Computer upgrade - SSD & what else? [solved]

[johnlvs2run]

I'm thinking to get this 500gb Samsung solid state drive.
Would this be a good SSD to help improve my computer's performance?
My current 250 GB HDD has only used about 16 GB (6.5%) over the last 15 or so years.

Current specs:
Motherboard: Biostar a870u3
CPU: Amd Athlon II x2 250 3.0ghz - 65 watts
Memory: 8gb G.Skill DDR3
PSU: Earthwatts 80+ EA-380
HDD: Seagate Barracuda 250G Sata + a 2nd one never used
Geforce 210 graphics card based on Nvidia gt218 processor
LM 19.3 XFCE
Rosewill R5717-P SL ATX mid tower computer case

[Lady Fitzgerald]

The Samsung Pro and EVOs are excellent SSDs and should give you much better performance than an HDD (unless you ever decide you need more than 4TB, stay away from the Samsung QVOs). It won't make programs run faster but they will load faster and the computer will boot faster. With the exception of a couple of Sabrent Rocket 8TB M.2 SSDs, all my SSDs are Samsungs.

I wouldn't get it from Newegg, though. Ever since they got sold to a Chinese company, their reliability and customer service has plummeted; I won't do business with them anymore after several incredible screwups on their part and the horrible way they handled them. Amazon is more reliable (https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-500GB-In ... 132&sr=8-1) and costs the same.

[Moonstone Man]

I'm thinking to get this 500gb Samsung solid state drive.
Would this be a good SSD to help improve my computer's performance?

Yes and no. More lower down.

My current 250 GB HDD has only used about 16 GB (6.5%) over the last 15 or so years.

500GB is overkill if the above is true. 128GB or 250GB maximum would be cheaper.

Geforce 210 graphics card based on Nvidia gt218 processor

That's where you'll continue to feel pain. The 210 is very old. Your slow RAM will also prevent applications from performing at their best too so you won't see any gains there either.

You will get a boost in boot and software load times but your graphics card is also a major bottleneck. Your SSD won't help with displaying modern web pages. Maybe it's time to look at a newer machine. If that's not financially possible, and as long the drive is still working fine, perhaps putting the money aside for a more up to date machine is possible.

[Reddog1]

An SSD, with / on it, makes a computer boot noticeably faster. The best upgrade is memory and then an SSD. My laptops are the only machines I have that I boot often (desktops run for weeks without reboots) and I am a believer in replacing mechanical laptop drives with an SSD. I've used a small ssd for / and a large mechanical drive for /home, and that works really well for those with desktops that want to boot fast on the cheap. With an SSD as a main drive and an SSD as an external drive, transfers between drives are really fast, too. My opinion is that SSD's are more reliable than mechanical drives, just due to the number of moving parts (zero), and that's another reason for an SSD in a laptop, which gets knocked around just because it's a laptop. I have a 2008 core 2 duo laptop that I added memory and replaced the hd with an SSD and it is a perfectly good everyday laptop with the upgrades. Brand name SSD's are uniformly excellent (you get what you pay for). Remember, when you replace your old hardware, you still have that SSD to put in the new.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

I'm thinking to get this 500gb Samsung solid state drive.
Would this be a good SSD to help improve my computer's performance?

Yes and no. More lower down.

My current 250 GB HDD has only used about 16 GB (6.5%) over the last 15 or so years.

500GB is overkill if the above is true. 128GB or 250GB maximum would be cheaper.

Geforce 210 graphics card based on Nvidia gt218 processor

That's where you'll continue to feel pain. The 210 is very old. Your slow RAM will also prevent applications from performing at their best too so you won't see any gains there either.

You will get a boost in boot and software load times but your graphics card is also a major bottleneck. Your SSD won't help with displaying modern web pages. Maybe it's time to look at a newer machine. If that's not financially possible, and as long the drive is still working fine, perhaps putting the money aside for a more up to date machine is possible.

What you say is true. However, the SSD and can be moved to another machine at a later date (I frequently repurpose SSDs) so it may be worthwhile to get one that will meet future needs.

[Petermint]

SSDs make a lot of programs faster. For example, Firefox writes dozens of little work files and SSDs make that overhead almost disappear. Start the System Monitor and watch applications run. If they sit with 100% CPU, you need a faster CPU. The ones that rarely hit 100% CPU may benefit from SSD and may sit at 100% CPU once the disk delay is out of the way.

If you do choose SSD, consider skipping the old SATA limitations. Use a modern NVMe drive in an expansion card. Locally, a Samsung 860 EVO 500 GB is AU$124. A Samsung 970 EVO 500 GB is just $109 and a PCIe adapter card is just $18. If you have the available slot, you get a disk you can move straight to the NVMe slot on any modern motherboard.

[ThaCrip]

The best upgrade is memory and then an SSD.

I might argue the opposite (i.e. SSD over RAM), especially for general usage.

because if someone has a lack of RAM, upgrading from a HDD to a SSD can help compensate for lack of RAM (on some level). the OP has 8GB of RAM and I think that's definitely good enough for general usage where I would rather have '8GB of RAM + SSD' than '16GB of RAM + HDD'.

hell, I was using 8GB of RAM on my main PC since I got it, which was May 2012, until last year in 2020, when I went from 8GB to 16GB and while the RAM can help occasionally, in day-to-day use I don't really notice it even though I do see that with the Firefox web browser running for days/weeks with plenty of tabs open that it does go around 8GB of RAM in use here and there and sometimes I have seen it in the 10-12GB range. still, with a SSD it seems to offset any performance hit you might otherwise notice.

another area you can really start to see benefits of SSD is if your doing more than one thing at a time that requires decent hard drive activity at which point a regular hard drive comes down to a crawl. I noticed it recently on my backup computer which has a 250GB HDD and Update Manager was running updates and I tried to open the Firefox browser while that was happening, quite sloooow. but just loading one thing at a time, while it's still noticeably slower than SSD, it's not the end of the world.

p.s. even on my old ASUS A8N32-SLI board, it only supports 4GB of RAM MAX, which is what I got in it, but it currently still has a regular HDD and if I used that on a regular basis I would definitely put a SSD in it and I suspect, even with only 4GB of RAM, because of the SSD, I might be able to get away with only 4GB of RAM for browsing even when RAM use goes over that figure, which it will with my general usage patterns (not immediately, but it would not take all that long).

Start the System Monitor and watch applications run. If they sit with 100% CPU, you need a faster CPU. The ones that rarely hit 100% CPU may benefit from SSD and may sit at 100% CPU once the disk delay is out of the way.

I have a HP2000 laptop, which is a AMD E-300 CPU(dual core), which hits 100% CPU here and there and one can still see the benefit of a SSD overall. but one computer I had not all that long ago but retired the motherboard because the CPU was just TOO ancient and just about anything routinely pegged CPU to 100% and you could clearly see CPU was a problem where as on the AMD E-300 setup, while that's still easily the weak link to a otherwise respectable system, while it's on the slower side for sure, it's not quite full on ancient level like that board I retired a while ago now which was a single core 1.2GHz Athlon CPU which I had in 2001.

If you do choose SSD, consider skipping the old SATA limitations. Use a modern NVMe drive in an expansion card. Locally, a Samsung 860 EVO 500 GB is AU$124. A Samsung 970 EVO 500 GB is just $109 and a PCIe adapter card is just $18. If you have the available slot, you get a disk you can move straight to the NVMe slot on any modern motherboard.

That's not bad advice but at the same time it might depend on what expansion slots they got available. plus, either way... there ain't any noticeable real world difference between SATA II and SATA II connections with a typical SSD for general usage. sure, if someone was doing a SSD to SSD transfer that would be noticeable since performance would roughly double since SATA II is capped to about 300MB/s where as SATA III I think is about double that.

but looking up my board specs it shows I got PCI-E 2.0 x1 slots which I believe are limited to 500MB/s MAX, which is better than the boards SATA II which is 300MB/s, but in real world it's unlikely I would notice any difference and my PCI-E 2.0 x1 slots are basically used up etc.

[Termy]

Most SSDs will be a huge upgrade VS HDDs, especially modern ones. You don't need an expensive one, though. I've had great success with an old 128GB SSD I bought for £20 from a friend. The SSD was from an old school computer, yet it still chugs along without any issues. I have another, slower, SSD which is 64GB for my '/home' and it's chugging along nicely; I got that for a similar price, brand new. SanDisk seem to make some good ones at a sensible price.

I find the idea of a 500GB SSD in Linux to be a bit overkill, though. Linux doesn't take up that much! I guess if you're just putting all of your data onto the SSD, but it's been common practice for a long time to put the important stuff on HDDs and things like the OS and software installations on an SSD. Up to you, ultimately. Since SSDs last a lot longer, these days, I guess I can see why people just bung it all on an SSD. I'll stick with the tried and true approach.

I wonder if people not clearing orphaned packages, particularly because of the kernel, has caused a sort of irrational sense of "Linux requires as much space as possible!"

[ThaCrip]

Most SSDs will be a huge upgrade VS HDDs, especially modern ones. You don't need an expensive one, though. I've had great success with an old 128GB SSD I bought for £20 from a friend. The SSD was from an old school computer, yet it still chugs along without any issues. I have another, slower, SSD which is 64GB for my '/home' and it's chugging along nicely; I got that for a similar price, brand new. SanDisk seem to make some good ones at a sensible price.

I find the idea of a 500GB SSD in Linux to be a bit overkill, though. Linux doesn't take up that much! I guess if you're just putting all of your data onto the SSD, but it's been common practice for a long time to put the important stuff on HDDs and things like the OS and software installations on an SSD. Up to you, ultimately. Since SSDs last a lot longer, these days, I guess I can see why people just bung it all on an SSD. I'll stick with the tried and true approach.

I wonder if people not clearing orphaned packages, particularly because of the kernel, has caused a sort of irrational sense of "Linux requires as much space as possible!"

I nearly totally agree with that.

lately I suspect 250GB range SSD's are probably what people want at a minimum (or 120-128GB bare minimum) as they, at least the last I checked, not much more $ over the 120-128GB range SSD's and give you a little more room to breathe. but I guess if someone plays games and wants to run the game data from SSD that can potentially burn up SSD space fast. but other than that, I, like you, generally put all of my larger files on a regular HDD and the stuff I need to load fast on a SSD.

so for gamers and the like... 500GB or 1TB is the sweet spot for storage space/price combo.

[Termy]

...

Good point.

[johnlvs2run]

Thanks very much for your comments.
Here's a 120GB ssd for $23, which should be plenty for my needs.
I can afford a new computer, but since I'm frugal, would rather do an upgrade to this one if that's feasible.
Things that are important to me are cost vs benefit, low power usage, efficiency, quietness, low temperature etc.

What type of faster ram memory would help, and would my CPU be able to handle it?
Also, what should I get to replace the graphics card? Can I do without having a graphics card?
I don't play video games, but the computer does bog down sometimes on videos and some web sites.

[Larry78723]

Please post an inxi -Fxxxzr report. This will give us a concise overview of your hardware and how Mint sees it.

Here is how to generate the report and post it:
Open a terminal window (Ctrl-Alt-t). Make it fullscreen to avoid unneeded linebreaks or chopped lines. Execute the command

Code: Select all

 inxi -Fxxxzr 

exactly as it has been typed here.

Mark the complete text output which the command will display with your mouse.
Press the keyboard shortcut <Shift><Ctrl>C to copy the marked text into the clipboard.
Enclose the results between the code markers by selecting </> from the mini toolbar above the textbox where you type your reply then paste <Ctrl>V them in your reply between the code markers [code]Results [/code].

We can then make further recommendations.

[johnlvs2run]

Code: Select all

#  inxi -Fxxxzr 
System:    Host: computer Kernel: 5.0.0-32-generic x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 7.4.0 Desktop: Xfce 4.14.1 tk: Gtk 3.22.30 
           info: xfce4-panel wm: xfwm4 dm: LightDM 1.26.0 Distro: Linux Mint 19.3 Tricia base: Ubuntu 18.04 bionic 
Machine:   Type: Desktop Mobo: BIOSTAR model: A870U3 serial: N/A BIOS: American Megatrends v: 080015 date: 01/19/2011 
CPU:       Topology: Dual Core model: AMD Athlon II X2 250 bits: 64 type: MCP arch: K10 rev: 3 L1 cache: 256 KiB 
           L2 cache: 2048 KiB 
           flags: lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4a svm bogomips: 12000 
           Speed: 800 MHz min/max: 800/3000 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 800 2: 800 
Graphics:  Device-1: NVIDIA GT218 [GeForce 210] vendor: eVga.com. driver: nouveau v: kernel bus ID: 01:00.0 chip ID: 10de:0a65 
           Display: server: X.Org 1.20.4 driver: modesetting unloaded: fbdev,vesa resolution: 1440x900~60Hz 
           OpenGL: renderer: NVA8 v: 3.3 Mesa 19.0.8 direct render: Yes 
Audio:     Device-1: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD/ATI] SBx00 Azalia vendor: Biostar Microtech Intl Corp driver: snd_hda_intel 
           v: kernel bus ID: 00:14.2 chip ID: 1002:4383 
           Device-2: NVIDIA High Definition Audio vendor: eVga.com. driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus ID: 01:00.1 
           chip ID: 10de:0be3 
           Sound Server: ALSA v: k5.0.0-32-generic 
Network:   Device-1: Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet vendor: Biostar Microtech Intl Corp driver: r8169 
           v: kernel port: e800 bus ID: 04:00.0 chip ID: 10ec:8168 
           IF: enp4s0 state: up speed: 100 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter> 
Drives:    Local Storage: total: 232.89 GiB used: 10.56 GiB (4.5%) 
           ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: Seagate model: ST3250410AS size: 232.89 GiB speed: 3.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> rev: A 
           temp: 39 C scheme: MBR 
Partition: ID-1: / size: 228.23 GiB used: 10.56 GiB (4.6%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda1 
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 24.0 C mobo: N/A gpu: nouveau temp: 61 C 
           Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A 
Repos:     No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list 
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/official-package-repositories.list 
           1: deb http://packages.linuxmint.com tricia main upstream import backport #id:linuxmint_main
           2: deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic main restricted universe multiverse
           3: deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates main restricted universe multiverse
           4: deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-backports main restricted universe multiverse
           5: deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ bionic-security main restricted universe multiverse
           6: deb http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu/ bionic partner
Info:      Processes: 162 Uptime: 3h 18m Memory: 7.79 GiB used: 1.86 GiB (23.9%) Init: systemd v: 237 runlevel: 5 Compilers: 
           gcc: 7.4.0 alt: 7 Shell: bash (sudo) v: 4.4.20 running in: xfce4-terminal inxi: 3.0.32 
#

[rene]

Do not get the Hyundai 120G that you linked; it's a so-called DRAM-less SSD and that's about the one thing to absolutely avoid --- although it according to the box also only does 520/300 M/s R/W sequential. You have a SATA3 board so you should aim for 500+/500+ for both. I'd as to what is now on newegg advise this one if indeed you'd go for 120G:

https://www.newegg.com/adata-ultimate-s ... klink=true

And, yes, your earlier linked 860 EVO is an excellent drive as well.

RAM I'd leave as is; 8G sounds fine for a system of that generation and if you use it as a Linux desktop.

No, you can't do without a graphics card since your CPU does not have integrated graphics. And while certainly a GeForce 210 is very old by now I'd wait a bit for that market to cool down again to do anything about that: the world's at the moment experiencing a global GPU-drought and even second hand prices are through the roof.

[EDIT] If you really must now this would pair okay with your system

https://www.newegg.com/msi-geforce-gt-7 ... klink=true

Nvidia has due to the mentioned GPU-drought been feeding the market with those old 710's and will supposedly keep supporting them for some time to come still. Personally I 'd wait and go for an e.g. AMD 400 or 500 series card later (not older; crummy driver support...)

[rene]

Note; just noticed that the 256G version of that ADATA SU800 is only $10 more at $35.

[EDIT] Moreover, I only now see that the 128GB variant also does only 300M/s write: https://www.anandtech.com/show/11085/th ... 56gb-512gb. Having noticed those SU800's before that didn't even occur to me as they're great drives. But definitely a recommendation for the 256G version then and not the 128G one.

[RollyShed]

I've installed over 20 SSDs, mainly in laptops. They also get Linux Mint installed.

The best timed speed-up was 8 minutes with Windows down to 26 seconds with an SSD and Mint.

It always depends what is available at our local tech shop, Crucial or WD. I always fit 240GBs. My own desktop has a 120GB SSD plus a 1TB HD, both fitted a few years ago. SSD prices have dropped since then.

[Petermint]

Memory is different to disk. Anything you buy for your current machine will not transfer to a new machine. Check your current usage befor buying extra memory.

System Monitor can also show your RAM usage. Leave it running. Check each hour across the day. My machine has 16 GB but is currently using only 1.7.

When I browse loots of photos, the file cache can hit 4 GB, There is one application that does not free memory after use and I have to restart it to clear memory. With 4 GB, I had to restart it after almost every use. With 16 GB, I can tun it for a couple of hours.

[johnlvs2run]

Thank all of you very much for your extremely helpful replies.

Update 7/16: I've ordered the 250 GB SSD from Adata on Ebay.
Update 7/17: Memory use so far has been up to 38% but is usually below 15%.

[johnlvs2run]

What about instead of upgrading the graphics card, upgrading the motherboard and CPU?
I've usually used AMD, but this 55 watt Intel CPU <-- has onboard graphics.

Or, there's a used 55 watt Intel Core i3-3225 BX80637I33225 + ASUS P8H77-I LGA 1155 Intel H77 Mini ITX Intel Motherboard combination for sale for $35 + $99, so I wouldn't need to get a new motherboard. As far as I can tell, this would work with my other components, except I'd need to adapt or buy a new case. Suggestions?

[Larry78723]

If you're going to go that route, I'd prefer to see an Intel Core i5-5300U. It also has on-board graphics.