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

I'd pass on the Transcend. Either Crucial or Samsung should do OK.

Happy shopping.

 

Thank you man
A last question before going :
Is the used M500 a deal ?

 

Well, if you can afford one of the newer drives I'd go with them. If not...I guess that it's not the worst thing.

 

As long as you're going with the 240GB+ versions, it's not that different from today's drives.

 

Looking to upgrade my Lenovo T530 with an mSATA for the OS. User files will be stored on a separate 500GB HDD. I'm thinking about the Samsung 850 EVO 120 GB mSATA (MZ-M5E120BW). 120GB will be more than sufficient for the OS and program files. Is there any reason to spend extra on a larger drive if I don't need the space?

 

The reason depends on your real world usage, expectations over the short and long term of the SSD's effect on your system and the amount of space you'll be filling on that toy-like SSD.

If you want a huge and permanent step up from your HDD - consider getting a 2.5" SSD instead that is big enough to hold your O/S, Programs and Data for the foreseeable future (at least 18 months out...). The mSATA SSD's tend to overheat and soon after throttle (and with no effective way of cooling them in most systems) and have half or less of the controller channels and nand chips needed for the optimal interleaving which means eventually; you'll be leaving performance on the sidelines with an mSATA solution.

In addition to the above, bigger capacity SSD's are not only inherently faster (usually), but with OP'ing (over provisioning) can stay as fast as possible with almost any work load you throw at them. I would also consider keeping ~50GB free space for future O/S updates as needed in addition to ~50GB free space just so Windows can run optimally day to day too.

With all the above points, buying a small SSD and especially an mSATA version is disappointing in the long run, to say the least (I would describe it as below HDD performance levels overall; because I hate pausing and stuttering on my drives - especially the O/S and Program drives).

The EVO series is great for benchmarks and 'scores' - but when real work is required, it falls on it's face and seems to never recover fast enough. I would recommend other SSD's than a small, Samsung EVO - even if you need to keep the capacity as small as possible.

Hope this gives you pause for thought, even if it is not what you wanted to hear.

Good luck.

 

Thanks for the detailed reply. I was debating replacing the HDD with a 2.5" SSD and you bring up some good points to go that route. My reason for leaning towards the mSATA route was to free up some HDD space and boost some performance (boot-up / program loading) at a fairly modest cost. The only concern with going the 2.5" SSD route is that I would need a 500GB-1TB drive. My current drive fills up about every 8-12 months with my wife's pictures before I have to move to another system. Unfortunately a larger 2.5" SSD looks like a $200-500 upgrade rather than a $100 upgrade.

Real world usage of the laptop is pretty light. It is mostly Internet browsing, budget / office applications and occasional Sketchup use. There are four users that it shuffles between so there is frequent switching between accounts. The OS and programs take up ~60GB.

Your comment is interesting the mSATA performance could be worse than the HDD. Is the reason for the pausing and stuttering because the system is waiting for the HDD to access files?

I was looking at the Samsung EVO due to the favorable reviews and what appears to be good power consumption. However, you indicate this might not be the case. Which other SSD's should I consider?

Thanks!

 

The mSATA route will give you a performance upgrade at modest cost, but I abandoned using mSATA as a boot drive (at any capacity point) years ago.

Though this is the 1TB EVO mSATA that the following quote discusses, it is indicative of what I experienced over and over.

See:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9023/the-samsung-ssd-850-evo-msata-m2-review/2

mSATA as a data drive is fine. As an O/S drive; I can't recommend it blindly (but, if you want, try and see if it works in your setup without issues).

As you can see from the quote - the stutters and pauses is what brings the performance below HDD levels, even if it is nominally faster 90% of the time.

Why are you buying a new system when the drive fills up with images? Use external drives or better yet, a NAS.

Yes, the larger drive will cost more, but the benefits are much, much more than that small one time cost. A doubling of the budget offers ~4 times the capacity and an almost linear performance, reliability and longevity boost too.

See:
http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Extreme-2-5-Inch-Warranty-SDSSDXPS-480G-G25/dp/B00KHRYRLY


The above ~$200 SSD is the minimum I would recommend and even with 30% OP'ing (~300GB actual capacity), it should still give enough capacity to be usable with 4 users and an external data drive or two (for backup...).

The HDD that is in your system now can be used in an inexpensive external enclosure to convert it to a data drive and the notebook will be much more reliable and durable without a spinning disk inside.

Choosing an SSD on power consumption figures is a wild goose chase. If the workload stays the same when the system was powered by a HDD, then the SSD will give an incremental boost in battery life. However, with increased performance comes increased (and different) usage, ime. The battery life should be relatively the same for most users. Unless the system is 'used' by simply leaving it on and idle (which I don't consider a real usage case for a portable system).

While both the mSATA and 2.5" formats will become obsolete quickly in newer systems, the 2.5" SSD with a real world usable capacity will be relevant much longer in the long run - whether in a mobile or desktop system. And in the meantime, you will enjoy performance that is more in line to what SSD's offer, rather than having an SSD in name only - even in the lightly used system you are considering upgrading today.

 

Thanks again for the detailed reply. You won we over to go with the 2.5" SSD format.

I actually have a dedicated media PC-server that I use for long-term storage of images and as part of my laptop backup strategy. I'll move the images over there permanently as the laptop drive fills due to better WAF. While it would be better to go to the 1TB option for wiggle room, the 500GB price point is fine and I'll be no worse than today.

Quick question, what is OP'ing?

 

Overprovisioning. Essentially creating a partition that's 70-80% of the size of the drive. This lets the drives controller use the unallocated space as it sees fit to keep performance up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

See:
https://www.google.ca/#q=OP'ing+tilleroftheearth+notebookreview.com+site:forum.notebookreview.com


One little correction; the partition size you create doesn't need to be ~70% of the actual usable capacity of the drive in question - it is just that that is the point (actually; 33% OP'ing...) where the benefits of OP'ing drop off sharply vs. the smaller user capacity available. In my desktop workstations, I still run 50% OP'ing or more, depending on how heavily the systems are pushed on a daily basis.

 

Thanks. I just placed an order for the 480GB Sandisk. It was conveniently on Amazon gold box deal for $159 today!

 

Now that's a steal. Congratulations!

 

Holy smokes! If they would just bring down the 960GB price, under $400, I'd pull the trigger.

 

50% OP in partitoning is a lot. What drive are you using?

 

Mostly SanDisk Extreme Pro 480GB that are used as secondary drives for PS's Scratch disks and other programs that need fast temporary space. When I run some of my routines on RAW NEFs (on multiple systems), those systems and drives could be in use for over 24 hours, depending on how many NEFs I'm processing at once and what specific manipulations are done to the files.

50% to 60% OP'ing has given me a storage subsystem that has high sustained performance with little performance drop from my default ~30% (actually; 33%) of my O/S drives and/or other uses I put SSD's to use for (like storage of the LR database, for example for thousands and thousands of final/finished images).

This costs a lot in TB/$$, but without using this technique since ~2011, I would still be using VRaptors as SATA based SSD's performance plummets otherwise.

It will be interesting to see the NVMe drives (especially the x8 versions on a Skylake platform) and how they handle OP'ing or if it's needed at all. Preliminary info shows that OP'ing will be beneficial there too, but I will need to test that for myself, of course.

We have come a long way from spinning rust platters. But short stroking those ancient drives, like OP'ing anything more modern, is still required for the best balance of performance vs. capacity.

The more things change... the more they stay the same...

 

@ tilleroftheearth
In Daily uses like excel,movies for 4 hour, downloading 7 GB data, what will be OP % will be

I have 256 which 238 GB, allocation is like 69.90 GB for OS, 144.67 for data and 23.80 OP,

I think the time i purchase my first SSD, I followed OP %.

 

That's my motivation for these, all in RAID and expendable (regular image backups). However ... don't want to see another mSATA for quite a while ...

Had 2x 120GB mSATA's in stripe. These got too small pretty fast and swapped them for 2x 250GB. However, this left two perfectly good drives without a proper purpose. So, in order to use both, deployed them in a 2.5" -> dual mSATA adapter (in jbod). All well ........... except .......... all four 840 EVO !



So ... firmware upgrade time ... on 4 non-single setups ...

First one was relatively easy:

1. Change bios RAID -> AHCI
2. Flash firmware and rewrite data on disk 0
3. Flash firmware and rewrite data on disk 1
4. Change bios AHCI -> RAID
5. All done, no data loss (or image backup necessary)

Now, the other two were running in SATA 2 (old SATA-only system), so wasn't in a big hurry as the speed drop could be lived with. Only recently it got too annoying, so wth, let's fix these too. Hiccup; adapter is hardware raid/jbod, so no way to flash firmware directly (drives are invisible to both bios and system). Solution; remove both from adapter, and use the 2x mSATA system to flash them. This, temporarily, leaves no OS available.

Steps:

1. Remove adapter from system
2. Remove 2x120GB from adapter (screws ...)
3. Prepare usb stick on 2x 250GB system
4. Unplug, battery, etc.
5. Remove 2x 250GB mSATA
6. Replace with 2x 120GB mSATA
7. RAID -> AHCI and boot
8. “cannot find drive”

Right ... remember it wasn't easy on the other system either; RAID wasn't supported, so only thing was a hard-to-find iso. Well ... probably waited too long and f'ed something up with usb stick. No helping this:

1. Unplug, battery, etc.
2. Remove 2x 120GB mSATA
3. Replace with 2x 250GB mSATA
4. AHCI -> RAID and boot

Now, Samsung uses subfolders, but skipped that since I expected some switches listed when using " /?" or " help" ... not so. Subfolders added and also put in original 2.5" firmware, for good measure (mSATA fw was separate and not included with this iso).

1. Remove 2x 250GB mSATA
2. Replace with 2x 120GB mSATA
3. RAID -> AHCI and boot
4. “cannot find drive”

1. Remove 2x 120GB mSATA
2. Replace with 2x 250GB mSATA
3. AHCI -> RAID and boot

Wth ... search for a new iso; nothing ... well ... why not the Mac version; " Firmware Updates for Mac Users". Only for the 2.5", but need mSATA fw, but can modify to match. So Download "Mac.iso" -> Extract -> " ISOLINUX" ... riiiight ... Extract "ISOLINUX" -> " BTDSK.IMG" -> extract "BTDSK.IMG" -> " COMMAND.COM" ...
????!!!!! Seriously, not kidding:



That ... is ... enlightening, really. It explains a good deal about Samsung's peculiar behaviour over the years ... anyway:

1. Remove 2x 250GB mSATA
2. Replace with 2x 120GB mSATA
3. RAID -> AHCI and boot
4. Flash firmware and rewrite data on disk 0
5. Flash firmware and rewrite data on disk 1
6. Unplug, battery, etc.
7. Remove 2x 120GB mSATA
8. Replace with 2x 250GB mSATA
9. AHCI -> RAID and boot system #1
10. Re-insert 2x120GB in adapter (screws ...)
11. Re-insert adapter and boot system #2
12. Done

So ... no; don't want to these things again anytime soon (nor a Samsung 'engineer').

 

That was quite a ride!

 

Sorry, I'm not understanding your post?

Are you asking for the best OP % for your use?

 

t456, how do you maintain your 120GB drives inside 2.5" to dual mSATA adapter, without TRIM and NCQ, in good shape?

 

No need; temporary solution and usage is pretty much read-only, just something snappy-ish until they get relocated in new system. Plus, it's SATA II, so not that taxing:

Only worrying bit is no SMART report ... could zero+check and write back image ... but that'd take another 2x2 swap (x2) ... should've done that while busy with the fw, come to think of it. Missed opportunity . But ... seriously: don't want to see these things anytime soon.

Ran into funny image on the Samsung EVO's download page, btw:



Either they meant something else or they're very much into irony ...

 

Yes, the daily uses I mentioned.

 

Short answer; ~30%.

I'll be able to answer in full in a few hours.

 

Also keep in mind that SSDs have some level of build-in OP. Write throttling helps with performance consistency as well.

 

Still too busy, so in point form:

OP'ing is necessary to achieve the fastest sustained storage performance of an SSD over time (almost no matter how you use it). Period.

• Any OP'ing that is 'built in' from the factory is ignored when I set up OP'ing.
  • Why? Because that is there to just get the SSD past warranty for the manufacturer, not to provide consistent performance for the user.
• Levels of OP'ing from 5% to 50% or more do contribute to giving us the maximum sustained performance a specific SSD is capable of (depending on the workload), but from experience, there is a level where a balance is reached and further (sustained) performance increases are harder or impossible to achieve.
• That level is 33% with any SSD I've had the chance to use this technique on.
• Less than 33% OP'ing and there is performance left on the table.
• More than 33% OP'ing and there is capacity lost for no apparent benefit to performance.
• At 33% (or more), what we get is the fastest storage subsystem we can have right now.
  • At least till Optane hits the shelves click here and gives us almost an order of magnitude increase in performance (especially for low QD's).
• Circa 2011 I started playing around with partitioning SSD's (was told it was insanity at that time... ) as I was prone to do with my VRaptors of that time. The reasons were same as for HDD - first to separate my data from the O/S partition - the second was to ensure endurance was increased as the Intel literature was stating at that time. The sustained performance benefit was a shocking revelation to me; when I did a clean install of Win7x64Ultimate back then to a 100GB partition of an SSD - the snappiness and sustained performance was off the charts. No SSD had continued being this responsive after I had installed the O/S, the drivers, the Windows Updates and the Program (suites) I rely on day to day (totaling around 80GB for C:\Drive back then).
• With endurance of the nand a non-issue (to my satisfaction) and performance now overall higher than my VRaptors in a sustained workload, SSD's finally were 'real' and indispensable starting with the Intel 520 Series 240GB models.
• While I still use 50% or more OP'ing for my desktop workstations that have an SSD as a pure Scratch Drive, it is for higher endurance, not for more performance.
• At less than 25% OP'ing, an SSD is not worth buying for me (or is the point where I upgrade to a bigger capacity model).
• Between 25% and 33% OP'ing, I see at least a 10% boost in sustained performance/responsiveness.
• Above 33% OP'ing there are still incremental performance boosts for certain tasks on an O/S drive. But what you get that is not so obvious is the lowest WA and fastest GC possible on the drive.

In addition to the OP level free space is still important;

• Windows thrives on 25GB or more of free space (C:\Drive).
• Depending on what programs you use, additional free space is necessary (for PS Scratch Disk use, I allow an additional 50GB to 100GB of free space depending on the normal workload of that specific workstation).
• I also account for future WU's and O/S upgrades too - so I like an additional 25GB 'reserve' capacity on my Windows partition.

With all the above taken into consideration, the optimum clean install (Win10x64Pro as of today) method is:

• Windows partition C:\Drive: 250GB
  • when Windows Setup creates this first partition on an empty drive, it needs additional hidden partitions which I take into account and add 200MB additional to the 250GB size.
    • Eg. I would add the 256,000MB (250GB) plus 450MB (Recovery), plus 100MB (System), plus 16MB (??) partitions and add a 200MB extra (to allow Windows to show me a full 250GB capacity after formatting) and I would enter 256,766MB as the first partition Windows Setup would create.
      • It will warn that it needs additional partitions and once ok'd, it will create the necessary partitions it needs and the partition (at the size) we want too.
        • The C:\Drive partition should now be at 250.20GB - if it isn't, simply delete all the created partitions and do this again until it is.
• Data partition Z:\Drive: remainder of the drive less the above capacity used for C:\Drive and less an additional 33% as shown by the total MB's capacity available during Windows Setup (note; this is always different than the stated capacity).
  • I also tend to round this number down to a whole number for the Data drive (eg. 150GB, 300GB, etc.).
  • So if we had a 960GB SSD, and the Windows Setup advanced drive setup showed us something like 915,542MB of actual capacity - Actual capacity x 0.67 = 613,413MB Total Usable capacity.
  • Total Usable capacity less C:\Drive + hidden partitions actual = 613,413 - 256,766 = 356,647MB Nominal Data drive capacity.
  • Rounding down the Nominal Data drive capacity to 345GB (from 348.288GB=256,647/1,024) and adding 200MB to account for formatting (and to show me a full 345GB in Windows file explorer) we get 345 x 1024 = 353,280 + 200 = 353,480MB for our Data Drive.
• Go ahead and create this partition now (at Windows setup...), but do not format it until you are ready to put data on this system).

Make sure you select the 256,200MB (250GB) partition when you click 'Next' to install windows to...

After Win10 is fully setup and updated and the drivers are installed and up to date and your Programs are fully installed and setup too...

Now is when I format the 345GB partition (in Disk Management). I also typically assign it the 'Z' drive letter too.

Create a 'Users' folder on that drive and in the Security Tab, click Edit, click Users and in the Permissions for Users, click 'Full control' checkbox. Hit OK, OK.

In the Users folder, create another folder using you name or initials (I like short paths...).

Go to C:\Users\XXX (where XXX is your account folder) and CUT all standard user folders*** and PASTE them to the Z:\User folder you just created.

Now, all your saved files will be on the Z:\Drive (DATA) partition.

Reboot or log off and on again before continuing to use the system.

With the system setup as above:

• You can Shrink the C:\Drive (O/S and Programs) partition to the smallest you can get away with while observing the limitations above (I don't recommend anything smaller than 15GB of free space for C:\Drive at a bare MINIMUM - at this point, either use up the OP'ing as needed... or better yet; buy a bigger SSD).
• The same amount of capacity recovered from shrinking the C:\Drive can be used to Expand the Z:\Drive.
  • Doing so, the % OP'ing is kept constant on the SSD (it doesn't care where the 'unallocated' capacity is located).
• You do not need to expand the DATA partition immediately if not needed. The extra OP'ing is simply lowering the WA factor and speeding up the GC routines while we are able to use it like this.
  • Make a note of the maximum Total user capacity, so you don't need to recalculate in the future if you're using more than the 33% OP'ing 'ideal'.
• Re-installing to the C:\Drive should leave your data untouched in the event of a Windows O/S catastrophe.

*** The standard user folders in the C:\Windows\Users 'user' folder are:

• Contacts
• Desktop
• Documents
• Downloads
• Favorites
• Links
• Music
• Pictures
• Saved Games
• Searches
• Videos

Moving any other folder to the Data drive is done at your own risk.

Hope this helps?

 

What is the best way to completely reset drive previously used in non-TRIM enviroment (USB enclosure, RAID)? I'm thinking of secure erasing the drive and leaving it in running Windows system for a while, so that TRIM & GC take care of everything. Which tool should I use?

 

Which SSD?

 

tilleroftheearth, any drive produced not by Intel/Samsung/Crucial, i.e. not having fancy software provided by manufacturer.

p.s. yes, I sold that dual mSATA adapter. =\ for twice I bought it for. =/ before actually trying RAID. =(

 

Almost all SSD makers recommend you only use their tools, especially for SE. That is why I asked which one.

Using a generic tool on a generic ssd will give you results that you may not have hoped for (like a bricked drive).

 

tilleroftheearth, will filling the SSD with any data, then deleting it and deleting volume help me achieve my goal, i.e. removing any remnants of previous activity which may result in possible performance losses & drive degradation? The drive in question is OP to 30% (as all other drives SSDs I currently use). It was used in external USB enclosure, filled with data to the limit of formatted capacity, and some time after the data was deleted - while the drive was still in enclosure, so no TRIM.

 

1) If you're worried about the previously stored DATA, then I would delete all partition(s) and simply reformat the drive (in it's USB enclosure, even) and use the full capacity (for now). Then, I would run CCleaner with the Wipe Free Space (advanced) option and the Secure Delete (Options, Settings) selecting at least the Simple Overwrite (1 Pass) or higher setting along with the Wipe Alternate Data Streams and Wipe Cluster Tips checkboxes selected too.

2) If all you want to do is restore the performance of the drive, then it must be in an AHCI SATA port with appropriate drivers and then delete all partitions, create a single new one (again, full drive) and do a quick format. Leave this to idle for the next two hours or more.

After doing 1) or 2) (or both) above, you can then delete the partition one more time and create it again with 30% OP'ing as required in the system it will be going in.

Hope this helps (and I didn't misunderstand the questions?).

 

tilleroftheearth, thanks, it does help a lot. I'm worried about drive performance and longevity so will follow option 2.

 

for now, which 2.5" SSD should I buy? I'm thinking about 1TB, kinda over budget here but 512gb after OP-ing isn't so future-proof. Considering the SanDisk Extreme Pro ($419) and the Mushkin Enhanced Reactor ($289). The Mushkin price seems to have dropped. I remember back in summer it was $360 or something. What happened?

Also, the Mushkin is inferior I guess but if it was $360, I'd choose the SanDisk but now its price has dropped so much.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226596&cm_re=mushkin-_-20-226-596-_-Product

http://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Extreme-2-5-Inch-Warranty-SDSSDXPS-960G-G25/dp/B00KHRYR0U

 

http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?s..._-cables-_-na-_-na&itemnumber=N82E16820173012

 

Samsung 500gb 850pro usually goes on sale for around $225 and 850 Evo for around $165.00 keep an eye on Newegg. I also used jet.com to shop for sale prices. Mind you the previous link I shared about SanDisk is a TLC drive similar to Samsung Evo.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

If you can tell what kind of usage you are going to do on the SSD then I can recommend something that will suit your needs.


Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?s...2615&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-cables-_-na-_-na


Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

oh, the SanDisk Ultra isn't actually that expensive but I'm not sure how it compares to the Reactor. I don't know much about SSD and have never owned one. I'll use it for OS, utility programs (browsers, office), Photoshop, some video editing program, and games. Don't think I need a super fast one, my biggest concern is longevity and stability.

 

Are you installing it on desktop or laptop.??

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

kaze no tama, I'd say any SSD is fantastic compared to HDD/SSHD/eMMC.

 

SanDisk makes good drives. I think if you are not editing video for a living it should be fine.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

Samsung 850 pro should out last your desktop or laptop.
http://m.newegg.com/Product?ItemNumber=20-147-361

Just pick a one that suits your budget from either Samsung, Crucial or SanDisk they all use in house NAND which binned for high quality.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

Samsung 500GB EVO will cost you $160.00 plus tax after promo code: AFSAMSSD928C

http://m.newegg.com/Product/index?s..._-cables-_-na-_-na&itemnumber=N82E16820147373



Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

Yes, that's why I'm considering to pick the cheaper one. Entry level maybe, as long as it'll last for a few years.

No, I don't. Thanks for the input. I might consider the SanDisk.

 

kaze no tama, only big SSD may last through years - you'll likely dump smaller ones quite soon.

 

Yes, that's why I'm looking at the 1TB.

After digging a little deeper, I think I might go with the Mushkin Enhanced Reactor. Have looked at the SanDisk Extreme Pro + Ultra II, Samsung 850 Pro + EVO as well. It has the slowest sequential write and IOPS but is MLC and the cheapest. Worth it over the TLC Ultra II and 850 EVO? From what I've read, MLC has longevity.

FYI: Mushkin $290, SanDisk Extreme Pro $420, Ultra II $314, Samsung 850 EVO $343, 850 Pro $448 (price from Amazon and Newegg).

Probably be able to push up to the SanDisk Extreme Pro tho but since it's the first time I use SSD so it's like an experiment, or rather to gain experience.

//Not sure why they put 1TB and 960GB. 960GB is the actual (or I should say usable?) capability or what?

 

It is so hard to kill even a small modern SSD.

http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead/2

Read this article and then do analytical analysis. People will fear monger and talk without facts and data about smaller modern SSD's dying.
Don't believe them.



Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

kaze no tama, I'd go with Mushkin for obvious reasons. I even might, unless something cheaper is introduced. =p

 

Just a fyi, if your checking prices. Check out the hoverhound extension for firefox and chrome. Made by some users over at HardOCP, it places a button on the page when your looking at a product at newegg. You mouse-over the button and it shows you the current price at amazon and other retailers, as well as price history at newegg, amazon, etc..
I don't install very many add-ons, but this one is good.
http://hoverhound.us/extension/