any point to allow compression on primary 128GB SSD

[TedShackley]

I have win7 and programs, and about 5 games on there, with about 20GB free

what would it compress? The only stuff I don't use regularly are the ton of win7 extras.

[TedShackley]

anyone ???

[Supergrover]

TBH I have not use compression since 95 or 98, do you have a secondary hdd to move apps that dont benifit from running off a ssd?
I run a 60gb ssd and tbh still have over 20gb left, just the OS and programs that benifit get installed to it everything else gets split beteen my 2 other My Programs hdds. Video/music/images/downloads/documents all have there own separate drives. And I find everything nice and snappy.

[pitz]

20gb free, whats the problem? Compression would just slow you down, and if its a Sandforce drive, just slow things down too. Makes data recovery more difficult. I'd say, avoid it if you can. Because fragmentation isn't much of an issue on SSDs, running them near capacity doesn't really pose a long-term problem.

[enaberif]

Originally Posted by TedShackley

I have win7 and programs, and about 5 games on there, with about 20GB free

what would it compress? The only stuff I don't use regularly are the ton of win7 extras.

Don't. Get another drive and move stuff off the SSD.

[JimboToronto]

As pitz mentioned, it would slow down a Sandforce SSD which uses internal compression and shows much slower performance on compressed data than on compressible data.

Get another SSD, keep your OS on your fastest SSD, your apps on your second fastest SSD and your bulk data on your HDD.

If you can't afford another SSD, I guess you'll just have to figure which games you'll have to move to your HDD.

Running your OS SSD at 80% capacity will shorten its write endurance and decrease performance. A healthy happy SSD has lots of emptry cells for internal functions like wear leveling, error correction, ITGC etc.