DCS on separate drive performance?

[blkspade]

See I don't get why you have to do that when I make a response, just say "its useless garbage", and skew what it is that I'm actually saying. I'm making references and providing context. I never said RAID is never used by individuals. Hell I run a truenas array at home that is mostly ever accessed by only me. Way back before SSDs existed I was one of the guys running RAID 0 trying to get faster performance on my desktop, eschewing the redundancy. Lose one drive, lose the entire resource. Almost bought a couple Velociraptors. Plenty of us computer geeks likely did, but it was somewhat atypical on the whole.   When I said (typically) shared, that would indicate I don't mean "always".

Just like I was never claiming to know more than the inventor. I was saying that people at that level don't always have consistent messaging on a topic, because the relevance and context switches depending on who or what group they may be talking to. Now I would like to use a separate example from a different Intel employee, just to point out how something can be miscommunicated, but not wrong due to context. I'll refrain though, as I see its not worth the effort.

[kksnowbear]

What I'm doing is providing exact quotes from you.  The "why" is because you keep posting more and more unrelated terms and figures, to obscure the fact that you contradicted genuine experts and stated incorrect opinions.

All the stuff you're posting since, trying to undo that, doesn't change what you said.

I'm not failing to grasp or skewing anything. I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth.  I quoted your exact words, and I quoted the expert's exact words.

The brutal reality is that your statements are incorrect, and I get that you don't like that.  But like I said, don't blame me.

On 2/28/2024 at 11:59 AM, blkspade said:

A RAID volume is still a single resource, so that doesn't actually promote your point. It's literally centralizing storage intended to be accessed by many clients simultaneously, along with potentially providing redundancy. All those drives are operating as one, not being dedicated to different tasks. SSDs have boosted the throughput well beyond most single user needs. A single gen 3 NVME has the equivalent throughput of like a 12-16 HDD array, but with near instantaneous access time. The only tangible thing you're getting with the $50 is additional storage.

That's your entire original quote, and you didn't say "typical" anywhere.  What you factually did say is that it's intended to be accessed by 'many clients', and that's misleading.  The number of clients will definitely make the contention problem worse, but even one will still experience contention at times.

Putting everything on one drive factually decreases availability (regardless of drive speed or number of users), thus increasing contention.  Multiple drives, as well as faster drives, IF properly configured and allocated, will decrease contention by increasing availability - thus improving system responsiveness.

Edited March 3, 2024 by kksnowbear

[kksnowbear]

14 minutes ago, blkspade said:

Just like I was never claiming to know more than the inventor.

You've insisted throughout this entire thread that you know what NVMe was for, and how the inventor didn't mean or understand what she was saying, or what she invented it for.  Your comments are in stark contradiction to  her own statement.

If that's not claiming to know more than the inventor, I don't know what is.

[kksnowbear]

30 minutes ago, blkspade said:

See I don't get why you have to do that when I make a response, just say "its useless garbage"

By the way, I never said that (yet you write it as if it's a quote). 

I've quoted you exactly; please stop putting words in my mouth.

[Hootman9104]

Hello. This is Google AI. While searching the internet (which I do 24/7, I need no sleep like puny humans), I came upon this conversation, and decided to add my response, as humans continue to come to wrong conclusions about practically everything that exists. Due to the rambling nature of this conversation, my algorithm determined that I must post my AI response to the originators question. I also include HDD's in this analytical response for those who also question the advantage of having DCS on an SSD versus an SSD. Here is my perfectly formulated response to the originators question, which cannot be questioned or debated (as humans are wont to do):

While having a separate SSD for games doesn't guarantee a noticeable performance boost in most cases with modern SSDs, it can offer advantages like faster loading times, potentially longer SSD lifespan, and easier management of your game library. If you have an NVMe SSD, you'll likely see the most significant improvements in loading speeds and overall gameplay. 

Here's a more detailed look at the benefits and drawbacks:

Benefits of a separate SSD for games:
Faster Loading Times:
Games installed on an SSD, especially an NVMe SSD, will load much faster than those on an HDD. 

Reduced Latency:
SSDs generally have lower latency than HDDs, leading to smoother gameplay and potentially less stuttering, especially in games that heavily rely on streaming assets from storage. 

Longer SSD Lifespan:
By keeping your operating system and game libraries on separate drives, you can reduce the write load on your system drive, potentially extending its lifespan. 

Easier Management:
A separate SSD allows for easier organization of your games, making it easier to find and manage your game library. 

Reduced Risk of Corruption:
If one drive fails, the other drive can still be used, and the data on the separate drive remains safe. 

Drawbacks:
Not a Game Changer: With modern SSDs, the performance differences between a separate drive and a single drive are often negligible. The difference in loading times may be subtle, especially between high-performance SSDs. 

Cost: Adding a separate SSD can increase the overall cost of your PC build. 
Complexity: Managing multiple drives can be more complex than managing a single drive, especially if you're not familiar with disk management. 

In conclusion:
While a separate SSD for games can offer some benefits, it's not always a necessity, especially with modern SSDs. If you're looking for a significant performance boost, an NVMe SSD can be a good investment. However, if you're on a tight budget or don't need the extra performance, keeping everything on a single SSD may be sufficient. 

Have a nice day, humans.