Buying Hard Drives

>>376367
>3TB for movies/series

If you are asolutely sure you will really use that much space (don't underestimate how fucking much 3 TB really is, we all know how that goes filling it up with shows and movies that you then never watch again, 2.5 TB of literal garbage) then go for it this way.
There is absolutely no disadvantage- why would there be, if you got enough ATA slots in your board then you can use all of them, you just get three different drives shown in the File manager and that's it. Where you install the systems is pretty much irrelevant, partitions exist for this reason, if you were crazy you could install both Win and linux with 125GB on the SSD and then format the 1TB disk FAT32- will still work...
Pure preference, it doesn't really matter if both OS are on the same drive or not. You should install the OS to the SSD that you will use more because it will load faster.

Imho you can leave the 3TB one out, 1 TB for whatever plus 250 GB for gaming is a very well settled system. But of course that is pure personal preference, If you are sure you will have enough stuff to fill it- go for it.

>>376387

Also just a line of thought, I don't really know it myself: If you install two OS on different drives, won't the one earlier in the boot sequence always boot first so if you want to use the other system you will have to mess with the BIOS first? Is it possible to install grub to one drive and then let it boot both the OS on that drive and one on a completely different drive?

>>376367
HDD prices won't be rising anytime soon. I recommend getting an ssd of 512gb, games are getting pretty big install sizes these days, also you probably want both OSes installed on the ssd for snappiness. Get a 1 or 2 TB hdd for all your movies/series. You can easily get another one when your first one is starting to reach its capacity.

>>376393
I don't really think i will need 512gb ssd for games as they are a lot more expesive and the games i will be playing will be medium range, like cs:go,insurgency,l4d2,warframe,tf2.I just want them to run as smooth as possible.

>>376387
Yeah now that i think of it 3TB might be to much.I just thought of it because i found out about opendirectories and want to actually keep all the movies/series, maybe watch them in the future and not re-download them.If i want i can always buy one later.

File: it's fucking nothing.png (2KB, 444x34px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 444x34px

>>376392
No, it's completely impossible, which is why you can't dual-boot on a laptop: they only have one drive.

>>376497
>I just want them to run as smooth as possible.
So get enough RAM that they're not streaming anything.

>>376387
>don't underestimate how fucking much 3 TB really is
It's fucking nothing; pic related.

>>376367
My only advice when buying hard drives is never ever buy used ones.

File: blog-drivestats-4-year-life[1].jpg (49KB, 560x820px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 560x820px

>>376507
Depends what you need them for. A one-year-old disk is less likely to die on you than a new one.

>>376511
i odnt get it

>>376367
why not just get a 4tb one instead of 3 and then make a 3tb partition and a 750gb partition for linux?

>>376502
>you can't dual-boot on a laptop: they only have one drive.

Utter rubbish, stop spouting misinformation. You make several partitions and use a boot loader like grub.

>>376367
I built my system in 2011 and have one 128 SSD for windows, one 500 GB for games and one 1.5 TB for movies. Never had any problems.

File: 4L_qPUtiw9P.jpg (99KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 960x540px

>>376650
Holy shit you're right.

>>376619
It's a graph of failed/not failed, from data collected by a major cloud provider who built their own racks out of consumer drives.

The failure rate is the first derivative, i.e. the slope of the curve. As you can see, during year two the failure rate is near-zero, far lower than during year one.