Slashdot Mirror

I've stopped attempting to keep my game collection on the an SSD.

Install all games to an HDD, and only keep the games you're actually playing on the SSD. Under Windows 7 I use a 120GB SSD for OS and the 2-3 games I'm currently playing by using Steam Mover. Since it's simply a GUI for a few cmd commands (mklink being the central one) it'll work for any directory you point it at, not just Steam games, and it's very robust.

If you're on Linux you're likely already familiar with some ways of doing this, if not I can give you a few pointers :)

I've been running multiple partitions/drives on Windows for years and haven't encountered a sizeable app that I'd want to put on a different drive that wouldn't let me.

Same here. I've also found that for gaming Steam Mover makes it very easy to shuffle my current games onto the small SSD. It works for any directory, not just Steam games. Windows doesn't know the difference, but some games benefit greatly from living on the SSD. It would likely fool any stupid software that insists on living on C: as well :)

I use SteamMover to copy over games that have loading problems to the SSD. http://www.traynier.com/software/steammover
It's "ancient" now but still works great : )

Sounds like someone's never heard of Steam Mover. Moves games between directories (even across drives) using junction points. Set your steam install directory to the large slow spinning HDD, and use Steam Mover to swap a couple games you play often to the SSD.

Yes, it is worth it to me. I only run my PC when I am home for the day, so having the OS boot in a quarter of the time is awesome (ESPECIALLY on the laptop, where I am often trying to pull up something quickly for class), but everything ELSE I do with it runs faster, too, like opening up Office as you said, Paint, Winamp, FRAPS, the control panel, or Firefox. I've never seen Superfetch use more than 2 GB or so of RAM, even on my desktop that has 16 GB and close to a year of data to predict, and Readyboost is only useful if you are running very limited amounts of RAM, i.e. 2 GB or less, and even then, USB and SD cards are a bottleneck to flash performance - putting an SSD into my old netbook (1201N with 4 GB of RAM) made a huge difference, even with a Class 10/8 GB SD card dedicated to Readyboost.

I have 120 GB drives in both my laptop and my desktop, so with a bit of pruning, all of the games I have a reasonable expectation of playing in the near future (Borderlands, Torchlight, L4D, TF2, Path of Exile, Alien Swarm, whatever games I've recently bought) fit on the drives with plenty of space. A few multiplayer games that I don't play often, but do play on occasion on a Friday night when my friends are baby-free, like Counter-Strike, Civ IV, DoD, AvP, I keep installed on my media drive with Steam Mover, so when it does come up every couple of months, I don't have to wait to download it. Most single-player games, like Fallout 3, or Arkham Asylum, I don't bother to keep installed, because they're play-once-and-done kind of games, at least until I decide to revisit them two years down the line, when I just reinstall them (since I've undoubtedly reformatted once or twice since then anyway).

Plus, on my laptop, using Readyboost is a pain, because I have to plug/unplug the SD card every time (full recess SD slots have pretty much gone the way of the dodo).

As to failure rates, I have four SSDs (my first two, 60 GB drives that are now in my HTPC and my stepson's 1201N), and I have not had a problem with any of them, though I have had two of the eight or so HDDs I have purchased since I built my first PC about ten years ago fail. Not comparable sample groups, of course, but in my experience, SSDs are more reliable.

Now, without Steam Mover, I might very well still share your opinion - having Steam tied to a single, small drive was a pain in the ass, and there were several instances in the first few months of my SSD ownership where I missed an hour of gaming with my friends on Friday nights because they were playing something I had deleted to make room for War for Cybertron, or the Ghostbusters game, or whatever I was currently playing. But being able to keep the old favorites on a slow drive for the rare instances when I do need them immediately makes it a superior system.

Yes, it is worth it to me. I only run my PC when I am home for the day, so having the OS boot in a quarter of the time is awesome (ESPECIALLY on the laptop, where I am often trying to pull up something quickly for class), but everything ELSE I do with it runs faster, too, like opening up Office as you said, Paint, Winamp, FRAPS, the control panel, or Firefox. I've never seen Superfetch use more than 2 GB or so of RAM, even on my desktop that has 16 GB and close to a year of data to predict, and Readyboost is only useful if you are running very limited amounts of RAM, i.e. 2 GB or less, and even then, USB and SD cards are a bottleneck to flash performance - putting an SSD into my old netbook (1201N with 4 GB of RAM) made a huge difference, even with a Class 10/8 GB SD card dedicated to Readyboost.

I have 120 GB drives in both my laptop and my desktop, so with a bit of pruning, all of the games I have a reasonable expectation of playing in the near future (Borderlands, Torchlight, L4D, TF2, Path of Exile, Alien Swarm, whatever games I've recently bought) fit on the drives with plenty of space. A few multiplayer games that I don't play often, but do play on occasion on a Friday night when my friends are baby-free, like Counter-Strike, Civ IV, DoD, AvP, I keep installed on my media drive with Steam Mover, so when it does come up every couple of months, I don't have to wait to download it. Most single-player games, like Fallout 3, or Arkham Asylum, I don't bother to keep installed, because they're play-once-and-done kind of games, at least until I decide to revisit them two years down the line, when I just reinstall them (since I've undoubtedly reformatted once or twice since then anyway).

Plus, on my laptop, using Readyboost is a pain, because I have to plug/unplug the SD card every time (full recess SD slots have pretty much gone the way of the dodo).

As to failure rates, I have four SSDs (my first two, 60 GB drives that are now in my HTPC and my stepson's 1201N), and I have not had a problem with any of them, though I have had two of the eight or so HDDs I have purchased since I built my first PC about ten years ago fail. Not comparable sample groups, of course, but in my experience, SSDs are more reliable.

Now, without Steam Mover, I might very well still share your opinion - having Steam tied to a single, small drive was a pain in the ass, and there were several instances in the first few months of my SSD ownership where I missed an hour of gaming with my friends on Friday nights because they were playing something I had deleted to make room for War for Cybertron, or the Ghostbusters game, or whatever I was currently playing. But being able to keep the old favorites on a slow drive for the rare instances when I do need them immediately makes it a superior system.

There's even a small downloadable program called Steammover for simplifying the process, there's an article about it here.