Small SSD as Intel SRT cache
Medium SSD with games moved to hdd
Large SSD
other (comment below)
Absolutely not. All you have to do is a) get rid of too much bloatware, b) get rid of the hiberfile and c) reduce the pagefile to 2GB. Then you start with less than 20GB before you install your programs. I have 6 Windows 7 and Vista systems and they all are in that ballpark - no games though.I don't really see that unless you're installing a basic bare bones nothing OS.
That's why I'm waiting for Haswell. It's not official but so far there's a 65w processor with Iris pro that's equivalent to a Nvidia 650m, which is sufficient for my needs. the top and sides will have huge vents, so cooling shouldn't be too bad.
I could use Steam Mover to move games I'm not playing to the external however. Then I'd only need a 128GB ssd.
I have a 80GB Intel that has only Windows and all my apps/programs on it. Nothing else. I find its the perfect size for me.
For Steam, I have a 1TB HD dedicated just to Steam. Steam is installed there and the majority of my games go there as well.
You'll find many games really do not benifit enough from a SSD to justify the cost/space. While some games do, not all will.
I also have a 40GB Intel SSD I use as a secondary Drive dedicated to Steam.
For the most part open world games that stream data constantly. (Skyrim, Fallout etc) live there. Ive found that these type of games, especially heavily modded get some benefit.
Still ... OS on SSD and a spinner dedicated to Steam will suite you just fine. Since that spinner has nothing to do except be being dedicated to games, it will be more responsive. And, you get full benefit from the OS on the SSD.
This is the cheapest way to go and What I would do for now.
Later, get a bigger SSD you can dedicated to your most played or favorite games, leaving smaller less daeanding ones on the spionner. Its very easy to add/format and them move some Steam games over to it.
This also has the added benefit of keeping the OS SSD clean and free from any clutter. It will make back up and restores of the OS very quick.
Well, I have tried almost every configuration of Spinners and SSDs there is. I can tell you from experience, there is very little difference in playing games from an SSD or a spinner. I have 2 systems with the exact same games on them. One the games are installed on a spinner and the other games are on an SSD. The only advantage to installing them on an SSD is they will load faster. As for actual game play, Sygnus is correct. There is no difference. As for Smart Response, it may help slightly, but nothing in the ballpark to an SSD. As far as I'm concerned, it all comes down to what you want and how much you are willing to pay for it. If it is worth it to you to have your games load faster, get a big SSD or 2 big ones, if you want. Your games won't play any faster or smoother either way though. I ran for well over a year with a 64GB SSD and a couple of spinners and did very well. I've done it almost every way it can be done. If you are on a budget get a 128GB SSD and a 1TB spinner. If you just want the speed and are willing to pay the price, go for it. But, truthfully, there is only a little difference.
I am not talking about essentials. What I mean is the useless stuff that the OEMs put on the systems. If you install from a retail disc, there is no bloatware and the system is around 18GB after the initial installation.
I usually do this too.
But, I left my PF as-is since moving from a 40 to 80GB SSD.
I have a ton of Programs installed. some of the heavier ones being the Nero Suite, Power DVD, and Photoshop. With everything, my 80GB SSD is only half full.
If needed I could reduce the PF I just haven't needed to yet.
For just OS and apps, I really can't see needing bigger TBH. With dedicated Game and Media drives anyway.
But maybe thats just me. We all have our own needs.
I would recommend getting the largest SSD you can afford, but avoid ones with sanforce controllers. To maintain performance over provisioning is a great idea from what I have read.
A-zon has SanDisk's on sale, 240gb for $170, 120's for a C note. Some may not like the quality of SanDisk, I've always had good luck with thier SD cards. I have about a dozen 16g cards for my Pi collection with different OS's.
My Samsung ssd with what I consider a typical W7 install uses under 20gb. A 120g is more than large enough.
This!Well, I have tried almost every configuration of Spinners and SSDs there is. I can tell you from experience, there is very little difference in playing games from an SSD or a spinner. I have 2 systems with the exact same games on them. One the games are installed on a spinner and the other games are on an SSD. The only advantage to installing them on an SSD is they will load faster. As for actual game play, Sygnus is correct. There is no difference... But, truthfully, there is only a little difference.
With good configuration of the hhd, the difference is miniscule vs a ssd when gaming.
This is how I do mine as well - Leave my page file (6gig) on the SSD drive, and install all my programs to the C directory. For heavy data such as media files - photos, music, games, I keep those on a spinner drive. With that my 256 SSD drive is only 35 percent filled (83gig used out of 238 available).
This leaves me plenty of room, and options to work with heavily layered files in Photoshop, or install games there should I want to. I also don't have to worry about the "My Documents" folder.
Some might view that as wasted space, but I've always liked room, and options. And with the price of SSD drives continually dropping, outside of budget considerations, I can't see why you would want anything less than a 120. But, like said, that's me.
Quote