Upgrading PC Storage

[Rod200SX]

Hi All,

Looking to upgrade the storage in my Gaming PC as for some reason it old has a 240GB SSD & no further storage.

The mobo is a Gigabyte Z370 HD3 https://www.gigabyte.com/uk/Motherboard/Z370-HD3-r...

Any idea on best upgrades for my £? Not wanting to spend masses, also SSD/HDD etc don't really know which is preferable (SSD for speed I presume!)

[RedWhiteMonkey]

Really depends how much storage you want and how much you want to spend. Here are all your SSD storage options in price ascending order.

https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/products/internal-hard...

I'd stick to the likes of Samsung, Crucial, WD, Seagate....

[JimbobVFR]

You could keep the SSD and add another drive for storage. The motherboard has 6 SATA ports so there's plenty of capacity of your case has the space.

[Rod200SX]

Cool cool thanks! Is it fairly straightforward, in that any of the ones in the above link would fit? Good bit of space in the case (mid size tower) so just pop it in and fire away? Would obviously need to change preferential drive etc once It's installed.

Probably go with 2TB, see whats best in budget.

[macdaddy11]

Drives are standard size, you won't get stuck. Just get one you fancy, plug it in, and set it up via Computer Management, you'll be done in 30 minutes or less. Google it first if you're unsure, but it really is a piece of cake.

[Rod200SX]

Beautiful, cheers all. Going to go for either one of the below. Tempted by Samsung as just a more familiar name to me, though I know Cruicial are big, too!

https://www.laptopsdirect.co.uk/samsung-860-qvo-2t...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B003J5JB12?tag=pcp0f-2...

[macdaddy11]

If it is purely for storage just go for a standard HDD, you won't make use of the extra speed if you're just storing files. If it were me, I'd get a new 500-1TB SSD for your C drive, and spend the rest on a 2-3TB HDD. Best of both worlds, but you'd need to reinstall Windows etc. so a bit more of an undertaking, but still not too complicated.

[anonymous-user]

macdaddy11 said:

If it is purely for storage just go for a standard HDD, you won't make use of the extra speed if you're just storing files. If it were me, I'd get a new 500-1TB SSD for your C drive, and spend the rest on a 2-3TB HDD. Best of both worlds, but you'd need to reinstall Windows etc. so a bit more of an undertaking, but still not too complicated.

You are right about if just for storage.

However.... Windows has a nice habit of slowly spreading system files about.

I used to have 1 SSD for Windows and games, 1 HDD for data storage.

After about 6 months the HDD started to get acessed at boot up.

I now run 3 x SSD. For the modest extra, and the massively increased reliability (no moving parts - HDDS are terribly unreliable) who not just go fast now, and ditch old fashioned HDDs. Nice silent PC, and when you copy your massive "storage" data across, it'll fly.

OP - there is no changing "preferential drive" any more. As long as your current system boots, adding more drives just adds more drives. The days of drive jumpers has gone. The only place you can change it is on the BIOS.

[Halmyre]

RogerDodger said:

macdaddy11 said:

If it is purely for storage just go for a standard HDD, you won't make use of the extra speed if you're just storing files. If it were me, I'd get a new 500-1TB SSD for your C drive, and spend the rest on a 2-3TB HDD. Best of both worlds, but you'd need to reinstall Windows etc. so a bit more of an undertaking, but still not too complicated.

You are right about if just for storage.

However.... Windows has a nice habit of slowly spreading system files about.

I used to have 1 SSD for Windows and games, 1 HDD for data storage.

After about 6 months the HDD started to get acessed at boot up.

I now run 3 x SSD. For the modest extra, and the massively increased reliability (no moving parts - HDDS are terribly unreliable) who not just go fast now, and ditch old fashioned HDDs. Nice silent PC, and when you copy your massive "storage" data across, it'll fly.

OP - there is no changing "preferential drive" any more. As long as your current system boots, adding more drives just adds more drives. The days of drive jumpers has gone. The only place you can change it is on the BIOS.

Where do you get this idea that HDDs are 'terribly unreliable' ?!? I've thrown out half a dozen or so HDDs in the last thirty years, but only because their storage capacity meant they weren't worth keeping. I've got a PC with a Windows system hard drive that must be ten years old and it's still going.

[macdaddy11]

RogerDodger said:

However.... Windows has a nice habit of slowly spreading system files about.

…

(no moving parts - HDDS are terribly unreliable)

I'm not so sure about that. I've got a machine with SSD boot drive, and M.2 SSD for gaming and 3 HDD for storage (2 of those in RAID config for redundancy). I've never had a HDD fail at home, and at work, I've only seen it on about 2-3 workstations over 12 years (say for 100 users or so) and about 3-4 server drives (in about 50 drives, that run 24/7 over the same 12 years).

HDD are mechanical, so more prone to injury if dropped, they weigh more and are slower, but so much more storage for the price. Windows should only be POSTing the HDD on boot, nothing else; although my install does spin up my HDD on shutdown for some reason...

Still, I don't want to pick a fight, but don't write off HDD as 'old tech' just yet. It is still relevant and will be for years. Reliability I'd say is comparable to SSD, but SSD will be much faster, certainly for moving large volumes of data around, but after setup, how often does that happen? I'd pick capacity over speed for storage drives, but it's individual choice.

[Mr Pointy]

RogerDodger said:

...(no moving parts - HDDS are terribly unreliable)...

That's simply not true: while they can fail they are generally very reliable. The big issue with an SSD is when it fails (& they do fail) then they go suddenly & with almost no chance of recovering anything from the drive. An HHD will often give you a clue it's on it's way out giving you time to get the data off.

If you have one single SSD then you need a good backup policy (not that you shouldn't have one anyway).

[macdaddy11]

Mr Pointy said:

That's simply not true: while they can fail they are generally very reliable. The big issue with an SSD is when it fails (& they do fail) then they go suddenly & with almost no chance of recovering anything from the drive. An HHD will often give you a clue it's on it's way out giving you time to get the data off.

If you have one single SSD then you need a good backup policy (not that you shouldn't have one anyway).

Very true, a HDD often gives you plenty of warning, and even when it has failed you can usually get the data off. Best to have a backup too, better to have one and not use it...

"Each generation must learn for itself that the stove is hot."

[Derek Smith]

Mr Pointy said:

That's simply not true: while they can fail they are generally very reliable. The big issue with an SSD is when it fails (& they do fail) then they go suddenly & with almost no chance of recovering anything from the drive. An HHD will often give you a clue it's on it's way out giving you time to get the data off.

If you have one single SSD then you need a good backup policy (not that you shouldn't have one anyway).

I agree. Since the days of upgrading an Amiga with a hard drive (I was cool then) I've had two fail: one that restricted access to certain files, another which was catastrophic, with an arm breaking free. After that, I backed-up data weekly rather than monthly.

I didn't recognise any warning signs for either.

I've put SSDs into my desktop and two laptops and had no problems, but I've had two USB sticks fail on me.

Back up weekly and put important files on more than one disc immediately.

[anonymous-user]

Halmyre said:

RogerDodger said:

macdaddy11 said:

If it is purely for storage just go for a standard HDD, you won't make use of the extra speed if you're just storing files. If it were me, I'd get a new 500-1TB SSD for your C drive, and spend the rest on a 2-3TB HDD. Best of both worlds, but you'd need to reinstall Windows etc. so a bit more of an undertaking, but still not too complicated.

You are right about if just for storage.

However.... Windows has a nice habit of slowly spreading system files about.

I used to have 1 SSD for Windows and games, 1 HDD for data storage.

After about 6 months the HDD started to get acessed at boot up.

I now run 3 x SSD. For the modest extra, and the massively increased reliability (no moving parts - HDDS are terribly unreliable) who not just go fast now, and ditch old fashioned HDDs. Nice silent PC, and when you copy your massive "storage" data across, it'll fly.

I backup all my data on a weekly basis. It's done automatically.

OP - there is no changing "preferential drive" any more. As long as your current system boots, adding more drives just adds more drives. The days of drive jumpers has gone. The only place you can change it is on the BIOS.

Where do you get this idea that HDDs are 'terribly unreliable' ?!? I've thrown out half a dozen or so HDDs in the last thirty years, but only because their storage capacity meant they weren't worth keeping. I've got a PC with a Windows system hard drive that must be ten years old and it's still going.

From being an IT manager and IT director from when I was in my mid 20's to my mid 40's. They certainly proved to be the least reliable component in computers. I'd be replacing them in Raid arrays on a fairly frequent basis, and experienced plenty of laptops and desktops that had duff HDDs. Perhaps "terribly" was too strong a word on reflection.