SSD Thread (Benchmarks, Brands, News, and Advice)

the one without GC feature

 

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,10238.html

30nm, X25-V, 3-bit MLC, X25-E refresh (up to 200GB SLC, $350 for 50GB SLC, July 2010)

http://vr-zone.com/articles/g.skill...ew-indilinx-eco-controller/8033.html?doc=8033

New Indilinx ECO controller w/ 34nm memory. Saw it a few days ago on the G.Skill website, also, though not announced yet, looks like Super Talent is following up with the UltraDrive GX2:

http://www.supertalent.com/products/ssd_category_detail.php?type=UltraDrive#

 

Source

It would be good to know some actual numbers

 

Woah! that new G.Skill drive sounds like the business!!

 

I would like to see the price differential between the new SuperTalent SLC and MLC versions of a given drive. I would sure love to have a 126GB SLC!

 

nah, no need for slc for home use at all. it's nice to have, but wasted.. it's like a car that could drive hell fast, but you can't ever drive it that fast as it's forbidden. here, not about speed, but about quality. i like slc, it's more "solid". but mlc ssds of today dance around them.

i can't wait for the 3bit mlc

 

Aren't there inherently less "problems" with SLC. Like stuttering, TRIM, slowdown, etc etc etc?

 

Not from what I've read.

 

Source(s)?

 

well, in the public history, yes. but that's not because of SLC, but because someone (ocz) wanted to make cheap ssds to sell as high performing things, and never really tested it's stuff. it's an issue of the controller being able to manage the stuff, or not.

the rest is just public news chaos of how and what and bla. stuttering doesn't happen on any ssd you can get now, slc or mlc. it was an jmcicron thing mainly. slowdowns are overrated while possible, you don't normally get one (and it will still be faster than your hdd). trim is overrated, but nice.

so all in all, no, mlc of today rocks. slc was easier to write working firmware for, and build working controllers. but by now, the major vendors learned how to handle mlc very well.

 

There are a number of variables to consider when choosing between SLC and MLC. AFAIK they use the same controllers within the same gen and manufacturer, the NAND is different and more expensive for SLC. While SLC is more dense and performs better do you need it? Wanting and needing are two different things and I consider wanting as valid a justification as needing, it is still a consideration. The vast majority of users will never utilize the additional benefits of SLC over MLC because they will never work their MLC drives to the point of noticing any slowdown slack that SLC would pick up except in benchmarking. As far as lifespan, I am imagining most users will be on to the next latest and greatest before either "wear out".

Is it worth the additional cost for SLC which is considerable over MLC? I have one of the much maligned Samsung drives with the "low" 6-8 mb/s 4k random write performance and I have benchmarked it hard for the 2-3 months I have had it. Even in the most degraded state from repeated IOMeter 4k random write tests I never find myself waiting for my computer to respond while opening an application or too many at the same time.

I would like to have the best SSD available but money is an object so probably not gonna happen. Still, I can't see SLC being orders of magnitude better than MLC such is the case with SSD over mechanical hard drives. My SSD in it's most degraded state is orders of magnitude better than my 7200 rpm mechanical drive in pristine fresh install condition.

 

i state it again and again

RIGHT NOW, SLC ARE FOR SERVERS. THEY ARE FOR SERVING THOUSANDS TO MILLIONS OF USERS AT THE SAME TIME.

they are of 0 use for an individual home user.

0

 

Hmmm.... my source is the 'net in general since I've started reading about SSD's over the last few months (in great depth).

To summarize; no TRIM for any SLC drive yet, DOA failures, failures within hours to weeks in server environments (remember, this is what they're aimed at).

Also, SLC drives also offer dramatic 'slowdowns' with extended use which (because of their server use) means they perform effectively below their specs most of the time (can't shut down a server to simply 'refresh' an SSD too easily).

I can't truthfully recall any firmware being offered for an SLC drive that added new features, so can't remember any failures with that, but at the same time, not offering a firmware update simply means to me that you're not trusting your computing skills enough to be able to trust it in a server/critical work environment - either way, a fail.

Of course, not issuing a firmware update also is capitalist in nature; when the 'better' SLC drives come out you can simply charge more for them.

I agree with davepermen and Intel, that SLC drives are wasted in workstation use - there are just too many MLC drives that can consistently deliver better performance at much less cost than the relatively old SLC drives (over 1 year 'old' designs) that are currently available.

And although Intel has issued firmware for it's SLC line, I don't consider it anything other than a 'fix' of what they had promised, performance-wise - when they offer TRIM support not only of SLC and MLC drives but also SSD's that are included in RAID setups and also which use their own controller (Intel Matrix Storage Manager), without any problems or hiccups, then I'll say SLC drives are 'better' - but so far, the waiting game continues.

 

SLC drives have been used in mission critical applications for over a decade now. Maybe the more recent low end enterprise drives that consumers can see have had these issues but you can't generalize that with SLC drives in general. However, I agree that normal consumers would benefit with MLC drives much more, but that is mainly due to price.

 

Not sure if this was posted here already... The Brave New World of SSDs

 

Does anyone know anything about this drive and what its generic name is?
There is some conflicting information out there.
MMCRE28GTMXP-MVBD1
What are the speeds that you can expect with this drive?
I also like Samsung drives and own two already.
Thank you

 

The technical specs are listed below.

The SAMSUNG SSD SATA 3.0Gb/s Thin uSATA 128GB MLC MMCRE28GTMXP-MVBD1 Thin uSATA Small form factor 53.5 X 77.7 X 3.40 (mm) - Considering connector dimension : 53.5 x 78.5x4.0(mm) 3.40mm height with no case

Micro SATA connector
128GB unformatted capacity
SATA 1.0a interface
ATA Security Mode Feature Set
ATA SMART Feature Set
Native Serial ATA II (3.0Gbps)
Internal transfer read rate: 90MB/s
Internal transfer write rate: 70MB/s
Buffer: Yes
Low power consumption
Active (typical): 105mA
Idle* (typical): 31mA
Standby* (typical): 31mA
Sleep* (typical): 40mA
Highly durable
Operating shock: 1500G ( @ 0.5ms duration, Half Sine Wave )
Operating temperature: 0°C to 70°C
http://cgi.ebay.com/Fastest-128GB-S...ItemQQimsxZ20091112?IMSfp=TL091112191007r4759

 

Thanks, I've seen that on ebay but i have seen different specs listed also online. Ebay is not really official, some sellers just list stuff without being really sure of the specs.
This seller (not on ebay) is selling a very similar drive with different specs listed.

http://translate.googleusercontent....le.com&usg=ALkJrhi3NUmKuMfnzRaTQ7BA-L05NDzt9w

This seller has also got different specs listed
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260501608637&ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT

 

Thanks all for the current info/opinions. I have a better understanding of the 2 types of SSD's.

I beleive that for what i do, an SSD would be the best upgrade I could do. I tried a old G Skill micron bomb a while back, and then tried the newer version of the Samsung but MLC, and I did not see as much of a boost from that as I expected. Better than the G Skill, for sure, and no stuttering, but also not that knock me out of my chair SPEED either.

So, I am certainly looking at an Intel next. G2. Thanks, Dave

 

Are the Intel G1 160GB stable? Do they degrade much? I wonder if they're worth it at this point.

I can get two for around $400 in an Envy 15 raid0. Should I do it?

 

Yes and that is a very good price compared to what they are retailing for. You can read all about it HERE

 

yes, no, yes, yes.

 

Two for 400!? It's hard to find ONE for $400!

 

Just want to confirm:
Does intel G1 or G2 have GC feature?

 

they have their way to check that they're clean and fast, yes. not a thing called GC, as this is a marketing term mostly.

such stuff is vastly overrated anyways.. they run, they run well, what else does one really have to care about?

 

Some new info from Samsung about FW update.

 

everything is about will..

 

RAID 0? Crappy controller with no official "GC" and TRIM feature/support?

Do the manual TRIM, it works, and it may cost you $30 in the long run.

I followed this post here:

http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=64753

You'll need to download this:

http://ftp.raxco.com/pub/download/pd10/PD10_WS.exe

It's a free, fully functional trial for 30 days. After, the program will run $30 to buy.

But, to the main point, I have 2 Samsung SSDs in RAID 0 with no TRIM or even "GC", but doing this has increased performance back to NEW.

Here are my results that speak louder than words:

AFTER <-------------------------------------------> Before



AFTER <-------------------------------------------> Before



I've also attached the FreeSpaceCleaner program you have to run after using PerfectDisk10

 

To use it in a notebook you will need one with a built-in IO controller, the only product that has this are the new Samsung Mini-Pcie SSD that are supposed to be in the market relatively soon.

All other RunCore, Supertalent etc. mini-pcie SSDs will not work in a notebook (unless the notebook has the IO controller built-in).

I also believe that most notebooks do not support mini-pcie as a primary boot device, but a simple BIOS upgrade should fix that.

 

Megaman, for your CDM test, can yo run 1000MB package instead of 100MB package for the testing? then post the result?

 

I've never ran it on the 1000MB package before, so I don't have any test results to compare it to.

But here it is, after several hours of use since my last benchmark and no manual TRIM.

 

Is it possible to run intel's SSD toolbox without 02HA on w7?

 

No, I've tried.

 

the reason why I don't use 100MB package because the samsung drve have 128MB cache, so if we are using 100MB package, we are actually testing the cache. so I didnt see any improvement here, this test with 1000MB package is the same as my current samsung 256G speed. when I did a quick format the entire dirve, and did the test again with 1000MB package, my speed back to normal, 210MB/s and 180MB/s for seq read/write, 200MB/s and 160MB/s for 512k read/write.

 

This demonstrates one of the reasons why Crystal Disk Mark is useless for SSD benchmarking. I wish people would stop being so lazy and learn how to do proper benchmarks with IOMeter.

 

I would not recommend using IOMeter for the average user especially if the drive has no GC or TRIM feature. IOMeter is a hardcore benchmarking tool that will degrade your drive. I think there are sufficient low level benchmarks that can be run periodically so that users can keep an eye on performance. IOMeter is the way to go for reviewers to compare drives but not the average user to monitor performance.

 

Thread is very informative, but quite a lot to go through so I'll ask away... forgive me as I haven't finished reading the entire thread.

I'm looking at an OCZ summit 60GB, relatively cheaper nowadays, how does it stand against the newer intel ssd's and others with indilinx controllers?

 

go for Vertex or intel

 

so the ssd to get is still the G2?

 

Ran IOMeter 512k sequential read--completely filled my drive with useless data before it ran. Thats why I say it is definitely not for monitoring performance.

 

512k seq write

 

4k random write--it starts out at about 11mb/s then gradually drops through the three minutes the test runs to this. The other tests gradually increase in performance throughout the three minutes they are running.

 

4k random read--started out at 25.5 and gradually went down to a little over 25 for the three minutes the test ran.

 

So all the info I've found online about a 320GB Intel SSD seems to point to a Q4 release but the year's almost over and there's no release date still. Plus all the articles are from like January to June...any recent info on them? Release date anyone?

 

Nothing right now...

 

chrismas gift....

 

Can't remember where, but if you really hunt down info for the 320GB Intel's, I recall that 1st or 2nd quarter 2010 was the 'official' line.

 

I checked on the status of the Intel G2 Firmware upgrade and lo and behold:

Link

Update from Intel's NAND Solutions Group - Firmware issue

To 34nm (G2) Intel® X25-M Solid-State Drive consumers,

• Intel has confirmed an issue with the firmware update process for 34nm (G2) Intel® X25-M SSDs (80GB and 160GB). This predominantly affected Windows* 7 (64bit) users during or immediately after the upgrade process to 02HA firmware using the firmware update tool (version 1.3). Intel plans to release a fix for this issue by the end of November 2009.

• Please see below to decide what you should do:

• If you have not upgraded to 02HA but using 02G2 or 02G9 – then use new tool when available to upgrade to new firmware to get Trim support and better sequential write performance (160GB)

• If you have successfully upgraded to 02HA - then continue using the SSD, there are no known issues.

• If you have received a SSD with 02HA pre installed – then continue using the SSD, there are no known issues.

• If you have unsuccessfully upgraded to 02HA - then contact Intel Customer Support for instructions on how to recover the SSD via secure erase or return SSD to Intel for replacement or refund.


Alan
NAND Solutions Group
Intel Corporation

 

and i still want to see other companies as honest, serious, and clear about their problems. some are better (like microsoft) some worse (like apple ), uh, oh, but i didn't wanted to start a flamewar

but intel does exceptionally well in that area, which is why i trust them. ocz, again, i can never forget the core series and what fud they spread with it

 

Agree 100% with you on this and why I'm biding my time for an opportunity to test drive an Intel G2 in my own systems in spite of their less then stellar write speeds.

(Have had a few opportunities with the OCZ SSD's, but have turned them down - just not trustworthy enough for me).