I have a 120 GB RAID 0 SSD array for OS and essential tools and 2 GB of mechanical HD capacity for apps & data. Works well.

I have a 60Gb OCZ agility for my OS and essentials, not for gaming. Unfortunately i made the mistake of putting steam on the SSD so Skyrim installed there as well.

I can no longer see tooltips once i'm in the game /first world problems.

SSD's are great don't get me wrong but yes do your research and it is new tech so give it a bit and most of the major issues will be gone. INTEL THEN(lol) go with trusted brands. Agility 2 was one of the best rated SSD idk if they are still available.

Surely you mean 2TB?

http://www.stefanjones.ca/steam/is an excellent way of managing your Steam installations between drives.

I would recommend making use of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_symbolic_link but not all software supports it. (Unsure of how compatible software is with the NTFS Junctions approach)

Yeah, and like I said or meant to say, the difference is in how much you spend. If you want to believe that the 2x-3x amount of cash you spent on your SSD's are worth it, go ahead. I'm sitting here with four 10k RPM drives in RAID 0 that is ridiculously fast that I got for less than the price of a single SSD that had any storage space worth buying. But I made the mistake I try to avoid, and that was argue with someone who has there system specs in their signature.

The only bad part of my way is that HDD's cost a forutune now due to some flooding in Thailand. Whatever you choose to go with, don't do it until prices drop back down to normal. That would be around 40$ for a 1 TB mechanical drive, and around 800$ for a 1 TB SSD.

People put their specs in their sig here mostly because if you have an issue it is the first thing next to a dxdiag that people will ask for....call it a time saver.

People forget that SSD's are much, much faster, so you get your moneys worth by the speed difference, just like you do with GPUs or CPUs. SSD's are the biggest speed increase for your system for day to day stuff and that's a fact since no CPU will give you the speed increase a SSD does.

idk I have a crappy Hitachi 7200 rpm and everything loads fast for instance party mode in BF3 with a friend with a crap brand SSD and regardless who joins the game and who is pulled in for being in party.....I always get in before him....well before him. Not all SSD are created equal and there are def some really fast HDD configs you could have. I am just waiting for the tech to be not so new have nothing against SSD just very expensive and some are pure junk.

Sure, and that's why you put what case you had in your sig?

New tech always costs more so it's nothing new in that regard. Mechanical HD's fail and fail more depending on manufacter so knocking SSD's is not fair. HDD's are far from perfect.

It keeps temps a lot cooler than most....sounds like your jelly or something bro.

CHEAP mechanical drives *can* fail, I've been using "modern" PCs for over 12 years and not once has a HDD ever failed. You sound just like the other guy, trying to justify your purchase of something that is not much more than a bragging rights item over something that is practical. And why do you say "costs more" in such a casual fashion, we're talking 4x-5x the price of the same thing here, and not all cases support 2.5"" drives right now, that's even more $$$ spent *IF* they have an adaptor available.

I am not knocking them I am saying that most brands have serious read write issues....if you want it for a boot drive or for programs fine but I like having one HD once SSD's have fixed some of their KNOWN issues I will buy one. I do tons of read/write on this rig so it just wouldn't serve me very well and my last mechanical HDD (Seagate) lasted for 8 years rig never was off and it was always being ran by utorrent. Moving parts can break but SSD lacking them doesn't stop them from crapping out. In my case I opted to spend more on a GPU than a HD.

I think you clearly fail to realize that you are in the HARDWARE and SOFTWARE ISSUES subforums buddy....pretty sure nobody is bragging you are just in rage mode based on this thread:http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1342821-quiet-sound-will-it-ever-be-fixed/
must have woke up mom and she told you it was time to turn the game off and go to bed

Excuse me? I brought an SSD because I don't need large storage and I after trying an SSD and having my load times on everything go down 2/3 times then yes I'm very happy with it. Please don't make assumptions about why people buy hardware, SSD's are practical given their speed improvement over HDD's.

Now if an SSD only improved speeds by 1x then you might be right. If Firefox takes 4 seconds to load but 1 second on a SSD then you are getting your moneys worth and in my case it cuts loading times down like that. Also if you think your data is safe on a HDD then you know nothing and anyone with good PC knowledge knows to backup their most important files properly anyway.

I think it's great that you have the cognitive ability to check my other posts, but please try to leave discussions that you have no idea what's being discussed alone, thanks.

He is just hating Half64 but for the record my firefox takes 1 sec to load on this 7200. I was actually amazed at the speed of it will make a vid when I get a second to show how fast this HDD can work. That said I have a bad feeling that its not going to last as long as a better brand HDD. Def getting a SSD but just waiting so I can save some cash.

RAGE

If you were using a single drive, then sure i can see the improvement. Why won't you and that other guy understnad that THAT IS NOT WHAT IS BEING ARGUED HERE. Multiple HDDs in RAID 0 is not new. Every MB has the ability to use multiple drives. You guys don't seem to understand that the perforance of RAIDed mechanical drives is ridiculously fast and CHEAPER than your precious SSDs. If you want to post your system specs and feel good that you spent more money than other people, go right ahead, that doesn't mean your money was spent wisely.

Windows 7 does a lot of precaching and preloading, you browser starts fast because it's in warm cache and that goes for other things as well. WIndows turns these methods off because it doesn't need warm cache because SSD's pretty much have the speed of warm cache.

SSD's are faster than RAID, again do your home work. Nothing new about RAID it's just that people don't want to do it. and the hardware might not support it. Also, RAID SSD's totally own a HDD RAID.

Again, you are reaching. There isn't a single gaming MB that can't do RAID 0, and isn't hard at all to set up.

I really want to know the real reason you want to endlessly dispute this. If you will just say that mechanical HDDs are the more efficient solution, I would be happy. The fact that your sig is your system spec just screams that you want to brag about how much you spent on your system, and that means you want to justify your cash with empty propoganda with your posts.

Anyone with any sense, and not endles dollars, will do the research and see what I am getting at.

If you happen to have a z68 mobo get a 60 gig SSD and use it as a cache drive I did this when I built my new comp. 64 gig SSD in "raid" with my 2TB HDD.

Cache drives are the way to go till SSDs come down in price. (if your z68 or newer...)