199,026 users have contributed to 43,150 threads and 258,877 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 6 new thread(s), 13 new post(s) and 57 new user(s).
If I am right there are two kinds of SSD disks: the ones you can write on them plenty of times that are the most expensive, and the ones you can write on them a lot less that are the cheapest.
As with samples we have to write only once and then only on updates, can we safely use the cheapest SSD for Vienna instruments PRO 2?
While your first assumption are not neccesarilly correct, it's true that putting your libraries on SSDs and thus only reading/streaming from them will involve very little work and performance degradation over time. Basically it makes little sense opting for the latest, greatest SSD due to the fact anything but the most crappy 1st gen drive will be able to handle whatever you throw at it, so what matters is finding the ones with the best price per GB ratio so you dont ruin yourself in the process.
So with VI Pro 2.0 I guess it is better to invest on SSD drives instead that on more RAM
and my 14 gigas of RAM will be sufficient for huge projects?
Is there any difference in the performances of VI PRO 2.0 using SATA II or SATA III?
So with VI Pro 2.0 I guess it is better to invest on SSD drives instead that on more RAM
and my 14 gigas of RAM will be sufficient for huge projects?
wait we do some test ;o)[quote=Sergino Futurino]
Is there any difference in the performances of VI PRO 2.0 using SATA II or SATA III?
If you have a PCI SATA III card yes
For my testing of SSDs in a big template setup I found that it was not so much about the amount of RAM anymore, but rather how many SSDs you could lay your hands on. [:P] Using Kontakt 4 I could easilly set the preload size to 6KB instead of the default 60KB, so easy math tells me that I'm able to load 10 times more into the RAM I have available. Compared to using HDDs to load a 20GB template you could now make do with only 2GB of available RAM to load it if using SSDs. That's good stuff, especially if MIR is part of the setup, and another huge advantage is of course that the loading speed of this much smaller buffer is lightning fast with a SSD.
You only need SATA3 if using one of the newer SSDs like the Vertex 3 series or the newer Intels (510 etc), since they are the only ones able to completely saturate the SATA2 bus and thus be hampered from using their full potential. But again, there is no idea in using these new super fast SSDs for sample streaming since you won't need all that performance to run your compositions anyway. It makes much more sense going for the SSDs with the best price-per-GB, as they will do the job just as well.
We just need those SSDs to fall in price so we can get rid of all HDDs. Can't wait 'till that's possible.
I just don't get all this raving about SSD disks, has anyone tried using fast SATA drives? I have two Western Digital Cavier Black SATA II drives (3TB) and with 24Gb of RAM, the system never glitches, I have the latency in VE Pro set at 128 buffers (I could use 64, but Vienna Imperial convolution reverbs don't work with 64 buffers).
With cheaper SSD drives at about £400 for a 250Gb, that would cost me nearly £5000 is SSD drives - and that would be 12 of them ! Isn't it better to spend maybe £200 more on some more memory? (that would be high quality matched fast memory as well).
I agree that if I could buy a 1TB SSD for £100, then it might make sense (that's what a WD cavier black costs) - but I really don't see the benefit in them just to save on the cost of RAM, as they cost 50 times more, and their data integrity is still questionable, especially if you are buying a cheaper drive.
So let's try a test, take Vienna Imperial, load the DISTANT position (omit soft pedal - so default setting), mine takes 11 seconds to load, so how long will £5000 worth of SSD drives take? Only run this test once after boot up - otherwise Windows will cache the data and give inaccurate results on repeat loads.
There are various reasons I can think of:
Of course you hit the nail on the head when you say that there are also problems with them. They do fail a lot. I did have an SSD when I first got my current rig, but abandoned it after a couple of months, due to the fact that it kept on dropping out in the middle of sessions. It was fantastic when it worked, enabling me to run a huge audio session from one drive, which I now have to run from three, but it was not worth the hassle or risk.
As time goes on I would assume that these problems will get sorted out, and if I no longer have to get a server motherboard, I would imagine that SSD would be more reliable, due to the fact that they will have been tested more in single CPU set-ups. However, I think that looking for cost savings at the moment by using SSD is not necessarily the best motive, because even though you'll be able to get a replacement, should a drive fail, you would still need to have spare drives that can be slotted into your system at a moments notice.
I'm very excited about SSD. I just don't trust them for professional work ATM.
DG
Hi andyjh,
I'm not an expert for ssd drives, but I believe the reason to buy ssd drives is not the loading time for the instruments - it's the streaming performance. Only a small fraction from the instrument samples are loaded into RAM when you open a matrix.When I playback for example 60 instruments then my hard drives reach 100% workload. If they do so some instruments (for example kontakt instruments) won't play. They just can't load all that samples fast enough.So I started buying additional drives for strings, woodswinds, brass, percussion etc. and some weeks ago I bought two smalll SSD drives. Now everything is fine and the hard drives peak at 50% workload.
Nevertheless the loading time should be faster too. That is not so important when you only load a single patch. But for people with 24GB templates it should be a difference of some minutes.
@andyjh said:
I just don't get all this raving about SSD disks, has anyone tried using fast SATA drives? I have two Western Digital Cavier Black SATA II drives (3TB) and with 24Gb of RAM, the system never glitches
Have you ever tried one? I wanted the upgrade for a few things that require SSD's (not music related), and I figured having a another fast HD would help me with music, so it was an all-around benefit. After using it, I look at my 10,000 RPM HD like it's a child's toy now. Performance is far superior and is absolutely consistent, unlike physical disks.
If VI Pro 2.0 has a feature that SSD's can utilize, all the more of a benefit. I doubt if you used an SSD you'd feel any different. I hesitated based on the numbers for a long time, and now I realize I was wrong. Plus the lack of any noise coming from my SSD is worth it's weight as well.
-Sean
