Has anyone replaced an laptop optical drive with an SSD? How did that work out?

This is my first inquiry. Meaning I recognize I must, and will, do a shitload of googling. But first I'd like an inkling if the idea is completely dumb.

 

Here's a general 6 min video for doing this. It seems very simple and going from an 5400 rpm harddrive to SSD should make a difference.

 

Concerns I have.

 

-Is the interface SATA?

 

I count on the interface being a SATA interface (one of the myriad I will google). If it is SATA I count on getting the same performance increase as if I had replaced the 5400 rpm drive.

 

-Would placing DCS on SSD but keeping the operating system on 5400 rpm hard drive still give a considerable performance increase?

 

I hate to throw away a perfectly good 700GB drive. And this way I would avoid the hassles of a complete operating system reinstall to the SSD.

I get screen freezes occasionally when approaching a densely populated airfield. I figure the this is due the hard drive.

 

The main draw of this is the simplicity and cheapness. When I upgrade to a gamer desktop computer this will not be a loss. The CD optical drive breaks easily, it's broken now and I didn't use even before it was broken.

The swap is simple enough, but I'm not sure it will solve your stutter problems as you didn't describe your laptop configuration.

 

The optical bay interface is SATA, but it could be SATA 2 (capped at about 250 MB/s) or SATA 3 (capped at about 550 MB/s or somewhat less), depending on your laptop model.

 

You could actually clone your current Windows installation to the SSD with some backup tool (or at least move the Windows swap file to the SSD, as well).

Done that with my wife's former Dell Latitude.

 

It is very simple and very cheap to do.

 

Usually you wont have to open the back lid to open the 1 screw that holds the DVD drive, slide it out and insert the new one with your SSD attached, it's THAT simple.

The swap is simple enough, but I'm not sure it will solve your stutter problems as you didn't describe your laptop configuration.

 

A Commodore 64... ASUS K55VJ

 

CPU: Intel® Core™ i7-3630QM Processor, 4 core, 6M Cache, up to 3.40 GHz (base 2.4 GHz)

GPU: GeForce GT 635M/PCIe/SSE2, 2GB

SDRAM: 16GB DDR3L PC3-12800

Hard disk: WDC WD7500BPVT-80HXZT3 (750.2GB, SATA300, 2.5", 5400rpm, 8MB Cache) : 699GB

O/S: Win 10 64 bit Home

~

 

"SATA300" is SATA-II I think (3 GB/s 300MB/s).

"SATA300" is the harddrive (see above). I cannot figure where to read in "SiSoftware Sandra" SATA-I, SATA-II or SATA-III.

 

Quotes from Tom's hardware

A SSD is about 50x faster than the best hard drives in small random I/O. That is what the os does mostly.

A SSD will be 2-3x faster in large sequential operations than the best hard drives.

https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/128-gb-ssd-vs-5400-rpm-hdd.1523387/

 

A modern 2.5" 5400 RPM drive should be able to hit 100 MB/s.

 

https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/128-gb-ssd-vs-5400-rpm-hdd.1523387/

SSD is surprisingly cheap. Size. Though my DCS install is 97GB I figure a 120 GB SSD is risking to be to small. A 240GB would be fine but if I ever decide to put Windows there as well, it's better to go with a 480GB SSD.

 

480GB Kingston A400 2.5" SSD 2.5" SATA 3.0 (6Gb/s)

cost 57 pound (70 dollar) (surprisingly cheap I thought).

Edited October 1, 2019 by -0303-

The SATA controller on that CPU gen should be SATA 3, the SATA300 rating is for the hard-drive only. The A400 sequential write speed is noticeably slower than competition, but you shouldn't notice that I guess, especially with 16 GB of RAM.

 

I'd presume that HDD caused stutters happen when it has to retrieve some random data which it doesn't have preloaded in the RAM (and in these random reads the SSD is faster) or if it's moving data between RAM and swap file.

 

Since you mention freezes (recurring?), the 635M GPU is pretty archaic and I'm surprised DCSW 2.5 even runs on it, I'd presume the slowdowns happen when it's faced with vastly increased number of objects (polygons) it has to draw.

 

E.g. I have a noticeably faster 650M on some old portable Sony Vaio (with a same gen Intel CPU, but dual-core) and it can barely run Unity based strategy games.

 

So, I sincerely doubt the SSD will sort out your problems, apart from having faster loading times and shorter stutters when random loading some stuff. You really need a much better GPU, IMHO, even at 1366*768.

Edited October 1, 2019 by Dudikoff

The SATA controller on that CPU gen should be SATA 3, the SATA300 rating is for the hard-drive only. The A400 sequential write speed is noticeably slower than competition, but you shouldn't notice that I guess, especially with 16 GB of RAM.

 

I'd presume that HDD caused stutters happen when it has to retrieve some random data which it doesn't have preloaded in the RAM (and in these random reads the SSD is faster) or if it's moving data between RAM and swap file.

 

Since you mention freezes (recurring?), the 635M GPU is pretty archaic and I'm surprised DCSW 2.5 even runs on it, I'd presume the slowdowns happen when it's faced with vastly increased number of objects (polygons) it has to draw.

 

E.g. I have a noticeably faster 650M on some old portable Sony Vaio (with a same gen Intel CPU, but dual-core) and it can barely run Unity based strategy games.

 

So, I sincerely doubt the SSD will sort out your problems, apart from having faster loading times and shorter stutters when random loading some stuff. You really need a much better GPU, IMHO, even at 1366*768.

 

tbh, +1

 

still, the SSD will make that device much more user friendly in every aspect of daily usage.

I wouldnt wanna run any kind of PC w/o SSD anymore.

still, the SSD will make that device much more user friendly in every aspect of daily usage. I wouldnt wanna run any kind of PC w/o SSD anymore.

 

Sure thing, but that's 60 GBP thrown towards a dead end DCS-wise.

 

E.g. I can see refurbished PC's with Geforce 970 on Ebay UK starting 300 GBP so I'd rather scrape money together for one of such used PC deals (he'll probably have to pay more plus a monitor, but still).