, 2019 Author Share Posted August 5, 2019 That is my conclusion as well now. The only improvement to achieve is via adjusting the settings and framerate friendly planes. Regards Hans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.