the hard drive speed is more important then ram, just sayin

 

once a year I drop the knowledge

 

EVO pro not basic

 

I'm about to buy a SSD, but after see a few benchmarks I felt like the ultra speed ones dont make THAT difference.

In music production is different? Daws take advantage of a ultra speed NVMe?

 

Not much. Reliability is much more important and the Samsung EVO series have proven to be very reliable choices.

 

Evos come as nvme as well, so you get blinding speed and reliability.

 

Not the actual speed is important, the file access time is!
With an SSD, no matter if via SATA or m.2, the responsibility increases like crazy.

Once you have your stuff on the drive, everything loads up with incredible speed
compared to any HDD.

You can see it like that:
The HDD reads file after file and then loads up the program.
The SSD reads every file at the same time and loads the program immediately.

Same applies to big Kontakt libraries.
Made a quick comparison a short time ago:

And thats just using an SSD, no extra RAM, no nothing.

 

Essentially SSDs are MUCH better than HDD, this I don't think is a remote debate. But u won't really see much difference in the speed differences between SATA SSD and M2 SSD. Anything after 500mbps is unnoticeable, reliability is more important to a fault. As fiction stated

, Though I cannot attest to the long term reliability of EVO vs, say Adata XPG series, do u actually get much better for almost a $50-100 premium? I hover around the NO, but again, I've not tested.
As well, with the way SSD prices are dropping for the performance u get, any SSD should have a 3-5 yr lifecycle, before they a related to more menial duties, whatever that may be. In 5 yrs likely well be looking at a new interface, deffo newer speed protocols (PCIe 6.0?).

 

That's what I'm talking about!

 

I have 1GB Evo 860 SSD as main drive for apps and VST, and 2GB SSD for my projects and the most used libraries. I can't complain about the performance, and I can be ready to record in a few seconds.

BTW Evo Sata M.2 SSD have a greater longevity rating compared to NVMe, so I consider these to be the workhorses of the family, and they are cheaper too!

 

Last edited: Aug 27, 2019

If you're using Samsung EVOs be sure to check out Samsung Magician available from the company. Let's you track the wear and tear and gives you a health check. SSDs have limited lifespan, very long on an EVO, but limited. Best to know what's going on. Samsung Magician.

950/Nvme is for booting off. 850s on SATA is enough for music production.

 

I currently run 3 Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe

1 500GB Boot Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe
2x 2TB for Data Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe
And a 4TB 860 EVo for offline backup

Just to let the false prophets know the Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe reads at 3500mb/s and you definitely know the difference.

If in doubt download https://crystalmark.info/en/software/crystaldiskmark/
or any other disk util.

 

The only thing that can keep you from taking the most of very fast SSDs is that the bottleneck is on another place. Typically the CPU/RAM combo.

 

 

Last edited: Aug 27, 2019

i had Evo pro from the start but... i went down the line with Crucial and man... its not worth the extra coins . Crucial does the same stuff and no human can notice it

 

I spent too many years in SQL Server. Faster drives do not always equate to faster performance because in DAWs, there is a finite limit to the computation task of generating sound, and once you are at that limit, all faster drives do for you is make you feel good. You can't make the sound go any faster. Any SSD is going to perform massively beyond the requirements of all but the most heavily laden DAWs.

 

My omnisphere steam folder on samsung evo made me enjoy the omnisphere engine so much more and it increased my workflow. All stuff that I want loaded in no time or that is just taking a shit load of time to load (such as Strezov Sampling Freya, Wotan, Arva) go to my SSD. All other stuff, such as percussion libraries go to my HDD.

Don't buy an external SSD, because it isn't the same as an internal. If i'm not mistaken, an external SSD isn't much better than an HDD due to the limited speed USB can handle.

 

Eh, it depends on your perspective. I write orchestral music and I frequently run into low memory issues. I dont care that my orchestral arrangements of 32-48 gb takes 20 minutes to load, its when I need to add another brass library and my PC slows to a crawl and cannot keep up that I want to beat the crap out of something.

To each there own I suppose, but I dont shut my PC down, I hibernate it, so it really is no big deal. Hibernate it, power it back up and in seconds, the thing I was working on is loaded back into ram. Its only when I start a project from scratch that I experience loading, and even then, its no big deal to wait 20-30 seconds for a library to load.

The question is, are you using 32 gb of ram? Most probably are not, but if you are doing orchestral arrangements that are any good and that sound realistic, you probably are using over 32 gb of ram.

The recent controversial arrangement I posted last week, to give you an idea, sat in 46 gb of memory, plus another 4 gb for MIR Pro (the best convolution reverb engine on the market for orchestral music).

 

Prolly doesn't mean anything, but I'm still using a (samsung) 850 from 2015 and it still works fine. Would recd. Lots of loading libraries everyday, prolly liek everyone else here?

 

Here the same. My System SSD is an EVO 850 and after all the years it still shows a health of 98% and to be honest,
I also use it for downloading, rendering videos and stuff like that. So I bet the life time is a lot bigger than expected.

Because of that I recently started to replace all of my HDD's with SSD's, even my Backup Disks got replaced by Samsung's QVO.