Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Rash on January 12, 2017, 07:49:26 PM
-
I've been away for a while, should I load AH on my ssd drive, it will use about 2% of the remaining space?
-
I've been away for a while, should I load AH on my ssd drive, it will use about 2% of the remaining space?
It has been advised against installing AH to an SSD, as there will be no performance increase for the game.
Coogan
-
Tkanks 1/10th of a k Coogn.. :salute
-
It has been advised against installing AH to an SSD, as there will be no performance increase for the game.
While I agree that the reasons the game shouldn't be loaded on an SDD, I will argue this point (at least in AHII). I was getting micro freezes a while back. I traced it down to disc reads. An SDD solved that. Since then I heard that SDD's have issues with rewrites, so I didn't put it on the SDD on my new box.
:salute
-
SSDs have considerable longevity today, and could without a doubt survive a few hundred years of rewrites. The problem that arose concerning SSDs was during the beta when the program and associated files were updated. Still, the only real advantage of SSDs is quick load times, which comes into play when you start AH or load a different map. It is not enough advantage to be of much value, unless your system frequently crashes and if that is the case you should probably be on a platter drive anyway.
-
While I agree that the reasons the game shouldn't be loaded on an SDD, I will argue this point (at least in AHII). I was getting micro freezes a while back. I traced it down to disc reads. An SDD solved that. Since then I heard that SDD's have issues with rewrites, so I didn't put it on the SDD on my new box.
:salute
If you are getting stutters, due to the game disk reads, then the computer has other problems as Aces High always preloads what it needs long before it needs it.
We all use hard drives here and have NEVER had a disk based stutter. I have never seen it at home either.
The game has been designed to make sure disc reads would not be an issue. This is not new either. It has been at the core of Aces High for over 12 years.
-
I've been running on SSD for ages, it's all I have on my PCs.
-
If you are getting stutters, due to the game disk reads, then the computer has other problems as Aces High always preloads what it needs long before it needs it.
We all use hard drives here and have NEVER had a disk based stutter. I have never seen it at home either.
The game has been designed to make sure disc reads would not be an issue. This is not new either. It has been at the core of Aces High for over 12 years.
No argument, but that's how I solved it, right or wrong :) #oldposmachine
-
Started from scratch on the computer this time. I haven't flown AH in about 5 years and I went with Cogans advice on the drive. First time ever to buy an assembled computer, i went with game storm with a 1070 card. I just loaded the game last night.
-
Rotating platters will not be manufactured within 2 to 3 years. But hey, you can still find an ST238R on ebay today.
-
Rotating platters will not be manufactured within 2 to 3 years. But hey, you can still find an ST238R on ebay today.
not sure if any of my old 8088's or 286's would even start up these days, they've been in storage for so long........rofl
TC
-
Rotating platters will not be manufactured within 2 to 3 years. But hey, you can still find an ST238R on ebay today.
I remember people saying we didn't need any more than 4k of memory, that computers don't need color displays, that sound was never going to be any good on a computer (ouch), and that game console controls would never happen for PCs because computers are only for 'serious' work.
Yeah.
-
Rotating platters will not be manufactured within 2 to 3 years. But hey, you can still find an ST238R on ebay today.
That's non-sense. They already have areal densities approaching 10Pb/sq in in the labs. It will be 3 years before they hit the streets. With the amount of data required to be stored growing at an exponential rate, the industry needs higher densities in order to keep up.
When was the last time you looked at a big data center?
Google is behind a large initiative to design new platter based storage systems as they do not believe SSD's will never overtake HDD's cost/GB. The HDD industry is alive and well and will continue to be the primary storage for data centers, over the next decade.
-
Rotating platters will not be manufactured within 2 to 3 years.
Marketing hype is a funny thing. It makes people get very strange beliefs. Quite a few years ago several people were wondering if desktop PC's were made any more because all the ads were full of laptops. Some time ago I was asked if laptops existed in productions any longer because the ads were full of tablets. The only thing that has really disappeared is the cheap mini laptop.
-
https://www.micron.com/solutions/why-nvme-should-be-in-your-data-center
-
http://searchdatacenter.techtarget.com/feature/Server-SSDs-open-up-storage-possibilities-in-data-centers
-
It may be more than 2 or 3 years but don't doubt that the days are numbered for the production of mechanical drives.
-
https://www.micron.com/solutions/why-nvme-should-be-in-your-data-center
Of course they are going to say that. They are selling the technology.
It may be more than 2 or 3 years but don't doubt that the days are numbered for the production of mechanical drives.
Again, non-sense. Investments in mechanical storage has technology which will not be in mass production for another 10 years. We are talking about the potential for 50PB, of storage, in a 3.5" half height drive. Beyond that, who knows. Sounds like a lot, but considering Youtube uploads tally more than 1PB/day in uploads, it is not that much storage.
For mass storage, SSD is just not a cost effective technology as compared to mechanical drives.
-
SSD (I include NVMe) technology is improving rapidly and costs are dropping fast. At some point in the very near future SSD will be cheaper than HDD. New Servers already support it and it can be scaled comparable to HDD. Why would anyone buy the older slower technology?
-
But who knows, you may be right Skuzzy. Technology sometimes changes very rapidly and sometimes it doesn't as expected. Sometimes it takes a turn few expected.
-
One thing I know for sure, SSD in a PC is miles better than an HDD.
-
So, is there a clear verdict, AH3 better on SSD or HDD?
And, if SSD is NOT preferable, what is the reason?
SSD's are new to me. I am gettin the drift that due
to rewrites, they are a perishable commodity?
-
You won't gain a single frame per second on an SSD, not in any game. The only advantage in games run from an SSD is that they load faster, i.e. you'll see the start menu some seconds sooner. Also, if there's video episodes in the middle of a game, they'll load faster.
I'm not against SSD's, on the contrary. They're clearly a good product in many ways and they've got rid of most of their teething problems. However, an SSD is not the Holy Grail or a Final Solution.
-
One thing I know for sure, SSD in a PC is miles better than an HDD.
This is only true on limited budget PCs. In the years ahead you will be asking yourself why you ever considered SSDs in the first place.
-
I put my OS on my SSD and games on HDD.
Makes for a very snappy Windows 10.
Games perform the same on the HDD as they would on an SSD.
Coogan
-
This is only true on limited budget PCs. In the years ahead you will be asking yourself why you ever considered SSDs in the first place.
I don't know what you mean. I use SSD in the generic sense, a solid state drive, to include NVMe. I am using the term SSD to describe the function, not necessarily the technology. I've been using SSD for about 5 years on my own machines but provide IT support for many that use HDD. The difference is painfully obvious to me.
-
I have 3 different computers that l have had AH loaded on 4 different Crucial m4 series 128GB SSD's since April 2011 on 3 of them and August 2011 on the 4th Crucial m4 128GB SSD...
Only had one issue show up on one of them about July 2012, that was fixed by updating the firmware...have not had nor experienced any other problems or issues outside of that 1...
I know that back during closed beta of AH3, that some were getting corrupt downloads/installs on their computers with AH beta being installed on their SSD'S due to iirc SSD timing out on the write cache'ing.....thinking that is what HTC deciphered it down to...that closed beta forum has been removed, so can't go back to check for correctness
That is just 1 of the handful of reasons to not install AH on your SSD....
I know it's a risk in doing so, but all our different computers are backed up weekly with double redundancy, these days here at the house...on top of that, I have started to back up the server to my old server about every 2 to 3 months, then I pull the HDs out and put them in the gun vault
TC
-
:salute Got it. Thanks for the solid answers.
-
SSD (I include NVMe) technology is improving rapidly and costs are dropping fast. At some point in the very near future SSD will be cheaper than HDD. New Servers already support it and it can be scaled comparable to HDD. Why would anyone buy the older slower technology?
Server class SSD's are still running about $500.00/TB. Server class hard drives are running about $50.00/TB.
There is a reason only a very small percentage (less than 1%) of Googles servers have an SSD in them. Cost. And I quote, "Also, Google isn't interested in SSDs despite their higher IOPS because they cost too much per gigabyte.
"
Looks to me like a consumer grade SSD is still around $250.00/TB, while the consumer grade HD is aroun $42.00/TB.
-
I don't know what you mean. I use SSD in the generic sense, a solid state drive, to include NVMe. I am using the term SSD to describe the function, not necessarily the technology. I've been using SSD for about 5 years on my own machines but provide IT support for many that use HDD. The difference is painfully obvious to me.
What I am referring to is the stacked storage limitations of solid-state versus the storage capacity of platter-type drives, which experience tremendous increases in capacity regularly (which drives the cost down, also). Cost reductions in SSD technologies have not been revolutionary, especially compared with HDDs which can be $40-50/TB. Either one of these technologies should outlast an individuals need for them, because as your (or my) need for more capacity develops we simply buy a new device rather than experience the end-of-life for either one (there are still cases of early demise). Obviously, a HDD will always satisfy that need with the smallest $cost/TB, because as flash density increases the reliability of the device declines. This is why enterprise level facilities are not all adopting SSD technologies, because those same enterprises know the units have limited lifetimes in practical use. The device probably will be replaced before it dies, but the replacement will be a HDD.
-
We're gonna hafta disagree on capacity/size being a limiting factor. Cost is the difference and only obstacle to a complete replacement today.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/233358-seagate-unveils-the-worlds-largest-ssd-60tb
-
Just a little paper on this topic:
https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/fast12/tech/full_papers/Grupp.pdf
-
We're gonna hafta disagree on capacity/size being a limiting factor. Cost is the difference and only obstacle to a complete replacement today.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/233358-seagate-unveils-the-worlds-largest-ssd-60tb
Did you read the article? It is a "technology demonstration" and not for sale yet. That aside, it is still not going to keep up with the advances in platter based storage.
There are two new technologies in the labs which will take the 3.5" hard drive up to 50PB. The culmination of those efforts will start showing up in 3 years and be complete in 5 years. During that period of time new technology designs will be starting in the labs.
Hard drive technology is nowhere near the end of its life and without a major breakthrough in chip design/manufacturing, there is no way SSD costs will ever catch up to the hard drive in the next 5 years.
There are still other mitigating issues with SSD's keeping them from the data centers. The few Google does have in place are only used for static data as write performance/reliability, over time, is still an issue, but those are more difficult to quantify as it would depend on the application.
-
In 10 years time we will have ports in the back of our heads and have AH direct to our brains.
No need for hard drives.
Image that Skuzzy exploring our ports :)
-
Did you read the article? It is a "technology demonstration" and not for sale yet. That aside, it is still not going to keep up with the advances in platter based storage.
There are two new technologies in the labs which will take the 3.5" hard drive up to 50PB. The culmination of those efforts will start showing up in 3 years and be complete in 5 years. During that period of time new technology designs will be starting in the labs.
Hard drive technology is nowhere near the end of its life and without a major breakthrough in chip design/manufacturing, there is no way SSD costs will ever catch up to the hard drive in the next 5 years.
There are still other mitigating issues with SSD's keeping them from the data centers. The few Google does have in place are only used for static data as write performance/reliability, over time, is still an issue, but those are more difficult to quantify as it would depend on the application.
Yes, I read it. It is a counter to the idea that there is an inherent limit to the capacity of SSD per volume that is more restrictive than HDD. There isn't and that is one proof. Have you ever seen a 60TB HDD in 3.5 inch form factor? I haven't. The speed difference between SSD and HDD is amazing if you have never seen it. Even the cheapest SATA SSDs can make a big difference for an aging dekstop/laptop over HDD.
-
Just a little paper on this topic:
https://www.usenix.org/legacy/events/fast12/tech/full_papers/Grupp.pdf
That looks like an old article, 2012? Hardly relevant today.
-
If the desktop/laptop market shifted from HDD to SSD (inevitable imo and soon) what do you suppose would happen to the market for HDD? Those high end plattered drives for data centers will go up in cost, maybe dramatically.
-
Laptops already did to a large extent, remember moving / dropping a laptop with a spinning harddisk in it can be bad news, even with new technology.
For data centers there is simply no replacement in sight.
I have both SSD and hardisks in my game system, of my laptops 4 out of 5 are SSD (3 of them work laptops for different types of work).
-
A mostly unrelated anecdote. In the mid 90's I installed a couple of new HP servers for a private school down your way Skuzzy, St Marks of Texas. Had trouble with the HP branded drives, think they were 4GB. So I'm on the phone with HP support who had me update the firmware on the drives to a new release which was supposed to solve the problem. The conversation with the tech got kind of chatty and I asked him why the drives cost about 4 times the desktop equivalent. Of course I knew he was just a tech but he said the cost is due to all the testing HP does for the specific hardware. I laughed and said, you mean like these drives we're dealing with right now. He chuckled, I think he saw the irony.
-
That looks like an old article, 2012? Hardly relevant today.
Yeah, because the physics behind electronics changes every day. (sarcasm off).
-
While our understanding of physics does change that's not my objection to an outdated report. Technology changes rapidly. We'll revisit this in 2020.
-
There are more reasons to consider the platter HDD approach to have a longer lifespan than just track size. Cabling, controllers, and even internal array structures. The problem with SSDs is that miniaturizing flash memory itself is limited by design. Both HDD and SSDs have temperature limitations. SSDs actually use more power than HDDs (an OCZ Agility 3 SSD uses 1.5W at idle and 2.7W under load, whereas a 1TB WD Scorpio Blue HDD uses only 1.4W under load and a mere 0.6W at idle!). Even if you look at the most economical SSD available it will still use more power than an HDD of any size. I realize that most people look at the speed of the SSD and think that's all they need to know. Well, except if some of the early hybrid projects hit the market the HDD will literally leave the SSD in the dust! Even if that doesn't happen, would you really want a 4TB drive, when for the same price you can buy a 100 TB HDD? a 1 PB HDD? That day is coming.
-
According to Google's testing, based on no longer current technology, SSD has a better replacement rate than HDD. I know that doesn't necessarily mean a longer potential lifespan.
Yes, I will trade capacity and price for performance.
-
I'm waiting for a 1 Geopbyte hdd, then I will be all set. (that's 1000 Brontobytes to you and me)
Coogan
-
According to Google's testing, based on no longer current technology, SSD has a better replacement rate than HDD. I know that doesn't necessarily mean a longer potential lifespan.
Yes, I will trade capacity and price for performance.
Lifespan and performance become secondary concerns when you have to buy 300,000 drives for a single data center. The last numbers I saw from Google was they were collecting 15PB/day of data.
Google is advocating for a smaller form factor hard drive. They would like to see 8TB 2" hard drives. They would rather replace smaller drives, than larger drives. Makes sense when you think about it.
-
Since you guys hijacked my subject. How much power, support and money that cost? Per opinon?
-
I think you obtained great information for your expense.
Seagate is supposed to have a 60TB SSD out this March, if you can pay the $40,000.
-
If you are getting stutters, due to the game disk reads, then the computer has other problems as Aces High always preloads what it needs long before it needs it.
We all use hard drives here and have NEVER had a disk based stutter. I have never seen it at home either.
The game has been designed to make sure disc reads would not be an issue. This is not new either. It has been at the core of Aces High for over 12 years.
I was thinking about moving AH to the SSD because I have noticed game pauses associated with HD access, but apparently that wouldn't be worthwhile. So, I'm guessing that some background process is grabbing the CPU and accessing the HD, resulting in a pause in AH. Is there a way to find out which process?
-
The most prominent processes, which will hurt disk accesses are anti-xxxx programs. Even when allowed, they still interfere with any application which is accessing the disk.
You can run the resource monitor (bring up task manager, under "Performance" tab and hit the "Resource Monitor" button) in Windows and check it when you note disk access to see what program is running at that moment. It will show in the "Disk" tab.
If you are running a dynamic swap area for Windows, that will take more resources, than a fixed sized one. If you have multiple disks, you can put a swap partition on each, which helps also.
Fixed size swap areas are guaranteed to be contiguous (much faster for reading and writing) whereas dynamic ones are spread all over the file system in any hole the operating system can find.