These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Is putting EVE on SSD worth the space?

First post
Author
verde bandit
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2012-06-16 06:25:29 UTC
I just upgraded to 12gb ram and 120gb Vertex Plus SSD, after windows 7 instaleld only have 80GB left on ssd.

Question is (since space is so limited w/ other games i play) does anyone think its actually worth it to put EVE on a SSD? with my reg drive that i have it installed on right now it only takes a few seconds to load up etc.

I wish i could have got a more big drive, but it was expensive enough. It sucks because Shogun TW / FOTS is 30gigs alone, and i heard (not sure if its true) but you shouldnt fill up more then 3/4 the drive. So Windows + Shogun takes up the whole drive if you want to only fill up 3/4 lol
Copine Callmeknau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2012-06-16 06:42:58 UTC
I did it for a week, didn't notice much difference, put it back on the platter drive

Too big for too little benefit

There should be a rather awesome pic here

Renturu
In Glorium et Decorum
#3 - 2012-06-16 08:11:12 UTC
RAID0 2 SSD's - will that give a significant boost?

By the orders of PlunderBunny: ☻/ /▌ / \ This is Bob, post him into your forum sig and help him conquer the forums.

Kurfin
Kippers and Jam Developments
#4 - 2012-06-16 09:11:47 UTC
Wouldn't have thought so, after all eve isn't a very demanding game.
Onyx Nyx
The Khaleph
#5 - 2012-06-16 10:50:15 UTC
Provided you got the space, I'd put it on the SSD.

I kill kittens, and puppies and bunnies. I maim toddlers and teens and then more.

  • Richard (http://www.lfgcomic.com/)
Copine Callmeknau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2012-06-16 14:31:26 UTC
Renturu wrote:
RAID0 2 SSD's - will that give a significant boost?

Well I had it on a RAID0 3xSSD and it was basically no benefit
It's like the splash screen is on a timer or something so loading the client fast doesn't really help performance.

There should be a rather awesome pic here

Xenuria
#7 - 2012-06-16 16:05:22 UTC
The biggest bottleneck that exists on most systems with up to date parts is the transfer rate of the HDD.

However for whatever reason replacing the regular HDD with a SSD will NOT result in eve loading instantly.
We are reaching a point where even a 64bit windows OS is in and of itself a bottleneck.
So in the next few years it won't matter how much money you pour into the parts because windows is reaching a soft cap on how fast their OSs can processes things.
AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
#8 - 2012-06-16 17:43:49 UTC
Makes a difference to loading solar systems, yeah, you'll notice the difference alright.

Gotta say though, having EVE on the same 'drive as Windows...not a good idea - put it on a separate SSD.

Best combo would be:

2 x SSD in RAID-0 for win7 + Apps/drivers/core
1 x SSD for games.
1 x HDD for storage.

AK

This space for rent.

Copine Callmeknau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2012-06-16 20:28:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Copine Callmeknau
AlleyKat wrote:
Makes a difference to loading solar systems, yeah, you'll notice the difference alright.

Gotta say though, having EVE on the same 'drive as Windows...not a good idea - put it on a separate SSD.

Best combo would be:

2 x SSD in RAID-0 for win7 + Apps/drivers/core
1 x SSD for games.
1 x HDD for storage.

AK


I will admit that solar systems do load a bit faster on a quicker drive.
I've got my platter drives in a RAID5 array though and that seems to be about the practical limit to EVE's performance gain from HDD speed.

Linear read speed of ~160-200MB/s on that, easily reached by a cheap SSD or a pair of modern platter drives in RAID0.
Anyway just don't think he'll get the sort of performance that would justify using almost 13gb of a 80gb partition

I may try reorganising my drives like that, I derped when I bought them and got 3x SATA3 drives with only 2x SATA3 ports on my mobo, so they're all running on SATA2 atm. If I go the suggested way I could run a 2xRAID0 over the SATA3

Wouldn't it be better to use the RAID array for the software/games + the page file though? Software load time matters to me more than windows boot time.

There should be a rather awesome pic here

Buzzmong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2012-06-16 21:41:16 UTC
The only benefit you'll get is loading the game up initially.

Considering the biggest bottleneck of EVE is the EVE cluster itself (as shown by TiDi's effects on systems on the same node as the big battles), you're not going to see any ingame performance increases.

The server also operates on a one second tick, both normal HDD's and SSD's will retrieve whatever assets are needed well before the next update happens.
ivar R'dhak
Deus est Mechanicus
#11 - 2012-06-16 23:35:25 UTC
I think it patches faster ..
AlleyKat
The Unwanted.
#12 - 2012-06-17 11:19:06 UTC
Copine Callmeknau wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to use the RAID array for the software/games + the page file though? Software load time matters to me more than windows boot time.


You could RAID-0 the game drive as well - 2 x 120/8 GB would be very nice, and right now, very cheap:

120gb Agility3 is sub $100 on new egg right now, Agility4 is $109.


This space for rent.

Adam Junior
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2012-06-17 11:22:31 UTC
SSDs only help with loading stuff, so unless you get annoyed with how long it takes to load models in some cases (loading the grid is down to the servers and your internet connection) it's not worth it.

Other games with long loading times however benefit greatly.
CCP Sharkbait
C C P
C C P Alliance
#14 - 2012-06-17 14:24:41 UTC
i did a few experiments with this a year or 2 ago but can't where i logged my findings.

as a few have stated the SSD's can help with loading times. internally we what we call a "perforce" client which is a client we run directly from our perforce server (source code repository). this doesn't run from stuff files, so we have to use the OS's filesystem more than we do with a built client.

not running on SSD's in this case adds maybe 2-3 seconds on startup or something stupid like that. on a built client, i would be surprised if the different was anything even worth timing.

my laptop has a 250GB SSD from Intel and i have a 2nd 5400 spin 500GB disk (replacing the DVD drive). i keep both eve and the source code on the 500GB disk because i dont need nor would use the speed of the SSD.
Aryth
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#15 - 2012-06-17 15:20:39 UTC
I highly recommend SSD if you are in null. Where SSD shines with EVE is when you jump into a massive fight of 1k people and load a lot of random crap you might not already have in memory. Editing buffersize only gets you so far.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Jett0
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2012-06-17 22:49:08 UTC
There's also hybrid drives...

Occasionally plays sober

Equto
Imperium Technologies
#17 - 2012-06-18 00:00:53 UTC
Personally when I put my eve on my SSD I couldn't even tell the difference. So while is probably an improvement, like in all mmo's you are more often waiting on the server to finish its stuff.
Leeloo Killik
Fweddit
Free Range Chikuns
#18 - 2012-06-19 13:25:46 UTC
Yes, there's not much performance improvement havning Eve on SSD, but as mentioned above, patching is really quick.
Baneken
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
#19 - 2012-06-20 12:15:56 UTC
One thing where SSD's do shine though are consoles such as PS 3 which in case of EVE means DUST. :)

I've seen some videos on SSD performance on consoles and it's quite impressive they way it speeds up texture load times.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#20 - 2012-06-20 13:49:03 UTC
Once the client is loaded, Eve doesn't seem to require a lot of hard drive access. I'm about to have 240 GB of SSD space between two drives and will be loading Eve on it because I can, but it's certainly not as useful as other games that spend more time loading.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.

12Next page