On 6/10/2013 6:10 PM, Bill Pearce wrote:
> The second SSD is for the PS scratch disc. Reputed to make a huge
> difference.
On a mobo with SATA 1, and where I already had the PS cache on a separate HD
from the OS, an SSD cache has made little
difference that I've noticed. I tihnk getting the caches on separate disks is
the first, big step.
On 6/10/2013 6:22 PM, C.H.Ling wrote:
> I'm with you, if the SSD is large enough it can hold both OS and cache/temp
> files at the same time, no second SSD required.
It's not a matter of size. As Adobe and others explain it, the problem is that
both Windoze and PS are trying to use the
same disk for their caches at the same time, and they run into each other. I
think this is certainly true with HDs.
How much the faster seek and R/W times of SSDs will alleviate this, I don't
know.
I will go with the idea CH first proposed here, although I've heard it
elsewhere, as well. Adding 16 GB to a new machine
is about $130, in the same ballpark as a 128 GB SSD, but as a RAMdisk much
faster than an SSD.
I do already have an SSD for projects/images I'm working on.
Ram Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|