[SOLVED] Storage on a PC . . one big SSD, or two smaller ones? Equal size or different? What's your preference and why?

[King_V]

Ok, so, the subject pretty much says it all. Plus, maybe the answer is different for you for Linux vs Windows.

But, in having increased the storage on my son's PCs, I did the following:

1. T1700 Tanker - replaced existing 1TB Crucial MX500 2.5" with 2TB Crucial MX500 2.5" (this system cannot take an M2 drive)
2. ChromaTron - kept the original 1TB Intel 660p, and added a 1TB Crucial MX500 2.5" (taken from the T1700 Tanker, above), as a "game library" (and maybe some other software) drive.

Then I wondered which is the better arrangement, in general. A single huge drive (slightly easier housekeeping), or two drives (what's on the second drive stays in place if a clean-reinstall of the OS is ever needed).

What are your thoughts? Which is your preferred setup, and why?

1. Single large capacity drive
2. Two equal sized drives?
3. Two drives, smaller for OS drive, larger for game libraries, other software.
4. Some other option that I haven't mentioned.

And, whichever your choice, if you use both Linux and Windows, would you use the same setup for an Linux machine as you would for a Windows machine (assuming neither is a dual-boot system)?

 

[hotaru.hino]

I typically have a two drive setup: a smaller one for the OS and my main applications, another for everything else. Although currently I'm using a 3 drive setup, one OS, one data, and one "other applications" (which is mostly just games right now).

The reason I do this is if I have to perform system refresh, it only affects the OS drive. Since everything I want to keep is on the other drives, I can do this without needing a lengthy process of grabbing things off of the OS drive beforehand.

Although in reality, you can do the above with a partitioned drive. I just never really saw a benefit in doing that.

 

[USAFRet]

As you can see from the specs in my sig, I'm into multiple drives.
Currently, 6x SSD.
Makes upgrading/changing/replacing a trivial thing.

OS+applications on one, the others for individual purposes.
Photo
CAD
Video
games
etc....

But all these drives did not appear at once. Collected over time, as something went on sale.

I've found that Windows and applications have gotten really good at managing multiple drives.

Other people prefer one large drive.

 

[Eximo]

Gaming PC. Single 2TB SSD.
HTPC 512GB SATA SSD + 3TB hard drive

My near future plans include replacing that 3TB drive with a 4TB SATA SSD. I have two of those 3TB drives, they are pushing about 7 years old. Maybe getting something like a 10TB disk to keep a live backup of everything.

Most everything else I have are loose drives and a external SATA dock.

Ideally I think something like a 1 or 2 TB SSD for the boot drive and your most commonly used game titles. Then a slower NVMe drive, or even SATA, for infrequently played games.

PCIe 4.0 boot disk, PCIe 3.0 game storage, SATA drive for backup?

 

[King_V]

What happens if you have to reinstall Windows, specifically (may be an issue for Linux, too)? I know that even if you re-create the same username, at least with Windows, the internal identifier is different, so files from the previous install are suddenly not accessible... ownership issues and such.

Or will that only be the case for anything within C:\Users\whatever_user directory, and nothing else?

 

[USAFRet]

What happens if you have to reinstall Windows, specifically (may be an issue for Linux, too)? I know that even if you re-create the same username, at least with Windows, the internal identifier is different, so files from the previous install are suddenly not accessible... ownership issues and such.

Or will that only be the case for anything within C:\Users\whatever_user directory, and nothing else?

NTFS permissions are specific.
Does NOT carry to a new user, even if it the same "name".

For instance, your name is Joe Smith.
You are NOT the same Joe Smith that lives 3 streets over.

Permissions for files in a Windows install are only applicable to the default Libraries. Pictures/Documents/Videos/Downloads.
The libs carry those permissions, the files within do not.

But, the only way to get through that Library folder is TakeOwnership.
A PITA that can easily be avoided with a teeny bit of prep work. Move those files OUT of the parent Library folder first. Some other location or device.

This is why I don't really use the Libraries...😉


For replacing a drive?
A full drive backup image with Macrium, done.

 

[JohnBonhamsGhost]

What are your thoughts? Which is your preferred setup, and why?

1 for OS & basic applications
1 for games
1 for media, text, images, etc
1 for temp folders/files & page file
a few more for backups, storage, and backups of backups & backups of storage
can see the setup in my signature.

keeping games stored alongside the OS seems to be a bad idea these days with the size of a lot of the games out there.
if you have any disk or OS corruption that requires a fresh OS install that could mean TBs of data needing to be re-downloaded and/or very large OS backup images that can take hours to reload.

the same with video, audio & other media.
having them alongside the OS can lead to similar issues.
keeping them on separate drives and just assigning the 'Music', 'Pictures', 'Videos', 'Downloads' libraries to that destination can make a lot of things easier over time.

 

[Barty1884]

Historically I ran two, one for the OS and anything that could be easily reacquired with a small download (Chrome, etc).

Secondary drive was mass storage & game library. I have no qualms about reinstalling Windows to fix any little issue as I tend to run pretty barebones anyway. Post reinstall, it was easy enough to then just re-link Steam libraries etc.

When I built my latest system I just went with a single, larger SSD. Backing up games etc to an external before a clean install, and bulk storage is on my NAS.

 

[hotaru.hino]

What happens if you have to reinstall Windows, specifically (may be an issue for Linux, too)? I know that even if you re-create the same username, at least with Windows, the internal identifier is different, so files from the previous install are suddenly not accessible... ownership issues and such.

Or will that only be the case for anything within C:\Users\whatever_user directory, and nothing else?

The permissions on my other drives are defaulted to the "Users" group, which is a built-in group.

The only thing permissions get hairy are user folders. But anyone with an admin account can override them.