Hi all, I have a spare 240gb SSD and was looking to create a cache drive for P3D so that my photo scenery files load faster.

I have looked into this and it lost me in the jargon so may have to think again.

I am on windows 10 now and liking it very much, although have not really noticed any difference.

I was wondering if installing P3d onto the SSD will have any benefits whatsoever as at the moment it is on a SATA3 HD. Many thanks, Terry

​

It will load faster, thats about it though. 

Cheers!

SSD's will help ... if you run file monitor you can see just how much file I/O is performed when flying P3D (or FSX) ... considerable file I/O.  

 

But as will all things that "go faster" in a PC, if your system has other bottlenecks then making one component faster just shifts the bottleneck.  But not ALL SSDs are the same, nor the chipsets/motherboards that support them.

 

With 240GB you may run out of space rather quickly if you use a lot of photo-realistic scenery.

 

Cheers, Rob.

SSD's are faster and prices are looking good.  I was just pricing a Crucial 512GB at Newegg for about $200. This is going to be the home for v3.0, maybe.

 

I agree with Rob, 240 GB will be tight if you have many additions. I'm about there now with not much photo scenery, thanks to Orbx I think. My use for that small of a drive would be a data drive, a place to keep charts, documents, tools and utilities...etc.  I have such a drive that I've designated D:  so I remember what it's for.

Thanks for the replies, maybe should mention that it would be just for P3d alone plus some addon aircraft and a few ORBX bits and bobs. My photo scenery is on 2 x 2 TB SATA 3 drives and until the cost of some SSD's to replace them comes within my range, they will have to do.

Dont get me wrong, I have a moderate set up and get about 25-30 FPS with the new JF tornado, so I am pretty happy. I have some blurries but not as bad as they used to be, and reading these forums for many years and seeing you pros still complaining about this and that, does not want me to go and spend thousands of pounds trying to get that tiny extra bit of performance out of something that is over 10 years old effectively.

Until we go to 64bit, I think we will always spend more time tweaking than flying, and even when and if we do make that leap, we will still be there tweaking away to our hearts content.

 

 

It was just what to do with the spare 240gb SSD that I thought I could use to speed things up a bit, even if its just load times.

 

many thanks. Terry

 

my rig BTW is an intel I5 3570k at 3.80 GHz on a Gigabyte Z77d with win 10 on a 128gb SSD and a GeForce GTX 660sc

If you have photo realistic scenery entries in your scenery library you can disable the scenery you aren't using for whatever flight you have planned and that will help reduce blurries ... I ran into similar blurries issues even on an SSD when I had ALL of MSE US installed and "enabled" in the scenery library.  Simply disabling most of the entries solved the blurries issue for me (this applied to both FSX and P3D).

 

Cheers, Rob.

SSD's are faster and prices are looking good.  I was just pricing a Crucial 512GB at Newegg for about $200. This is going to be the home for v3.0, maybe.

 

I agree with Rob, 240 GB will be tight if you have many additions. I'm about there now with not much photo scenery, thanks to Orbx I think. My use for that small of a drive would be a data drive, a place to keep charts, documents, tools and utilities...etc.  I have such a drive that I've designated D:  so I remember what it's for.

 

The same thoughts here. However, I'm wondering whether 500GB for P3D will be enough or not IF photo-scenery is planned for future purchases