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

I'm about to try the firmware upgrade on my Intel 120GB (G2). Current firmware is 02HD. Does anyone have any info on what this upgrade does... that is, other than the rather generic statement by Intel:

"This firmware will enable your SSD to deliver the best performance in your PC."

It would be nice if they would tell us a bit more about it.

Edit: Here's the release notes link. I guess this answers my question -- Release Notes.

Looks like a worthwhile update.

Look for the HP USB Format Tool (I think I got it from Softpedia) and the Win98 Boot Files (via Google). Format the flash drive as FAT32 with the HP program and tell it to use the win98 files you downloaded and extracted into a folder (to make it bootable). Then just put the ISSDFUT.EXE on the flash drive (extracted from the .iso) and boot from the flash drive. Then run the program. Voila! Firmware updated.

Or, if you must use a CD, try Imgburn. It's a free .iso burner, small and fast. Burn at slowest possible speed. It's never failed me. Just be sure you tell it to burn an image... not data files... and select the Intel .iso.

 

Intel 510 Series SSD
Intel controller/firmware
34nm MLC
120GB for $280, 250GB for $580
450MB/s read, 300MB/s write
20K IOPS at 4K read, 4K IOPS at 4K write
Coming in February
New 34nm SSD have 450/300MB/s R/W

OCZ Vertex 3 Pro
Sandforce SF-2000 controller/firmware with OCZ tweaks
50GB to 400GB capacities
550MB/s read, 525MB/s write
75K IOPS at 4K write
Coming first half 2011
OCZ'z Vertex Pro 3 Demo: World's First SandForce SF-2000 - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

Crucial C400
Marvell controller with Micron firmware
128GB $210, 256GB $425, 512GB $825
415MB/s read, 260MB/s write for 256GB and 512GB
415MB/s read, 175MB/s write for 128GB
40K IOPS 4K read
Micron's RealSSD C400 uses 25nm NAND at $1.61/GB, Offers 415MB/s Reads - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

Corsair P3
Marvell controller
480MB/s read, 320MB/s write for 256GB model
410MB/s read, 210MB/s write for 128GB model
365MB/s read, 110MB/s write for 64GB model
Late January 2011
CES 2011: Corsair Performance Series 3 SSD Benchmarks - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News
Performance 3 Series - Solid-State Drives

This is going to be a great year.
Dear God i am ready. Unleash the beasts. My money is waiting

 

A great litte App for burning ISOs - Burn CDCC. Simply an exe file, no installation - never failed me yet.
Thanks also for the update on the firmware - worked without issues.
Link: http://burncdcc.en.softonic.com/

 

The OCZ Vertex 3 Pro speeds are ridiculous. Too bad Vertex 2 Pros that are out now are so insanely expensive to even consider the new version.

Is there supposed to be a newer version of intel ssds with 25nm architecture? Or are those not coming out in February 2011.

 

There was supposed to be (the G3), but there's been no mention to date about them, apart from a message a few months ago that they'd been "delayed". No updates since then.

 

I tried imgburn, windows built in iso burner, even just copied iso to DVD thinking I'm an idiot (well that too), extracting to a USB flash, iso on the flash, copy file to my existing bootable USB flash, but it wouldn't run.

Had to recreate a bootable iso from what stasmatisix offered earlier

http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...marks-brands-news-advice-845.html#post7103255

copied the single exe to the flash drive and worked like a charm.

 

did anyone try the new intel firmware?

 

lulz... see above quotes...

 

Bootable USB Drive Creator Tool.rar

No need to install. Very easy solution

 

Are any of these set to be "mainstream" SSDs? $500+ for 256gb, is still a little hard to swallow.

 

Am I missing something?

Intel G2 SSD
34nm MLC
120GB for $130 (after rebate and cashback from Newegg in Dec)
35K IOPS at 4K read, 8600 IOPS at 4K write
Available now

Aside from the high sequential speeds (which will only be useful on brand new machines), how is this new 510 series better than the existing G2? It costs way more and has significantly slower 4K random speeds. I don't get it.

 

Hi everyone,

1st post in this thread and looking for advice.

I've just taken delivery of a Dell XPS 17 L701 Laptop. It originally shipped with i7 740QM Processor, Nvidia 455 3gb graphics, 640 7200 HDD and 4GB memory.

This laptop has two hard drive bays so I also purchased a OCZ Vertex 2 120gb drive to run as the primary C: drive with the O/S and programs and then use the 640gb drive for file storage and backup.

I mounted the SSD in bay two and then Used Acronis software to clone original 640 Gb HDD which had windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit and various other softwarwe and Dell files. Once migrated to the new OCZ 120gb drive everything is working absolutely fine and it is so fast...really pleased. (and so quiet)

Here's my question: Why does the 120gb drive only show 104 gb capacity in Computer Details? The Samsung 640 gb HDD only shows 580gb capacity too. I went into windows 7 Administrative Tools/computer management/system tools and checked the partitioning/disk management.

Here's what is says for the Samsung HDD: Basic 596.17GB Online: as disk 0: 4 partitions 1: 39mb Healthy 2: Recovery: 7.37gb NTFS (Healthy, Active Primary) 3: 7.12GB Unallocated 4: (F 581.48GB NTFS Healthy (Primary Partition)

and for the OCZ SSD: Basic 111.79GB Online As Disk 1: 3 Partitions. 1: 16MB Healthy. 2: Recovery: 7.12GB NTFS Healthy (Active Primary). 3: (C 104.66GB NTFS Healthy, Primary Partition.

Can anyone help and advise: 1st - why both drives do not show their actual size? second - how can I reclaim some is this space for actual use (particularly on the SSD as £ per gb is far more expensive than traditional HDD storage) and 3rd - Where is the remaining storage space that is not being shown in disk management? I do realise that due to binary number reporting, etc, that any drive will always show less than the amount advertised in its sale but surely not this much ??????

Any help/advice is most appreciated as I don't really understand this at all. My cup is empty....and is ready to be filled.

Thanks

 

Yes, most review sites give people the impression that the higher the number(i.e. throughput) the faster the SSD. They are just giving what the market wants. I would stick to the G2 and may be the G3 when it is released and stabalized.

 

Yes, I'm afraid the binary/decimal conversion actually is that much. For your SSD, it's 120,000,000,000 bytes / 1,073,741,824 bytes = 111.76 GB. For your platter, it's 640,000,000,000 / 1,073,741,824 = 596 GB. That then breaks down into the partitions you've mentioned; on your SSD, there's a 16 MB partition (drive alignment, perhaps?), then a 7 GB recovery partition, and then the 104 GB partition that holds your OS and other files. On your platter, it's a 39 MB partition (same partition alignment?), then 2 approximately 7 GB partitions (one recovery, the other... a copy of the recovery partition?), and then the remaining 581 GB.

This is a big part of the reason that clean installs are often recommended; this way you can skip the recovery partition (and gain back 7 GB on your SSD, 14 on your platter), and oftentimes you can immediately update to the latest drivers (drives from the manufacturer are usually pre-imaged, often with rather old drivers and software). If you're not willing to go that route, you can wipe the recovery partitions manually, but I'm not sure that you can expand a partition "forward", and since the recovery partitions are at the front of the hard drive, this makes things difficult. So I guess the question is... how much effort are you willing to put into this?

 

I think it should start pushing new formats, but in the beginning only along side with 2.5" slot for HDD.
I just don't see why SSD needs to be in 2.5" format when it can be way smaller.

This is perfect solution: one mPCI-E SSD for OS + programs and huge 2.5" HDD/SSD for data (Dell Precision M4500 and M6500 have mPCI-E slot with SATA signals).

Click!

 

So this means it will only work in netbooks or Dell Precision?

 

I also have a 120GB SSD (Intel) and yes, it is listed as 111GB which is normal because 120 billion bytes divided by 1024³ = 111GB. You have some unallocated space which was left by the Acronis cloning. As Judicator said, it is best to do a clean install of Windows 7 to assure proper partition alignment which is very important for performance. I wouldn't trust Acronis to do that unless it is a new version that specifically states that it can clone to an SSD properly. Windows 7 is "SSD aware" during installs and will align your partitions on the right boundaries for full performance.

A clean install will give you the best performance because all the bloatware that comes with new laptops will not be on there. There are a lot of tweaks you can apply to Windows 7 to increase SSD performance. Look around, there are lots of adjustments you can make to the OS. And you don't want to fill up the SSD. I leave at least 30% of the drive as free space for purposes of wear-leveling, TRIM, and whatever else the controller wants to do with it to maintain performance.

I have the 02M3 firmware installed and one of the improvements is better S.M.A.R.T. attribute reporting. SSDLife now gives me accurate data on drive life (finally). Everyone seemed to think that SSDLife was at fault for reporting erroneous lifespan when, in fact, all that program does is read the SMART attributes from the drive's controller. I'm glad that's been fixed, at least in the Intels.

 

Yes! If most laptop manufacturers offered SATA in the mPCI-E it would be great. But for most it's just for WWAN or other networking cards.

 

Speaking of smaller... I seem to remember reading somewhere that the 22 or 25nm SSD NAND chips are not showing acceptable drive life stats. Apparently you reach a point of diminishing returns as you get smaller and smaller circuit traces. This may be why we are seeing a delay of the G3 drives. They don't want to release a drive that will "burn out" in a year or two. But I'm just speculating here from assumptions I've read on the 'net.

 

I have a question: the realSSD C300 seems to get a lot of top reviews and benchmark results, but I never hear of it recommended or bought. Is there something I'm missing?

 

You may want to send a msg to Phil. He's one of the moderators here and he wrote a review of that drive comparing it to a couple other drives.

 

Phil recommends it quite often for European buyers, especially the small 64 GB version. Here in the US, it's usually not bought because it tends to be a bit more expensive than the others, with fewer tangible benefits. I think a lot of people also see the fact that it's bottlenecked on a SATA 3Gbps interface, and avoid it for that reason (because they don't want to pay for the extra speed that they can't use). I know that SATA II versions of the C300 are the SSDs that HP puts in their Elitebook 8740w if you order one with a SSD installed. And then it really comes down to name brand, as well. Intel drives get bought, even though they're usually more expensive per GB than the others, because, well, it's Intel, and people feel that they're more reliable and trustworthy. The C300 doesn't quite have that cachet.

 

No, it means that will work in any mPCI-E slot with SATA signals.

Sad but true! Hope it'll change in near future, because I don't think it's hard to find place for one more mPCI-E slot and that every chipset has one unused SATA to share.

 

I wish to see more Mac Air style design where mostly useless things get removed. Take out the optical, take out the HDD bay and give me a 120-160GB SSD module instead and supplement it with USB 3.0/eSata connection.

This would free a few Oz here and there so I can have some more battery juice and couple that with an Ivy Bridge setup, I may have a 10hr laptop that can do serious stuff.

 

C300 doesn't get talked about much around these parts because the real benchmark buster is the 256gb version. The expensive one.

Since July last year or thereabouts, the general consensus has been:

1) C300 if you have SATA III and want 256gb capacity
2) Sandforce SF-1200 if you have SATA II and want < 256gb capacity

 

Hi Thanks very much for your help and input.

I decided to go down the route of clean install of Windows 7 64bit to the 120gb SSD drive.

I did a quick format to delete all info on the drive (Re-booting from the samsung HDD with original Dell/Windows installation) and then closed down laptop. I removed the Samsung 640gb HDD completely and put the OCZ 120gb SSD drive in drive bay '0'. I then changed the boot sequence to boot from dvd, put in my OEM Wndows 7 dvd and went through the installation process. Upon completion and entering windows and checking drive info in 'Computer, it is still showing 104gb drive. (not the 111gb expected).

Went back into administrative tools, where it says 'create and format hard disk partitions', and it is still showing 3 partitions: 1st - 16mg with 100% free. 2nd- 7.12gb with 99% free. 3rd - 104.66gb with 86% free (operating system installed here)

I will put the other hdd back in again (with the original windows full installation on) and do another quick format of this SSDS drive, IF NECCESSARY, but HOW can I delete this 7.12gb partition so that it is regained and forms part of the partition that I may install the OS to? (the 111gb as previously discussed and suggested should be available. (pulling my hair out....arhhhh.

I am sorry if I'm missing something here and apologise for my lack of knowledge on the subject of deleting partitions and formatting prior to Windows OS installations. As I understand it; doing a full format on SSD drives is not recommended due to reducing life of unit.

Any further help and suggestions here to regain the 7.12gb into the partition where OS will be installed is most welcome.

Thanks in adavance

 

Put both drives into your notebook and set things up so that it boots from your HDD. Go into Administrative Tools, select each partition on your SSD individually, and delete them all. Then set the boot sequence to boot from DVD, put in your OEM Windows 7 DVD, and install (you may have to remove your HDD for this part, I'm not completely sure) to your SSD. This should do it. The problem with installing to an already formatted and partitioned drive is that the Windows installer respects any already existing partitions and doesn't override them. It's also possible (although I'd think unlikely) that your OEM Windows 7 DVD installs a recovery partition automatically. If you still find yourself with a recovery partition after this procedure, you might want to go ahead and download a legal ISO of your appropriate Windows type and install it using your CoA license on the bottom of your notebook.

 

Thanks,

I'll put the Samsung drive back in now and reboot from this and follow your instructions.

I pre-empted your O/S suggestion and downloaded an ISO copy from the net. I will use my C.O.A. code for installation if this is necessary.

I'll report back and let you know how this progresses. Apart from this regaining space problem, the OCZ Vertex 2 drive is blistering fast and an excellent addition to an already top spec'd very fast laptop.

Cheers

Trev

 

good choice of ssd ... and yea it is awesome

 

hi,i am new...

a stupid question:i am going to buy a notebook asus g53jw which shows my hard drive " 500gb ssh@7200"

what is ssh?is it ssd?is it good or bad?
please reply

 

Not sure what SSH stands for but it isnt an SSD as it wouldn't have the 7200 number included as this is the speed it spins as, hence it is a normal HD.

Edit. Harddrives start at 5400 spin speed 7200 is used in a lot of gaming laptops

 

That's Seagate Hybrid Drive which comes with 4GB SSD + 500GB HDD. My guess is SSH is typo.

 

thanks...

 

I've been seeing "SSH" creeping into Marketing-Speak and some reviews, standing for "Solid State Hybrid". Kind of silly, since the drive is more HDD than SSD.

Maybe they should call it a "HDH"? Or a "HDDSSDH". Oy.

 

It isn't even really "hybrid" it's really just a "smart cache". They shouldn't even bring SSD into it.

 

Genius marketing...................

 

The SSD bug hit me again this weekend. I needed more room than what my Corsair F-120 was giving me, so I ended up going with a Samsung 256GB SSD. So far it's a nice little speed demon. Samsung has a nice tool that you can download that Benchmarks your drive, Performance Optimazation, FW Updates and such.
What I don't like is the fact that if you want to do a FW update you lose all the drive info. Why can't these other guys do it like Intel does and make it to where you won't lose it all?

So far I have used the following SSD's.
Intel 32GB E-EXTREME SLC
Intel 80GB G2 SSD
Patriot Torqx 64GB
Corsair Force Series F-120GB

That freakin Patriot is the oldest SSD I have, and the cheapest. I can go from a cold start up to being connected via my wireless in 18 seconds. My intel SLC can't match that! I just wish it was bigger

What is the opinion around here on the Samsung SSD's?

 

The Seagate XT uses 4GB MLC memory. I think it's fair game to call it an SSD even though it acts like a giant cache.

It's a fast reader but hopelessly slow with random writes. Try CDM for example.

PS. Samsung latest 470 SSD is one of the best SSDs available, if not the best. Fast & reliable. http://www.techspot.com/review/340-samsung-470-series-ssd/page6.html

 

Ordered the OCZ Vertex 2 60gb SSD to see if it's worth all the hype. $114 + free shipping from Newegg.

Will post feedback when it comes in.

 

So far the 470 is doing good

Speaking of the Seagate XT, I used one for 2 weeks while deciding on which SSD I was going to get. My Hitachi 5400K that came in my Toughbook originally is faster than that freakin thing. That is the slowest HDD that I have ever used. The learning aglithorim crap is just that! To say I was dissapointed is a huge understatement.

 

Toyo,

You were using it (XT) wrong.

 

And how the heck would I be doing that I could have sworn I plugged it in

 

Was it a clean install?

What O/S? RAM size?

What apps/utilities?

Did you partition it? Did you defrag it? (PD11 highly recommended once a month).

See... much more to just plugging it in!

 

PD11? Perfect Disk v.11?

 

Alright knucklehead

Clean install of W7 Ult.

3.82 GB Ram

M/S Outlook is always running, VZaccess Manager, usually about 4 to 5 programs are always running.

Why defrag a clean install on a new drive?

However, we have to remember I went from using a SSD to a HDD for a couple of weeks. It's been 3 years since I used a HDD!

 

Lenovo is doing this in the next gen models which should be launched at the end of Feb or early March.

 

So, you're running Win 7 32bit?

VZaccess Manager is a cpu hog, no?

Doesn't matter how recent a clean install is - defragging the HDD is always beneficial (with a good program like PerfectDisk 11). As a matter of fact, a defragged 5400 RPM drive responds faster than a non-defragmented 7200 RPM drive in my experience.

Also, I guess you didn't partition the XT. I can't stand the 'feel' of a non-partitioned system, so maybe it was as slow as you say... anyway, partitioned properly, the XT is fast enough for me to take out an Inferno and use it instead (using the Inferno as a big USB 'key' now...).

Compared to a 7K500 and even a Scorpio Black, the XT is in a different league (all three 500GB drives, all partitioned identically, all with exactly the same installs) - it is easily the best mechanical HDD available.

Can't wait for the 64/128MB cache version with 16GB SSD and 1TB capacity (coming soon to a dream center near you).

 

Why on earth would anyone on this planet want anything VZ running on their computer??? What a waste of valuable CPU cycles.

 

If the XT didn't give you a boost over any 5400 or 7200 rpm drive there was definitely something wrong.

Please stop using this thread for the discussion. Here's the XT thread:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/har...e-momentus-xt-hybrid-hdd-w-built-4gb-ssd.html

 

Saw that, thumps up!