Worth getting second ssd for cache and source file?

[Chng_Zhi_Hao]

Hi, I am editing off a laptop with 2 ssd slots and 1 hdd drive. Currently my setup is :

128gb ssd : OS, Software, and media cache
1tb internal hdd : Photos
1tb external hdd : Video source files

I see that some people recommend getting a dedicated ssd for cache files and source files to edit will significantly improve performance, so is it worth getting a 250gb ssd just for those files?

Thanks

[excited_Genie16B8]

My preferences (and recommendation) is a minimum of five internal drives for easy organization and best performance.

System (Windows & Software only)

Projects (Project files, still images, audio files)

Cache & Scratch

Camera Media/Proxies

Exports

The first three can be SSD drives.  The last two will often need to be very large capacity, which can get expensive as SSDs.  HDDs might be the better option for those.

[R Neil Haugen]

The guy with the most hard data on performance within PrPro suggests that a decent SSD for OS/programs is good, and that if at all possible a fast SSD of an m.2/nVme connetion can handle most other things. BUT ... if you can ... then having a third SSD for cache files is also an upgrade. You can read up on Bill's stuff here ...

Tweaker's Page ... http://ppbm8.com/index.html

JIm's advice is still sound, of course ... it's been the standard recommendation for several years now. And even with 5 SSD's on my editing rig, it's how I'm setup. But with the fastest SSD drives having such massive sustained read/write speeds, things are changing. LIke using spinning disks for holding, storage, archiving purposes rather than really for any video editing 'active' files.

And the Samsung T5 USB3 external drives are capable of sustained read/write to match or exceed any internal spinner. Which can really help with laptops.

Neil