Plan to move to SSD. Share your experience in SSD and convince me why I should buy

Hi all,

First of all, I don't do games at all. I work in financial firm and I use my laptop mostly for word, excel, pdf, email, and browsing.

My laptop is Dell Latitude E6400 Core2 Duo (2Ghz), 2GB RAM, and the hard disk is WD 320GB 7200RPM (WD3200BJKT). I have been using it for 2-3 years. I have been pretty satisfied with my disk performance so far and I don't see (or probably don't know?) any benefit/how SSD could improve my productivity.

I love gadget and this is the only reason I look into SSD, but this reason alone is not enough considering SSD is not a cheap item where I can use and throw it away if I don't like it.

Here is my experience with hard disk drive:
Like I said I work with word, excel, pdf, email, browsing. Opening the application just matter of seconds.

So someone here with SSD, please share your experience, tell me, and convince me why I should buy SSD and why it's worth the investment.

Thanks.

 

Given what you do, I don't think it is really beneficial to get a solid state drive. Yes Windows will be snappier, programs will open up faster, but that is pretty much it. Battery life isn't guaranteed, all depends on the SSD you get. You will have to live with smaller space and mad expensive prices which can be the value of your laptop if you want 200GB+

 

The only benefits I see for your usage is booting and launching applications. You'd get nearly the same benefits from a Seagate Momentus XT, which is much cheaper per GB.

The review in my signature shows the difference between XT and SSDs.

This article highlights some of the benefits from SSDs:
http://blog.laptopmag.com/get-an-ssd-you-putz

 

OK. You don't need an SSD. Period.


--

 

I think for those who only use a handful of set programs its a pretty optimal situation to take advantage of the Momentus XT, that 4GB SSD built in will cover most of your applications and you will still have a large cheap HDD left over for anything and everything else.

 

Unless those are some really large files, I'd agree with what the others have said. Use my SSDs for large Office files (mainly Excel and PPT). Linked operations, databases and presentations - with large files the SSD does improve the operations. especially if working around several of them simultaneously. But based on what you've described I'd try the hybrid first.

 

You don`t have to put up with that annoying noise from the HDD when it is working...

 

Momentus XT user here and it does the job honestly for all those small apps..My browser opens in a snap, windows boots quicker, plus you have 500GB of storage space..If you're contented with the speed of your hard drive, I don't see any reason why you should get an SSD..

Cheers

 

Guys, thanks for your inputs. Appreciate it.

I forgot to mention that I am also looking for reliability. I cannot afford to lose these pdf, word, excel, customer data. Currently (with disk drive), I constantly do back up & back up like paranoid.

1. Is SSD guaranteed to be much more reliable than disk drive?
If so, this would probably help me a lot by doing less back up and less concern with data lost. Looking at the intel material, SSD offers much higher reliability than disk drive, but some articles say it otherwise where SSD has similar failure rate with disk drive. I appreciate your feedback on this.

2. Regarding data security.
When I delete a file in SSD, where is the file then? Is the file permanently deleted and irrecoverable? Does it need to be overwrited to be irrecoverable?

With above questions answered, I guess I should be good to go to make decision. By the way, I plan to buy Intel SSD 320 160GB.

 

a big advantage I see is the peace of mind knowing there is only a few risks you loose your data. I lost several hdds while moving my laptop around. With a ssd even throwing your laptop from the second floor won't stop you from getting your data back

here are the percentage of hdd and ssd failure per brand
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/810-6/taux-pannes-composants.html

 

The problem with SSDs is when they fail, it's usually sudden and without warning, so an SSD could work fine yesterday and not be detected by bios the next..With Intel however, the failure rate is very low although I've personally never had a hard drive fail..I mean my old 40GB drive still works and I've been using it quite a lot for word or browsing etc..So I can't really say if SSDs are more reliable than HDDs or what..Specially since there are SSD failures being reported after 6 months of use or so with other brands..

The intel 320 is a new drive so reliability cannot be measured as of yet..I'd advise to stay away from it as of now cause no one knows how reliable the drives actually are..If you want a tried and tested drive, go with the x25-m G2..These drives are known for their reliability..They are the only drives that have been proven to work for more than 2 years without losing much performance I believe..

I can't answer your second question cause I'm not 100% sure..as far as I know, the file is still there until garbage collection or "GC" starts kicking in, you can read more on this in the best SATA 2 thread or in other threads/forums..Once GC kicks in, the data gets whipped from the drive..Different drives have GC set differently too..

And for the record, I wouldn't recommend dropping your laptop from the second floor..

 

If you should buy any of the new SSDs now, i would recommend Intel 320 as the safest bet. It performance is about where C300 is, and you won`t notice much difference between C300/320 and Vertex 3 anyway. 320 have the same controller as Intel X25-M, which is reliable as hell.

 

Are we talking about SATA 3? Cause I believe the 320 is SATA 2, which is the G3 or 3rd generation x25-m..you might be talking about the intel 510 which is the SATA 3 Intel?

 

Doesnt matter. Anandtech tested C300 with SATA 3 and 320 with SATA 2. They both scored just about the same

 

SSD's are generally robust since there's no mechanical moving parts. Should your notebook be subjected to extreme shocks (i.e. dropping on the floor) it should fare better than a conventional rotating disk drive. However which SSD is the main question and I think you made a good choice on choosing Intel as very little has gone wrong them when comparing to the competition.

I have an Intel X25-M SSD in my system and I don't do any gaming personally. I mainly just use it for office work, graphic design and casual web browsing but compared to a conventional drive it's almost night and day in terms of performance. I don't think I can get go back to a 7200RPM drive once you get used to an SSD. Given your usage I think the X25-M G2 would be good enough, plus with the newer Intel SSD's coming in you can expect discounts with the previous models from retailers who want to clear their inventory.

 

The thing you will notice with SSDs no mather what you do with it, is the snappyness. It boots up very fast, it shuts down very fast, it starts programs very fast etc. I will never ever ever go back to crackling slow HDDS

 

Why SSD?

First of all, your work pattern fits. By not stressing the storage subsystem in high write scenarios, by not stressing it with copying huge files back and forth and by not demanding too much (more) from it (coming from a 5400 RPM HDD).

Second, assuming you have a regular and consistent backup strategy in place - the durability of an SSD is unsurpassed by spinning platters. Reliability? Well, that is why you stick with Intel (and possibly Samsung - as a distant (real world performance) second choice).

Third, your boot up, shut down and general responsiveness ('snap') of the system will be greatly improved. While this won't make you any more productive with your tasks (you are the limiting factor; not the storage subsystem, I'm assuming), it will allow you to fully concentrate more on your tasks and less on the tools you're using to do them. Yes, the 'tools' will become 'transparent' - they'll just be an extension of your mind.

Fourth, your battery run times should improve - maybe not a lot (or even significantly to you), but it should increase non-the-less.

Fifth, this will actually be an investment: if your current system offers all the horsepower you need, then adding a ~$300 SSD will greatly increase the lifespan of that system - as long as your computing needs don't change - there will be no real reason to yearn for the latest offerings.

Sixth, if you are comfortable with the screen, the keyboard, the input devices and can generally just depend on this system, adding an SSD makes the positives of this machine go on indefinitely for relatively little cost (when calculated over the next few years).

Seventh, with a new drive (HDD and/or SSD...) you have the chance to really become up-to-date in the most important regards: O/S.

Download (search for legal links on this site) the Windows 7x64 SP1 iso (of the flavour you would be willing to buy - Ultimate, Professional or Home Premium - I favour Ultimate myself) and take a modern O/S for a test drive for a few months. Assuming the initial week or so is enough to overcome any obstacles you may encounter, of course. If there are no show stoppers, upgrade your RAM to 4GB too and then we can really welcome you to 2011 (technologically speaking... ).

If the Win7x64 'test drive' doesn't work out for whatever reason, you can always simply put XP/Vista instead - but you owe it to yourself and your new SSD to try first (XP/Vista is very SSD 'unfriendly' and will require more maintenance than Win7 ever will).

Also, keep in mind that you don't have to figure out Win7x64 in a single sitting (you may also discover that Win7x86 is better for you; if you have certain hardware devices with no 64bit drivers available, for example). With two physical drives available, you can simply switch to your current 'working' HDD and get your work done as needed. Then, when you do have some more time to explore - switch the HDD for the new SSD and continue exploring, setting up and optimizing/perfecting your new O/S and SSD workflow.

Eighth, you will be able to safely ignore sleep and hibernation modes (assuming Win7 x64 or x86 versions) and 4GB RAM). Startup/shutdown will be safer (for your data) and almost as fast - if not faster (especially hibernation, of course).

Ninth, with your contribution to the SSD gods, we will get to better, bigger, faster, cheaper SSD's even sooner than without you.

Tenth, well, what else can I say? Enjoy! :yes:

 

I thought you were disappointed on the 320s, I am, but not enough not to buy them. The thing for me, is that i expected more, i have waited almost 2 years to upgrade my destkop, in my eyes now a mistake, i should just bought another x25m a year ago if i new how this new gen was coming. Still even today im thinking on just getting a X25m 120gb and wait for intel 700 series (lyndoville), suppose to come Q1 2011, but with the delay of 320s by 4 months, im guessing that one will move around that, so maybe late Q3 or early Q4. Very little info is out, mostly rumors and speculations, but there are some that say its going to be a Sanforce based ssd, but im planning to upgrade with Sandy Bridge X68 or Ivy Bridge which will have sata III, so im just toying with just buying a x25m 120gb for this year until new intels come out.

 

SSD's are more durable, but no real conclusive evidence that they are more reliable. I had two SSD's just stop working, primarily due to the controller. Other than quick boot and app load up time, there are other factors to consider as well.

Quick rundown:

Pros:
+ Fast boot, improved system responsiveness, and fast app and data loading
+ Improved battery life for low power laptop (i.e consumes <10W idle already) in most cases (depends on SSD and HDD you're currently using)
+ No noise
+ No vibration (7200RPM hdd's can cause my hand to go numb when used in a small notebook or netbook)
+ Improved durability due to no moving parts

Cons:
- Cost
- Reliability unknown. I had two SSD's just die on me without any warning. Replaced under warranty but still quite an annoyance.
- Some require a little user intervention to maintain system performance like secure erase, run system logged out of Windows to ensure proper internal drive maintenance (garbage collection, wear leveling, etc)

So the choice is yours...

 

Security in SSDs is... tricky. Regular deletes and overwrites don't necessarily "work" due to the way that SSDs have to move data from page to page to manage wear leveling.

In theory, what you need to do to make SSD data irrecoverable is a secure erase. This is "supposed" to be overwrite all the NAND cells and zero everything out. The problem is, secure erase functionality is not universally implemented (or perhaps not implemented correctly), and there have been reported test instances of still being able to pull data out of the NAND after the SSD has been disassembled.

In this respect, Sandforce may have a slight edge; since all Sandforce data written to the NAND is compressed hash anyway, if you don't get the right data associations when pulling data off the NAND (as well as the decompression algorithm), you're not going to get usable information. This is speculation, though. In the current end effect, data security on consumer SSDs is a big unknown.

 

secure erase is a standard ATA command that almost all HDD/SSD supports. They are designed for that purpose, securely erase data on the device. Not sure how HDD does it but for SSD, it would just apply a high voltage to the NAND and reset all the gates. They are supposed to be very reliable.

 

No, they weren't 'designed' for that purpose. Just what they were 'supposed' to do in HDD land.

See:
https://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/12153-Data-Remains-on-USB-and-SSDs-After-Secure-Erase.html

 

That article is not talking about secure erase, the ATA command. But more the 'secure erase'(i.e. multiple pass write over), the program. It is a bit misleading to use this term, IMO.

They are very different thing. Multiple pass write works very well for HDD but may not have the same effect on SSD due to OP etc. This is in particularly not effective on SF drive(if you just write 0s).

 

Oops!

Sorry, wrong article:

See:
SSDs prove difficult to securely erase | Computer Security Articles

 

Same thing. They are testing different over written pattern on SSD and overwritten on SSD is not effective. The only sure way is via ATA secure erase(which is what I mean designed for that purpose) but the article said only 8 out of 12 has it and only 4 worked. All the popular models I see now support SE though doing it is a pain in the A. As most need to go through the hot plug process to first unlock it and must be done via linux.

 

Lol... okay, you're contradicting yourself in one sentence, but this does show that SE is not the 'secure' erase that it might have once been (with HDD's).

 

I have said that they have used the term 'SE' too loosely. When I said SE, I implicitly mean the ATA SE, not the overwritten program.

Which is why I said the ATA SE is the CORRECT WAY to securely erase the content on the device(in particular SSD). It is designed for this particular purpose.

So what contradiction was there ?

Edit:
This is the result of the test(of ATA SE) which you can get the detail via the link to the paper.

 

Well i am a bit disappointed in a way that i actually had pretty big hopes for these drives. I was like "Man the X25 was fast, imagine how fast the next generation is ZOMG". But then early reviews came and i was like, ok faster in Write, but that is just about it. Then came Anandtech and tomshardware reviews out and they actually dig a bit deeper than the first reviews and showed that a SATA 2 drive can compete with a SATA 3 drive. That is an amazing feat. Just shows how good the Intel controller and firmware is to actually push out the speeds it is specced out to be.

I do agree with you that if you that this new SSDs are a bit disappointing. We were probably all just totally hyped up about them and was thinking 2x the speed etc. Wild thinking. But real life tests showed that the actually speed gain between earlier drives and the new generation is a few seconds here and there. I guess the people who actually gain anything with SSDs are people coming from HDDs and trying out SSDs for the first time. Or people who do large file transfers 24/7, although i imagine that there are very few of them who will have the use for the extra Write/Read speeds the Vertex 3 gives...

I have never heard about Intel 700 series before. Thanks for the tip. I will look in to them
But with the harsh reality that the new SSDs gave us, i wonder if we can expect any huge improvement in SSD area at all in the next few years? I mean, this is hardware we are talking about. New better faster technology come out every half year or something. If you always are thinking "but what about the next generation CPUs etc. Maybe i should wait" then you`d be stuck forever because when those CPUs come out, 6 months from there another improved CPUs will follow. It is very impressive to think about how computer have evolved during the last 10 years. Impressive, but darn frustrating and expensive for us who try to keep up and buy the latest...

Anyhow this is just me chatting directly without editing too much. Just my thoughts

 

SSDs still perform similarly to each other even after the many generations that have passed..(more than 1 is many lol) So the only plus is that hopefully prices will go down a bit for the "older" drives like the G2 and the C300 to name a few..Well I'm still saving up some cash for 1 of these babies which means I'm still making a choice on which SSD to get.. And intel always seems to come up above the rest..So I'd say if I were to get a new generation SSD, I'd grab an intel..Although yeah, I am a bit disappointed with the 320..

 

Yeah, for the most part unless you have a specific and frequent need for very fast sequential or 4k read/writes, most of the current gen SSD's are more than adequate for your average user.

 

IMO, SSD is already an yawn item. I am not expecting any future 'wow' improvement, just some incremental ones.

 

Same here. I was going to get a new "SATA III" SSD, well because I have a SATA III controller but decided that was added cost for nothing really, and went with the tried and true Intel X25-M.

In a year or so if prices drop significantly on larger size SSD's I may end up getting a 256GB but otherwise am happy with what I've got.

 

Plan to grab an X25-M G2 120GB as well..Just saving up..Plus I have to sell my XT and add my cash to that in order to get the SSD.. Not to mention probably have to sell some extra RAM and casing a have lying around..Trying to squeeze as much cash I can get LOL..Maybe even sell some PS3 games I've finished..Hope I don't get lazy though..Sometimes I'm just to lazy to sell my stuff..(Which is why I have them lying around in the first place)