should I get rid off hiberfile on my SSD ?

In another thread from a senior member whs :

I absolutely recommend to put the OS on the SSD. And leave all system files on the SSD. Just get rid of the hiberfile (the command is powercfg - h off) and reduce the pagefile to 2GBs. And if you got SP1 via the update cycle, delete the backup files. The command is DISM /online /Cleanup-Image /SpSuperseded. All this together saves you about 18GB of SSD space (assuming 8GB of RAM).

But, I like to hibernate my computer all day long. I only shut it down at night. Though this seemed to speed up logging into windows with the regular 7200 rpm HDD, I do not notice any benefit with the new SSD. Both resuming from hibernation and booting takes about the same time.

Should I get rid of hiberfile ? Then I guess I will have have to shut down the computer everytime ?

I agree with the point of having the entire system on the SSD. Depending on the size of it, I would perhaps recommend to have secondary programs installed on another disk, in order to have the main SSD function as fast as possible. I have two 120Gb SSDs, one for main programs, the other for secondary = like games and such. You should leave ~30Gb free on the system disk, that way it will certainly function properly and fast. Not a definite measure, though.

I wouldn't suggest you delete anything. Why you should delete your hiberfile... I cannot understand. I've never heard that suggested before. If you don't want your computer to hibernate, you can change it through the control panel. Eh?

If you're scarce of disk space, you can move your backup to a secondary disk. Like I have a disk partition called "Backup", taking roughly 100Gb out of a 1Tb HDD.

I'd say the main thing is you have space. And use the space where it's needed, as well as use the SPEED where it's needed.

Cheerio.

Personally I use hibernate too. On my PC With SSD it is almost as quick as returning from sleep. Or at least the difference does not impact my life! One advantage of hibernate over rebooting, which may or may not matter to you, is Wake on LAN works in hibernate mode, not from OFF.

I guesss it all comes down to the size of your SSD and how tight you are for space!

As I understand it one of the determining factors of the life of an SSD is the number of write cycles made to the device, which is precisely what hibernate does. I used to use hibernate when everything was on an HDD but since I swapped over to an SSD for my OSs ( W7 & W8 ) in my desktop the start-up time is so quick that I've stopped using it. Disabling the hibernate function will also free up space on the drive to the amount of the installed RAM.

Not sure if SSDs have been round long enough to determine if hibernate is a signifcant factor in their life but why use it when, IMHO, it's unnecessary.

Having had such a good experience on my desktop I've also replaced the HDD in my laptop with an SSD, the prices having dropped such that I got more than 4 times the size ( 256gb as against 55gb ) for just under twice the price.

I'd make the claim that with present components, and the pace we most probably will renew them, it doesn't really matter. Like with older cars, every start consumed the engine. With modern cars, we have them automatically stopping at red lights, re-starting at green, and no one talks about engine wear.

HDDs supposedly suffered from thermal expansion / shrink each time they started or were shut down, and many experts warned about excessive defrags = since they caused a lot of reading and writing. Suggestion was, partly, that you keep your computer on 24/7. May have been, but I haven't really heard of a HDD that burned down in defrag. Of course, me ain't omnipotent.

Contemporary components are less durable than coming ones. Like we will get rid of CDs and DVDs, since their speed cannot be improved, as they run at more than 200km/hour, and going faster will break them physically. The next step will be something we already have, USB > furthered.

Before you get to know, and before you get the need: it'll be there. Engineers get paid, and they created Color TV before anyone needed it. And Nokia's CEO Kairamo, he was considered a lunatic when he talked about "everyone having a mobile phone" in late 1980's.

Go figure.

Originally Posted by cloggyjohn

As I understand it one of the determining factors of the life of an SSD is the number of write cycles made to the device, which is precisely what hibernate does. I used to use hibernate when everything was on an HDD but since I swapped over to an SSD for my OSs ( W7 & W8 ) in my desktop the start-up time is so quick that I've stopped using it. Disabling the hibernate function will also free up space on the drive to the amount of the installed RAM.

Not sure if SSDs have been round long enough to determine if hibernate is a signifcant factor in their life but why use it when, IMHO, it's unnecessary.

The whole OS is constantly writing to the disc, that is clearly no reason not to use it! The additional writes due to use of hibernate are negligible, but, of course, if you feel it is unnecessary for you, disable it and save the disc space, if nothing else.

I realise that the OS is constantly writing to the disc but the post referred to the use of, or not, the hibernate file with an SSD and that is what I gave my experience of and opinion on, including its probable neglible effect on the overall life cycle of the SSD.