Not him but the majority of games releasing on PC now were still developed with older consoles in mind so an SSD isn't really required.
Hell it's been almost 2 years since the "next-gen" SSD DirectStorage API was made available on PC and there's only eight games on Steam that even make use of it.
>don't have any real benefits from using something like SSD due to the hardware and games being not designed that in mind
LIterally what?
99% of games now even indies are designed with SSD loadtimes in mind
If you just want something quick and easy and don't care about the safety of your data, there are plenty of USB enclosures you can get.
If you want something more advanced that you can keep in another room entirely and keeps your data safe, buy a NAS and build a raid array.
USB case looks tempting, but I am a bit worried about just having it in my desk, is there anything I should do to make it "safer"?
I have an external USB HDD that I've kept it on the desk for years now without problem.
But again I've been quite lucky with HDDs in my life, never suffered the loss/failure of one.
If you just want something quick and easy and don't care about the safety of your data, there are plenty of USB enclosures you can get.
If you want something more advanced that you can keep in another room entirely and keeps your data safe, buy a NAS and build a raid array.
I have only one M.2 slot on my motherboard with a low capacity NVMe in it which I have my windows installed on, can't be arsed to frick with my OS install just to get some extra storage so I went with a SATA SSD. It's good enough.
i was surprised when i watched some tech channel recently and he was like "heh no one uses HDDs any more" has it really moved on? i am still using my 10 year old PC
I got my entire ISO library (mostly ps2) on a harddrive and play them off of that. Everything else goes onto my SSDs, the cutdown in loading times is too good not to have.
Because [my] SSD has 17-20TB host writes before it begins to crumble, due to the fact flash storage i such a fricking snowflake still after 20 years.
So take a game that is 120GB. Steam downloads compressed version, yes but it writes on disk all 120GB. That's 120GB + on top of writes.
Now, patches. REGARDLESS of the type of patches your launcher will be doing, it will write FULL patched files anyway. Let take for example worst example, where game is UE trash and all its 119Gb is PAK files. There are 2 type of patches
- delta patch aka steampipe (Valve fancy name for old tech)
- full patch (when required files replaced, in case of UE game because devs are hacks it is usually full download)
But even in case of delta patch it is STILL 119GB writes on disk. WAIT, how so, you ask? I've downloaded just 2MB tiny patch! That is because you cant expand the file in place, you have to rewrite it again on storage after modifying. So you have 2 files, each 110GB, you compare, make delta patch, download these changes which are just 2Mb, and then patch target 110Gb PAK. So what happens? Steam writes these patched 100Gb as new one.
Another 120GB for an update. EACH update. And they can happen often. Multiple this by the amount of games you have installed that require updates that way. You can easily burn through 1TB in 1-2 weeks.
So that us like what, 20-40 weeks of life for SSD that costs fricking 200-300$? Frick that noise.
>That is because you cant expand the file in place
Small correction for ACHUALLY low-IQ morons: you can't EXPAND file, at least windows FS by default does not allow it and does not expose it via API, because it is risky. You CAN modify it in place, but it delta patch between 2 files produces file that differs in size you HAVE to rewrite.
So shove that smug remark in your hairy ass.
>Because [my] SSD has 17-20TB host writes before it begins to crumble,
What fricking cheap ass garbage SSDs are you buying, moron? Anything with less than 500 TBW isn't even worth looking at nowadays.
No, it doesn't really make any sense to buy HDDs smaller than 8TB anymore. They are still useful for storing large amounts of data for obvious reasons.
Just passing by to say that for you, the average user is better having 3 or more 2TB hard drives than one or two 8TB hard drives. It's going to die anyway and you probably won't have more than 500GB of data worth recovering.
Because lots of game machines don't have any real benefits from using something like SSD due to the hardware and games being not designed that in mind
> due to the hardware and games being not designed that in mind
what are you talking about
old hardware doesn't support high speeds and the games weren't optimized for that anyway. put ssd on og xbox and there's basically no difference
Not him but the majority of games releasing on PC now were still developed with older consoles in mind so an SSD isn't really required.
Hell it's been almost 2 years since the "next-gen" SSD DirectStorage API was made available on PC and there's only eight games on Steam that even make use of it.
>don't have any real benefits from using something like SSD due to the hardware and games being not designed that in mind
LIterally what?
99% of games now even indies are designed with SSD loadtimes in mind
Stay away from the varnish fumes, anon.
best option for for big storage and i mostly play single player games
can anyone recommend me good and affordable solutions to keep HDDs outside my PC? I switched cases recently and I can't fit one of my HDDs anymore
Buy hard drive enclosure cases.
USB case looks tempting, but I am a bit worried about just having it in my desk, is there anything I should do to make it "safer"?
I have an external USB HDD that I've kept it on the desk for years now without problem.
But again I've been quite lucky with HDDs in my life, never suffered the loss/failure of one.
If you just want something quick and easy and don't care about the safety of your data, there are plenty of USB enclosures you can get.
If you want something more advanced that you can keep in another room entirely and keeps your data safe, buy a NAS and build a raid array.
i just pulled the wires out and left it on the floor
Old games are still fine on hard drives. PS1 and PS2 emulation loads instantly.
even using sata ssds should be a crime when nvme ssds are dirt cheap
I have only one M.2 slot on my motherboard with a low capacity NVMe in it which I have my windows installed on, can't be arsed to frick with my OS install just to get some extra storage so I went with a SATA SSD. It's good enough.
i was surprised when i watched some tech channel recently and he was like "heh no one uses HDDs any more" has it really moved on? i am still using my 10 year old PC
2TB nvme drives were like $400 back in 2021
Majority of games that need ssds are AAA slop, old games and indieshit still run great on hdds
No, but I shoved my old mobile barracuda into my gaming laptop for backups. CrystalDisk says it's healthy.
I like the whirring and clicking.
Seeing as how you can get 2TB or 4TB SSDs for cheap, there is no reason to buy hdds anymore.
>no reason to buy hdds anymore
NAS
hoarding crappy tv shows and movies you'll never watch isn't worth it
So?
a 10TB hdd is about the same price as a 4TB ssd, even less if you are autistic and cheap enough to stack refurbished drives
Waiting to get a new computer. Using a 1TB sata ssd and a 1TB HDD for now
What's the cheapest, largest storage option?
my butthole
Sometimes you can find 10+TB HDDs refurbished on fleabay for around $100/
>$100
Pain. I'm a broke NEET.
Cuz it's cool and it has a lot of space.
Only emulators. Everything else is on one of my two NVME drives.
I got my entire ISO library (mostly ps2) on a harddrive and play them off of that. Everything else goes onto my SSDs, the cutdown in loading times is too good not to have.
I do?
Only games I installed on a HDD in the past that I now can't be bothered transferring.
Because I reserve my SSD for times when I get in an unoptimized AAA slop mood
It still works.
Because [my] SSD has 17-20TB host writes before it begins to crumble, due to the fact flash storage i such a fricking snowflake still after 20 years.
So take a game that is 120GB. Steam downloads compressed version, yes but it writes on disk all 120GB. That's 120GB + on top of writes.
Now, patches. REGARDLESS of the type of patches your launcher will be doing, it will write FULL patched files anyway. Let take for example worst example, where game is UE trash and all its 119Gb is PAK files. There are 2 type of patches
- delta patch aka steampipe (Valve fancy name for old tech)
- full patch (when required files replaced, in case of UE game because devs are hacks it is usually full download)
But even in case of delta patch it is STILL 119GB writes on disk. WAIT, how so, you ask? I've downloaded just 2MB tiny patch! That is because you cant expand the file in place, you have to rewrite it again on storage after modifying. So you have 2 files, each 110GB, you compare, make delta patch, download these changes which are just 2Mb, and then patch target 110Gb PAK. So what happens? Steam writes these patched 100Gb as new one.
Another 120GB for an update. EACH update. And they can happen often. Multiple this by the amount of games you have installed that require updates that way. You can easily burn through 1TB in 1-2 weeks.
So that us like what, 20-40 weeks of life for SSD that costs fricking 200-300$? Frick that noise.
>That is because you cant expand the file in place
Small correction for ACHUALLY low-IQ morons: you can't EXPAND file, at least windows FS by default does not allow it and does not expose it via API, because it is risky. You CAN modify it in place, but it delta patch between 2 files produces file that differs in size you HAVE to rewrite.
So shove that smug remark in your hairy ass.
This. Why would people buy storage that doesn’t last even for a year? SSD cucks are morons.
>Because [my] SSD has 17-20TB host writes before it begins to crumble,
What fricking cheap ass garbage SSDs are you buying, moron? Anything with less than 500 TBW isn't even worth looking at nowadays.
Are HDDs even worth it nowadays unless you're going for something insane like 20TB? A 2TB HDD only costs like 33% less than a SDD now for fricks sake
No, it doesn't really make any sense to buy HDDs smaller than 8TB anymore. They are still useful for storing large amounts of data for obvious reasons.
I said I'd replace my HDD with an SDD after it breaks, it's been more than 10 years i'm still waiting
Are you okay anon? Need a quick dilation break?
V1dya butts anon died in vain
let me guess. you need more?
correction, I store my porn on hdds
I don't even do that.
I put the install directory of my games onto a DVD-RW and boot from there.
It takes forever to load and they crash constantly and half the time it's unplayable, but I like the sound the optical drive makes.
we're hitting levels of culture that shouldn't be possible
How many DVD drives are you running in parallel to boot up a game that's more than 8GB?
If it's more than 8GB I don't bother.
I should try running them in parallel to see what happens though, I do have a separate external USB-based DVD reader/writer.
To read the loading screen tips in old games
To make you load in slow to your multiplayer games.
>Why do you still play games on a HDD?
it's cheap
too many games
I put the online shit on NVMe though
what's with the melty?
Because most of Ganker suffers from data hoarding.
Just passing by to say that for you, the average user is better having 3 or more 2TB hard drives than one or two 8TB hard drives. It's going to die anyway and you probably won't have more than 500GB of data worth recovering.