BradB Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 I finally today will be setting up my new rig in my sig . Which sim would benefit more by putting it on my 256GB SSD , FSX or P3D ? . Cheers Brad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Culley44 Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 your gonna benefit greatly from either sim being on the ssd, put the one you use the most, in my case i quit using fsx all together and just use p3d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrbolkin Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 In terms of load times the ssd will help either sim,in terms of performance ie. appearance etc it will not improve either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caaront Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 I wish I could go back and not have installed an SSD, but though FSX was going to be so great on it. It may load a bit faster, but if I had left it on the 1TB HD I'd never run out of room, I just had to delete 5 sceneries to make room for NCA and Redding, it sucks mightily to have to delete good scenery for new scenery. The slight gains were not worth the eventual re-install I'll have to do some day to get it back over to my big drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccb777 Posted April 29, 2014 Share Posted April 29, 2014 I wish I could go back and not have installed an SSD, but though FSX was going to be so great on it. It may load a bit faster, but if I had left it on the 1TB HD I'd never run out of room, I just had to delete 5 sceneries to make room for NCA and Redding, it sucks mightily to have to delete good scenery for new scenery. The slight gains were not worth the eventual re-install I'll have to do some day to get it back over to my big drive. You might want to look into using symbolic links. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Culley44 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 give it time, the ssd's will continue to drop in price, i am on a limited income so i can relate on how hard it is to buy the expensive hardware, so far i have been able to keep up pretty good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Howarth Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 I wouldnt run anything but an SSD (or a hardware accelerated RAID array) for my windows boot drive because I'm impatient and single mechanical HDDs are slow. However, the actual I/O bandwidth that P3D uses isnt huge and during the render a modern mechanical SSD can do sustained reads with enough bandwidth not to slow down the render. Its just for general computing use that I use SSDs for my windows boot drive. If I were on a budget I'd buy a smallish windows boot SSD and a large SATA 3.5" mechanical HDD for large apps and other data like P3D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurice_King Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 OK if you want to achieve some good speed and reliability run the OS and OS only on say a 30-60 Gb and a dedicated 30 Gb for the Pagefile and Temp directories, everything else (Edit your registry) running of conventional drives just about every other application will use the prefetch and preloading internally in windows and store that in the Temp and Pagefile which is where ? thats right on the SSD & THAT is where the biggest speed increase will come from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack the Swede in Spain Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 As said before. do NOT install any FS on an SSD smallert than 512GB still better on a 1TB SSD. the 512GB SSD will run out of space within a year. Beleive me I have tried that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mamue Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 Whats about that one? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/velociraptor-1tb-hdd-ssd,3250.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hkterry Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 My experience on using the 256Gb SSD would not help any faster speed on FSX. 1. 256Gb has not enough space to install all airports and other utilities for FSX, 2. The reponse tile for FSX is not so obvious between SSD and harddisk. I am now using a 2TB harddisk with the FSX in root directory of C drive. this seems much faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Howarth Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 Whats about that one? http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/velociraptor-1tb-hdd-ssd,3250.html Its still slow in comparison to modern ssds. Case in point, sustained read speeds. 160MB/s or so on the raptor and over 550 MB/s for an SSD, and with sata express coming on the x79 and x99 chipsets youll see new express sata sustaining over 700 MB/s. IMHO its better to go for capacity in the 3,5 inch sata drives like getting a 4TB drive and a smallish cheaper SSD for the windows boot drive if budgets are tight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Culley44 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 2 points i would like to point out and this is not a war, first you don't need a 512 gig ssd for your flight sim drive unless you plan on adding alot of addons,i use 128 gig 840 pro as my boot drive with rapid mode and get 1,130 on sequential read and 702 with sequential write, that is due to the samsung caching memory,my second drive which holds my flight sim is 120 gig and i have ftx global, vectors,2010 global mesh north america,south america,europe only.if you don't plan on flying in an area of the world don't install it.i have orbx pnw,northern cali, and southern alaska also installed with 40 gig of the drive to spare.so in reality with a 240,256 gig drive if you are careful you can fit alot of addons in there.i have been there time and time again, i have a 3tb storage drive and had p3d only installed on it,my load times were horrible.sure if you can afford the larger drive buy it, but right now we are on a balancing act this year with hardware transition.the faster sata express drives coming out,which is also gonna be available on the z97 boards and that board will work with your current haswell,haswell refresh and the upcoming broadwell.my opinion is if your gonna buy a larger drive,wait for the z97 boards on may 11th and see what the prices are for the sata express drives which will push 10gbps+.in my case if samsung releases a new drive and have there software i should be pushing higher.please noone take offence to this, you can put alot on a smaller ssd and not spend a fortune,tigerdirect and newegg, 256 gig drives are falling under 140 usd,when i bought my samsung 840 pro it was 150 and that was 6 months ago, good luck with your decision, take care guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 This will seem like a criticism of Orbx but it's not. We have to accept the way it works and as far as I can determine it will only work on the disc that FSX is on. However, to ease the problem of space, virtually everything else incuding scenery other than Orbx, will work off another disc. For this reason I have Orbx on my 'F' disc alongside FSX, but all my other addons, including aircraft, other scenery, REX, or whatever, is working off a separate disc 'E'. Works well too. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Culley44 Posted April 30, 2014 Share Posted April 30, 2014 sure the larger the ssd the better you will be, but for people like me that can't afford large storage ssd's right now, you can make it work with a smaller drive, i have been doing it for over a year now,my next step up probably will be a 256 gig of 500 gig drive, but if your patient you will pay half of what the retail is.i just had to have the gtx 780 when it was released last year, i paid 650 usd for it and now evga is offering a gtx 780 a little cheaper with 6gigs of video ram instead of 3 gigs, i imagine our flight sims would love the 6 gig version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0cks.nz Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 The load time for P3D on HDD was atrocious (at least for me). Especially when you are tweaking and thus quitting and loading up the sim very often. It was worth it just for the load time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caaront Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 The linking tool works great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maurice_King Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 I have done many tests with other game player's and have come to the conclusion that current SSD's do not give a performance boost in line with their cost, I have found having the pagefile and temp directories on a SSD has more beneficial that has previously been thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Culley44 Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 I have done many tests with other game player's and have come to the conclusion that current SSD's do not give a performance boost in line with their cost, I have found having the pagefile and temp directories on a SSD has more beneficial that has previously been thought. i have never tried this,how much of an ssd is recommended for the page file?i am not out of space on my current setup, but i am curious what kind of performance you get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Howarth Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 ,i use 128 gig 840 pro as my boot drive with rapid mode and get 1,130 on sequential read and 702 with sequential write, that is due to the samsung caching memory Hi Brett. Great to see you doing some benchmarking there. I also have a samsung SSD for boot - an 840 Pro Series. I ended up disabling the samsung caching technology. There is mixed opinions about it. Windows 7 or 8 is very good at caching itself and people have done tests to show why in some cases samsungs caching isnt as good as windows. In my I/O benchmarking I tend mate to ignore the caches results. They arent too meaningful. You need to use better benchmarking tools than what samsung offers to see the *sustained* speeds not peak. For example for my work at my home office I have a professional grade raid 6 hardware array using SAS drives. According to samsung I'm doing 3.5 Terabytes per second in write speed. In fact my sustained reads and writes are all aove a terabyte per second not multiple terabytes per second. Heres a pic cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackrat Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 I wish I could go back and not have installed an SSD, but though FSX was going to be so great on it. It may load a bit faster, but if I had left it on the 1TB HD I'd never run out of room, I just had to delete 5 sceneries to make room for NCA and Redding, it sucks mightily to have to delete good scenery for new scenery. The slight gains were not worth the eventual re-install I'll have to do some day to get it back over to my big drive. Caaront Move one of your bigger folders (Orbx for example) to a HDD and create a junction link to it from its original location. Result: loads more room for scenery with only a minor slow down of loading. Magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caaront Posted May 2, 2014 Share Posted May 2, 2014 Made a junction link to the FSX folder so I could add aircraft, other sceneries, etc... Works great, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 I would like to transfer all of my Orbx products from my 'F' (FSX) disc to my 'E' disc which has far more spare space. So can you tell me how to make a junction link please? Or, have I misunderstood? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccb777 Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 In Windows 7 I use 'mklink.exe' from a command prompt. eg: You wnat to move MyStuff from C drive to D Drive... C:\ MyStuff D:\ Move MyStuff from C: to D: C:\ D:\ MyStuff Create the link in C:\ using mklink mklink /j C:\MyStuff D:\Mystuff The link is a kind of a shortcut and is transparent to the OS. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caaront Posted May 3, 2014 Share Posted May 3, 2014 I used this, very simple: https://code.google.com/p/symlinker/ Just highlight and choose the original FSX main folder, then copy it to whatever drive you have a lot of room on, it'll ask you a name, I named mine FSX LINK, then create the link with one click. It works great and anything you add new will automatically be added to the symbolic folder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taph Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 If in future you want get rid of the link: To delete a symbolic link to a file or directory, the following command line syntax can be used (in each case, "linkname" specifies the name of the symbolic link to be deleted): For links to files: del linkName For links to directories: rmdir linkName Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porsche Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 I have a 128ssd for boot and a 512 for fsx. Got a great price for the 512. I've got lots of photo scenery in use among other things and am using well over 200gigs for fsx. Nice thing is boot time. Prices especially with a sale can be pretty good for a ssd now otherwise I wouldn't have got the 512. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Culley44 Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 Hi Brett. Great to see you doing some benchmarking there. I also have a samsung SSD for boot - an 840 Pro Series. I ended up disabling the samsung caching technology. There is mixed opinions about it. Windows 7 or 8 is very good at caching itself and people have done tests to show why in some cases samsungs caching isnt as good as windows. In my I/O benchmarking I tend mate to ignore the caches results. They arent too meaningful. You need to use better benchmarking tools than what samsung offers to see the *sustained* speeds not peak. For example for my work at my home office I have a professional grade raid 6 hardware array using SAS drives. According to samsung I'm doing 3.5 Terabytes per second in write speed. In fact my sustained reads and writes are all aove a terabyte per second not multiple terabytes per second. Heres a pic cheers interesting, i will try disabling it and see what the bench marks show, with me having 16 gigs of ram i didn't think it would hurt to leave it running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.