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

C300 is truly better on SATA III sure.

Corsair Force is a good Sandforce drive. How much cheaper can you get the C300?

 

much cheaper i think.. should be a $100... but i've got a question...

how much space will a 128GB C300 have in windows? Using someone's calculation that 128000MB/1024MB= 125GB.. do you really get that much space?

 

I'd say a lot less than that... a 40GB is 37.3GB.

37.3/40*128=119.36GB
probably around that

 

anyone with a more certain answer? Although ur answer looks most likely..

 

Phil, I would like to clear 2 things :
1st : In the StorageReview bench they used a VERY good Sata3 (6Gbps) controller and not a "crapy" one like the cheap Marvels that you get on the motherboards (or you might get on future laptops). In other reviews (controller reviews, not ssd reviews) we have seen the ICH10R to beat the hell out of these cheapo on-board Sata3 controlers especially in 4K random r/w. These kind of good Sata3 controllers will not be available to notebooks in the near future.

A system with a good Sata2 controler (like ICH9/ICH10) is a better overall option for a C300 drive at this time.

2nd: StorageReview bench did not say anything about the IOMeter test so I assume this IOMeter that they used is the "default" and just read/writes a bunch of zeros or aces, and these are highly compressable data for the Sandforce controler. See the C300 review in Anandtech. With data that are random 0 & 1 (not so compressable - closer to real data) you see that the Vertex2 (Sandforce) is way behind the C300 256GB. And when you want to install a 256GB SSD in a laptop you want to have OS/programs/data/movies/music/images on it and all these files are compressed already so in real-life sandforce is way behind the C300 256 GB.

By the way, I purchased my C300 256GB SSD from Germany, it was an offer, 470Euros plus 20Euros shipping and handling to Greece.

If the question was "Sandforce 60GB or Crucial C300 64GB" probably I would recomended the Sandforce.

 

Here's what I'm looking at with newegg prices:

OCZ Agility 2 256GB - $585
Corsair Force 240GB - $600
Mushkin Enhanced Callisto Deluxe (whew) 240GB - $600
Crucial C300 256GB - $550

My Sager has an ICH9M.

So C300 makes sense then? I'm willing to spend the $600 if its a better performer, but also am looking forward 6-9 months when I get a new laptop and transfer it over, most likely to have SATA III?

I'm just looking it to perform well for general OS use and gaming. I'm very disappointed with the overall performance of the Samsung SSD in my Envy 14. My 7200RPM Seagate Momentus performs similarly.

I'd prefer to spend this kind of money at a reputable dealer, but if I can get it cheaper at another reputable dealer I'm game. Thanks.

 

^ do you mind me asking which Samsung SSD do you have ? ... like the number for it ?

thanks

 

damn thats a lot of money. Why not just use a smaller size ssd and keep the 500gb hdd for storage also? You would save like $200 or $300 and would have somewhere to back everything up also.

 

Check the thread I started here:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/hp-envy-hdx/505396-all-samsung-256gb-ssd-owners-firmware-trim.html

It's: MMDOE56G5MXP-0VBH1

with firmware: VBM1AH1Q

firmware VBM1CH1Q supports TRIM but HP hasn't offered a tool to flash it yet. And 4k writes are still pretty dismal.

Because I only have room for one drive, have a Windows Home Server for backups, and the vibration of a hard drive puts my hand to sleep. Not to mention an Intel 160GB already costs ~$400, and it wouldn't suffice for my needs. I could probably make due, but I'd rather go for capacity that I need than worry about it later.

 

sean473,

what you basically want to do is multiply what the nominal GB capacity is with 0.9313225746154785

so 128 x 0.9313225746154785 = 119.2092895507813 GB (less formatting overhead).

This is calculated as 1000x1000x1000 / 1024x1024x1024 = 0.9313225746154785

HTH...

 

@ htwingnut, for the fastest performance on SATA II the Corsair Force, for the fastest performance on SATA III the Crucial C300.

The less heavy your multi tasking the better the C300 does on SATA II.

The C300 on ICH10 performs quite bad in the Storagereview in 3 of the 3 real world benchmarks.

My own review on ICH9 confirms this. In the multi task test that didn't include any writing the Sandforce clearly beats the C300.

PS. I own a C300. I'm happy with it, but for multi tasking the Sandforce beats it on a SATA II controller.

I'm only interested in real world benchmarks, not synthetics.

 

Thank you! So is it reasonable to assume that decent SATA III controllers will be included in laptops in say 6-9 months?

I will look more into the Corsair Force then. It's $50 more but probably well worth it. Heck either will probably be ten times better than the piece of crap Samsung in my Envy 14 now.

 

u do have to understand that the 64GB drive is way crappier than the actual 256GB drive?

Like i said , the 256GB drive is really a much better deal and comparison to the 64GB drive will not be accurate.

thanks tiller.. 119GB is more than enough for me.

 

The drive reviewed by Storagereview is a 256GB.

"The P67 and H67 chipsets will both feature SATA 6Gbps ports"

Source: Intel Sandy Bridge: Details of the next gen | bit-tech.net

 

I took a look at your post there, and .. dang, I though the drive will not drop that much when full.

isn't this the same thing that it used by Corsair P256 though ? I remember I had very good expectations for that particular drive. Or maybe they have different firmware loaded into their units.

either way, I'm interested to see how the new Samsung SSDs perform, being said that those have higher IOPs over 4k read/writes, and TRIM standard

 

Right, either way, 4K writes are no better than 6 MB/s, compared with 50+ with most other drives like an Intel. I wouldn't expect same as Intel with the Samsung, but 6MB/s, but periodically that will be less than 4MB/s when testing.

 

There is only 1 difference in the Crucial 64Gb as compared to the 256Gb drive and that is the fact that each NAND chip contains only 1 NAND die in the 64Gb drive vice 4NAND die in the 256Gb drive, thus giving the faster write speeds.

 

Where are you seeing the Vertex 2 EX for only $169?

It normally goes for about $725

 

He said 60GB, not 256GB.

 

60GB B&H

60GB Froogle Search

I repeat, "Where is he seeing Vertex 2 EX (60GB) for $169?"

I can only assume he is talking about some MLC variant and not the SLC Vertex 2 EX.

 

Ah, sorry, didn't realize it was an SLC drive, that definitely makes it an expensive one. Probably just meant MLC OCZ Vertex 2

 

119GB on my Win 7 Premium X64

 

ty.. i'm using same version.. now if the asus sends B1 to gentech.. this wait is killing me..

 

Alright guys, looking for advice: I'm looking for a 32 or 40GB SSD with excellent read speeds and good write speeds for my OS. Any suggestions?

 

@ Gator, Corsair Force 40. Or any Sandforce drive.

Corsair Force F40 Review (40GB) | StorageReview.com

 

Thanks Phil, been looking at those. How do they stack up against Intel's X-25E's? Also, is TRIM enabled on both at this point in time?

 

Well going by the SR real world benchmarks the Force is faster than X-25M 160GB. As far as I know the X-25E is only slightly faster than the X-25M.

TRIM works on both.

 

I'de be looking at the OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 40Gb with the SandForce controller with 'Special August' opening price of $99 (40 bucks off limited time)...

I dont think anything even comes close with respect to performance and price....

 

Good tip. Performance differences with Force 40GB are small, but at that price it's a no brainer.

 

Thanks. I might pick one up for my Shuttle desktop.

I'm assuming that price is only good through today since it's called "Special August Pricing?"

 

As my sis is currently in Tokyo, I am getting her to source for an Indilinx Barefoot drive ... likely to be using 40nm NAND. Pricing is pretty good. I want a higher capacity drive than my C300 128GB .. I believe speed difference should be negligible as I am using it in my laptop (HM55 chipset + i7). Should I or should I not?

 

Yeah with PM55 chipset there's a pretty big chance you won't notice any difference.

 

X25-E doesn't support trim, but it doesn't need it. It is STILL the fastest 2.5'' SSD. Its is SLC and its performance isn't affected even if is not aligned. But it is still very expensive. Its IOPs are awesome !!!

Sandforce 40GB is the best low-cost choice and has decent performance

 

Where did You hear that?

As I know, every drive is performing better when aligned.

 

Yes, in general this is true, but in good SLC SSDs (due to 1 cell= 1 byte, while in MLC 1 cell is 2 bytes) the profit of proper 4k aligment is not so big. See Google Translate

I am also searching for a post in a greek forum where the user of the X25-E had two benches from CDM, aligned and not, and only the 4K write was ~5% less in the misaligned partition, and all other numbers was the almost the same.

 

1st: on SLC 1 cell = 1 bit (not byte), while on MLC 1 cell = 2 bits (not bytes)

2nd: any SSD WILL BE FASTER when aligned because of erase block size

 

Sorry about the bit/byte confusion, of course 1cell is 1bit and not byte as I wrote earlier.

You might convince me or other people here about that, but can you convince the MTron Pro 7000 (SLC) in the link above ? It is a "bad a$$" and quite stuburn !!!

 

Can't say why there isn't bigger difference, but when I tested it on my SSD and two HDDs the difference was approximately 5%.

 

5% percent performance drop on todays MLC is very good !!!! My C300 is more than 20% slower unaligned

 

Hmm, that deal is still good even though it's "special august pricing". I may have to pick up two and RAID them.

 

Where is that deal from?

 

@ spurs99, there is a link in the text: Search Results for 40GB ssd extreme at MacSales.com

 

It's $117.99 now. Glad I ordered @ $99.99. Should have bought two. I'm sure I would have made my money back if I didn't use it.

 

really looking forward to the RealSSD P300 from Micron

Micron Innovations Blog Setting A New Benchmark for Enterprise SSDs

 

ive had my intel x-25m for about a month. so far ive simply used windows disk check for checking the fs @ startup. have not done any defraging ... also havent visited the ssd software i installed since i got it. any maintenance in particular that i should look to doing to keep the drive running right ?

 

Anybody got any comments on the performance, ect of the 60gb ssd, £109.98 is not a bad price for the UK.

Corsair 60GB Force SSD 2.5" SATA-II Read 285MB/s Write 275MB/s - Inc 2.5 To 3.5 Bracket

Corsair 60GB Force SSD 2.5" SATA-II Read 285MB/s.. | Ebuyer.com

 

It's a good drive. Basically the fastest performance you can get on a SATA II controller.

Well a 120GB would be faster especially with writing.

 

All i need now is money

 

If you are planning on upgrading to a SATA III notebook Crucial C300 is interesting too. It's around the same price.

Here's a benchmarks with my C300 after applying some tweaks.



(only kidding, got the result from here).

 

I don't know if this is the new Samsung but newegg is selling a 256 GB version: Newegg.com - SAMSUNG MZ-5PA256/US 2.5" 256GB SATA II Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)