Steam’s hidden storage trick just saved me $200 on an SSD


For the longest time, I always defaulted to storing my games on my lightning-fast SSD. Then the inevitable happened—my SSD filled up, and I found myself playing that miserable little game of “which titles do I uninstall so I can squeeze this new one in?”

Turns out I was completely wasting my time. One built-in Steam feature flipped my entire setup on its head, and now I keep my whole library parked on a cheap, slow hard drive, and I only shuttle a game over to my fast drive when I actually sit down to play it.

Steam actually lets you spread your games across as many drives as you want

Steam Library Folders are the unsung hero of a tidy PC

The Steam client itself lives in one spot, but you can create separate “library folders” on any drive you like: your fast NVMe, a SATA SSD, a giant hard drive, even an external drive. When you install a game, you just point it at whichever folder you want, and Steam keeps track of all of it for you.

Conveniently, none of the important stuff is tied to the folder. Your account, your ownership, your cloud saves—all of that lives with your account, not the drive. So you are completely free to put the game files wherever makes sense for you. Setting up a new library takes about ten seconds: pop into Settings, go to Storage Manager, click the plus, and pick a new drive.

Most folks set this up once, dump everything onto their main SSD, and never think about it again. But that’s a real mistake, and it’s the same reason your external drive is probably being wasted on backups when it could be pulling real weight.

The “Move Install Folder” button is the part that sold me

Shuffling a game to your fast drive takes minutes, not a fresh download

The Backbone Pro controller with the Steam Link page open on a mobile phone. Credit: Cianna Garrison / How-To Geek

The best part is how easy it is to move games from folder to folder. You can right-click any installed game, go to Properties, open the Files tab, and hit Move Install Folder. Steam copies the whole thing over to another library and updates itself, no re-download required.

We are talking about games that can be 100GB, 150GB, 200GB, and beyond. Redownloading something that size over a normal connection can take a seriously long time, but moving it drive-to-drive wraps up in the time it takes to go make a snack. For some connections, it will be the difference between getting to play the game today and having to wait until tomorrow. Your saves either ride along with it or sit safely in the cloud, so there is nothing to lose.

If you’re kicking yourself for not already knowing this, it’s okay! The feature didn’t always exist. But, on the other hand, it has been around since 2017, and that’s almost a decade ago now.


A straight-on shot of the Crucial T710, Samsung 9100 Pro, and Samsung 990 EVO Plus NVMe SSDs mounted to a motherboard.


Your expensive SSD is slowly cooking itself: The $5 fix you need

It’s one of the cheapest, easiest, and most important investments you can make.

Yes, the HDD is slow, but only in ways that stop mattering when you’re not playing

A game you aren’t loading doesn’t care how fast the drive is

An external hard drive enclosure. Credit: Ismar Hrnjicevic / How-To Geek

A hard drive is no place for a game you’re actually playing, because it will severely affect load times as your computer waits a million years for the data it asked for to arrive. But for a currently unused game that’s just waiting for the next time you feel like playing, it does not matter at all how fast a drive is. All it’s doing is chilling out and taking up space.

It’s also worth saying that storage speed was never handing you extra frames in the first place. A faster drive shrinks load times and smooths out texture streaming, but it does not raise your fps, so storing your backlog on a mechanical drive costs you nothing in raw performance.

The HDD is my warehouse, and the SSD is my display case. That is the same logic behind turning an old drive into a dedicated “abuse drive” for stuff that doesn’t need speed.

In 2026, this trick went from clever to borderline necessary

Every gigabyte of flash is luxury real estate right now

The Samsung 9100 PRO NVMe SSD box sitting on a desk. Credit: Patrick Campanale / How-To Geek

If you’d told me a year ago I’d be out here defending hard drives, I would have laughed. But storage pricing in 2026 is a horror show. There is a massive NAND shortage, largely because AI data centers are hoovering up supply, and consumer SSD prices have doubled or worse in a matter of months. A 2TB SSD that ran you about $150 not long ago is now $300 and climbing, while a 2TB hard drive is still sitting around $80 to $100.

Filling a drive that pricey with 200 games you’ll realistically never reinstall is just financial nonsense (just like building an all-SSD desktop in this environment). And there’s a second reason to keep that SSD lean: cramming an SSD close to 100% full makes it slower and can wear it down faster, because it needs free room to shuffle data around behind the scenes.


It’s the feature, not the hardware, that did it

To be clear, none of this works without Steam doing the heavy lifting. If moving a game meant redownloading it from scratch every single time, I would never bother, and my hard drive would stay largely unused. It’s the frictionless shuffling between drives that transforms a slow, cheap disk from a downgrade into the smartest storage in my whole PC. So, go set up that second library folder. Your wallet and your SSD will thank you.

The Samsung 9100 PRO NVMe SSD.

7/10

Storage capacity

1TB, 2TB, 4TB, 8TB

Need internal storage after all? The Samsung 9100 Pro is a fantastic pick, but it’s a lot pricier than giving your old HDD something to do.




Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


TL;DR

Meta stripped NameTag facial recognition code from its AI app one day after WIRED exposed it on 50 million phones. Meta says no decision has been made.

Meta removed nearly all traces of an unreleased facial recognition system from its smart glasses companion app on Friday, one day after WIRED reported that the software had been quietly embedded in an app installed on more than 50 million phones. The feature, which Meta internally called NameTag, was designed to convert faces captured by the company’s Ray-Ban smart glasses into unique biometric signatures and compare them against a database stored on the user’s device. WIRED also found that faces the system failed to recognise were cropped, indexed, and stored locally for future processing.

Andy Stone, Meta’s vice president of communications, told WIRED on Monday that the feature is “purely exploratory,” adding that no final decision has been made on what to do with it. That characterisation sits uneasily with the evidence WIRED documented. The version of Meta AI published the day of WIRED’s Thursday report contained several code libraries explicitly named for face recognition, a process for running the NameTag recognition pipeline, and a “Person recognised” alert the app would have shown if someone were identified.

Friday’s release stripped all of it out, along with a folder where the app would have stored the cropped images and biometric signatures of unrecognised faces. Meta did not answer WIRED’s questions about why the code was removed or whether the changes were planned before the story was published. A few fragments remain in the latest version, including an internal debug menu label and a dormant link meant to open a recognised person’s profile, pointing to parts of the system that are no longer there.

The 💜 of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

The gap between Meta’s public statements and the code WIRED found is the central tension. Before the Thursday report, Stone dismissed the findings by writing that the company could not answer questions about how the system would work because “the feature does not exist.” Andrew Bosworth, Meta’s chief technology officer, called the reporting “incredibly misleading” and “absolutely dishonest.” Yet the code was functional enough to include three AI models, one to detect faces, another to crop them, and a third to encode them as biometric data, all embedded in the companion app for a product already at the centre of a mounting privacy crisis.

Meta declined to answer ten questions WIRED posed before publishing, including whether it had already created the database of face profiles NameTag uses, how long the app retains photographs and biometric data of unrecognised people, and whether that data would ever be sent back to Meta’s servers. The company also did not respond to questions about whether it was building NameTag for blind or low-vision users, or to criticism from privacy advocates who warned the system could let stalkers and abusers identify strangers in public.

NameTag first surfaced in February, when The New York Times, citing internal Meta documents, reported that the company was developing face recognition for its smart glasses and considering a launch as early as this year. One internal memo reportedly described releasing the feature during a “dynamic political environment” when privacy and civil liberties advocates would be distracted by other concerns. WIRED subsequently found that much of NameTag’s machinery had been built into the Meta AI app as early as January, months before any public acknowledgement, adding another layer to the company’s pattern of shipping first and disclosing later when it comes to its smart glasses.

Kade Crockford, director of the technology for liberty programme at the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said the removal does not undo the original decision to ship the code and pointed to it as evidence that consumer privacy needs stronger legal protection than Congress has been willing to provide. The Massachusetts House of Representatives last week unanimously passed a consumer privacy bill that, if enacted as written, would impose strong enforcement provisions including a private right of action allowing aggrieved users to sue. “State lawmakers need to do their job and step up to protect consumer privacy,” Crockford said.

Meta’s sneaky tactics in slipping the face-recognition code into its smart glasses show exactly why data privacy bills need the teeth of strong enforcement,” Crockford added. “Companies like Meta prioritise their bottom line, so lawmakers need to speak in the only language its C-suite understands.” Whether a code removal prompted by investigative reporting constitutes a victory or merely a tactical retreat depends on what Meta does next, and on whether the regulatory pressure building on both sides of the Atlantic produces enforceable consequences before the feature quietly returns under a different name.



Source link