Moving Game files to SSD?

You can't actually move program files around that way in Windows, at least not those that use Windows Registry settings to control them. If the files aren't where the Registry expects them to be, they are bound to malfunction (maybe not on the next launch, but usually so). If this were an Origin or Steam controlled install, there would be a function available to move an existing installation to your S drive -- doesn't always work, though. For a retail disc or other type of install, and likely now regardless since you have already tried moving the files around manually, the way to do this would be to uninstall entirely, clean the Windows Registry with a tool such as Piriform's CCleaner (the free version is fine) to clear out the outdated entries, create a new folder yourself on the S drive (call it Program Files or whatever you like), and reinstall onto that. You can't install directly onto a drive letter like S:, that would produce an error saying so, it would have to be something like S:\(folder name).

For the TS3 user game folder in Documents where your saves, caches, and added content live, the best way to shift that over to S would be to instruct Windows to redirect your entire Documents library to the SSD. There are ways to shift just the TS3 folder to S and leave the rest of Documents on C, but if you have enough space on S to work with there usually isn't much benefit to splitting things up with symbolic links as would be required. The game doesn't really care which drive the Documents library is on, as long as it can find it.

Running the game program and having the Documents user game folder both on S should stand to improve startup times, saves, travel transitions, caching, CAS, Pattern, and Build/Buy catalog building (these can be huge) but actual gameplay itself won't be much different. Some other games like TS4 don't really get much benefit from running from an SSD. But how dramatic the difference is will depend on the rest of your system and how much content you are throwing at the game and tends to vary widely by player.

Also, this hasn't been mentioned but is your new SSD an internal drive? If it's external, it's not actually recommended to run resource intensive games from it because the latency introduced by an external connection no matter how good it is will usually far outweigh any benefits gained by having a faster drive.

Well, your processor isn't that bad (as far as TS3 goes) but you might be getting what is called classic bottlenecking if it can't keep up with the faster graphics card. Fortunately you have a solution on the way for that.

The too many write warnings on SSDs or else their lifespans will be shortened really apply to the earliest generations of them. If this is a modern SSD, there will still be a limit on the number of drive writes possible, but usually it's so high that unless you were routinely doing something much more unusual (not playing games) it would probably take longer than the your computer's lifespan to exceed it. TS3 benefits from its user game folder in Documents being on an SSD because of the caching and frequency of things having to be read from it, as well as written to it. And of course this is where saves load from and are saved to, so you would only be getting a portion of the benefits by having the program files only on the S drive.

This doesn't prove anything of course, but the desktop I am typing this to you from is a Mac with an SSD only, no HDD, and I use it for just about everything including running TS3 for Windows by way of Bootcamp. I would cart it to and from work on my back if I could, back when I actually left home to go to work (but I do have a laptop and tablet for such portability). I expect my Macs to last 8-10 years or to obsolesce before they begin to wear out mechanically and I do not anticipate this SSD being written to so many times that it will fail before its time. You could check back with me in 2028 or so to see if that's really what happened, but I'm guessing we'll both have forgotten about this conversation by then. :)

I can't really recommend a way to manually edit the Registry to shift an existing program install, the DRM for the game (that which allows only those who have purchased a license to play) is likely to get annoyed by that. If the base game and its packs are registered to you, or can now be, then you might consider a Patch 1.69 Origin controlled re-install and then you wouldn't need the discs at all, just possibly the registration codes. But if that's not an enticing or practical option, then your choices would be to wait for the new cable or obtain an external CD/DVD drive, which are pretty cheap these days and will work once the install is complete because the game doesn't really run from the discs, it just authenticates from them.

I'll have to defer to others here with more personal experience with Samsung and Nvidia (my cards are all AMD). Not sure the very high GPU usage indicated in Task Manager is really anything to be concerned about as it would be with CPU. I believe that could mean the card is being used for as many graphics related tasks as it can possibly be. But with a slightly weaker than optimal processor, yeah that might be kind of an indirect symptom. GeForce Experience is not a requirement. It's perhaps a more convenient way to deliver driver updates, but we do know that its Optimize function can make a mess out of the performance of older games like TS3 and probably some newer ones as well.

If the games are registered to you or now can be, then you don't need the discs at all. You can install the game and its EP/SPs by way of Origin instead, and Patch 1.69 is delivered automatically with no choices given. That ties the game to Origin and the Launcher though, which means that you do have to use Origin or at least have it running in the beginning to startup the game. With 1.67 (and below), the game can be started with a Launcher bypass to the TS3w.exe file, but that trick won't work on Patch 1.69 -- instead double-clicking on such a shortcut just takes you back to Origin.

"alexandrea;c-17761420" wrote:
I decided to stick with the 1.67 update. Is there really any major difference between the 1.69 update and the 1.67? I never even knew there was an update beyond that. I'd rather not have to use Origin to play TS3 so I really don't want to update to that version if that's the only thing it offers. I don't even use the disk to play my game so using Origin would just be a hassle.

Patch 1.69 is delivered by Origin (only) and its purpose is to tie the game to Origin and the Launcher. The only other "feature" it adds is the ability to activate/deactivate Expansion/Stuff Packs that are already installed upon launching the game each time. Many of us find that it often forgets which packs we want activated, even if it's always all of them 100% of the time, and sometimes loses track of the ones we even have installed so we have to count them each time when launching the game to make sure they are all there. And many of us feel this is more of nuisance than a benefit -- I repurchased the game on Steam a couple of years back just to get away from this patch as I never had the discs to begin with. Steam only delivers 1.67.

There is no difference in actual gameplay between the two patch levels. The gameplay files are exactly the same except for their internal build numbers, which may annoy Core Mods and display a harmless version mismatch warning on startup unless the mod accounts for the build number correctly. (e.g., NRaas ErrorTrap is a Core Mod but we have different iterations of the current version available to avoid this)

CC Sims3packs can be broken apart into packages using various utilities to do so, but certain types of content aren't going to work properly that way and really need to be Launcher installed. Store content sims3packs can't be broken apart the same way because of the store encryption on them. To be honest, as much as I can't stand working with the Launcher myself, I've never used any of these procedures.

Sometimes that error means you are missing the store patches. The 1.67 Launcher no longer delivers them. You can either grab them from a prior 1.67 or earlier install, they would be in the ContentPatch folder within the TS3 user game folder in Documents, or from here.

There is supposed to be one cumulative ContantPatch.package folder in there, that's the actual patch. It doesn't get opened, it just sits there within the TS3\ContentPatch subfolder.

"igazor;c-17769204" wrote:
There is supposed to be one cumulative ContantPatch.package folder in there, that's the actual patch. It doesn't get opened, it just sits there within the TS3\ContentPatch subfolder.

Okay, I see... I downloaded and I'm still getting that error. I think it might be corrupt cc.... I'm going 2 try to clean out my mods and Dccbackup folder.


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50818567776_d6f619bd24_b.jpgScreen Shot 01-09-21 at 03.47 PM by

"igazor;c-17751303" wrote:
You can't actually move program files around that way in Windows, at least not those that use Windows Registry settings to control them. If the files aren't where the Registry expects them to be, they are bound to malfunction (maybe not on the next launch, but usually so). If this were an Origin or Steam controlled install, there would be a function available to move an existing installation to your S drive -- doesn't always work, though. For a retail disc or other type of install, and likely now regardless since you have already tried moving the files around manually, the way to do this would be to uninstall entirely, clean the Windows Registry with a tool such as Piriform's CCleaner (the free version is fine) to clear out the outdated entries, create a new folder yourself on the S drive (call it Program Files or whatever you like), and reinstall onto that. You can't install directly onto a drive letter like S:, that would produce an error saying so, it would have to be something like S:\(folder name).

For the TS3 user game folder in Documents where your saves, caches, and added content live, the best way to shift that over to S would be to instruct Windows to redirect your entire Documents library to the SSD. There are ways to shift just the TS3 folder to S and leave the rest of Documents on C, but if you have enough space on S to work with there usually isn't much benefit to splitting things up with symbolic links as would be required. The game doesn't really care which drive the Documents library is on, as long as it can find it.

Running the game program and having the Documents user game folder both on S should stand to improve startup times, saves, travel transitions, caching, CAS, Pattern, and Build/Buy catalog building (these can be huge) but actual gameplay itself won't be much different. Some other games like TS4 don't really get much benefit from running from an SSD. But how dramatic the difference is will depend on the rest of your system and how much content you are throwing at the game and tends to vary widely by player.

Also, this hasn't been mentioned but is your new SSD an internal drive? If it's external, it's not actually recommended to run resource intensive games from it because the latency introduced by an external connection no matter how good it is will usually far outweigh any benefits gained by having a faster drive.

Yes, I am learning this the hard way now. What about editing the registry files? My optical drive is disconnected right now because I ran out of SATA cables and I'm using my last SATA cable on my SSD while I wait for another one to be shipped to me next week. All of my Sims games are on disk so I can't reinstall them now that the drive is disconnected for now. What about editing the registry files to read it form the S: drive?

I'm going to bookmark that website. I was wondering about the documents folder and that helps... But should I just keep the documents folder on the HDD? I heard it's not good to constantly write things on an SSD and I have my TS4 game files on the SSD as well and I use quite a lot of cc for both games.

Yes, I am realizing that the SSD can only do so much. I ordered an i7 processor that will hopefully be here soon. I have a GTX 970 gfx card but I never upgraded my processor and it's really bad... I have an Intel Pentium G2030 currently and occasionally I get this weird stopping in the middle of my session on TS3. It will just stop and I have to wait for it to load before the game resumes. It happens randomly... I've ignored it but it is kind of frustrating.

And yes it's an internal drive. :smile:

"igazor;c-17751481" wrote:
Well, your processor isn't that bad (as far as TS3 goes) but you might be getting what is called classic bottlenecking if it can't keep up with the faster graphics card. Fortunately you have a solution on the way for that.

The too many write warnings on SSDs or else their lifespans will be shortened really apply to the earliest generations of them. If this is a modern SSD, there will still be a limit on the number of drive writes possible, but usually it's so high that unless you were routinely doing something much more unusual (not playing games) it would probably take longer than the your computer's lifespan to exceed it. TS3 benefits from its user game folder in Documents being on an SSD because of the caching and frequency of things having to be read from it, as well as written to it. And of course this is where saves load from and are saved to, so you would only be getting a portion of the benefits by having the program files only on the S drive.

This doesn't prove anything of course, but the desktop I am typing this to you from is a Mac with an SSD only, no HDD, and I use it for just about everything including running TS3 for Windows by way of Bootcamp. I would cart it to and from work on my back if I could, back when I actually left home to go to work (but I do have a laptop and tablet for such portability). I expect my Macs to last 8-10 years or to obsolesce before they begin to wear out mechanically and I do not anticipate this SSD being written to so many times that it will fail before its time. You could check back with me in 2028 or so to see if that's really what happened, but I'm guessing we'll both have forgotten about this conversation by then. :)

I can't really recommend a way to manually edit the Registry to shift an existing program install, the DRM for the game (that which allows only those who have purchased a license to play) is likely to get annoyed by that. If the base game and its packs are registered to you, or can now be, then you might consider a Patch 1.69 Origin controlled re-install and then you wouldn't need the discs at all, just possibly the registration codes. But if that's not an enticing or practical option, then your choices would be to wait for the new cable or obtain an external CD/DVD drive, which are pretty cheap these days and will work once the install is complete because the game doesn't really run from the discs, it just authenticates from them.

Yeah, I was thinking that's what could be causing some problems because the gfx card is pretty good and I always get around 60-100% of CPU usage when playing TS3. I play TS4 as well and their CPU requirements are higher so I figured I would upgrade. I recently started experiencing that weird freezing in TS4 as well. I am performing a clean driver install to see if that helps both of the games. I'm not sure why I'm getting this mysterious freezing in TS4 now.

That makes me feel much more comfortable about redirecting the documents folder. I have a lot of CC between both games. Are you familiar with Samsung SSD's? I heard there's a TRIM command on most SSD's to help them be more efficient but I'm not sure if it's only if you have the OS installed on the SSD.

That's a great point. I heard it takes about 600 TB and even more before some SSD's die. I guess that really is promising. I will try to check back in with you in 2028 if I don't forget lol.

Okay, yeah that sounds like a lot of work. I'd rather do a clean install. I believe my base game and packs are registered.... What is the Patch 1.69 Origin? If I can get my games to install via Origin that would be great... If not I will wait for the cable.

And are you familiar with Nvidia cards? I was doing some digging around on the internet today and some people said the Geforce Experience application shouldn't be installed because it uses up a lot of RAM. I've always had it installed for easy driver updates but I've never really liked it. Would you recommend uninstalling it? My games run fine with it, but the program itself has been unstable sometimes. I'd rather download my drivers on the Nvidia website instead of fighting with the program to cooperate just so I can update my drivers.

Which version of Windows are you running? Also are you adding to or just replacing an existing drive? If it's the latter, I'm wondering if you may be better off just cloning the drive?

Also, if you're just looking to get the drive set up for now (and may be removing a drive later) and are out of SATA cables, you can try and get a USB->SATA adapter and hook the SSD up to it temporarily if you plan on removing a drive or may be looking to clone an existing drive (if you have USB3, the adapter only needs the one USB3 port; if you're running USB2, you'd need to look for an adapter that has a separate AC adapter attached that hooks up to the drive, itself, via a separate power cable (a USB2 port on its own can't provide enough power to the device, hence the need for an additional power adapter) in addition to the SATA->USB cable (there's one brand out there that comes as a sort of "kit" where it contains both of these items). The downside to this is that as it would be running as USB, it may appear slower in that setup than it might normally in a SATA environment, but it's useful if you're out of cables and looking to setup or clone a new drive or for backups and provided that it's temporary (it would revert to "normal" and run faster once it's hooked up to the SATA cable--again, the speed difference initially is more a USB versus SATA thing).

Also, regarding TRIM (which is not limited to Samsung SSDs nor exclusive to them), it doesn't matter if the OS is installed onto the drive, itself, as to how it functions nor its purpose given that it's usually managed via the OS and treated more like any other tool might be, except in relation to a SSD versus a mechanical (think of it like chkdsk or defrag or any other Windows tool out there where you don't need the OS actually installed onto the specific drive to run those tools on that drive, if that makes any sense?). Also, while in theory it can make a SSD run more efficiently, it's also been said that it can lead to the possibility of permanently eliminating any hope of data recovery of the drive if something goes awry with it (which is among the reasons why some people might choose to disable it).

In terms of the data writes/reads of a SSD, one tends to see it being more of a problem in certain usages due to the Flash-based nature of the technology (for example, many engineers and some developers who work with constant compiling of code tend to steer clear of SSDs for that purpose for that reason). As igazor pointed out, however, it's really not an issue with consumer usages of SSDs these days.

Also, while most of my systems are running nVidia cards in them, I can't really comment on nVidia Experience in terms of personal use as I don't really use it nor even have it installed (as igazor pointed out, it's not a requirement and many of the features it contains that some feel make it worthwhile some might feel are not necessary or may not be worth it). As with many things in life, it has its pros and cons to it and while I'm well aware that many users have complained of issues with it (including with performance), I also know there are some who have felt it was worth using. Again, it really depends upon personal preferences and what you intend to do or even what you play.