Pro photographer's spec - scratch disk advice!

W

Wildflower246

New member
I am almost ready to purchase my custom laptop from PCSpecialist which will be used solely for photo editing in Lightroom and Photoshop, dealing with large volumes of RAW files. Chosen spec below, however I am not feeling confident about my choice with the SSD hard drive(s).

I have researched that it's helpful for photographers to have two drives in this configuration:
First: high storage volume and fast speed SSD
Second: smaller storage volume but equally as fast to use for temporary files/ as a scratch disk.

PCspecialist tell me they don't sell scratch disks.

This is the advice from Adobe about scratch disk set up: (which I am confused about because point 1 seems to conflict with points 2 and 3?)
  • If your startup disk is a hard disk, as opposed to a solid-state disk (SSD), try using a different hard disk for your primary scratch disk. An SSD, on the other hand, performs well as both the primary startup and scratch disk. In fact, using an SSD is probably better than using a separate hard disk as your primary scratch disk.
  • Scratch disks should be on a different drive than any large files you are editing.
  • Scratch disks should be on a different drive than the one your operating system uses for virtual memory.

I have also seen in my research that having two SSD drives can cause issues with Windows.

Is the solution to go for one single 4TB SSD drive? Would this satisfy the advice from Adobe?


Spec:
Chassis & Display Recoil Series: 16" Matte QHD+ 300Hz, 500nits, sRGB 100% LED Widescreen (2560x1600)

Processor (CPU) Intel® CoreTM Ultra 9 24 Core Processor 275HX (Up to 5.4 GHz) 36MB Cache

Memory (RAM) 64GB Corsair 5600MHz SODIMM DDR5 (2 x 32GB)

Graphics Card NVIDIA® GeForce® RTX 5070Ti - 12GB GDDR7 Video RAM - DirectX®12.2

1st M.2 SSD Drive 2TB SAMSUNG 9100 PRO M.2, PCIe 5.0 NVMe (up to 14,700MB/R,13,400MB/W)

2nd M.2 SSD Drive 2TB SAMSUNG 990 PRO M.2, PCIe 4.0 NVMe (up to 7450MB/R, 6900MB/W)
 
T

TonyCarter

VALUED CONTRIBUTOR
PCS are technically correct, as there is nothing specific called a 'scratch disk', it is just a drive used solely for your application's cache/scratch usage.

But, as per the Adobe advice, you'd want 1) for OS & apps, 2) for files, and 3) for scratch/cache...but that chassis doesn't support 3 SSDs...so you're stuck a little unless your working files are on an external drive?
 
W

Wildflower246

New member
That makes sense.

My plan was to have my working files stored on the internal drive, then once the edit was complete they'd go onto an external.
I'm happy to rethink this, if there's a better set up to be had!

So let's say I have my working files on an external, I would then use 1 SSD for OS & apps and the other for scratch.
Going on that basis, I'd probably look at 1. 2TB and 2. 500gb

Does that seem a better option?
 
Scott

Scott

Behold The Ford Mondeo
Moderator
In your shoes I would look towards

1TB Fast Primary - Windows & Apps only (Not a work drive or storage drive in any way).
2TB Fast Secondary - Work drive, temporary asset storage etc.
500gb-1TB 2.5" SSD drive (or M2 if available) - Scratch drive. 500GB is plenty but it just depends on pricing etc. You could also use this for longer term storage as the scratch drive won't need a lot of space. Just keep it lower than 50% and performance will be 100%.

Given that the chassis is the limitation on the storage (it seems extremely limited to me) I would opt for the Recoil 18 over the 16.

I wouldn't restrict my options or expansion ability by choosing a chassis that didn't meet or exceed requirements.

Side note. I wouldn't opt for Samsung either. They were the go-to for years but they need to re-prove themselves after the abysmal 980 and 990 releases.
 
T

TonyCarter

VALUED CONTRIBUTOR
Wildflower246 said:
That makes sense.

My plan was to have my working files stored on the internal drive, then once the edit was complete they'd go onto an external.
I'm happy to rethink this, if there's a better set up to be had!

So let's say I have my working files on an external, I would then use 1 SSD for OS & apps and the other for scratch.
Going on that basis, I'd probably look at 1. 2TB and 2. 500gb

Does that seem a better option?
Click to expand...
It would be the better option if you can't get a chassis with 3 SSD slots.

If you need an external solution, then if you get a fast enough external SSD or enclosure (40GBps USB4 / Thunderbolt 4) then you probably won't even notice the difference in performance.

USB4/Thunderbolt 4 (40GB/s)
Corsair 2TB - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Corsair-EX400U-USB4-Portable-External/dp/B0DR381N86
Sandisk 2TB - https://www.amazon.co.uk/SanDisk-Extreme-Portable-Powerful-Performance/dp/B0DN688B7V
Ugreen Enclosure 1 - https://www.amazon.co.uk/UGREEN-Enclosure-Cooling-Aluminum-Compatible/dp/B0CLV3D3H6/
Ugreen Enclosure 2 - https://www.amazon.co.uk/UGREEN-Enclosure-Aluminum-Support-Compatible/dp/B0D3WT2T8C/
 
Scott

Scott

Behold The Ford Mondeo
Moderator
TonyCarter said:
It would be the better option if you can't get a chassis with 3 SSD slots.

If you need an external solution, then if you get a fast enough external SSD or enclosure (40GBps USB4 / Thunderbolt 4) then you probably won't even notice the difference in performance.

USB4/Thunderbolt 4 (40GB/s)
Corsair 2TB - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Corsair-EX400U-USB4-Portable-External/dp/B0DR381N86
Sandisk 2TB - https://www.amazon.co.uk/SanDisk-Extreme-Portable-Powerful-Performance/dp/B0DN688B7V
Ugreen Enclosure 1 - https://www.amazon.co.uk/UGREEN-Enclosure-Cooling-Aluminum-Compatible/dp/B0CLV3D3H6/
Ugreen Enclosure 2 - https://www.amazon.co.uk/UGREEN-Enclosure-Aluminum-Support-Compatible/dp/B0D3WT2T8C/
Click to expand...

Surely can't just be me drooling over that TBT200 from Corsair? They've very cleverly, and obviously deliberately, included it in the advertising for the drive. I went straight in for a nosey at it!

They're almost doing an Apple o_O
 
N

nigham

Member
You could also get 2 fast SSD's and the 2nd SSD could be partitioned to create 2 separate drives in windows.

1st SSD is C:/ drive for Op and APPS

2nd SSD will become D:/ drive and E:/ drive in windows, use 'D' for your scratch drive and 'E' for you storage.

As a photographer myself I would say you can never have to much storage so don't skimp on TB's for the second SSD, bigger is better.
(Fujifilm GFX 100S user using PS, Lightroom and Capture One)
 
Scott

Scott

Behold The Ford Mondeo
Moderator
I wouldn't recommend partitioning for those uses outlined above. Partitioning should be limited to exclusive uses of the drive. Storage would be fine, if it wasn't being used for the fast storage to feed the project you are working on. If you were to use it for that and the scratch, you would have queueing which is best avoided.

For the scratch drive you don't need a partition either, you would likely waste space doing so. A folder is absolutely fine, but just ensure it's on a drive that is quite fast and that isn't going to be used during any of the current processes.

For proper high end use you will always want 3 fast storage locations. Primary for windows, secondary for the fast access storage (project assets) and a third for the scratch.

The 3rd drive used for the scratch could be partitioned for an offline storage use, but as above.... I wouldn't bother partitioning, I would just create a scratch folder.
 
G

GARYCOWAN114

New member
I do the same thing, and I have it as SSD1 = Windows/App, SSD2 = Scratch, External HDD = OneDrive/Backups : no partitioning on any drive.
 
N

nigham

Member
Scott said:
I wouldn't recommend partitioning for those uses outlined above. Partitioning should be limited to exclusive uses of the drive. Storage would be fine, if it wasn't being used for the fast storage to feed the project you are working on. If you were to use it for that and the scratch, you would have queueing which is best avoided.

For the scratch drive you don't need a partition either, you would likely waste space doing so. A folder is absolutely fine, but just ensure it's on a drive that is quite fast and that isn't going to be used during any of the current processes.

For proper high end use you will always want 3 fast storage locations. Primary for windows, secondary for the fast access storage (project assets) and a third for the scratch.

The 3rd drive used for the scratch could be partitioned for an offline storage use, but as above.... I wouldn't bother partitioning, I would just create a scratch folder.
Click to expand...
Scott said:
I wouldn't recommend partitioning for those uses outlined above. Partitioning should be limited to exclusive uses of the drive. Storage would be fine, if it wasn't being used for the fast storage to feed the project you are working on. If you were to use it for that and the scratch, you would have queueing which is best avoided.

For the scratch drive you don't need a partition either, you would likely waste space doing so. A folder is absolutely fine, but just ensure it's on a drive that is quite fast and that isn't going to be used during any of the current processes.

For proper high end use you will always want 3 fast storage locations. Primary for windows, secondary for the fast access storage (project assets) and a third for the scratch.

The 3rd drive used for the scratch could be partitioned for an offline storage use, but as above.... I wouldn't bother partitioning, I would just create a scratch folder.
Click to expand...
My reply is specific to the posters laptop spec.

PS does not give you the option of using a folder for a scratch drive your only option is a drive and if you have a system with only 2 SSD slots reserving slot 2 for a scratch disk only is pretty pointless and a waste of that onboard storage. Saving working files to external drives which are likely to be physical HDD drives rather than SSD drives will impact the time it takes to load/save a file in PS and will be noticed by the user.

As you probably know the conflict between Windows and PS happens when windows tries to write something to the same location that PS is using for the scratch drive this could happen because most users were using C:/ drive for their scratch disk, using a separate drive with a partition stops that from ever happening and any drop in performance on that SSD by partitioning it will never be noticed by the user but the user will notice how fast a working file kept on that SSD will load/save compared to loading/saving from an external HDD drive.

The Recoil 18 has those extra SSD (4) slots but it is also Intel processor only which with all the talk of problems with the Ultra 9's plus no water cooling option leaves you with a noisy laptop when batch processing photos or rendering video which may potentially give CPU problems in the future.

This is a problem that I looked at long and hard when deciding on what laptop to get to replace my 5 year old PCS Octane Series (4 x SSD's, 2 x onboard m2 and 2 x internal SATA) the negatives of the Recoil 18 put me off, the only negative of the Recoil 16 AMD is the limited 2 x SSD slots. The smaller screen of the 16 is not a problem because I use an external BenQ 271 27" photo monitor.
 
Scott

Scott

Behold The Ford Mondeo
Moderator
I don't think I've used a software that wouldn't let me select a folder before but will bow to your knowledge there.

Out of curiosity, when you select the scratch drive, does it format it..... or does it just use available space?

When 2 drives are the only choice then I probably still wouldn't partition unless imperative for the integrity of the file system itself. I used to have many partitions, thought they were the best thing since sliced bread for organisation. It was only in the later years of being able to afford SSDs and then M2s that I realised the impact they had. The impact in a conventional drive is awful if using more than one at the same time, but every day is a school day :D

I would absolutely avoid a 2 drive limitation nowadays though, for a professional application of course. That being said, the USBC drives are absolutely phenomenal so that is a fine solution as well. I would actually consider the USBC for the working drive, as then you could have a few different bespoke options :cool: :sneaky:
 
N

nigham

Member
Scott said:
I don't think I've used a software that wouldn't let me select a folder before but will bow to your knowledge there.

Out of curiosity, when you select the scratch drive, does it format it..... or does it just use available space?

When 2 drives are the only choice then I probably still wouldn't partition unless imperative for the integrity of the file system itself. I used to have many partitions, thought they were the best thing since sliced bread for organisation. It was only in the later years of being able to afford SSDs and then M2s that I realised the impact they had. The impact in a conventional drive is awful if using more than one at the same time, but every day is a school day :D

I would absolutely avoid a 2 drive limitation nowadays though, for a professional application of course. That being said, the USBC drives are absolutely phenomenal so that is a fine solution as well. I would actually consider the USBC for the working drive, as then you could have a few different bespoke options :cool: :sneaky:
Click to expand...
When you choose a scratch drive PS just uses the available space which is why in the past there have been problems/conflicts with windows, it is rare but has happened when C:/ drive is used for the scratch drive.

I think in an ideal world you would be able to spec a laptop with exactly what you do want but unfortunately there are always compromises on number of ports, number of SSD slots etc. My ideal laptop would be a watercooled Recoil 18 with an AMD processor but that is not available.
Checking my order I can see that my Recoil 16 has just gone into build which is a relief because the following day the Recoil 16 was showing out of stock until July for the AMD build.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top