Upgrading from HDD to SSD

Hey guys,

Ive tried to find the answer on the forum but couldn't get exactly what i need to know. Im getting more customers recently and i really need to increase performances in HF.

Do you think adding an SSD (sandisk 240go) that will be used only for running HF (and other programs) will improve it ? Then i will use my HDD drive only for storage.

I mostly use FX like particles, glow, a bit of 3D space, and text effects.


Here are my specs :




RAM : 8 GO


Thanx for your replies.


  • NormanPCNNormanPCN Website User Posts: 3,945 Enthusiast
    edited April 2016

    Hard disk performance can only affect reading of media files. Unless you are reading uncompressed video files then typical HD throughput is well within the abilities of most any video file.

    Effects performance in Hitfilm is determined mostly by your GPU. The particle simulator can have CPU bottlenecks in some circumstances.

    When you are looking for better performance you have to be very specific about what you would like to improve. You also typically have to whittle something down to isolate exactly what of many things that are typically going on is the cause of any performance bottleneck.

  • PalaconoPalacono Website User, HitFilm Beta Tester Posts: 3,442 Enthusiast

    As a single data point: I bought a Sandisk 128GB SDD for putting projects on and found it made hardly a scrap of difference and it hated going backwards. However, RAID 0 in a couple of 500GB HDD drives made a world of difference.

  • foleyproductionfoleyproduction Website User Posts: 110

    I create holographic video for windows shop or event, so 90% of the time, i have actors or objects with a green screen.

    I import the files to HF for chroma key (which is great) then i add FX (glow, gleam, particles ...) and texts. I convert the files to MOV but the original footage is 1080p AVCHD MP4 from a Lumix LX100.

    Most of the time the problem comes from lagging and preview ram, id like to be able to work on a video (1080p) and add FX (particles, glow, gleam, animation, 3D space) fluently.

    Right now it is not the case, as soon as i add FX, it's gettin slow and become a pain to work on the composite shot, the ram preview also takes too long (30 seconds wait for 2 seconds of playback).

    So maybe i should start upgrading my GPU and buy a NVIDIA 4GO ?

  • foleyproductionfoleyproduction Website User Posts: 110

    @Palacano Oh well, I guess your reply said it all, concerning RAID 0 ive seen stuff about it but still don't really know how it works, is it difficult to install ?

  • PalaconoPalacono Website User, HitFilm Beta Tester Posts: 3,442 Enthusiast
    edited May 2016

    Not really. My reply was almost a perfect example of "Don't believe everything you read on the internet." :) 

    A single response doesn't mean much, there are different brands of SSD, with faster speeds now. 

  • kevin_nkevin_n Website User Posts: 1,923 Enthusiast

    Raid0 HDD is slower than a single SSD. But if projects don't need super high streaming then you won't benefit from an SSD I don't think so anyways. Just loading times, unless access times is a thing when opening tabs and things inside HitFilm?

  • PalaconoPalacono Website User, HitFilm Beta Tester Posts: 3,442 Enthusiast

    See? Two responses, both at odds to each other. :) But my Raid 0, with 2x SATA 6 HDDs in parallel is faster than my  SSD with a single SATA 6 connection. Downside is it has zero redundancy, so I make sure I back everything up on an external drive, because if only one of the RAID 0 drives goes: the whole lot is knackered.

  • kevin_nkevin_n Website User Posts: 1,923 Enthusiast
    edited April 2016

    I got a Intenso SSD, it's one of the slower models, but gets the job done, and really only did it for the access times. Waiting a few miliseconds to even close to 1 second extra to open a specific folder started to really annoy me.

    It's rated at 520 MB read and 300 MB write. I could test in CrystalDisk if you want me to, but access times is what makes it worth while for me personally.

  • PalaconoPalacono Website User, HitFilm Beta Tester Posts: 3,442 Enthusiast

    Mine is a Sandisk (Ultra something? Not opening the case) 128Gb. Definitely not fancy, but it hates going in reverse. Like, really, really hates it. Annoyingly it performed pretty well in tests, but : not in the real world. The cache clearly never expects you to be going backwards through an open video file and just slows to 1/10 of normal speed. Before I gave up and went RAID, I was re-rendering reversed clips and reimporting them as new files.

    But, it was cheapish and is over a year old, maybe more, so I'm sure there are better out there now, just: buyer beware.

  • kevin_nkevin_n Website User Posts: 1,923 Enthusiast

    I've always heard that a super fast drive is the way to go with editing, yet my HDD which I keep most files on, even while editing, never exceeds 5 MB/s. I've seen peaks at 180 MB/s, not related to HitFilm. I'm using DNxHD though, I haven't tested other codecs yet, and probably won't.

  • Aladdin4dAladdin4d Moderator Website User, Imerge Beta Tester, HitFilm Beta Tester Posts: 2,509 Enthusiast
    edited May 2016

    @Palacono I haven't come across that problem before but I think it's pretty interesting even though it's a problem. It makes me wonder if some performance complaints by others aren't related to the same issue.

  • foleyproductionfoleyproduction Website User Posts: 110

    Well ive finally bought an SSD CORSAIR 240 G  (where ive put only programs) that goes up to 500mo/sec (writing reading) and ive seen improvement on my computer for general tasks, but none in HF.

    I guess my next upgrade will be a new GPU with GDDR4 and getting up to 16 GB ram (8GB currently), and hopefully it will increase speed and rendering in HF.

    By the way, ive FINALLY found out that using proxies and codec properly is something that increase speed much more than upgrading hardware lol.

Sign In or Register to comment.