Wish to Migrate TF 5.0 to a Different Hard Drive

[chris455]

Greetings Gentlemen,
I would like to free up some space on my SSD, where my copy of TF 5.0 currently resides. I have the Steam version. I have a near-clean HDD that I would prefer to move it to. I am "generation Etch-A-Sketch" and am hoping this will not be too difficult.
Anyone out there that has done this/ something similar before? Can you help an older guy out and point me at some steps?
Any helpful responses are much appreciated!
Chris

[Rostic]

I strongly recommend do not move Cliffs to HDD from SSD. If you move it to HDD be ready to get much more freezes in game.
I recommend to find other way to get some free space on your SSD. Run default Windows disk cleaning tool (right click on SSD drive icon, select lowest menu item ("Properties" and in appeared dilog press button "clean disk"). That is absolutely safe procedure.
Check your downloads folder and clear it. Better even to move it to HDD. Check Downloads folder properties. There will be be a text field where you can enter new location of that folder.

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

As has been mentioned, if you move the game from an SSD to an HDD, then you will get poorer performance.

This is especially the case if you are planning to use a VR headset in the future or if you will be/are using 4k/5k resolution.

If you can, look for other bulky programs which don't need the speed of the SSD to run.

For example, your videos, your pictures, etc.... store them on the HDD.

Greetings Gentlemen,
I would like to free up some space on my SSD, where my copy of TF 5.0 currently resides. I have the Steam version. I have a near-clean HDD that I would prefer to move it to. I am "generation Etch-A-Sketch" and am hoping this will not be too difficult.
Anyone out there that has done this/ something similar before? Can you help an older guy out and point me at some steps?
Any helpful responses are much appreciated!
Chris

[Dawson]

If you decide you still wish to move the game you must do it through Steam. In your Steam library right click on CLoD, select "properties", then "Local Files" and "Move install folder".

[ATAG_Noofy]

I agree with the previous comments that you will lose performance if you move the application to a HDD.
An alternative that worked fine with me is to move it instead to an external SSD drive, if you have USB 2.0 (blue plastic in the plug) or 3.0.
And as Dawson says, do it through Steam.


EDIT: My PC is equipped with USB 3.0 and above, so ignore what I said about USB 2.0, I did not test it

[Pinguim]

I say you can move to HDD with no problems. CloD is one of the games that are faster to load here, I leave my limited SSD to heavier games and OS. (that might change if you use 4k textures when the update is released)

to move you gotta right click on your game in steam library > properties > local files > move install folder > select your HD drive

[ATAG_Snapper]

I agree with the previous comments that you will lose performance if you move the application to a HDD.
An alternative that worked fine with me is to move it instead to an external SSD drive, if you have USB 2.0 (blue plastic in the plug) or 3.0.
And as Dawson says, do it through Steam.

Same here.

I have two external 500 GB SSD drives that I run off a powered USB hub from a 3.0 USB port off my laptop. These drives efficiently run Cliffs of Dover, DCS, and BoX.

[chris455]

Thank you all for the various replies..........I hear the advice re: performance issues and think I may try migrating to an external SSD as some have said. Much thanks!

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Thank you all for the various replies..........I hear the advice re: performance issues and think I may try migrating to an external SSD as some have said. Much thanks!

It is likely you will still see a reduction in performance with an external SSD.

Make sure if you do this, you use a USB 3.0 or higher port to connect the SSD... don't use a USB 2.0.

[ATAG_Noofy]

Here are some standard speed comparisons:

USB 1.0: transfer rate 1.5 Mbps
USB 1.1: transfer rate 12 Mbps
USB 2.0: transfer rate 480 Mbps
USB 3.0: transfer rate 5 Gbps
USB 3.1: transfer rate 10 Gbps

HDD: transfer rate 30 - 150 Mbps
SSD: transfer rate 500 Mbps
NVMe SSD: transfer rate 3-3.5 Gbps (new)

As you can see, USB 2.0 is in the same speed range than SSD, so you’d be OK with USB 2.0.

I am running two versions of the game, one for beta testing and one for normal gaming. One of them runs on my internal SSD, and the other on an external SSD connected via USB 2.0.
EDIT: My PC is equipped with USB 3.0 and above, so ignore what I said about USB 2.0, I did not test it

I cannot see any perceivable difference in performance, not even for the 4k beta tests (not VR as I am not yet equipped with VR, so only testing the 2D version).

And yes, I tried both versions on the external SSD, and both on the internal SSD. I actually switch from one disk to the other at each software patch release to avoid having to download both versions each time.

No difference in performance noticed between internal and external SSD. There was a big difference though when I was doing same with HDD (freezes, low FPS, etc.).

Clearly if you are planning to use SSD over NVMe you’d be better off with a USB 3.0 or 3.1. You may need to change your PC for that…

(NVMe stands for Non-Volatile Memory Express and is a faster communications interface than SATA)

[Rostic]

Here are some standard speed comparisons:

USB 1.0: transfer rate 1.5 Mbps
USB 1.1: transfer rate 12 Mbps
USB 2.0: transfer rate 480 Mbps
USB 3.0: transfer rate 5 Gbps
USB 3.1: transfer rate 10 Gbps

HDD: transfer rate 30 - 150 Mbps
SSD: transfer rate 500 Mbps
NVMe SSD: transfer rate 3-3.5 Gbps (new)

There is a little mistake in that table....
Here is more correct version

USB 1.0: transfer rate 1.5 Mbps (Mbit/sec)
USB 1.1: transfer rate 12 Mbps (Mbit/sec)
USB 2.0: transfer rate 480 Mbps (Mbit/sec)
USB 3.0: transfer rate 5 Gbps (Gbit/sec)
USB 3.1: transfer rate 10 Gbps (Gbit/sec)

HDD: transfer rate 30 - 150 MBps (MByte/sec)
SSD: transfer rate 500 MBps (MByte/sec) == 4.0Gbit/sec
NVMe SSD: transfer rate 3-3.5 GBps (GByte/sec)

So your SSD on USB2 work about 8 times slower than he can do at max speed

[ATAG_Noofy]

So your SSD on USB2 work about 8 times slower than he can do at max speed

Yes of course you are right


Still I cannot see any noticeable difference between running CLOD on internal SSD or external SSD on USB 2.0…
EDIT: My PC is equipped with USB 3.0 and above, so ignore what I said about USB 2.0, I did not test it
Don’t forget the limit of the standard SATA cable at 150MBps, so it would work about 2 times slower, not 8 times…

[Rostic]

Don’t forget the limit of the standard SATA cable at 150MBps, so it would work about 2 times slower, not 8 times…

Nope. SATA3 speed is 6.0Gbit/s, SATA2 - 3.0Gbit/s. So as I told, 8 times slower, but only for linear access (big data sequental read/write).

But usually games do not read a lot of data sequentally. They read several dozens of MBytes in one place, same in other and so on hundreds (or thousends) of operations. Also they decompress data stored on the disk, which utilizes processor. So for each game it has to be done own special test with loading time.
I think that more useful value is random operation access to disk. Check pictures below ("4k" tests). HDD is 30 - 70 times slower then SATA SSD and 60-140 times slower than NVMe SDD.

About the CloD the main problem not in loading mission itself, but in loading aircrafts models and textrures when they spawn by trigger in single player missions or when they enter "players bouble" in multiplayer. Especially for textures that had to be converted from JPG to DDS on the fly. Will be great if TFS some how optimize that process to be more asynchronouse running in background (if possible).

Here is my disks speed test in case some one interested in such information
Pay attention to how sequental write speed degraded after several years for NVMe SSD disk that is used for running Windows 10 (223GiB disk on the right bottom corner).
Also look how speed fall for HDD when it access data from beginning to the end of the disk.





P.S. HDD sucks, NVMe SSD rocks. Buy NVMe disks!

[ATAG_Noofy]

Nope. SATA3 speed is 6.0Gbit/s, SATA2 - 3.0Gbit/s. So as I told, 8 times slower, but only for linear access (big data sequental read/write).

I think you are mixing up SATA bandwidth and SATA data transfer speed. If you want to compare with USB 2.0 or 3.0, then you have to look at data transfer speed, which is limited to 600 MBps for SATA3, 300 MBps for SATA2, and 150 MBps for SATA1…

Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that for me there is no perceivable difference between running the game on internal SSD or external SSD via USB 2.0, whatever the reason may be…
EDIT: My PC is equipped with USB 3.0 and above, so ignore what I said about USB 2.0, I did not test it

[ATAG_Noofy]

This is my internal SSD drive
Apacer AS340 240GB 240.0 GB.jpg

This is my external SSD drive via USB 2.0
Samsung Portable SSD T7 1000.2 GB.jpg

EDIT: My PC is equipped with USB 3.0 and above, so ignore what I said about USB 2.0, I did not test it

[Rostic]

This is my external SSD drive via USB 2.0
Samsung Portable SSD T7 1000.2 GB.jpg

Impossible for USB2.0! Max bandwidth is 480Mbit/sec which is 60MByte/sec. So your external SSD is plugged, at least, into USB3.0!!!

[ATAG_Noofy]

Impossible for USB2.0! Max bandwidth is 480Mbit/sec which is 60MByte/sec. So your external SSD is plugged, at least, into USB3.0!!!

LOL, you are right Professor!

I thought I had USB 2.0... But no, my PC is more modern than I thought. It is equipped with USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 controllers...

2022-06-15_104904.jpg

Mea culpa, I stand corrected and will edit my previous post to clear the confusion.

[Rostic]

.. It is equipped with USB 3.0 and USB 3.1 controllers...

Ignore...

Spoiler: 

In this case I recommend to plug your hard drive to USB3.1 because you harddrive support USB version up to USB3.2 and manufacturer promises that it can work at speed up to 1000MByte/sec which is in theory possible on USB3.1 (Gen 2) standard 10Gbit/sec.

Just checked your motherboard spec and you have 8 USB3.1 Gen1 ports. So do not change anything