microsd for games viable compared to ssd?

Discussion in 'Gaming (Software and Graphics Cards)' started by hertzian56, Aug 29, 2020.

  1. Tyranus07

    Tyranus07 Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    86
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    56
    A bit off-topic but related somehow. I noticed that I don't play more than 3 games at the same time, so I do ok with 2 TB of storage, this being HDD/SSD or NVMe. But what happens with FHD movies, and FHD tv shows I need a huge capacity for this content. So what I did I bought a mid-size PC with a motherboard with 6 SATA ports, and populated this SATA ports with 2 or 4 TB HDD and solved my issue for a couple of years.

    Anyway I think that in the next couple of years everything is going to be cloud based, we just need better internet connections for that to be as good as a home storage and also better WiFi connections. I'm going to be testing 802.11AX soon, so maybe we're close to real 1 Gbps wireless connections (?). In 2x2 802.11AC I'm not able to get more than 350-400 Mbps
     
    katalin_2003 likes this.
  2. Tech Junky

    Tech Junky Notebook Geek

    Reputations:
    17
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    16
    FHD content... sure it takes up 4-6GB/hr in MPEG2 format but, if you convert it to MP4 it drops by 80%. I do this with automated software by MCEBuddy and it can also strip the commercials out of the files as well. It does okay with movies as well but, some features get stripped out that might be more desirable in the original format.

    You don't need AX to get speeds over what you're currently seeing. Sure an AX card in your laptop or desktop makes sense since they're ~$20. I would double check your channel / configurations. If there's a lot of competing SSID's around you on a particular channel then switching channels will help. Also the bandwidth allocation whether 20/40/80/160 on the 5Ghz side will make a difference as well. I was able to get a full 1.7gbps link up with a couple of different routers and a AX200 card. The router I got the link rate was R7800/X4S configuring it with 160mhz channel bandwidth and getting the wifi card settings correct to match up. The downside though of 1.7gbps is you have to figure out how to get the full throughput to your other lan devices since the bottleneck will be the router due to the lack of LAG/LACP options. The plus side on wifi I was able to get full speed 1 gig speed on speed tests and downloads.

    Using the AX card and a QCA-2600 in my setup I usually hit the max speeds minus overhead around 60-70MB/s across wifi which is sufficient for most things. Wishful thinking though would be a lot higher on the LAN side but, for whatever reason hostapd won't work with 160mhz for some reason to allow the higher bandwidth but, the only time that would be really nice to have is if I'm syncing a drive with a ton of files. That's when the long ethernet cable comes out to speed things up a bit.
     
    Tyranus07 likes this.
  3. Tyranus07

    Tyranus07 Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    86
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Well my wireless router can only do 40/80 MHz channels and 2x2, so my maximum throughput available is 866 Mbps, I think the overhead is around 20% of the maximum throughput so my maximum theoric useful bandwidth is around 700 Mbps best case. I also think my router is pretty cheap, is the one that my ISP of fiber gave me. I'm pretty close to the router, but I've never got anything over 400 Mbps. Also the uplink is unstable as hell, my uplink is always jumping from 866 to 433 Mbps I have no idea why. Now you're probably right and with a better router I could increase the performance, but AX is now cheap enough to buy an AX router and an AX WiFi card and forget about AC for good.
     
  4. Tech Junky

    Tech Junky Notebook Geek

    Reputations:
    17
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Certainly sounds like the router/card could be the issue. Fluctuating link speeds just indicate there's an issue but as to which piece it is can be a toss up w/o further testing. A good indicator would be checking the signal quality with your phone and an app signal analyzer to check the channels / signal quality. If the router is functioning correctly the signal should be fairly level between app refreshes.

    AX will give you the fastest speeds within 10-20 feet of the router and the device due to the frequencies they use to obtain those speeds. In most cases you'll be speed shifted to AC frequencies / speeds. Now if you were to mesh the AX signals throughout the space you should be able to maintain those speeds whenever you're close enough to pick up the higher band stably.

    I know when I put an AX card in my laptop the speeds weren't all that stellar even though the Intel drivers picked up the card and it was functional. Once I went ahead and updated them though the speeds and signal improved to what they should be.

    There are plenty of AX options though when it comes to routers.... dig around and do some research on them before picking one. Maybe consider using Amazon for the free no questions asked returns if you find you don't like the performance or it's not giving you a steady link state while connected or randomly reboots itself. I had a couple of those issues with a 2600 Synology router that got replaced with the Netgear but, the Netgear gets jumpy as well depending on the FW of the week they released.
     
  5. JRE84

    JRE84 Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    290
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    660
    Trophy Points:
    131
    back on topic I tried micro sd/sd cards and the load time were pretty bad and gaming well expect lag spikes
     
  6. hertzian56

    hertzian56 Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    22
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Yeah still haven't really tried it yet I did drag over ground zeroes which is only like 3 gb onto my old 16 GB sandisk pro plus(which is advertised as up to 80mbps reads, only gets 22mbps reads on my system), it took a lot longer to transfer it over than hdd.

    I think to save space in the future this just opens up 128-256GB or more as prices drop microsd to leave in the slot for music/video/pics so as to save space on the internal hdd's. I'm assuming even installing programs and running off it would work in most cases too. My dying hdd is used as an external on demand with my usb32sata cable hasn't had any problems, it made my system buggy when it was still plugged into internal slot like bootup etc glad to have it out of there. The ssd I used to just plug in externally is now in that slot and have not had any system bugginess etc since then.

    I'm seeing the light when it comes to playing a game then uninstalling it when I don't play it much to have the space for new games, at least on ssd lol Still I'll try ground zeroes and see, I'm only at 1080p and in some newer games 900p wondering if that makes a difference over running higher resolution?
     
  7. Aivxtla

    Aivxtla Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    458
    Messages:
    503
    Likes Received:
    669
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Thing is if you intend to run programs, you need to look past just the sequential transfer speed, what's more important here (assuming you have a fast SD Card) is the 4k random reads /writes performance which is going to be terrible on sd cards, in some cases worse than a spinning hard drive. There maybe some high end SD Cards that maybe good enough for this.
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2020 at 3:23 PM
    JRE84 likes this.
Loading...

Share This Page