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

ahhh I hear ya on that part. I can also buy SSD like right now .. yet I'm not doing it, but the right time will come for the right drive at the right price

 

K, just finished speaking with Xoticpc representative again and he still stands by what Sager has told him about ports 0 and 1 not being SATA III.

here's the chat log:

Xoticpc: Hello James and thank you for your interest in Xotic PC!
Have you had any previous contact with anyone from Xotic PC via email or chat? If not can I start with your email address to email you a log of our chat conversation from today please?
James: --------
Xoticpc: hello James
James: hey, the conversation we had earlier today, you said the 8170-S1 will not be able to ultilize the SATA III connection correct?
Xoticpc: right
James: i thought Ports 0 and 1 are SATA III though
Xoticpc: nope, we asked sager and they verified SATA III is not supported

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I had made a mistake, I apologize in advance.

 

That better be wrong. Otherwise Intel, Sager, and Clevo are all lying. NP8170 and NP8170-S1 are the same machine. The S1 is just a discounted configuration.

 

*shrugs* i'm just the messenger informing the masses....

 

Hmm... I can vouch for the 8150 showing SATA III speeds.

Can anybody show the benchmarks to verify?

The BIOS of course shows port 0 and 1 being used for the HDD bays, though.

 

I'm not sure why they said that, but the 8170 / P170HM / 8150 / P150HM models do support SATA III.

 

i want an intel 510 ... gonna save up for that badboy

 

I'd rather see SLC drives come down in price.

 

THANK YOU! Finally one who likes SLC. It is pathetic that they have not gotten more press, lower prices for these.

 

SLC would be nice...but OCZ had a 60 GB for 600 bucks awhile back. @ 10 bucks per GB, only enterprise level could afford that. That and the X25-E aren't cheap either..

 

they still don't have any advantage over MLC, that's why. so they don't life for 5-10 but 50-100 years in your laptop? great. as if you'd use one for that long.

 

I wold like to come in and apologize for the miss-information. One of our Sale Representatives was in touch with Sager Support that was providing him info that these channels did not support SATA III. They do in fact support SATA III. I again apologize this miss-information was provided. Sager Support is also now updated that they do support SATA III Speeds.

 

Great news, thanks for the information.

 

I feel bad about putting out this information.

Again, thanks for the clarification Justin.

p.s. I wasn't trying to make Xoticpc look bad ....

I'm going to get this drive, it'll be my first SSD.

 

Its ok James. We know that it wasn't your intention to make Xoticpc look bad you were just trying to find out if it supported it or not. It was just the wrong information being updated by Sager's Tech support department. We got it all straightened out and honestly you brought the truth to light. It was odd because we all assumed that it supported Sata 3 and couldn't understand why it wouldn't. Especially since we were certain that the Asus did through testing the SW model here in house.

By the way that is a nice looking computer you have built there! I am sure you will love it. Especially if you add the sata 3 Intel drive. I cant wait to get one myself.

Enjoy your weekend!

 

thats a quick reply! I appreciate it!

I do have one question about my build. What do you think about Bigfoot Networks Killer™ Wireless-N 1102 ? I'm still on the fence about this card. I don't know if I should go with this card or Intels 6300.

Ya, I'm super excited about this laptop. I'm definitely making somebody rich though haha.....

Thanks for the reply and I hope you have a great weekend as well!

 

To be honest I haven't had the time to really test it out personally, although I do plan on putting one in my machine. For the small difference in cost if it truly does what it says it will do(not sure if you have read up on bigfoots website or not) then it will easily be worth the money, because I pretty much only game online. Between FPS and MMO's it would certainly benefit me. That said I have the Intel now and I did notice over the standard non 5.0ghz card that it improved my range some and my in-network transfer speeds. I didnt use the standard card for long though so I don't have much memory for the comparison. If you game online I would say its worth a shot and honestly its probably not that much different from the Intel. The current one will only do 300mb/s transfer speeds and the 6300 will do 450mb/s because of the third antenna. However the triple antenna big foot cards will be out later this year so I guess if you get to the point where you are transferring that much data across your network you could upgrade.

Hopefully your wait isn't too much longer. I look forward to hearing what you think of your awesome machine.

 

BOLDED: no, I haven't read up yet but planning too tonight. I guess I'll have to make up my mind fast since I just now PAID for the laptop! i feel 3k + lighter now....lol


To be honest, I'll be playing WoW majority of the time and will have school work to do so I'm thinking 450mb/s isn't required at this time.

Thanks for your awesome response! I'll definitely let you know how the machine is once I get my hands on it.

Oh ya, +1 for the helpful info and fast response.

 

Hello, guys, a little question fast to answer, some of you know certainly the answer. I want to know: is that true that OCZ "hidden" transition from 34 nm NAND to 25 nm NAND only exist on lower capacity drives, especially on 60G, 90G and 120G. Because I recently purchased a 240 GB version, and I want to know if it is still 34nm. Thank you very much.

 

Why would OCZ lie and steal from only some of it's customers?

You can tell by seeing slower than mechanical sequential performance from it.

Download CDM and prepare to be disappointed (if I'm wrong, you should be double happy!).

 

I don'y receive it yet and all these story of lie from OCZ embarass me. I see on reviews that this problem only affect lower capacity drives like 60 90 120GB. So I really want to confirm that with you guy who have 240 GB. Thank you

 

First of all, you shouldn't be cross posting (against forum rules...).

Second, it still affects them; just a little less noticebly is all.

Why does OCZ's less than honourable actions embarass you? You should be getting a hint of what the company is like to deal with and maybe consider other companies to align yourself with?

 

I am sorry, I will stop post in this topic. Because for almost 1 month, I have looked for painfully a fast and reliable SSD for my envy 14. I first began with Crucial RealSSD C300 256 GB. But the freezing issue is really annoying. Also it is only nice on SATA III. I return that to the ebay seller. And now I want to go definitely with OCZ but I don't want to receive a 25nm one as it perform worse. I don't consider Intel 160GB although it is stable and reliable. Because it is really old technology and is really slow in many cases.

Thank you for your answers.

 

I just started using a Samsung 470 64gb. Everything load very quickly except Firefox. Why is there a 1.5sec delay when I open it for the first time after booting?

 

@ Kyoka Suigetsu: Did You consider Samsung 470?

 

No the ebay seller doesn't sell this. And I must exchange a product that he sells. Moreover OCZ vertex 2 has better read/write rate.

 

For compressible data, yes. Which, admittedly, is what most people work with. I think the Samsung is better, personally, but it also comes with a bit of a price markup.

 

I have a Samsung 470. Would any of you consider selling it for an Intel 80gb G2 (I'll go for a G2 over a G3 if I can get it cheaper)? What concerns me with this drive is that there are so few users of it that little is known about it's wear leveling. The Intel is a positive known quantity in that regard. I have confidence in the reliability of both.

 

I would have gone with the Intel 80 GB, but that's because I personally favor the larger size, really. In fact, I think even the 80 GB is a bit on the small side for my taste.

 

Space is not an issue since I have another drive for media files. The Intel would be slightly wasteful for me since I have 30gb free on this one. But apart from that, what about aspects like wear leveling?

 

They all have static wear leveling these days, where static files are moved periodically to maintain a fairly consistent wear across the drive.

 

As far as I know Samsung performs very consistent over time while I've seen some complaints about Intel. I'd stick with the Samung unless you need the extra space.

 

Interesting... I finally remembered to update the firmware for my Intel X25-M 80GB. Went off without a hitch.

I just checked SMART information from Intel SSD Toolbox and the Media Wearout indicator is now 100%, where it was 98% just yesterday. I wonder if it will drop back down after it gets used for a bit and the firmware adjusts, or if there's different criteria to determine wearout? Hmmm...

 

that's what I'm thinking too. Too bad I need more like 500GB ...

I dont know how you all fit in 80GB.

 

Cause we don't store 200GB of music and movies on our drives.

For a boot drive, 40-60 GB is enough and a few applications. 80+ GB for main apps is a comfortable level, 120GB+ is super nice.

 

no movies, music ~25GB, pictures ~16GB

overall in use: 2 partitions, 190GB + 50GB, so my computer can do lots of things

 

240GB storage we are talking about 50 DVD or so. Assuming an application can fit one DVD that is 50 application which is quite a number. I am wondering other than contents like video, music, games and say VMs, what kind of user generated data can fill that kind of space.

 

mostly, it's just a "i never looked what i really need but just want to have everything that i might have needed at some point in the last 10-15 years with me".

like tons of isos of software and stuff. my \\server\Software gets a regular halfyear cleanup where i drop stuff i don't need. for some years, i for example had setups for different neros with me. that filled 2-3gb. /delete. older offices than 2010? delete. actually nearly everything old gets purged.

and besides, that's on the server. none of that is on clients if not really needed. not even most music, as i don't need much of that on the go (same with movies, photos). what's not needed is not on the ssd. the result: never more than 40-60gb used anywhere.

 

I got games, yes ... those take like half of the space. I got photo editing software, quite a bit. I have CAD software, chip burning software for different stuff. I got automation software, quite a bit too, from different manufacturers - that gets big depending on the project. I got bunch of utilities for various stuff. But yes my second partition is filled with installation software only (no games), in case I need something that I dont already have installed.

that's one of the reasons why I'm still with XP - I cant clean install W7 and then all that again - will be major pain, and not for sure if it would work fine, and my stuff HAS to work.

Kind of not in the same situation here with Dave who clean installs W7 twice per year (saw your post the other day) .... Anyways, each to his own. I can squeeze to 256GB SSD and in fact almost bought one ... almost.

P.S. - speaking of games, I got ~450GB on a separate 500GB HDD, setups only. Obviously I'm using small part of those right now

 

ah, so 50G are just DVD image, 1/2 of the 190G are games(or game data). So really serious stuff is about 100G, that is more like it.

 

40GB are music and pictures ... so installed software only would be 60-70GB, but how fun would that be.

This laptop is the only computer that I have right now, so that plays role too.

 

well, get a nice backup nas for your laptop then, if it's the only thing in the room. on that nas, you can then store your images and all, too. so you can remove EVERYTHING that you don't need on the go. like every game you don't play, etc.

and i don't clean install all half year. i clean install when ever i have a new disk, which happened to happen quite often (i'm replacing lots of hardware, and giving it to friends so they get fresh hw, too... they don't reinstall my systems most of the time. so some of my setups run since years, too).

the other nice thing about the backup is, you could move to win7, test everything, and in case of a problem, revert back.

 

Hi all

What would be rock solid choice for a 120 to 240 go 2.5" ssd to be put in a Dell M6400 ?

Looking for best quality (still wth a reasonnable price)

 

Depends on what you are doing with your laptop.

Intel tend to be the most reliable, SandForce will give you better value and faster read/write speeds.

The 120GB Intel goes for like ~220, same with the SF based SSD. You might want to wait as Intel G3 are coming out very shortly, and newest SF are coming out later this year.

 

I though was Q3 at least, but seems they are going to be out before Intel G3 (im still waiting on them), OCZ Vertex 3 120GB 2.5IN TAKING PRE ORDERS NOW (WILL SHIP 3-21-2011)

 

Samsung 470 or Intel G2 are solid choices.

 

just a poll for my curiosity...

what is your average data written every day on SSD?

i moved temp and cache folder of google chrome on the normal hard disk but from my intel toolboox i read a total of 500 gb in 26 days ( did a fresh install of windows 7 )

 

you should exclude the install, windows updates(SP1) etc.

After you have stablized, measure again(like take the difference after a week or two).

My usage is around 2-3G/day.

 

I don't know how much I write but this article may be interesting:

"At Intel's 2010 developer forum they made a presentation on SSD endurance and discussed results of a client study that showed most of us actually write very little data. Most users fall around 5GB/day while only a single digit percentage breach the 50GB/day mark. To use round numbers, this means if you have a 100GB SSD, you would rewrite the drive fewer than 1000 times in five years, even if you're a heavy 50GB/day user. For most SSD users, this data alone should be comforting, but there's more to come to help users understand the lifespan of their SSD."

Demystifying SSD Endurance | StorageReview.com

 

i haven't moved my tempfolders. i actually want to enjoy my ssd snapiness => caches should be on it.

writes should slow down over time and never be an issue.