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

I kept those on.
All I did on Vista was switching off Defrag - and System Restore (although I know this can be dangerous).

 

I left System Restore on. I haven't had problems with the toolbox because of it.

 

Good luck!
With using that tool you originally mentioned.

 

I'm looking at the benchmarks, and it looks like TRIM is working for the Crucial but not the Intel. (I ran the wiper and the benches look almost the same). What the hell, man.

 

OK - what your Intel's firmware

 

2CV102HD.

TRIM is enabled, it looks like.

 

Strange - try the toolbox?

 

Toolbox gives me the exact same firmware code.

And the toolbox cleaner does work correctly. Benches noticeably increase after running it (though I don't notice real life degradation in performance prior).

Curiouser and curiouser.

 

Indeed.
Maybe worth a dedicated thread?

 

I thought TRIM does work with a RAID array now? But it wasn't endorsed by Intel officially..

 

Quick question for the experts around here. I'm working on an issue with an SSD. Probably a simple one. On my Inspiron 1720, I have a 256GB Samsung SSD. I've installed windows, done a lot of the optimizing, and havn't installed any programs. This is all after secure erase through Ubuntu 9.10, hdparm.

Below I have the before and after speeds. Now for the heart of the question. When I uninstall the Intel Storage Controller, it asks me to restart, I do, and it just gets reinstalled. How can I stop this? I think this is preventing the TRIM commands from being recognized thus reducing the performance.

Win 7 Benches before and after secure erase following this guide. ( https://ata.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/ATA_Secure_Erase)
BEFORE AFTER

Device Manger.





I know it should be a bit faster, I have abused my M11x drive with the wrong type of wipes, numerous times, through Achronis and it's still faster, havn't done a secure erase on it yet. Below are the results for that drive. They are current as of yesterday. Both drives are Samsung TRIM enabled firmware drives, but differant models, and differant firmware.


I have been following some others suggestions in another thread, but also wanted to pitch my problem here since there seems to be a lot of knowedge, and maybe some new light can be shed. Thanks guys

 

Just thinking... so you've got the Rapid Storage Manager and uninstall that - and it comes back?

I think it does the same on Vista - try installing the Intel Matrix Storage Manager and then uninstall that - that should get you to MS AHCI if you want that.

 

Where can I get the Intel Matrix Storage Manager? Just download it off the intel site? I'll give it a shot.

 

Yepp, that would be the easiest way.
(And safest no potential for hidden malware)

 

Intel Download Center

 

Thanks, when I get off work I'll download it. +1 Misdemeanor

 

i've been running newest IRST 9.6 driver for corsair P256(samsung SSD) but have same result as yours. both firmware and driver are TRIM enabled, but performance seems never get fully recovered.

 

Yea, my performance just gets worse and worse. No sign of recovery at all. Going to try a few things tonight. We'll see how it goes.

 

SGilmore...tx for the return...been busy as heck putting an article together...

DR650SE...do u have restore enabled?

 

Quick question. I don't think I've read it anywhere in this forum so I thought that I'll ask.

Does anyone have any experience with Intel regarding a RMA of the X25-M G2 drives? If yes, how long does it take for Intel to repair the drive?

Thanks in advance for any help.

 

For RMA's, most companies just send you another one.

 

I have a Samsung SSD in my XPS 13, which is being replaced. I want to put the SSD in the new system as the primary drive (studio 14) and have the new HDD from the studio 14 as the internal backup. Do I need to erase the SSD, clone it to the studio 14, or both?

 

Is the Intel G2 X25-M Solid State Drive good ? Or can you recommend me some other alternative for the same price ? thanks

 

Stick with Intel.

 

Thanks.

Hopefully, Intel is very fast processing my RMA request & wouldn't be like some companies who take forever with the RMA process.

On second thoughts, maybe I should have waited a bit longer for SSDs to be more "stable & reliable" before jumping on my first one about a month ago. There's no question that I may have gotten a lemon but given this experience, I can't help but think that SSDs on a whole are just not "really ready for the mainstream" yet.

 

It isn't just SSD's that fail, HDD's in notebooks have failure rates too..

http://download.intel.com/it/pdf/En...t_of_Notebook_PCs_with_Solid-State_Drives.pdf

 

SSDs are mainstream and right now I don't think there is any question that HDs have a smaller lifespan and far higher failure rate than SSDs. Was it here at NBR I saw a thread that polled the failure rates of HDs lately. My mouth dropped when I saw what some of the results were.

You had a bad experience which occurs with all retail sales. It appears that it is much more common because, like others who have had similar experiences as you, they come here to find solutions which inflates the actual failure rate immensely. Its the basic premise that one rarely hears from happy clients yet those that have negative experiences are loud and clear...and who could blame them really.

I have been through 10 or so SSDs since the first was released in 2007 (my first SSD review posted here). I haven't had a bad experience with an ssd yet and I have to tell you that I run the heck out of them. I havent even been able to put one to rest through overuse...

 

Well, Intel SSDs are pretty much amongst the most reliable ones out there
The only issue I am aware off was the one Firmware upgrade issue - but they pulled the firmware as a result - and firmware flashing is theoretically always a risk.

Others... well... if your drive dies from going into standby - you wonder who that company employs testing their products...

 

You guys have got valid points & I agree with most of them.

The thing is that I've never had a HDD fail on me but my first SSD died after about a month of ownership. Obviously, mine was a bad experience. However, I'm not bashing SSDs, I'm not telling anyone not to buy any SSDs, I'm just saying that I feel that the SSDs are "not quite really" yet, & I did mentioned earlier that I may have gotten a lemon, which can happen to any product.

My X25-M G2 160GB SSD was working fine until one morning when I turn on my notebook to find that it isn't working anymore (it wasn't recognized at all) & I followed whatever tips/methods I could find on this & other SSD related threads to recover my drive but to no avail. Hopefully, Intel will be really fast in processing my RMA & that my replacement SSD is at least going to be very reliable for a long, long time.

Thanks to everyone though.

 

chevychic55, can You write what happened whit Your Samsung SSD

 

Apparantly IBM trusts the Sandforce drives...

SandForce makes SSDs cheaper, faster, more reliable -- just how IBM likes it -- Engadget

 

So?

I still wouldn't trust it.

Also - here is a good question:
Why don't HDDs not use compression in the same way these Sandforces now do?
Because its not meant for data security.

If you archive stuff - you don't compress it either.

 

The Sandforce Controller supports Hardware encryption -- no need for bitlocker or any other software that will slow your system down.

Understanding SandForce's SF-1200 & SF-1500, Not All Drives are Equal - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

 

Well, finally got fed up with the Crucial drive after it disconnected when trying to connect to Steam. Back goes the Hitachi.

I'm going to wipe the SSD and RMA it, then sell the RMA. thing.

 

Yay... even more way to loose your data....

I wonder how many people will complain about dries that failed with their data on it...
Yes, I know hardware encryption is more secure - but the downside is you MUST have an external backup, because if the drive fails, you can't recover it.

 

Sorry, but you are mistaken on all accounts.

Enterprise hardware not only employs compression but also offers encryption for security purposes when backing up systems.

Current HDDs do not have the controllers capable of performing real-time compression and decompression of data.

Besides, hardware encryption/compression/RAID or not. External backups are the only ways to safeguard your data.

 

Welp, looks like the new C300 firmware update isn't going well...

Crucial Releases RealSSD C300 Firmware Fix, Bricks More Drives? - AnandTech :: Your Source for Hardware Analysis and News

I thought about buying a couple of those C300 drives but my mobo's 6gbps Marvell controller doesn't support RAID -- only IDE and SATA.

 

Hello everyone.
I have a question regarding the loading of a SSD drive. It's a Samsung MMCRE28G5DXP-0VBD7 brandnew.
It seems to me, there a 2 alternatives to accomplish this.

1. Creating an image of my OS(Windows 7 64 Home Premium) partition and subsequently restore it to the SSD.

2. Copy all files(inclusive hidden files) of the OS partition to an external disk, install the SSD, copy all files back and finally create the MBR with the Setup DVD of Windows 7.

Is there any difference regarding the performance of the SSD using one of this options?
Are there any other possibilities to upgrade to a SSD without clean reinstalling the OS?

 

Can somone try and explain to me why doing a Secure erase through Ubuntu 9.10 would kill my write performance?? Here is a before and after shot. I reiinstalled everything, and let it idle all day after logging in. I've applied all SSD tweaks. I did the wipe and install yesterday of Win 7 Home. When installing I formatted at 64k clusters. Here is a Crystal Disk shot of before and after. It's a Samsung 256GB SSD running the standard Win 7 driver in AHCI mode. The Samsung in my Inspiron is crappy too. Must be a step I'm missing I'm thinking a 5400RPM could outperform this thing.


Before:



After:


Starting to think SSD=Evil.

 

It's not "SSD=Evil" - its just that you first buy the right one (Intel) and then don't do stupid things with it.

I just suspect the secure erase doesn't quite work the same on a SSD.

On a HDD you want zeroes - for empty.

There was an argument here whether zero or 1 is empty for a Flash cell - I suspect you just wrote to every cell without garbage collection or trim - result: bad performance.

 

Was it the ATA Secure Erase command or just some software that writes 00's or something?
The ATA Secure Erase sends a command to the controller to set all the NAND as empty, there is no writing and it only takes a few seconds.
Why did you select 64k clusters?

I use HDDErase
http://cmrr.ucsd.edu/people/Hughes/SecureErase.shtml

The Hdparm secure erase command works also...

https://ata.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/ATA_Secure_Erase

I Secure Erased my 80gb Intel G1 SSD yesterday, took less than 20 minutes to image, erase and re-image.

 

I have the X25M 160 G2 with win 7. I am manually trimming about once a week.
Is this necessary? It takes less than a second to complete. I know Win 7 and the G2 drive is supposed to support trim. Everything I've read shows ways to confirm trim is on/enabled but nothing that can actually show that it works.

 

If your write benchmarks are consistently near new out of the box levels and are up to spec then I would assume that it is working.

 

I used the hdparm secure erase command. Selected 64K clusters to see if there was going to be a differance vs. 4k clusters. Which on the 1720 there was no real differance. Certainly no performance drop.

Thanks for the helpful info, I have 3 Intel SSDs, those are not the problem.

 

Can you run AS SSD benchmark to see if 64k clusters somehow borked the alignment during installation?

 

it's running, going to take 20 min due to <1MB/s 4k writes, but alignment appears fine. Looks like I'm going to just try the erase again and re-install.

OK I stopped the bench run as it was taking way too long.

 

I see that you have VBM19C1Q, have you tried using Tony-Trim? I was using a Summit with that 19C firmware and didn't have problems with maintaining performance with TRIM. Something must be blocking the controllers idle time GC. Do you routinely leave the machine to idle at logon screen? I usually run the AS Freespace cleaner>shutdown>cold boot>sleep mode>resume and idle at logon screen for 20 minutes. Your drive is much larger than my 60gb so it should take longer for the performance restoring firmware to do it's job.

I have also had success with plugging the drive in as a spare to another Windows 7 installation and doing a quick format which triggers a TRIM. Just leave the drive plugged in as a spare for a few hours until the controller erases everything. It usually restores the performance instantly with this method it sometimes takes longer because the controller has to see the drive as being idle.

 

I havn't used Tony-Trim. I'll give it a shot. I've left it at the login screen for maybe 20 min. By plugging it into another computer, do I need to erase the drive or can I leave the O/S on it? My other computer is the Inspiron 1720 with Win 7 Pro and I'm not sure the TRIM is working on that as it's speeds are around 130 read/100 write. Is the login screen where the TRIM takes place? I've left it idle all day today, but that was at the desktop.

EDIT: Got a link where I can d/l tony trim? Can't seem to find a link through seach engine, just talk about it.

 

I would plug it in as a spare and do a quick format erasing all data. You could re-image from a system image but I am worried that your 64k clusters thing has somehow messed things up and would want to eliminate that from the list of possible things to troubleshoot.

With it plugged in as a spare there is no need to idle at logon because it will be a spare with no data on it so it should be seen as idle.

 

64K do not harm at all, even MS suggests 64K for improved performance.
I can confirm it since I tested it on my SSD