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

I am giving up Samsung SSD now, just ordered intel 160G from CircuitCIty for $470, and after cashback, is gonna be $410.

 

So I moved three, 8gb movie files over, and deleted them, and it wrecked my write speeds lol, 512k is down to 50 from 90, and the other went down about 10ish. So I guess TRIM is not working?

 

Linky linky?

 

Wow, great price.

 

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,10363.html

Tick-Tock.

 

The only one I like (and use) is CrystalDiskMark. Why? Because its fast and does the least damage to an SSD!

What 'real-world' application do you want to compare to?

I'm sure you remember my Torqx SSD comparison? (Can post the link again if you want) What I did there was memorize a 'typical' hour or two on my computer usage style and repeated it under different scenarios.

Is this something you can do (with your own particular workflow and software usage pattern)?

For a test when you get an SSD (or any other performance improving piece of hardware), you can then directly see if there is a real improvement for you, or not.

The benchmarks that I know and don't love (all of them!) can all be manipulated to show anything the reviewer wants them to show. Or, worse - anything that the manufacturer wants us to see (Seagate 7200.4's anyone?). I learned that over the years and now (actually for the last dozen years or so), everything that comes into my system is on a test or trial period until I see it offers a real (productivity) improvement for me and my style of computer usage.

So, to answer your question a little more directly; 'which benchmark is more close to real-world application' is the one you decide more closely mimics your actual usage - without allowing reviewers or manufacturers to hide behind or manipulate their benchmark scores - while not giving you any real or pertinent information to base a (purchase) decision on.

 

Thanks IntelUser!

February? 2nd quarter 2010? I waaant my MTV... er, G3, SSD....

 

narsnail, ouch!

So, did you do a clean install of Win 7? Or, was this a cloning?

Did you leave the drive to 'breathe' for a couple of minutes after all the HD activity?

And, the IRST drivers v9.5 are installed, right? (...and not the IMSM v8.9).

Is your % filled capacity significantly different than the last couple of CDM benches you ran?

Sorry, more questions than answers for you right now, but this is perplexing...

Oh! One more - but I'm sure I know the answer to this one, you are running in AHCI mode, right?

 

Ok I installed the older Intel Toolbox which apparently borks system restore, but i dont use it so that doesnt matter to me, manually TRIMed and everything is back to normal

 

OK, I backed up, booted with the new drivers from the Intel ISO and it went very smooth. 2 reboots and all is good. I am very happy. I am going to let it "settle" a bit. I am trying to see if there is any change in what we call the "snap factor" and then I will do crystal Disk.

 

narsnail,

Great to hear! Manual TRIM FTW!

BTW, is back to normal with the IRST v9.5 drivers?


Cape Consultant,

waiting, waiting...

 

Yeap! I have those installed. The TRIM actually freed up another GB of space.

 

Hmmm, I would like to install the toolbox, which i was not able to before with older drivers. IS there a link to that new SSD Toolbox somewhere? I am doing crystal now........

 

if you check what PCMark Vantage compares, (such as vista start-up performance, windows photo gallery, windows defender,application loading, windows media center, windows movie maker etc), the chart shows P256 has advantage over all others in every item PCMark Vantage compared, although we have seen P256 is worse than OCZ vertex and intel G2 in crystal and ATTO from here and other place. that's quite strange. no wonder this P256 is much faster than my previous 7K320 and 7K500 but i just don't have a chance to compare with intel G2 in real-world performance such as start-up time etc. according to this chart, P256 seems better than intel G2 for start-up time and application loading etc but i can't verify...

 

I can get you a link to the old one if you would like, it adds TRIM support, but the downside is it apparently corrupts system restores, but if you dont use system restore like myself, then your good to go.

 

Thanks, I guess I will try to wait. Not for system restore, but so that it will have a better chance of installing. the old one would not install.

here is score:

--------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 2.2 (C) 2007-2008 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
--------------------------------------------------

Sequential Read : 241.682 MB/s
Sequential Write : 109.295 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 157.720 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 111.514 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 19.509 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 43.211 MB/s

Test Size : 500 MB
Date : 2009/12/04 1:32:30

 

here is picture.

 

Just because PCMark Vantage compares what seems to be 'real world' tests - you think this benchmark is usable for you or even impartial?

It actually proves (to me at least) what I wrote before; benchmarks can be used by the manufacturers (in this case Samsung) to 'show' their product in the best light. My actual use of a Samsung (not the 256GB model though) has left me cold for anything with a Samsung label on it.

Also, everyone that I've talked to (davepermen?) that has used both Samsung and Intel just laughs at the Samsung's 'performance', comparatively.

Now, don't get me wrong - Samsung offers far and away the best power consumption of any SSD I've researched - but gaining a few moments in my 18.4" VAIO will not make me ignore the 'real' real world usage I've experienced with it.

Again, I'll repeat it a different way - benchmarks are simply statistics that can be bent at will, without your knowing who is doing the bending (but do know that it is definitely not set up to benefit you).

 

Cape (I can't believe I'm asking this... lol),

Do you want to install the CDM 3.0 Beta 1 drivers so we can compare more directly with narsnail? Thanks in advance (if you want to).

See:
http://www.majorgeeks.com/download5574.html?2009-11-15


narsnail, it freed another GB of space? Does it clean out temp files (I can't see this tool in action yet)?

Well, no matter how it does it, it is just running better than before - that's all!

 

I laughed, as I thoght you were suggesting that I install BETA DRIVERs at first LOL! Here are the results, WOWOWOWOW.

---------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0 Beta1 (C) 2007-2009 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
---------------------------------------------------------------

Sequential Read : 242.128 MB/s
Sequential Write : 111.137 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 160.008 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 110.522 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 19.714 MB/s [ 4813.0 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 43.203 MB/s [ 10547.7 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 25.050 MB/s [ 6115.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 78.169 MB/s [ 19084.2 IOPS]

Test : 500 MB [C: Used 52.3% (77.8/148.7 GB)]
Date : 2009/12/04 2:59:33
OS : Windows 7 [6.1 Build 7600] (x86)

 

I laughed, as I thoght you were suggesting that I install BETA DRIVERs at first LOL! Here are the results, WOWOWOWOW.

---------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0 Beta1 (C) 2007-2009 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
---------------------------------------------------------------

Sequential Read : 242.128 MB/s
Sequential Write : 111.137 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 160.008 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 110.522 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 19.714 MB/s [ 4813.0 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 43.203 MB/s [ 10547.7 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 25.050 MB/s [ 6115.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 78.169 MB/s [ 19084.2 IOPS]

Test : 500 MB [C: Used 52.3% (77.8/148.7 GB)]
Date : 2009/12/04 2:59:33
OS : Windows 7 [6.1 Build 7600] (x86)

 

and the photo, this is the best ever, right?

 

Ok, photo here, messed up before.

 

actually, for laptop users that have to rely on a system to work, they are important even wile you have backups. why? if somehow outside (power out, battery didn't take over, f.e.) you kill your system files, system restore will be there to help, backup won't, as you're not at home. and restore would take much longer from a backup.

i still have it disabled. so far i only had that issue happen once, and it was not right before i had a gig. so i continue to believe in luck

 

yeah. all ssds perform good enough to show up exceptionally well in about all benchmarks, compared to hdds. so the question is mainly, which feels faster. and the samsungs feel much slower than the intels for most, that used both. the intel gives an always instant-response, even while it might be slower, it at least reacts faster, which is what the end user actually cares about.

 

Somewhere between 3 and 6 times I actually needed system restore on mine or a clients computer, it did not work. Come to think of it, it never worked for me. Although I have heard of it working for others.

 

And yes, i could care less about benchmarks, I want it to FEEL fast. I like my SSD, but expected a bit faster. Would be nice if Dreamweaver popped like notepad

 

well, for me it never really works well, but good enough to at least get into the os again. later, i use a backup to restore to a 'clean state'. not that i use system restore myself, anyways..

and, no, dreamweaver never pops like notepad. it's an adobe app, the only reason we need faster cpu's, more ram, and ssds. adobe bulkiness.. (i would so love that company to just not exist.. hate them with passion.. die flash, die.. etc )

 

Yeah, agree on both counts. Adobe is slow starting, and a pain in general. But it is the devil I know for web sites and that makes me a little $$$ so I chug along. How do I know if I have TRIM or not? thanks.

 

Actually Dreamweaver opens pretty quickly on a G2 160GB Intel drive
Just timed it at 8 seconds.... but it used to be faster... I'm in a Vaio powersaver mode though - shouldn't affect my read speed but who knows...

Photoshop takes about 8 seconds.

And Dave, Adobe software may be bulky, but what it does it does well
(Photoshop, Dreaweaver...)

 

Yeah, it is popping up about that fast. No stop watch handy. Quiet and no moving parts. truly amazing.

 

I've always got one on my wrist but I'm sure it used to be faster...but maybe that's due to running on AC...

 

yeah, it does it's job well: spamming the web with flash, making it non-standards webby with dreamweaver, locking it down with the non-parseable pdf format, etc..

if you would be developer, you would run away from it when ever you can. and don't let us talk about adobe products in the corporate environment (adobe workflow, f.e... compared to this, everything you know is actually awesome and nice..).

nothing (except maybe photoshop, but alternatives actually exist, and are more cheap) that adobe created and invented is anything that is needed, except for one reason: because adobe created that arbitary need, and now we have legacy to support and built upon.

but yeah, it works. it's just fun to see dreamweaver taking 8 seconds on an ssd, while a real development environment like visual studio popping up instantly, not even having half a second or so delay. and that can do much more than just "creating websites"

 

LOL! Cracks me up. Yeah, the lack of standards has sure been a bummer for those of us who work the web, but a boon for companies Like Adobe.

 

something different: an app that takes about 1/3rd of a full os boot to start up, just to edit some simple textfiles shows lack of structured development. and a setup routine that can take 10x as long to install than a full os, same

both are, what adobe products give me besides making my vista very instable, back when i had to use it for a friend..

 

I've had no stability issues at all.
I did have Office 2010 crash with Adobe Add Ons, but that's a Beta...

And in terms of startup times - I'm sure the battery saver mode adds to the slow startup in my case, and maybe the fact that I haven't restarted in 30 odd hours...

Also: Dreamweaver is a large programme - and I do have to say that I find it easier to use than Visual Web Developer, and it seems to handle CSS better.

 

no, no, and.. no

dreamweaver is a more highlevel program. it has no features in it that makes sense to have it being slow, or large. visual web developer is for actually programming dynamic web pages. dreamweaver is about arty pages that mostly have no real content anyways .
don't ever try to write facebook, or this forum, or what ever in dreamweaver, you would fail. visual web developer, no problem.

and dreamweaver doesn't handle css well. had to fix enough problems friends created by using dreamweaver.

in the end, doing it by hand is the most simple solution for web pages anyways. it's not like it's much work, or complicated. but one has to learn a bit.

and btw, all offices happen to crash due to adobe addons. at work, the first fix we always do on a pc is disabling all things adobe. helps for most recurring non-regular crashes with apps.

 

I moved some things from my SSD to HDD like my pictures folder then I formatted my HDD--don't ask me why but now my snipping tool doesn't save because the default save location doesn't exist anymore. It just disappears after I click yes at the, "do you want to save changes to the snip" prompt. Does anyone know how to fix that? Create a new my pictures folder on D drive?

 

The time I used CSS in Visual Web Developer it dumped all in the header so I had to move it all to s Stylesheet...
Dreamweaver can write is to the style sheet directly.

Programming - that's your territory.

Adobe Add-Ons - they were all stable in Office 2007 for me

and on the start up time - I'm sure Dreamweaver would speed up in a non battery saver mode after a reeboot.

 

I think that will link to the default "images folder" - so you'd need to remap that.
(The one that is in the folder with your username)

 

Congratz man! If you don't mind my asking, what cashback did you use? Was it included with Circuit City, or some online promotion? I keep hearing about these cashbaks but I don't know anything!

 

you could just .. add a new stylesheet in web developer. and edit that. as said, dreamweaver is more highlevel, abstracting such stuff away from you, but then, not giving sensible options, too.

and is what all real web development is about. the rest is just a bit of design to hide that the web page doesn't really have content.

but not for others. for a lot others.

and they still are much too slow. compare to the office apps, or visual studio. even ableton live starts fast (but then hangs some seconds searching and initializing midi controllers.. but that's a constant-time issue that no faster hw can fix)

 

Design vs. content you can argue that forever...

But why are you so obsessed with start up speeds Dave?

The 8 seconds you wait - or 4 (when I launched it again, but on AC and maybe some was prefetched, no idea) won't change your life.

Reducing boot time from over 2 minutes - especially hanging a bit after the log on screen... (But that was KIS 2010 ) to less than 1 minute can be useful - but 4 seconds, come on.
At least you see its working by the little text jumping around the "loading screen".

 

just timed Photoshop CS4 64bit 6 seconds.(second time 4 seconds-launched again)

 

no. just read up and learn about web development, about hype vs. reality, etc.. it's just common sense against "gold rush".

i'm not, but seeing a simple text-editor-style app having several seconds, while the full os, initialising all hw, can be boot up in only maybe 2, 3x the time, shows something is completely wrong with that app.
espencially if all other apps for similar tasks boot instantly. it just shows how much crap is in that software.

it does, when you want to use it to "just preview something quickly".

it forces me to work less efficient when, f.e., scanning for a file. yes, it changes much.

and it shows how much that product is filled with useless clutter.

 

the problem is that i much doubt whether P256 is identical to samsung 256G: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?p=5568860#post5568860
plus nobody here seems have real-world performance comparison between P256 and intel G2(not samsung vs intel G2).(128G or less drive from corsair has less cache than P256 which has 128M)

 

I have a quick question. I have seen many variants of the X25-M G2 80GB drive I'm interested in. More exactly:

SA2MH080G2 01
SA2MH080G2 C1
SA2MH080G2 R5

and there could be others.

What does this mean? I suspect it's only some marking referring to what part of the world they're sold in. Then again, it might be a revision number, which may indicate differences in build quality, performance or other issues.

I would very much appreciate if you could enlighten me on this matter. Thank you in advance for your help!

scumtk.

 

In case this hasn't been posted before, this is a streamlined version of Tomy's post in regards to partition alignment, plus a bit extra: http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=107126

Plus a layman's alignment calculator.

 

vostro1400user, this is not the first time that i have read in tests that some SSD drives with a Samsung controller beat Intel drives in boot times.

This is just one of those tests that i've read and it seems fair because in those tests i don't think that the drive was near full.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2009/06/05/corsair-p256-256gb-ssd-review/9

I have owned 3 Samsung SSD drives and i couldn't be happier. They work well for me and i would consider them again in the future. I love the lower power consumption and that is the main reason why i am so fond of Samsung drives. Also, they perform very decently for me. My P128 that i bought in June in my Sony SZ still performs exceptionally well. I can get around 23-25 secs from a coold boot in W7 to my desktop and it launches all my applications fast. Where Intel may have the edge has no real advantage to me.
If you're happy with your drive then that is really all that matters.

 

while i personally think samsungs are utter crap compared to their competition, this statement of you is the real holy grail, so i quote it again in fat: