Convince me I would benefit from an SSD

I was tempted to get an SSD, but then I thought

1. All my music and video files are/will be archived on my hdds; so I won't benefit from the SSD's (if I get one) data access speeds since all the data to access will be on hdds.

2. Great file transfer speeds achieved by SSDs are only true within the SSD itself or in SSD to SSD transfers. But since my transfer route will be SSD to HDD and vice versa, I won't benefit from that, too. So unless I could afford to get 3+ TB SSD to replace my 3+ TB HDDs, for me an SSD is not going to be very useful in transfering files.

3. I am not a heavy or multi task person; just a regular home user. The heviest task put on my notebook is somewhat regular music conversions... So I figure I won't benefit from the SSD's strengths in heavy and multitasking that people like to show off on Youtube (eg. "46 programs opened at once in 15 seconds with X brand SSD!").

4. I am not a gamer: I play games rarely. So fast game/level loading is not important for me.

5. I rarely install new programs on my pc after the initial windows and software installations, so ligthning fast install times are not really necessary for me.

6. Don't care about the weight of the drive in my notebook whether it is an HDD or SSD.

So that leaves me with

+ Fast boot up and shut down speeds
+ Cooler drive
+ Quieter drive

What else?

I guess I am not getting an SSD, as it is too expensive for the benefits I will get from it, unless you remind me of other benefits or correct my misconceivings about SSDs' benefits and convince me to get one.

In short, please share your valuable opinion.

 

1. There are many threads that discuss the SSD v. HDD topic. I suggest searching and doing some reading before opening a new thread. Repetition gets annoying.

2. Read over your post. When it comes down to it dishing out on an SSD all comes down to YOUR opinion above all else.

My $0.02

You don't need one. So don't buy one.

 

dont get one. aside from loading times its not going to benefit you

 

Click on anything and it will open up in a second. That's the deal clincher for me.

 

Increased battery life.

 

You do not sound like somebody that should get a SSD.

Dont get one, maybe get a Seagate Momentus XT.

 

Indeed, it sounds like you don't need one. I also suggest the Momentus XT.

And yes there are several threads about this subject already, it might be interesting to read them.

 

Velociraptor seems to have performed better in Anandtech's tests (though Anand strongly recommends those who cannot afford an SSD getting a Momentus XT), so why should I get a Momentus XT, instead of other HDDs such as Velociraptor?

I'm a noob, so please enlighten me... What are the benefits of the hybrid HDD?

Also, I've been considering getting a Sata III hdd to benefit from my notebook's support for Sata III and USB 3.0 plus I have an external usb 3.0 sata III hdd... This would give me better file transfer speeds between the notebook HDD and the external hdd, right?

What is the best option? A Sata III HDD, Velociraptor, or Momentus XT?

By the way I noticed there is a Sata III version of Velociraptor (10k RPM 450 GB) and it is around 230 $ on ebay...

 

HDD = Hard Disk Drive. There are no SATA III HDDs because they cannot perform at those speeds.

There are SATA III SSDs though. And out of the three choices you have given me, the majority would choose Momentus XT, as would I.

Mr. Mysterious

 

Velociraptor is a desktop hard drive only, not notebook. And where did you see velociraptor out performed and SSD? Maybe in sequential reads, but not in random large and small read/writes, and the real kicker that no hard drive could compete with is access time. Hard drives, especially mobile ones, are well over 12ms, where SSD's are nearly instantaneous.

Momentus XT hybrid drive basically has onboard 4GB NAND (SSD memory chip) that acts as a smart cache. It caches your most commonly accessed files for fastest boot times. Completely transparent to the end user. It really isn't a hybrid, just used as a large smart cache.

 

You need to convince yourself if you want one,,I got one and I'm happy with it, if your happier with hdd keep it,,it want a hybrid ssd/hdd buy it,,if you want a ssd buy it. If your looking for a recommendation on which one to buy-SSD ,Hybrid or HDD,,ask the community, you'll get many responses.

Cheers
3Fees

 

Under Velociraptor section you will see 2.5'' Velociraptors... They are laptop hdds, aren't they?

Product List

I didn't say Velociraptor outperformed SSDs; I said it outperformed Momentus XT in most cases except boot up in Anandtech's review, so my question was what is the reason people recommended Momentus XT when VR outperformed it, that was it...

Now I don't know why everyone's so aggressive towards someone asking questions, that's a bigger question for me now.

 

There have been extensive discussion about the drives in the past.

For one, they are not designed for use in a laptop. Secondly, the velociraptor is much thicker and runs hotter than a laptop hdd. A laptop cannot provide the 12V power line that the drive requires.

 

Confirmed, Velociraptor is a desktop hard drive.

If you see someone being aggressive you can use the 'report post' button (traffic sign) to report the post. The moderators will look at it and take appropriate action.

Two posts have been deleted from this thread.

 

Thanks.

So in Anandtech's review the Velociraptor - Momentus XT comparison was made to show how Momentus XT performed similarly to a desktop 10k rpm hdd, I see now.

Momentus XT seems to be the best option. Thanks for the recommendations.

 

Ok, so there are no Sata III laptop hdds.

Does that mean there won't be any file transfer speed difference between

laptop hdd (Sata II) to external HDD (Sata III) connected via USB 3.0

and

laptop hdd (Sata II) to external HDD (Sata II) connected via USB 3.0

?

I was planning to purchase a Sata III laptop hdd and a Sata III external HDD to achieve the best possible transfer speeds, but now I know there are no Sata III laptop HDDs, it might be useless to look for Sata III capability in the external HDD I will buy.

But then, do you think laptop HDDs will support Sata III in the future? If yes, then I could achieve better transfer speeds then, so I should still get a Sata III external HDD?

 

USB 3.0 and SATA II (~250MB/s) will not be a bottleneck. Spinning laptop hard drives at the moment are max ~100MB/s.

The (spinning) external hard drive will be limited by it's own write speed. Not by SATA II. Even the velociraptor is less than 150MB/s.

 

So what is the purpose of an hdd being Sata III, if it's not effective in transfer speeds?

 

There are physical limitations involved. SATA II/III is just how the hard drive connects to the rest of computer. SATA II/III have their own limitations.

 

I apologize for keeping asking stuff that maybe trivial for you... But I need t ask:

So buying a Sata III external HDD is not especially useful and an external sata II hdd would serve me the same?

 

What specific models are you looking at?

Simply all you have to do is look for the weakest (slowest) link.

Most new rotating hard drives have a max of ~100MB/s. A SATA-II link supports say 250MB/s. USB 3.0 seems to be 300-350MB/s.

 

I have Dell XPS L502X which supports Sata III and has esata and USB 3.0 ports
I will most probably get a Momentus XT which is Sata II
I've got a usb 3.0 external hard drive case that supports Sata III hdds
So I am considering this model :

Amazon.com: Hitachi Deskstar 3.5 inch 3TB 7200RPM SATA III 6Gbps 64MB Cache Internal Hard Drive 0S03086: Electronics

 

The Deskstar 7k3000 seems to have an absolute max speed of 150MB/s.
Hitachi's Deskstar 7K3000 3TB hard drive - The Tech Report - Page 3

SATA II would not slow that drive down.

 

Aside from improved load times, improved multi-tasking performance, keeping your data safe despite bumps/sudden motion of your laptop, decreased temperature, silent operation, better battery life, and protection in the event of a drop, no, there's no real reason to get an SSD.

 

If you don't know if you need one, then you don't need one. That's a good general rule when it comes to technology.

 

Generally with technology replace "need" with "want", and in either case I disagree. There's been lots of technologies that I didn't really realize what they could offer until I bought it or utilized it extensively. The original Monster 3D PC 3D graphics card comes to mind. I thought it was a gimmick until I got one, and man, I never looked back, and was the best $300 upgrade I ever spent.

 

Good one.

 

May sound like a lot of paper, but its mostly embellished like how the media makes a small story out to be a big deal.

There are certainly benefits to be had but they come at a cost and so it becomes a question of is the benefits are worth that cost.

improved load times - yep ssd is faster but honestly has not impacted my computer use. My hdd boot time was fast enough that by the time I had my mouse plugged in and was sitting down to use it, it was booted. Programs already opened basically instantly with the hdd with the exception of the massive programs like photoshop that took like 8 seconds, now it takes 4 seconds. OMG?? 4 seconds is nothing. Games and internet browser and other things feel exactly the same as before.

improved multi-tasking performance - What? Not really unless your trying to open multiple programs at the same time.

keeping your data safe despite bumps/sudden motion of your laptop - so how often do you go on safari while using your laptop again??

decreased temperature - because this matters to who, you or your laptop? it should be neither as hdds are not that hot and some ssd are just as hot as hdd's and some hdds are cooler than ssds it just depends on what model your comparing. If its 30c or 32c it runs the same, it feels the same.

silent operation - I have never heard a 2.5" hdd in my entire life. Seriously. I have even had one outside of the laptop body and using it externally to transfer data for RMA and I had to put my ear directly next to the hdd to make sure it was working. This is again something that should not matter unless your hdd was loud for some reason, and that is not a benefit of ssd that is a messed up hdd, both are virtually silent.

better battery life - This is pretty true, but by how much? Not a lot if battery life was important to you, you could get an extended battery or something for less than the SSD cost and get tons more extra battery life than the ssd would offer.

protection in the event of a drop - hdds are pretty safe on a drop too, they lock into a secure position. You would have to drop it with enough force to break the platter and on a 2.5" drive thats actually pretty darn hard to do unless you dropped the drive itself from high up onto a solid floor.

For the cost of a ssd you could afford 2 hdds and have a totally independent copy of your data for safe keeping. Drop proof or not SSD is still vulnerable to sudden death, theft, loss, fire, etc.


I own a Intel 160GB G2 and a Crucial C300

Nobody can say my opinions carry no weight because I have not used or own a SSD.

I say it is "not" worth the money if your on a budget or "thinking" about a SSD. It should be looked at as an optional performance upgrade that comes at a pretty considerable cost.

Not only is the dollar value higher but you have to mention the HDD benefits.

- Hdds have tons more storage - I dont care how much faster you can boot, or open a program. You can just wait the few extra seconds for a hdd to do the same thing. However if you need to edit a large video file, want to install multiple games, or any other reason that takes up capacity beyond what your ssd offers you simply can not do it. But a cheap 500GB hdd will easily allow you to have the space you need and not worry about having to pick and choose what you can and can not have on your computer.

I like my SSD's probably wont go back to not using one on any system that can hold 2 drives so I can keep a 2nd hdd for the storage space I need, but I do not feel they are quite ready for mainstream due to the price and few issues they suffer.

I just dont like how the majority of SSD owners tote ssd around like its the best thing since sliced bread and the holy grail of computer tech. They embellish the benefits and ignore the cons so I post this only to be the opposing force to balance out all those one sided posts that do not show both sides of the story.

 

I'm only getting my SSD because it'll become mainstream in the future, so I'm future proofing it; I like the faster load times; and because I can afford it

Don't judge me, I'm happy with it!

Mr. Mysterious

 

Some may think that what ThinkRob (lol good one) mentioned is totally worth the money. Some do not. Some have lots of cash to spew out to buy the latest of the latest technology. Some don`t have much to splash around with and settle with what is "enough" for them.

We are all different.

 

Multi tasking performance of SSDs is clearly superior to HDDs, in many more areas than just opening multiple applications. Whenever a virus scan is running or Windows is installing updates the system with SSD will stay far more responsive. For more examples see the reviews in my signature or Anandtech.





PS. People that can't hear the sound a harddrive makes probably have larger notebooks or reduced hearing capabilities or both.

Another benefit that wasn't mentioned is the absence of vibrations. Every 7200rpm drive I tried in my Acer 1830T creates vibrations in the chassis.

 

I guess newer SSDs like Vertex 3 and Crucial M4 must widen the gap between SSDs and Hdds, including Momentus XT, right?

Also, I have observed that a new HDD works quite smoothly, silently and coolly in the first few months, but then it gets increasingly slower, louder
and hotter and some time later it starts to have bad sectors etc. and finally it fails. Is it the same way with Momentus XT? I believe SSDs perform uniformly good for much longer, do they not?

 

Well the Momentus XT has a spinning platter, so there's no reason to believe that it won't.

I'm not sure how to address your second question. On paper, that seems to be the case, but there is some unpredictability with the failures, as discussed in Phil's reliability thread.

Mr. Mysterious

 

Yes.

I've had a lot of hard drives but never experienced anything like that. Hard drives do get slower because of fragmentation. If you defragment occasionally that wouldn't be a problem.

Chances of failures and bad sectors are higher with conventional hard drives.

I would actually say the opposite. Normally the XT will perform identical in 3 years while some SSDs will show some degradation.

While hard drives have a higher chance of failure, SSDs have a higher chance of performance degradation.

 

...due to what?

 

It's the way the SSDs are designed, writing and rewriting data on blocks of flash RAM each sized 4k with data in most computers usually organized at 1024kb sizes eventually results in the drive getting slower as more and more free data blocks are eaten up by old data and not recycled properly unless the SSD has the TRIM feature enabled (even then that only goes so far, SSD users here refer to the secure erase feature very often to regain performance).

 

To be straight up, if you can't easily afford one they are simply a luxury at this point and the price per GB isn't worth it. Now, if you had the extra cash to burn I'd say absolutely get one and see if you like what it gives you. Otherwise just wait for prices to come way down.

What kind of laptop do you have?

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...erformance-increase-over-hdd.html#post6810222

This link has my tests timed to show what kind of difference a SSD makes for me. When I calculate the time savings, it pays for itself over 3 times in one year. And since I do a lot of work on my laptop at home, that doesn't factor in the quality of life for me. But in a world where I figure, if it doesn't make dollars, it doesn't make sense... this works well for me. You have to figure out your usage patterns and time commitment and decide if it works for you. It doesn't for everyone, but for those of us that use ssds for work, in many instances it pays for itself in a very short time, making it not a luxury, but a well used tool. I always try to work smarter, not harder.

 

I have not had much in the way of hdds getting the issues stated above, but I make sure I keep them defragged, keep them clean, no malware, no bloat, no crap... they just have limits for what i need a drive to do, and for me ssds help. My fam all uses laptops ( as I hand mine off) and 2 have ssds, the rest have hdds. None of them know what I have in the lappys I give them, and they don't know there is a difference (except my youngest son, because I put a Sata 2 ssd in his tablet when I upgraded my lappy to a Sata 3, and he noticed a significant heat decrease in his unit).

 

No offense to anyone....but this thread has gone on for long enough.

Either you want an SSD or you don't.

It's that simple.

If you can't decide, flip a coin.

Mr. Mysterious

 

Yes, really. You may not have an I/O-bound workload, but an SSD absolutely does handle heavy concurrent I/O better than a mechanical drive.

Far less often than I use my laptop on public transport, airplane flights, and in public places where it's prone to bumps and less-than-ideal handling.

No, actually it is a benefit of an SSD. You may not have the sort of environment or hearing that allows you to appreciate it, but there is a difference. I and others do indeed notice the difference between an SSD and, say, a 7200 RPM drive.

better battery life - This is pretty true, but by how much? Not a lot if battery life was important to you, you could get an extended battery or something for less than the SSD cost and get tons more extra battery life than the ssd would offer.

A head crash isn't the only thing that could go wrong. Furthermore, HDAPS depends on the software being active and responding in time to issue the park command. I'll take physics over a software solution any day.

I don't think they're "the best thing since sliced bread and the holy grail of computer tech". I do think they're one of the more significant advances in personal computing within the last 5-10 years.

And as far as trying to "provide balance": dude, you're posting in a thread entitled "Convince me I would benefit from an SSD". Surely you realize that there might be *some* reason for the bias of most of the posts here...

 

That was a really difficult post to parse...

At any rate, the above is somewhat correct. SSDs often have a page size of 4K, true, but the figure you gave for the OS's sector size is way off.

Also, not all SSDs suffer substantial degradation without TRIM. Many, like Intel's drives, have good internal garbage collection and will continue to retain most if not all of their performance just fine.

 

Apologies for the poor punctuation and phrasing, I should have linked the nice Anandtech review of the Vertex 3 drive that gave all of the technical details and explanation in a user-friendly manner.

For reference sake, what exactly is the OS section size for data? I'm mistaken with the 1024kb assumption but isn't it the minimum value a multiple of 256kb or thereabouts?

 

lmao. it's funny how these threads turn out to wishy washy pros and cons. i recommend the OP get a transcend 32gb SDHC c6 card and use it with ready boost. things will get snappier. i am using an 8 gig micro sdhc c6 i have lying around and am using with ready boost. results weren't apparent at first but then i noticed things got better. not ssd better but overall better.

 

They are 2.5" but not laptop drives. They are 2.5" to improve access times and overall performance. They are too thick, and need the heatsink that's attached to them. Your drive would burn up inside your laptop if you could even get it to fit.

Can you show evidence / benchmarks of this improvement? You said wishy washy, this sounds wishy washy to me too.

Why spend $50-$60 on an SDHC card when you can buy a 32GB or Intel 40GB SSD for < $70, and just put a second hard drive in your optical drive tray.

 

lmao. i have nooooo evidence whatsoever. just an extra micro sdhc lying around and it added a little snap to this slow hdd i got. little snap. no bang. i was tired and being funny. dude, just sounded like he was wishing for a ssd and i was... i don't know, sounded like no way he could afford one unless he sold his liver and right eye. i don't know. it is wish washy. where are these intel 32/40 gig intel ssd drives for under $70? ebay? i've seen for around $100 and + consistently. way too small anyways, unless you got a dual storage drive setup.

 

Until prices drop, IMHO a system with an SSD should be a dual drive setup unless it's a netbook/single drive laptop or where user doesn't require much local storage. Of course right now I can get a 96GB Kingston V+ for $85 after 10% limited time coupon and $50 rebate at newegg.com. Ok, you have to hunt for a discount, but they're becoming more common these days.

I guess my experience with ready boost has been lackluster at best.

 

they do elegantly solve a lot of issues that a harddrive can never solve, but only put some lipstick on it
- physical damage easily possible. parking doesn't work always. i lost one harddrive due to parking failure. others due to powerup failure. others (3.5") to not have parking in place really at all, etc.. i can wash my ssd, it still works (like usb sticks). if you think about the harm you can do to an usb stick you realize you could never handle a hdd like this. i handle my laptop like a usb stick by now. dropping it onto table instead of doing it nicely, etc. all while up and running.

- performance. the low latency can not be reached with hdd technology. nor can the massive amount of parallel read/writes. that difference is very noticable (but some people just don't notice it, ever. there are people that don't see the difference between 1080p from a bluray, and some analogue noisy vhs tape, too).

- silence. as above. some don't notice it. but the noise of a hdd is very annoying to others. the searching and spinning all the time just helps to notice whenever the disk is bottleneck. pc slow + some annoying noise? yes, your hdd fails to serve you well.
together with fanless solutions this results in 100% silent systems, like your phone, or your ipad or what ever. once getting used to that, having devices that make noise is really annoying.

so most of all, it's a matter of actually noticing things. some people are just plain blind in the world. others experience and enjoy every detail. for those, the (huge) differences of an ssd are a godsend.

tonight, i'll install my 13th ssd. so i'm one of those who sees them as a godsend, and can never step back. you might be one of those who just doesn't care much.

btw, to the negatives:
- price. worth every bit of it. spend less on cpu and ram instead. or don't buy a new system after just a year. get an ssd instead. compared to all the money spent on computers, an ssd is a bargain for the gains it brings.

- size. again, a good thing for most. finally stop filling your drive with all the crap you can, but just have the stuff on there that is needed suddenly makes 80 - 160gb ssds big enough for most users. for the others, dual-drive setups exist. and (as should backup be), some external storage is useful anyways.

 

I've become an "SSD believer" as well. However they still are expensive for what you get and aren't the greatest thing since sliced bread. I'm impatient for computer stuff at least, that's my main reason I run with SSD's. Otherwise, a standard 7200RPM HDD is fine.

 

So, what is the greatest thing since sliced bread?