I’m buying a relatively cheap new laptop around $700 to $900. Options are basically 512 GB SSD, 256 GB SSD with a 1 TB HD for the same price, or 1TB SSD for ca. $200 more. Other relevant specs are similar for any of the machines. I am a very low demand user. No video editing. No gaming. Nothing particularly processor heavy. If my current computer weren’t breaking down, it would suit my needs for the foreseeable future.
I’m leaning towards the SSD/HD combo. I know the SSD is supposed to be much faster at booting and loading programs. Presumably it’s faster at file searching (which sometimes takes a while on my current computer). I assume that the SSD will hold the operating system. I don’t know how the computer will allocate where other programs get installed. Maybe I’d have to make that decision program by program, which would annoy me a bit.
I also assume the 256GB SSD would be almost completely filled by the operating system (Windows 11 for all candidates). I worry about SSD failure rates. I’ve never had a hard drive fail but it would, of course, be massively inconvenient. My current drive is 1GB, roughly 5 years old and only about a 1/3 full so it’s not like I currently need a ton of space, but I like to future proof.
Basically you want to have your C Drive be SSD, and it will have all your programs on it, while the D Drive can be HD and will hold your data. Have you thought of moving your existing Hard Drive to the new computer as the D drive?
As to drive failure you should have everything backed (on a portable hard drive for example)–so don’t worry about SSD failure rates. Someone will have the data but I would expect HD to have higher rates because it is a mechanical device.
It’s a laptop so I won’t be moving the old drive over. Most of what is on it is programs, even though the data is much more valuable. I back up my hard driev from time to time with a 1TB portable drive but I’m not systematic about it, so at any given point, I could probably lose 1-3 months of non-work data as a result of a failure… Some of it could be reconstructed though.
If I’m wrong about SSD failure rates, and they are in fact more dependable, The decision to go with an SSD seems obvious.
Looking at that, I would get the 512GB SSD. That will hold all of the data you currently have, and still have some leftover space. A 1TB SSD costs about $100 on its own, but it doesn’t sound like you’re interested in upgrading yourself at some point in the future.
To me, the hybrid setup seems like a mess of figuring out where to save things, and it doubles the number of storage devices to fail.
The speed advantage of SSD over HDD is tremendous. I wouldn’t even consider HDD for anything except bulk storage or backups.
SSDs fail at lower rates than HDDs. And many (though not all) SSD failures result in the SSD becoming a read-only device. Which is annoying, but you still have all your data! Relatively few failed HDDs can be read without very expensive forensic data extraction services.
It wouldn’t. Windows is pretty bloated these days, but the OS is still only a few tens of GB (40 GB on my system). Even with all the rest of the stuff (pagefile, built-in programs, etc.) it’ll be under 100 GB.
I would only bother with an HDD if you needed significantly more than 1 TB of data. Get the 512 GB SSD, or if you can afford to splurge, the 1 TB.
Also, get a cloud backup service. SSDs are more reliable than HDDs, but all hardware should be assumed to fail at some point. Unless the value of your time is zero, it’s silly to take the risk of losing months of work.
Given your usage, definitely go with the 512 SSD. My OS, software, files, a bunch of music, and a half dozen downloaded movies currently take up 100 GB total. Unless you do a lot of video processing or UHD downloads, you won’t come close to filling 500 GB over the life of the computer.
They do, but they are spread out over the entire drive with modern controllers. A 512 GB drive might allow you to perform 150 TB of total writes, for instance. It’s not a big deal for most uses. The largest data hogs are going to be media that you download and then leave be. Someone going heavy photo/video editing might need more, but then, they wouldn’t be happy with a 512 GB drive in the first place.
As noted, they do but it’s typically not a problem. Also, it further depends on the quality and cell technology used. Today there are four NAND cell technologies characterized by the number of bits stored per cell. The fewer bits per cell, the longer the lifetime and generally the faster the performance, too. Single-level cell (SLC) is typically only found in high-performance commercial applications like servers. MLC types have two bits per cell, TLC three bits, and the new QLC has four, in decreasing order of durability and performance. In the Samsung line which I’ve always bought, the Samsung Pro line is MLC and is the one I favour. The Samsung EVO line is more or less the consumer level that uses TLC cells. They now have a QVO line with QLC which I have no experience with.
For years, I’ve always put SSDs in both my desktops and laptops. My current laptop has a 256 GB Samsung Pro and the space is ample for my needs. On my desktop, I have a 256 GB Samsung Pro as the “C” drive plus a 2 TB HDD. The “C:” drive contains all Windows files and all my programs and a bunch of other stuff, and is still 75% empty.
SSDs are particularly appropriate for laptops because they’re shock-resistant due to having no moving parts. But I use them in desktops, too, for performance reasons. SSDs used to all look like mobile HDDs and had SATA connectors, but for maximum performance you want the NVMe type with an M.2 connector if the laptop supports that. These SSDs look somewhat like memory chips and attach directly to the motherboard.
I’d also go all-in with the 512 SSD of the options mentioned. While the 2 drive option sounds like getting the best of both worlds, you have the worst options in terms of management, deciding what goes where and when, and your OP seems to indicate that 512 will leave you with plenty of space for additional data over time.
Plus, if you’re comfortable upgrading hardware on your own, you have the options of adding the second drive if you ever find yourself in need (depending on the make and model of course). That way you get the best performance right now, and if you need expandability in the future, you can buy to your needs and preferences at that time, rather than try to future proof based on the situation right now.
I am concurring strongly with others advising an all-SSD solution. For a laptop or other portable device, the robustness and shockproofness of a solid state device is the only thing I trust.
From that article, it sounds like the failure rate on SSDs is about 20% lower over the short period studied but, since there are finite read/write cycles for SSDs, the failure rate might get much higher with time. I do like the idea of a drive that fails by becoming read only though. If all drives failed that way, I would worry much less.
I have a lot of photos, but not bajillions. They go back a couple of decades of digital photography and the images keep getting bigger over time. I misled you all. My current drive carries around 650 GB, most of it programs. Around 82 GB is data I know I will transfer to my new computer.
I can afford it but when I continued shopping, I found a decent computer at a low price that pushed the price difference to upgrade to the 1TB drive to closer to $450. That much for just some extra storage space is way less than I can afford but way more than I want to pay.
This is what I worry about but I’m a really good worrier.
I’m not particularly comfortable upgrading on my own. I buy low to mid-priced laptops let’s say $800), and keep them for at least three years but really closer to five. I generally replace them when they are outdated because what’s the point in spending hours and $300 to upgrade a five year old laptop that’s outdated in every other way? The laptop I am retiring now is at least five years old (and I think, based on the Windows 10 release date, that it’s actually 7 years old-I had to install Windows 10 as an upgrade). It still does everything I need it to do adequately because I am low user of computer power. I am retiring it because parts of it are simply breaking down. It served me well. I have no complaints.
My hearty thanks to all of you. This message brought to you on my new HP Pavillion with 512 GB SSD.
As I said above, this is not likely to be a problem, even with the TLC cell technology that the laptop’s pre-installed SSD probably came with. Just do periodic full image backups with software like Macrium Reflect, which has a very nice fully functional free version for non-commercial home use. If you should ever have a failure, just pop in a new SSD and restore from backup. Most new laptops don’t have CD/DVD drives any more, but Reflect can create bootable rescue media on USB flash drives.
Congrats on the new laptop! And BTW, I have never had a failure on a SATA-attached SSD. A friend did have a failure once on a high-capacity NVMe type SSD that was undoubtedly pushing the envelope of leading-edge storage density.
I’m sorry, you did say that and I sincerely appreciate the additional comfort. Although I didn’t mention your post specifically because I had nothing to add nor more information about me to guide your input, I really appreciated the information and it was key to pushing me to getting the SSD (which in my 30 minutes of use so far, I really like - computer setup was lightning fast compared to my last few setups, probably in part due to faster drive access).
Upload your photos to cloud storage, so you will never lose them, and never have to worry about them taking up your entire hard drive. If you want to keep a local copy too, get a T7 portable SSD ($120 for 1TB), extremely fast if you need to access some of them.
Then just get the 512GB SSD laptop, without most of your photos that will be more than enough.
If you’re risking losing 3 months of work, use Google Drive for your critical files, you can sync with your local drive so you can still work offline, it will just resync when you next get a connection. You will also have online access to all your files on Google Drive from any computer (or your phone) if you don’t have your laptop with you. And/or get a cloud backup service that backs up your entire drive with timestamped versions. This stuff is really inexpensive, it’s foolish not to do it.
I still make a flash drive backup copy of critical files every couple of months, and never touch it again, to make me ransomware-proof. If you get ransomware and don’t catch it quickly, there’s a possibility that it might infect your entire cloud backup.
My critical work files are all securely saved in an employer-managed cloud. I wouldn’t lose any of that to a personal hard drive crash. I have some business records that I would have to recreate but, using files and data from vendors, I could recreate it. It would be a hassle digging up emailed receipts and tracking down expenses listed in my bank account, but not the end of the world. Most of the pictures I take are saved on my phone or camera and I don’t delete them from their until I have backed it up to my laptop and my backup drive. The backup drive is in a waterproof enclosure in a fireproof (or at least somewhat, as these things are) safe. I know my system isn’t perfect but it’s free and private. I could encrypt my files before uploading them to the cloud to preserve my privacy but, well, I guess I just haven’t.
I guess I’m going to be the naysayer. I would 100% go for the smaller SSD with the HDD, no question. The storage increase is just worth it. It really doesn’t sound like you’d actually have massive programs that would need the larger SSD. And anything other than programs will work fine on the HDD–e.g. videos, music, documents, etc. And I’ve never run into shock damage on a laptop hard drive.
The main downside is that it takes a bit more setting up to actually tell Windows to use your HDD for all of that. But it’s maybe a couple minutes, tops. You just right click on the appropriate folders go to properties, and find the tab to tell it to move them to the other drive.
The only reason I might consider is getting the 512GB version is if I assume I can add a HDD on my own later, just in case I have no use for the extra storage. In that case, I might go ahead and get the current one and throw in an HDD (or even extra SSD or even just nice SD card) later.
Now, if I could get a deal where the SSD was cheaper, then I’d probably go with that.
