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

COOL! This is what I've been waiting for

Thanks for the link.

 

It has some strange results though. For example the Crysis Warhead benchmarks and the File Copy benchmarks of Techreport looks very different.
Crucial's RealSSD C300 solid-state drive - The Tech Report - Page 5

 

hi everybody

i was considering to buy a SSD to upgrade my laptop (Samsung Q320); bear in mind I'm a student, so I would embrace more the low-end sector of the market (that means, I would like to stay under 120 €, top 140 €, that rates almost 180 $)

64 GB would be fine for me, as I would only fill the SSD with the OS and programs (though the Intel x25-V is in the choices pool with its 40 GB)

I was wondering, do the various diagnostic programs report temperatures of the SSD? How much do you get? as one of the secondary issues for the replacement is also the temperature of the HDD, a bit too high according to my wishes.

Secondly, programs like uTorrent are to be banned (like defrag) if I want that SSD to survive, right?

The products I selected are almost as follows (with price in €, sorry!):

WD Siliconedge 64 GB €131
Intel X25-V G2 Postville 40 GB €106 (cool, but i'm afraid it might result a bit too small)
Patriot Ps-100 64 GB €127
Kingston SSDNow V 2.5 64 GB €133 (seems that there is also a sata 1.5 version for 20 € less, dunno whether is worth it though)
OCZ Vertex Series 60 GB €144 (this is going to be a little bit too expensive)

AND

the last entry, the Crucial RealSSD 64 GB, for 145 €

as far as I read, the Patriot is a real waste of money, meanwhile the top two (three) would be the Intel x-25 V, the Western Digital and the Crucial
I don't have much of a clue about the OCZ, as a lot of benchmarks are for superior models and I also read here and there than cheap OCZ are to be avoided.
Honestly, for the performance (and also reliability I guess) side, I would go for the Intel, but it is a lot (relatively) smaller than the WD.
but then the Crucial is interesting, I just found some review about the 64 GB version and it seems to outperform both the WD and the Intel; and it is as big as the WD!

Do you guys have some advices for me?
I would be eager to listen from you!

Many thanks!

 

I would stay with the Intel and Crucial.

The temp of the SSD should be significantly lower than the HDD.

Also you can wait until the G3 Intel's are released in a few months and they will have a price drop.

 

@ eYe-I-aïe... : just clean Your drives as ikjadoon said, if You have any troubles using it, just ask.
BTW: I was using GParted

 

u mean like the Intel x-25 M?
now it rates almost 200 € (250$), you think it could reach 180$ by the end of the year?
That would be quite nice, since it is a performance monster and 80 GB also!

---but don't know if i can wait that long, the upgrading-urge is so alive!

thanks for your opinion!

 

Intel G2 is overpriced at € 200 considering the Crucial C300 is only € 145 euro incl. shipping.

Easy choice, get the C300.

If you want to save more money get WD Siliconedge 64 GB. You'll loose performance too of course.

 

ben je zo zeker over het?

I mean, are u really so sure that it outperforms the Intel x-25 V? ok the intel is smaller, but it costs also 50% less!

and if jtcady is right, and the X-25M can drop almost at 150 € for the end of the year...that would be very tempting, considering the extra 14 GB compared to the Crucial!

 

The C300 64GB runs circles around the X-25V 40GB Seriously though, the X-25V is a nice drive but it's a castrated version of the X-25M.

The C300 64GB beats Intel X-25M 80GB on performance, price/performance and price per GB.

 

goed zo! I haven't had much time to accurately analyze the benchs, this is a gorgeous summary indeed! about the C300 64GB beating x-25V I was quite sure, but about the C300 beating even the x-25m....well, incredible!

chances are that my bank account will be emptied soon!

thanks!

 

On another note, I'm always skeptical of people who say they feel the difference between Vertex 2, Intel G2 or C300.

These drives are so fast that it's nearly impossible to notice the differences without benchmark software or stopwatch.

 

Unfortunately I haven't found any review that directly compares the real life performance of X-25m 80GB with Crucial C300 64GB.

But based on the reviews of the bigger brothers it seems logical that the C300 64GB will outperform the 80GB Intel. After all, read speeds aren't crippled on the 64GB.

 

160GB Intel vs. 256GB C300
Crucial's RealSSD C300 solid-state drive - The Tech Report - Page 5

Another good review (no Intel included though):
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/989/pg18/hard-drive-roundup-june-2010-load-times.html

 

I don't think my finger clicking could be fast, let alone accurate, enough to tell the differences in most cases...........

 

At what prices can you get them?

How much storage do you need?

 

I'll try it one more time

How much do they cost in your country?

How much do you need more capacity than 128GB?

 

Get the C300 if you're looking for ultimate (level loading) performance.

 

Yes loading maps, levels etc. in games. Looking at your notebook I was wildly assuming you like playing games

 

OK. In that case the conclusion stays the same, C300 if you want the extra bit of performance. Intel for capacity.

 

256GB C300 vs. G2 booting: Crucial's RealSSD C300 solid-state drive - The Tech Report - Page 5

 

they did that using a second controller which was present on the mobo of the rig used for the bench.
on ur laptop u can't do that!

but it is as fast anyway!

jsut small note; if you're gonna take the 128GB, it will be a little less faster than the 256 GB (read page 1 (i think) for explanations)

always on the same bench test, there is plenty of SSD with also the two aforementioned controller (check page 2 i believe)

 

intel x-25m and trim

Crucial C-300 and Trim

u got data, numbers, chart, look at those and draw your choice.

personally, I will go for a Crucial (64GB) in a couple of weeks, times for the price to go down a bit hopefully

 

X-25m G2 has optimizer to restore ssd to out-of-box performance, so does the c300 have somthing similiar?

 

I have the intel X-25m G2 160gb...where is this optimizer?

EDIT: Nevermind....I've got it and already run it....memory is fading....lol

 

Intel SSD toolbox Link

 

also make sure download intel toolbox guide how to use
you cant use optimizer with RAID setup an some other situations> its all in guide

 

thanks amigos....I'm new to SSD's....I've basically just made sure I didn't do anything 'wrong'....need to read up a little

 

YW

Reminder: Proper OS installation is more important than trying to optimize your system with improper OS install.

 

What`s the correct OS install ? Clean install of OS only with addition of necessary drivers ?

 

Yes.......

 

Phil you going to WC? Of course clean install with unnecessary drivers would be bad.

 

Not sure what you mean. He asked "clean install of OS only with addition of necessary drivers?" so I said yes.

 

I agreed with you 100%. Was only having fun are you Dutch? If so aren't you in the World Cup finals? Just a shout out.

 

Alright, here in Holland the letters WC usually refer to something else.

I'll watch the final here in bar like I did yesterday.

 

"Phil, you going to bathroom?"

 

Yes. Installing only the necessary drivers is one of the key points to gain good performance.

 

Hey all. I just got the Intel X 25 M 80GB. I have Windows 7 and want to cleanly install it. Just wondering if there is a fresh install guide. I am browsing this thread as well as the one previous to this one. But its a LOT of pages. Anyone have any links to share for a clean install?

I know I have to have set the BIOS to use ACHI and to do a format and then fresh install. But I was just wondering what else I can do to make it an optimal install.

If anyone has any info or links, please share! Thanks so much!

 

There are lots of Optimization Guides to be found but a clean install is probably the best you can do for your system.

 

Thanks for the reply. I was just wondering about the Intel versus Windows driver thing. I have read about the different issues between them. I am confused as to which one I should use and how to install it.

 

You are speaking of the MSAHCI driver versus the Intel which does not yield any observable performance gain for the most part.

 

Question: If there is a significant price reduction (say 30-50% off) of a used 128gb SSD on ebay, would you buy it or not? If not, why not?
Would the degradation to read/write cycle be the most important reason
for not buying the SSD? Any other reason?

 

How's the warranty? What brand is it?

For example: Some Samsungs come out of Dell laptops. They might be very cheap but may not have warranty.

But if it's a used Intel G2 80GB with more than a year warranty I wouldn't have any problem buying it at 50% discount.

 

But if it's used, I'd be a bit worry just because SSDs have a certain write cycle limit. I certainly prefer new SSD if I'm getting one. RAM, CPU, etc I've no problem getting them even if they're used. Not SSDs though.

 

If its an Intel I don't think you'd need to worry

 

Can you elaborate? Isn't it the same with Intel SSDs too?

 

It is, but their lifetime is high enough to not really matter

I'd highly doubt someone could wear down an Intel drive to a state where its functionality would be limited.
Not in the 2 years they really been out anyway.

 

By lifetime, you mean their write cycle is higher than other SSDs? Or that their algorithm is better than other SSDs? Good to know. Thanks.

 

Write cycles is what I meant.

There was a discussion here a long time ago with Dave too - write cycles on the Intel SSDs - and the conclusion is: "very high" and "can't be worn out in normal use within a few years".

Algorithms - well, there is only wear levelling in the Intel - and the trim implementation.

No strange compression or similar.

 

40gb and 80gb Intel G2 SSDs have dropped $10 in price on bestbuy.com.

 

Vertex 2 review with real world benchmarks:
OCZ Vertex 2 Review (120GB) | StorageReview.com

Quite large differences versus Intel G2.