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

It could be true but it could also be that you are under the influence of placebo effects. We could take your word for it but placebo effects tend to be quite strong. People that are under the influence of them are usually unaware of it.

I'll try to measure some application launching too, to see if I can quantify any snap.

 

Thank you for your information. Yes I bought the OZC Vertex 2 120gb, I get it today. I will set it up AHCI, and I will just use the MS standard driver since I will have a non-raid setup. I am going to use a Seagate Moumentus XT as a data/game drive, I will see how this combo works.

 

Out of curiousity... was the Momentus XT really designed to be a 2ndary drive? I've read a lot of people lately wanting to use it for that. It seems that the logic of the drive in moving important things to the 4GB SSD portion would be lost on a data/game drive.

Any thoughts?

 

Right, you need to be able to quantify what makes it more "snappy". There has to be some measurable item that results in that perceived "snappiness". It could be a combination of features or lack of that result in it. Again, it's too bad the consumer is left to wonder what all this means for a high priced item.

 

I agree with you, the effects will be less strong if you use it as a secondary drive.

But the effects will sometimes still be there, for example when you are often playing the same game.

 

I would like to know too, I have looked everywhere on the web for answeres on if the Seagate Momentus XT has any benefits being a secoundry drive, and came up with nothing.

 

We have some people here on the forum that use it as a secondary drive. They said they are liking the effects.

You can probably find it here:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...e-momentus-xt-hybrid-hdd-w-built-4gb-ssd.html

 

Ok some more real world measurements. Launching these applications including a reboot:


MS AHCI 1.0 driver: 86.3 seconds
Intel RST 9.6.5.1001: 84.9 seconds
Intel RST 10.0.0.1043: 85.4 seconds

(averages of 5 runs)

 

I'm using it, haven't had a lot of time with it yet, but overall it's a noticeable improvement from the regular Seagate 500GB it replaced. Games load a lot more quickly in Starcraft 2 now too.

 

I'm getting a Kingston V+ in a couple of days. I managed to get a cheap deal.

Going by the Techreport review it will beat the C300 in power consumption and maybe even in application loading. Looking forward to get my hands on it.

 

done that tweak.. speeds went up almost by 100% in 4K read and write... trying this beta driver now..

 

Were you able to compare boot times using Windows Boot Timer?

 

I'm using this Firefox tweak now. What is a good size to set it to? I've got 4GB memory and all I do is surf basically.

 

this new driver reduced writes a little but 4k read went up.. maybe its also due to me using smaller size files but let me see how boot up goes..

boot time is similar... anyways , i think newer intel drivers are really needed..

 

There is hardly any difference between old MS drivers, Intel 9 drivers or Intel 10 drivers.

I think the newer drivers aren't meant for performance improvements but they fix other issues. Would be nice to know what issues.

 

I have 8gb of ram and set mine to 524288. So with 4gb of ram, maybe try 262144 (524288 divided by 2).

 

Thanks, I'll try that. 256MB doesn't sound like a lot to me though. Maybe I'll make it a bit more, if there are no objections against it.

 

I found this 128GB SSD (Corsair Nova V128) for $175 CAD, no rebates.

Should I jump on it?

I'm just a mainstream user, in reality.

 

Trade ya my Kingston V for your V+...

 

Oh what the heck. already pulled the trigger on it:

Corsair 128 GB Nova Series TRIM Supported 2.5 Inch Solid State Drive CSSD-V128GB2-BRKT: Amazon.ca: Electronics

Seems very reasonable. The drive's still for sale elsewhere for sometimes even double that price.

AND no pesky rebates.

 

In case this hasn't been mentioned before... there's a DOS command to see if TRIM is enabled.
0=enabled
1=disabled

Must be run from an administrative (elevated) command prompt.

 

No. I didn't compare boot times back then. Not really willing to go to all that effort anymore. I finally got my setup exactly how I like it, after many fits and starts. Need a little "me" time with it before I fudge with it again.

 

@raydabruce,

just a note: it still doesn't mean your TRIM is doings its job even if it shows 0

 

Can you elaborate? Is there a way to check if it's working?
I thought I'd try NOT running the Intel Optimizer for a couple of weeks and see if it still only takes a second or two to run. If it still runs quickly, that would be a clue that Windows 7 is "TRIMing" the drive.

 

Very true. It only means that Win7 is capable of sending the TRIM command. The SSD still needs to be TRIM enabled as well. In the Intel SSD ToolBox > View Drive Information > Line 169 Data Set Management Support > Bit 0 - Data Set Management Supported

=1 shows that your SSD has TRIM enabled and will then perform the function when the command is sent from Windows.

 

I just realized that you've got the X25-M G2. TRIM is enabled on the drive. So, if DisableDeleteNotify=0, then you're good to go. From what I've read, there really is no definitive way to know that it's actually happening, since it's so fast. We have to rely on the settings being correct.

 

@anseio:
Thanks. I'll not run the optimizer for a couple weeks and then see how fast it runs and report back. If it still finishes in a couple seconds then I can assume Windows 7 is using TRIM correctly.

(Posting from Belltown, at the moment).

 

Agreed.

This was the reason why I suggested flynnaz to use Intel RST driver Ver:9.6.0.1014 or later to make sure you have the right driver to let TRIM work

 

Currently using the 10.0.0.1043. So, guess I'm good for TRIM.

 

This could lead to wrong impression weather TRIM is working or not. ie, without much install/uninstall of apps wont affect the performance even without TRIM so will the toolbox, imo.

The best way is to set your system correctly (OS optimization/tweak and drivers) and forget the fsutil behavior query disabledeletenotify.

You can use the CDI to verify if your SSD is TRIM supported.

EDIT:
Can't comment on the 10.0.0.1043 (beta) because I only use official drivers

 

CDI INFO:

 

Posting from Madison Park here.

It's a safe idea. Still, the MD driver should fully support TRIM on AHCI. The later Intel drivers brought about TRIM support for RAID setups where there was none before.

 

Intel RST 9.6 and later do indeed support TRIM on RAID setup, but ONLY for SSDs that are NOT part of the RAID array...


As soon as SSDs ATA/ATAPI- 8 compliants hit the market, those will be TRIM enabled in RAID, and IRST will be able to "TRIM them", even if they're part of the RAID array.

 

On OCZ's Doc's it shows to use the MS drivers if you are using a single driver AHCI? Has this changed with the new Intel Chipset Drivers?

 

Hard time reading through almost 700 pages of posts. I usually read a thread all the way through to see if my question is answered. In this case I'll just ask. I was looking for opinion on the best 120-160gb ssd to upgrade my M15x to. I plan on putting only games, os and applications on it. I was also wondering if there is a best drive for rewriting on that keeps it's speed over time as opposed to losing speed as it gets written over more than a few times. If that makes any sense. If there's a drive that can sustain multiple writes I might go higher than 160GB. I was looking at C300, Vertex 2 or X25. Open to anything, though. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

Any Sandforce drive will basically do. Force 160GB, Agility 2 240GB and Vertex 2 240GB are all good choices. Last I checked Newegg had a good deal on the 240GB Agility 2.

There's a good deal for the Crucial M225 256GB at the moment. $399 including shipping.
CT256M225 - 256GB, 2.5-inch Solid State Drive , from Crucial.comUS

The M225 is good perfomer too, not exactly as fast as Sandforce but I doubt anyone would notice the differences in real life.

 

If one is a bit of a gambler, you could get a refurb 256gb or 128gb ssd directly from Crucial, only $256 for the 256 or $128 for the 128. The downside is that it's a refurb and there is only a 30 day warranty. Still, dollar for dollar it's quite the deal for a SSD.

Memory upgrades from Crucial.com - Refurbished parts

 

I was looking at that but was wondering if the C300 worth the extra cash. Or, is the M225 still a good performer.

 

C300 needs SATA III to really shine. On SATA II a Sandforce drive will beat it in performance and power consumption.

If you want to spend the extra cash, get the Agility 2 240GB. Or Force 160GB or.. etc.

 

I'm leaning towards the M225 256gb. How much of a difference over a 500Gb 7200 rpm drive would I actually see? thanks for the help. What I was thinking is getting the 256GB M225 refurb to tide me over til the release of the new drives next year.

 

The M225 will blow away any 7200rpm drive.

Look at the HDD vs. SSD review in my signature for an idea. The M225 will perform similar to the C300 in my review.

 

It will blow the 7200rpm away.. trust me.. i have a C300 and even if its the 128GB version which will not perform as well as the 256GB one, it still is awesome.. and really 256B C300 goes for $550-600 so this is a rip off.. i would have got it if i had known...

 

@T120ted:
The Intel drives have good endurance which is configurable by the user. Depending on how much space you're willing to give up for wear-leveling usage, they can last a very long time.

There are 4 videos at the bottom of This Page.

The third one talks about how Intel drives are engineered for endurance.

EDIT: They've added several more presentation videos. The one I was referring to is one of the 2009 presentations (2nd from the bottom, I think). They all have good info about SSDs.... Intel SSDs anyway: the info doesn't necessarily apply to those made by other manufacturers.

 

Good info. Thanks.

 

He was trying to say is that there is a benefit of having extra, un-allocated/partitioned space (e.g. 70gb partition on 80gb drive) because it means that extra space wont be written to by OS, and therefore can be used by wear-levelling without having to move its contents elsewhere first as is required when wear-levelling cells which contain data.

Free space within a partition will eventually be written to at some point, and once it has been written to (on a non-TRIM drive) its 'used' and then the wear-levelling must write its data to another cell before it can be erased.

The intention of what he was trying to say was correct, just the actual words he used made it wrong

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Thank You!

 

As You can see here, all I was trying to say is that wear-leveling will benefit from any extra space (no mater if it's unpartitioned or unused, just because wear-leveling will take care to wear all cells equally) and it doesn't need cells that were never written too, it'll do just fine with "used" ones.

 

It is a stated fact (by the manufacturer) for Intel SSDs that the more unallocated (unpartitioned and never used) space you leave, the longer the lifespan of the drive. I'll let your logic figure out the rest.

I suggest you learn how SSDs erase files. That will explain everything. All the cells in a partition are initially filled up sequentially. For deletions, files are not just overwritten like on a regular hard drive. It's a "read-move-erase-write" operation that needs the spare area (unallocated space) to accomplish the wear-leveling. SSDs only do erase operations in 512k blocks (at least, Intels do it that way, I don't know about other controllers).

Your partition probably has hundreds of files marked for deletion but they are still sitting there and the 512k blocks they are in will not be re-used until the drive must find space for new files. So it will do the erase operation and move the UNdeleted files in the block to the least-used cells. It needs the unallocated space as a workspace to store those files in the block that are NOT being erased so it can then gather them together to re-write them back into the partition.

So, you see, there is NO SPACE in your partition to do wear-leveling. It could be done there but that would wear out those cells much faster. The Intel drives come with a hidden area that is about 7% of the stated drive capacity and this is used for wear-leveling. Any additional, unallocated space will also be used for that. I cannot prove this, but from what I've read, I believe it (that partitioned space will not be used for wear-leveling). The whole idea is to maximize endurance. If you need proof of this, I suppose you'll have to consult an Intel SSD engineer. I would bet money that he would agree with me.

Unlike a hard drive, every cell in your partition has probably already been written and contains data. It will stay there until space for new writes is needed. The Intel Toolbox tells me I've already written 122GB to my 80GB drive (70GB partition). I show about 52GB free on my partition.... but the drive is slightly slower now that all cells have been written to and new writes require a read-move-erase-write operation. I'm glad I left a few extra GB free for that.

 

raydabruce,

I've mentioned it before (to you) that what seperates an Intel SSD from almost all (afaik) others is that it has the capability to use all free space as 'spare area'.

What this means is that static, unchanging data does not stay on the nand on which it was written. It is moved around to evenly use up the nand's write cycles.

What you describe (along with the video's from Intel) about leaving additional free space unpartitioned simply increases the longetivity in higher write scenarios of the SSD.

These two concepts are not mutually exclusive.

Therefore, in a normal (consumer) use scenario, simply leaving additional free space on your Intel SSD will greatly increase the wear - leveling percentage from the default (7%) level. Leaving the space unpartitioned also, is essentially 'over kill' unless you're using the drive in a more enterprise-oriented use.

 

Sigh. I'm now officially annoyed with my OCZ Vertex LE. After restarting several times, snooping around the BIOS, and physically switching SATA ports, my OCZ drive is not detectable at all on any SATA port.

Thankfull, I haven't sold my Intel 160GB G2, so I installed the Intel again and everything's looking good. I put the Vertex into my dock and my laptop instantly saw it. So I'm assuming both my computer and the SSD are working fine, it's just that Sandforce and HM55 don't play nice together. Or something.

In any case, I'm just going to sell the OCZ off on the BST board. How does OCZ warranty work? If I sell it to the buyer, and God forbid, it dies, can they go through OCZ and get it replaced even if they weren't the original buyer?