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

I really don't think you would notice the difference between 300MB/s and 600MB/s unless you were talking about huge files and even then it wouldn't be necessary. When do you think 600MB/s is going to be a significant bottleneck?

I really don't see it slowing down game level loading. Which games have over 300MB or 600MB! maps? the difference of a second or two loading would barely be noticeable.

 

LOL this is cracking me up! since when do you guys say "computers are good where they're at, no need for improvements..."?

I'll agree. At this stage in the game, with things how they are, you probably would never notice the difference, but later when the rest of the tech catches up, I'm sure we'll be glad to have transfer rates exceeding 600mb/s.

And if we can get something thats, maybe, not obsolete in a year or two, what's wrong with that?

 

There's nothing wrong with that and I wholeheartedly agree with you, if that makes you feel any better.

 

You know how it works, the more powerful tech gets the more developers get sloppy and make us require the top stuff for proper performance.

So when super fast SSD is the standard they will just start making programs and games and things rely on that speed and if you dont have it your going to be crawling along.

This trend is most obvious with video cards, every time a new super powerful card comes out some game developer makes a game so crazy hard to render that you need 2 or 3 of them in SLI/Crossfire to max out the game, but honestly if they had just optimized the engine properly it could have been done on just 1 card probably.

 

I agree, sloppy programming "because they can", costs you and me money, but if tech didn't advance, i'd be stareing at a black and green screen right now...

Advancements are a good thing and really they only moves as fast as consumers let it. if developers get so sloppy that programs are so resource intensive that only hardware that no one has can run it, it won't sell... and they will lose money.

However they do dance on that edge a little, but hey, that doesn't make anyones existing hardware worse, just that there is better out there that can do more...

Everone just has to know, if you buy the best today, there will always be something better tomorow, and that's a good thing!

 

actually, on ompf we're starting to think of ssds as huge caches for rapid raytracing of imense datasets that don't fit into ram

we can always use MORE POWERRRRHH (tim taylor)

more speed, and espencially, lower latencies, that is (love intel for that)

 

Yeah, it's funny to hear anyone say "isn't 600MB/sec fast enough?" Look at every hard drive interface standard there's ever been - the max speed has always been several times faster than the fastest available drives at the time. You want that, because you want the standard to stay relevant for several years. (Hell, it takes several years to write the standards in the first place.)

But here we are with SATA 300MB/sec being blown away, a mere doubling to 600MB/sec isn't going to be adequate for SSDs for more than a year, given the way integrated circuit technology advances. (OK, Moore's law says doubling is every 18 months, but you get the point.)

It really highlights a couple of points:
1) SSD technology is so different from HDD technology that specifications originally designed for HDDs will never be really adequate for SSDs.
2) HDD technology advancement cannot keep pace with Moore's Law. It's probably time to admit that the time for HDDs as primary storage is over. Given that HDDs are only tolerable when doing sequential operations, it's probably best to just think of them as tape drives. Maybe using them as backups is OK, backing up my 256GB SSD onto a 1TB HDD seems like a decent and cheap solution.

On the other hand, nobody said you can't make a PCIE card that looks like a SATA controller on the host side, but has unlimited speed on the storage side, so that it works with regular SATA controller device drivers, but spits data out at full PCIE speed.

 

Who said that?

Yes, it will be nice... but paying a premium now and in the next year or two for 600MB/s over 300MB/s is most likely not worth it for 99% of people. Sure, it's nice... but practically speaking it's a waste of money.

Nothing if you have money to burn... I'd rather put money toward my kids college than pay a high premium for something that provides almost no practical (useful) benefit.

Now if you're talking HD to SSD, that can be justified because the difference is significant, but 300MB/s SSD to 600MB/s SSD would be hard to justify if there's a significant premium and the benefits are not even noticeable (or barely noticeable) in typical use. But who knows, maybe the premium won't be that high.

 

Nice new review on Laptopmag with some real world tests.

 

no intel? have to read, do they state why no intel?

kingston v looks fine


okay, they tested 128GB disks only.

 

A bench without an intel is not a real bench.

 

So it looks like to me Intel's using the "Tick-Tock" strategy in nearly every segment of their manufacturing and design.

CPU

Core 2 Merom-Tock(innovation)
Penryn-Tick(shrink)
Nehalem-Tock(innovation)

SSD

Ephraim-Tock(innovation)
Postville-Tick(shrink)
34nm release later next year-Tock(innovation)

According to Tech Report, Intel didn't increase Postville for the sake of faster release and lowering prices. The 34nm 2nd release should be the performance-oriented one.

Now the question is:

Will you buy the "Penryn", or wait for the "Nehalem"??

 

and the obvious answer from dave:

both

 

sammys don't need trim since they are able to refresh them self without trim

 

LOL. I like the Tech Report review. It's good they realized that the old Pentium 4 system was the bottleneck. It changed the view of X25-M Gen 1 quite a bit.

The pricing is becoming enticing but as a user who spent $750 US equivalent(after tax) on the SSD, its still not low enough.

I have to admit though with lowly integrated graphics user with obsession towards loading times and boot up times its kind of hard to think of using anything else, even a non-NCQ enabled X25-M.

After a virus and a format recently I have used the drive without AHCI enabled but in games where I used to be able to play fine(5 fps with lots of action and 12 fps average but EXTREMELY stable fps), and when I haven't been able to as well, I JUST knew it was lack of AHCI and lack of related features was the problem.

The system is extremely resilient in not wanting to drop 4 fps in WoW no matter what I do. I have seen and heard better graphics systems dropping from 30 fps average to 1-2 which is unplayable, but 12 fps average to 4 fps drops(and stable mind you ) is very playable.

 

the big magic sammy feature interestingly, intel, mtron, indilinx all don't need trim.

but it's still nice to have.

 

Looking at the Tech Report review, the lack of high IOPS seems to be why the Samsung based Summit don't really drop in performances either. Except the really bad ones like the OCZ Core-controller based SSDs, the sacrifice for IOPS seems to be lack of fluctuation in performance and vice versa. And the ones that achieve BOTH were prohibitively expensive(like the Intel SSD, but not so much anymore).

Anyway, I still don't think its worth the $750 I bought, but when I hear of high-end graphics system people, like the 8600GT or 9600 whatever and they complain about not being playable sometimes, I do become proud of this system and this little SSD.

I don't need your 9600, pfftt.

 

the very bad IOPS of the samsung shows as well why they feel that much slower than the intel or mtrons.

and, as samsung once stated, they sell them in "degraded state". so the reason the performance doesn't drop on them, is, they pre-"dropped" the performance before going into the shops. that's why they have 0 drop. and the others have little drop.

still, a dropped intel kicks *** around any undropped samsung. so i still wouldn't buy one.

 

Yea, the Sammy's seem to do well on the FC benches though.

Anyways, I think the Postville stop-ship has to do with the drive-level AES 128-bit Encryption. It's good that its repairable by firmware update.

 

btw, here:

Intels refresh just perfect..

it really is no special sammy feature

 

Can someone tell me if Samsung SSDs can upgrade firmware if so where

 

I just wanted to clarify something for myself... so the intel G2's are not the smaller 34nm flash? just an updated firmware?

 

G2's have new controller and smaller flash. They are not G1's with updated firmware.

 

Ok that's what i thought. This post kinda confused me...
34nm release later next year-Tock(innovation)
is the "innovation" then just, cramming more flash chips into a drive? Or will the higher capacity drives be the same price as the G2's we have now?

 

here is a real bench http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlDWdfTAx8o

 

if the SSD's follow the same tick-tock path, then this new 2nd gen on the 34nm process is simply a shrink with minor improvements (tock). the controller, while technically not the same as before, is very similar. capacities have not changed, and performance is only slightly increased, but cost is where the big change happened

the next step in the process is another tock, which will be a completely new product. while it will still be on 34 nm, it will most likely be very different from the current SSD, with higher capacities as well.

 

should one of those "tocks" be a "tick"?

 

Looks like prices are dropping on other SSD's. OCZ Summit 60Gb for $149 AR, and another -$10 with a 10 off 100 coupon.
http://www.mwave.com/mwave/SKUSearch_v3.asp?scriteria=BA31644

 

This question must've been asked a million times already, so lets make it a million and one.

After installing my SSD in my laptop and it comes time to install the OS.

Do I need to format it, or do I just proceed the OS installation?

 

No, I said on the post that Postville is merely a shrink to 34nm(well it has some minor improvements but mostly a shrink). I'm just assuming similar Tick Tock seems to be in effect for SSDs.

The Postville refresh(the innovation) should be everything expected with new generation. Better performance, more capacity. Prices are not really going down with refresh since its not a die shrink, I'd say.

Tock-New architecture
Tick-Shrink/derivative

 

I ordered the intel 34nm "postville" 160gb drive from ncix a few days ago, and they emailed me back earlier today saying there was a recall for the firmware, so they are offering me the previous gen 160gb for 475. The new one is 529. Should I wait? or would it be worth the 50 bucks in savings for the previous version? How much of a difference do you guys think there will be? I cant find any info on this anywhere.

 

I say wait.

And I changed my mind. I want the Postville Refresh 160GB ssd coming in Q1 next year. Anyone have any details on it?

 

Seconded that. Wait. You spent so much, you might as well wait a little bit longer to get the best performance.

 

Wait. Get the best you can get now. My motto with tech is do it right the first time so you don't have to go back and do it again later. (think in terms of money) Though I still made the same mistake twice of not going with the fastest CPU speeds on my notebooks.

 

Does anyone here who have been using SSD for over a month have tried Diskeeper Hyperfast?

In my case, it actually improved snappiness and recovered disk space. My disk free space has actually gone up from 39GB to 46GB after using Hyperfast.

 

Hold on, looking at the review that legit reviews came out with, it looks like the only big difference between the two is ~20 extra megs of write speed, either than that, they are almost the same. However, the old X-25 M doesnt support TRIM.

Im playing games (steam stuff, Left 4 Dead and the like), surfing the net, downloading the odd bunch of movies (~5GB a month) and reloading my OS once a year. On average I would use half of 160gb at any given time. Would it REALLY reduce the lifetime of the drive a lot if I did not have the TRIM command?

 

Here, here, and here are good explanation of TRIM, see if it is worthwhile to you. I would want it.

 

...and I think I do too. Thanks for the Links!! Maybe I can get slightly faster shipping when they come in, rather than a discount (then again, its not their fault...)

 

Proceed with the OS installation and if it wants to do a format, let it... but do "quick" ones instead of "full" ones.

 

it will be the 320GB, and they will be faster due to new controller. so the slow writes will be fixed, the new slc will maybe be sata3 (one can hope), maybe even the mlc.

well, they'll all get faster, that's for sure.

 

http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/17269

The above review shows pretty good differences in File Creation test.

I'd say the latency measurements on page 4 are the most important because latency=time to access individual files vs. throughput=how long it takes to transfer data.

I mean, the strength of an SSD is not throughput but latency. If its even better on latency, I'd say go for it.

I'd be tempted at this price if I didn't have the Gen 1 drive already.

Nahh, I would personally only use TRIM before a format so it stays fresh state at that point. I mean, if I'm gonna delete everything, why not start fresh? TRIM's not gonna help you with drive lifespan, only performance. The deleting process it does still takes out the life out of your SSD cells.

 

http://www.dailytech.com/Intel+Conf...ents+Pending+Firmware+Update/article15827.htm

intel officially reports on the bug in the actual firmware and the shipment suspension..

that's why i buy from them, they know to act right, even in bad cases.

(and to all amd lovers intel haters: yes, they learned it the wrong way )

 

Go intel for making things right! AND GO INTEL FOR DRIVING DOWN PRICES!!!! never thought i'd be saying that

 

hey, I faceing a dilema now... what to get...
Intel M25X 80GB G1 @ 249$ CAD
or
Intel M25X 80GB G2 @ 275$ CAD
What should I get, I know the new intel is better but it doesn't seem to be 25 Dollars + a couple week wait worth... any thoughts? all I care about is OS and app loading time.

Edit: Intel as company still sucks. AMD just needs to put something out that competes and I'll buy from them

 

get gen2. it should worth it. bit higher performance, and, one day, when everyone supports trim, another chance for a bit of a performance gain.

and about the edit: haha, but.. no. sadly. with start of their core line, they did everything right they could. haven't seen anything close to perfection in the way they develop their stuff, and how it works. amd is so far behind it's not funny. i bought amd before, too. but it's years since they where the ones shaping the industry. now it's 100% by intel. and that is not the best we can have, of course.

but it's offtopic anyways

 

When the intel G2 was listed on newegg it was only $229 so i would definitely wait for newegg to list again!

edit: just noticed CAD was canadian dollar. Not that u wanted to use the SSD for Computer Aided Design work haha

 

Oh c'mon

 

I don't agree with You, Intel shouldn't ever sell products with defective FW.
OCZ too.

What if You buy car with low oil level in brake system?
If that manufacturer repair it on their own cost is this perfect manufacturer?
Of course NOT!!! Someone could die! And with SSD You can lose important files.

I'll never buy OCZ and Intel SSDs until they're few months available.

 

Intel is way ahead of AMD on there nm processing, since that seems to be the big leading factor in SSD now, looks like Intel wins in both SSD & CPU.

AMD has it place on the cpu market for low price low power machines, but for SSD intel has got both the low price and the performance so nobody can do much about it.

OCZ Vertex was the closest competitor IMO and while priced lower its just not low enough for most people to bite.

If I saw a 120gb vertex for $200 id go for it over intel

On another note, AMD did great on the GPU market this year, they actually beat out Nvidia IMO, high performance products and great prices. It was not till Q4 that Nvidia started to really get competitive and lower prices. Now they have there new IGP coming soon maybe too that beats out the intel/nvidia stuff.

 

What do you mean in your opinion? They either beat out nVidia or they didn't. Profits are profits.

As for the Intel haters, is that your only gripe? Shipping SSD's with poor firmware? Or do you hate the huge monopoly Intel seems to have? Just curious, as they seem to be doing quite well in the last two years...