Smallest size capacity for OS with hardly any programs?

M

metropole

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
302
I am building a new server for CCTV recording and some file server/backup duty.
I would like to load the OS on a SSD and use a second 2.5" drive as the recording drive.

What capacity do I need for an OS? I am thinking Win 2012 server or WIn 10.
 
60GB will have you covered for a while. Though 120GB drives may be the cheapest now due to low production of 60s.
 
Prices seems to vary a lot for a 120GB SSD. from $35 - $300. I think Samsung is highly regarded, also not the cheapest. What brands/products are acceptable in terms of quality?
 
what cctv software are you using? what cameras are you using?
i like to use zoneminder for security camera systems when i build them for people. i can deploy a 6 camera system on low power dual core gear with 32gb ssd and a raid 1 pair of drives for the camera storage.
 
Samsung and Intel are generally regarded as the
metropole said:
Prices seems to vary a lot for a 120GB SSD. from $35 - $300. I think Samsung is highly regarded, also not the cheapest. What brands/products are acceptable in terms of quality?
Click to expand...

Samsung, Intel, Crucial are all good. There aren't a lot of horrible SSDs on the market right now, just checkout some reviews before you buy.
 
I've set up a few Windows 2008 R2 servers on 60 GB and 64 GB SSDs, with plenty of space left over. One I have running right now has a few server applications running, has been operating a little over a year, and has 23.4 GB free of the 55.7 GB capacity (60 GB SSD).
 
I use 64GB SSD's for the boot drives in my servers. There is plenty of space and plenty of free space to maintain performance. And there isn't much of a price difference going smaller. Hell I don't know if they even make smaller anymore. I bought these a while ago, so even today there's not much difference between 120GB and 64GB price wise. Some people use thumb drives, but I just assume have full speed as their boot and small file write speed are slow. Sometimes you need to install new things and do maintenance remotely, etc, need speed.
 
Prices seems to vary a lot for a 120GB SSD. from $35 - $300. I think Samsung is highly regarded, also not the cheapest. What brands/products are acceptable in terms of quality?
Click to expand...

If you pay more than $60 for a consumer-grade 120GB SSD, then you are wasting your money and getting ripped off :D

And the very few 64GB units I have seen recently cost almost that much, so there is really no point getting one IMHO...

In terms of quality/reliability....just about any of the major name brands will do just fine. I've had a least one of each of the bigger brands over the past few years, and all of them have and continue to work great. The only one I have currently is an ADATA SP550 Premier, which is about 6 months old and steadily chuggin away as my 2nd back up drive...

In the rig I had last year, I had a 4 y.o. OCZ Vertex 3 and a 2 y.o. Sandisk that both ran like champs....
 
If you want long term reliability don't skimp on the SSD brand (having said that realize these are my opinions based on usage experience), I would say get either Intel (the preferred choice and my recommendation) or Samsung, but get whatever you can afford I suppose. My personal preference based on reviews and reading "horror stories" would be to avoid OCZ branded hardware in any and all situations but again that's just my personal opinion/preference. I just saw Fry's had/has an OCZ/Toshiba Trion 480GB SSD for like $60 (went on sale yesterday and is still available till close of business today at that price) and while I was considering getting one it wasn't to use for myself, it was to sell for $80-100 and make a profit off once it goes off sale tonight. ;)

As for the amount of space, Windows 7 needs no more than about 9GB for a full install of Ultimate (and I'm not counting the hibernate or page file in that amount because those both are dependent on the amount of system RAM in the machine). If you were to install a fully integrated Windows 7 (as of June 2016) it would take about 16GB (again, not counting the hibernate or page file in that amount). Windows 10 would probably be roughly that much as well, maybe a tiny bit more. The OS itself just doesn't take that much space after the installation (meaning the OS alone) but because of updates and how Windows duplicates files in the WinSxS folder it can grow over time, obviously.

For many years now I've used a 60-80GB partition for Windows 7 and had no issues with it ever, never ran out of space because I always use(d) the remaining space as a 'storage' partition on the drive where everything gets moved to for - go figure - storing it long term. Now that I finally have a 128GB SSD as my system drive (with a 1TB 7200 rpm 'storage' drive in the laptop bay as well) I don't worry about it much anymore (Samsung PM830 SSD, the OEM version of the 830 series). Even now a month after a clean install and with all my apps loaded on it I'm barely cracking 35GB of storage - the Windows folder itself is 19.1GB at this moment, and this was a fully integrated install as of May 2016 then with updates added from "Patch Tuesday" in June (not all of them, of course, just the ones that matter and don't have the tracking/telemetry/Windows 10 bullshit).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top