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

BTW, SSDs at least in the near term will only stay for performance devices.

By Moore's Law, transistors double every 24 months which effectively means half the cost per gigabyte every 2 years.

In comparison hard drive drops 50% every 1 year...
http://www.mattscomputertrends.com/harddiskdata.html

Currently in Canadian NCIX 1.5TB(1500GB) hard drive costs $200. In comparison, the 128GB OCZ Core series costs $568. The price difference per GB is an astonishing 33x.

Since hard drive prices don't stay static, we won't see price parity anytime soon(if at all).

 

I was one of them that I reported it. But now I think of it maybe I was confused in one of them(probably internet related). The hard drives do a similar thing. On the SSD though, even if the program slowed down for some reason, all the other programs would be unaffected. On a hard drive, there would be a situation when sometimes when the main program slows down, alt-tabbing or switching between programs would have a larger delay.

Jlingo is the other guy that reported it. He has all the write cache and prefetch features disabled. The system is also capped at SATA-150.

I tested some synthetic benchmarks with the write cache off(on device manager), the random write speed would drop to non-Intel SSD speeds. So don't disable write cache, although I reckon software prefetch on Vista would be better having it off.

Nah I love my X25-M.

Just tested searching from Windows. On the X25-M, it takes 2-3 seconds to search what I put...

FYI, the Intel drives aren't faster than regular SSDs when loading apps or booting. It has advantages when actually doing something like searching a file/opening pictures/transferring data.

 

you are absolutely correct ... the program matters a great deal.
I used Winrar 3.62
With Vista unpacking that zip supposedly was going to take 2 hours and 32 minutes. I canceled it.

 

Has anyone gotten an SSD successfully installed into an hp nc2400?

I tried a Sandisk ssd and it failed to work in the nc2400. I'd like to try another brand of ssd, but would prefer to hear back from someone that actually got it to work before I put my money down.

An ebay seller in korea lists the MTRON 3000 as being compatible with the nc2400, but I am skeptical....

 

whats the best brands out there now ? Itel or Samsung ?

OCZ is am OEM for samsung ?

 

Only OCZ SLC. OCZ MLC drives are their own junk. Intel and Samsung (and samsung rebrands) and maybe Mtron are the best.

 

The OCZ Solid series have been out for a bit, and they cost less than the Core series. Read: up to 155 MB/sec Write: up to 90 MB/sec. How are they inferior to the Core?

Also, i got this other question. If i copy a bunch of small files in windows explorer in one throw (select all, copy, paste), on a normal HDD it's considered sequential write. Is this considered random write in SSD? Do they close the cell and then rewrite it at each small file or do they know they're all in a queue? Seems pretty stupid to me if they did rewrite it a couple hundred times when it's obviously a single session copy.

 

did you guys notice the power consumption:

---------

Samsung 64GB SLC:
0.48 Watt read, 0/46 Watt write, 0.2 Watt iddle

http://www.samsung.com/global/syste...oduct/2008/10/29/14116725_SATA_30Gbps_SLC.pdf

--------

Mtron Mobi 3500 64GB SLC:
1.4 Watt read, 3 Watt write, 1.13 Watt idle

http://mtron.net/Upload_Data/Spec/ASiC/MOBI/SATA/MSD-SATA3525_rev0.3.pdf

--------

that pretty much says to me: Samsung FTW

 

Wow - what a difference indeed Miro. Do we know yet how the SLC drives compare to current HDD's temp wise? Excuse my ignorance but I have terrible memory despite reading this thread everyday at least twice.

 

what is SLC and MLC ?

 

Read the first post of this thread.

 

I am not sure that you are correct (although it may depend on the file system in use).

Take NTFS for example. If you are copying one large file, you are doing a sequential write. However, when you are copying lots of small files and folders, you are not just writing the file data. You are also writing lots of directory data, lots of metadata, updating the change journal etc, for each data file. AFAIK this data is not just sequentially added but written to other locations (e.g. the MFT).

Therefore copying lots of small files and folders (when using NTFS) results in lots of small random writes.

 

Quite often even a single file is not written sequentially. Hence the reason why fragmentation occurs.

 

I'm saying this thinking of the situation when i will transfer the content of my current HDD to my SSD, a full migration to a blank drive. That's why i supposed the write would have been sequential at least on a normal HDD.

 

i searched for SLC and MLC on the first page and got no returns, what do you mean?

 

Ok, it's fine if you've never heard of SLC or MLC, but it's a completely different thing to pretend that you've never heard of Google or Wikipedia.

 

To recap:

SLC = Single Level Cell
MLC = Multi-Level Cell

Until recently all Flash memory was SLC, which stores 1 bit per cell.

MLC is relatively new, and currently stores 2 bits in each cell. In the lab it has reached densities as high as 4 bits per cell. More bits per cell means it's cheaper to produce, but it also has lower write speeds and lower "write endurance", which is the number of times a given cell can be written before it is likely to fail.

SLC typically has a write endurance of 100,000 cycles. MLC is typically 10,000. In practice MLC's endurance is fine for solid state storage, given effective wear-leveling algorithms. This is something that Intel's MLC drive excels at, and everything else on the market is a toy in comparison.

I expect MLC is the future, but for now, SLC is the way to go for solid state storage if write performance matters - with the single exception of Intel's drive.

 

I've read that Windows Steadystate alleviates a lot of the write issues with first generation MLC drives with the jmicron controller. What do you think about this "fix"? I'm thinking of buying a SSD, but SLCs and the X25M are out of the picture by virtue of cost alone.

 

Read through this thread! It's only about 36 pages if you adjust your preferences accordingly

I think Steadystate falls into the ugly workaround category. It's probably not for most people.

 

Wow. I guess going to the Mtron Mobi 3500 is going to HURT battery life.
Does anyone know when the next gen Samsung SLC will come out / be available? Hopefully it will also be priced cheaper and then it will be the only SSD worth getting.

 

Thirty-six...!

Actually, I did leisurely peruse through the thread during a particularly glorious journey of procrastination, but to be honest my interest in acquiring an SSD extend only to precisely 23 and one quarter pages.

The only downside in using Steadystate seems to be an increased boot-up time and stuff gets written into the harddrive during each start-up?

 

Great question. I would be interested to know too.
I only tried a Patriot Warp (crap) 64GB MLC SSD once and it seemed to run about as warm as my Seagate 7200rpm 100GB drive. (<= both felt very warm to the touch if removed immediately after usage ... could be my laptop/temperature radiation from other components though).

 

Yes, that is about it. There is a SteadyState guide in the OCZ forum.

 

SSDs aren't supposed to produce any heat since no moving parts. Maybe try it on a desktop and leave it in the open. You probably won't even notice its running.

 

Unfortunately, theory and practice is not always the same.

E.g. some of the early 2.5" Mtrons had idle power consumption of approx 4W, with read and write operations raising it to approx 6W.

 

Thank you!

 

Hi SSD experts, today I was at my local Fry's and I saw "Imation Mobi 3000" 32GB SLC SSDs going for $199.99. I couldn't find any substantial review information on these drives, but "Imation Mobi 3000" sounds awfully similar to "Mtron Mobi 3000", so I'm wondering if it's just a rebrand? Can anyone confirm or deny?

 

Confirmed. Keep in mind that the Mtron Mobi 3500 is a step up from the 3000, and it's also cheaper.

 

How do the specs of the 3500 compare with those of the 3000? I've been able to find the same sized 3500 on ebay for $250, but $200 for the first gen still seems pretty good - specially when similar-sized jmicron controlled MLCs are still ~ $100.

 

CPUs and GPUs also have no moving parts.

 

Sorry, I didn't see the $199 price you posted. Not bad! Sequential write speed on the 3500 is improved to 100MB/s - mine actually does sequential writes a little faster than reads. I believe it has lower power consumption as compared to the 3000 (which is still not great) and is marketed as SATA-2.

I'm not sure if the 3500 is a native SATA design or not. I'm tempted to void the warranty on my 16GB model and take a peek inside.

Strangely enough, my 16GB Mobi 3500 has a white plastic enclosure and my 32GB Mobi 3500 has an aluminum enclosure (or else it's pretty convincing plastic.)

Last but not least, I wonder if the Imation units can be firmware upgraded via the Mtron site? My 3500's arrived with the most recent firmware (0.19R1H2) already installed.

Don't forget about Rocketdisk.com.

 

you know, this gets interesting here

Mtron mobi 3000 random write IOPS: 130
Mtron mobi 3500 random write IOPS: 60

thought the 3500 is a bit faster at sequential writes: 50,000 vs. 42,000 of mobi 3000 (test for 512b, or one block size)


knowing that the random writes is what slows down the devise, I'd say that the mobi 3000 is faster

http://mtron.net/Upload_Data/Spec/ASiC/MOBI/SATA/MSD-SATA3025_rev0.4.pdf

http://mtron.net/Upload_Data/Spec/ASiC/MOBI/SATA/MSD-SATA3525_rev0.3.pdf

P.S. Also the 3000 series use less power than the 3500 series, though it's still more than the Samsung SLC SSD

 

It's quite possible the 3000 is faster than the 3500 with typical workloads. Based on what I've seen here about the 3000, people like them. I am happy with my 3500's. Although if Mtron doesn't improve their controller technology quickly, I don't expect them to be a big player in this field. The Mtron firmware lacks just about all the optional ATA features. I'm betting that the Intel X25-M will hit $349 by July

I wish I could directly compare the 3500 and the 3000. It would also be nice to know whether Mtron uses the same tests to spec all their models.

 

Hello Everybody,

The Mtron 3500 Series is the new generation of the Mtron 3000 Series, but the Mtron 3000 Series is not EOL (End of Life). It is actually $179 here - rocketdisk.com/product_info.php?products_id=36.

The 3500 Series is indeed faster & has the SATA II interface.

The 2.5" 16GB & 32GB versions of the Mtron 3000 Series & 3500 Series have plastic casings. Bicster got very lucky, because the 1st 1000 pcs that went through production came with the aluminum case. Who says you don't get something for nothing nowadays

 

Whoa whoa whoa... the Mobi's power consumption is not that great? How does it fair compared to a regular 5400RPM HDD? I don't mind if it's similar, but if it's significantly worse... Imation is claiming 0.5/2 watts idle/active http://www.imation.com/products/ssd/ssd_compare.html

Honestly, I'm less concerned about sequential writes seeing as the real problem with the jmicron drives is random writes. Is IOPS a good measure of the drives' performance in random writes? If so, how do these compare to a standard HDD and/or the jmicron MLCs, and why is the 3000 double the IOPS of the 3500?

 

Newegg are selling the 250 GB Solid and Core Series SSD. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...00636 1421444038&name=250GB&SpeTabStoreType=1.

I just bought the 250 GB Solid Series as a storage drive to put in the ultra bay II Sata Adapter on my T400.

 

I was trying Diskeeper 2009 and noticed a feature in the new version that had to do with SSD drives. This got my attention and I ended up here:

http://www.apacer.com/ssd_optimizer/index.asp

Very interesting. Dave

 

Yeah, I still experience occassional Suttering.
Not as bad, still completely acceptable though.
I'm waiting for 128GB Mtron SLC.

 

Nice spot Dave. This sounds almost identical to EasyCo MFT but quite a bit cheaper when using a large SSD. Are you saying this is already integrated into Diskeeper 2009?

EDIT: This is the product page ( HyperFast) but it's currently giving an error, as are all the product pages on the Diskeeper site?

Some more info here.

"HyperFast delivers automatic maintenance of the file system, keeping a low level of free space fragmentation through specific optimization techniques which preemptively force the file system to write sequentially rather than randomly."

I see you can purchase Diskeeper with HyperFast here - I might give it a go.

 

HyperDrive5 is out: HyperDrive5

but while it has great iops that are allways the same, it has a low max read/write. should have 250MB/s read write constantly (sort of what intel said is the max you get trough the 300MB/s s-ata interface.

still, they're nice for the specific need. some way to fill the unused 5.25" slots

 

Looks too expensive for too little imho.

399$ for the box
+ ~5~10$/GB (may be cheaper depending on how cheap you can find the RAM after rebates and such)

so for 64GB you looking at...~$700~$1000

The controller is obviously limiting the performance of the drive to only around current state of the art flash SSDs. Another major concern ofcourse being that if you lose power to your house, or otherwise somehow lose power to the drive... everything is gone. But ill admit this has some potential, if they can get higher (triple what they have now?) max read/writes..

 

the best thing would be to directly combine it with a pci-e raid controller that can deliver up to 1gb/s.. (like the 9xmtron flagship demo).

i had high hopes for the hyperdrive5. if it fixed all the problems of 4, which was cool, it would rock. but the fact that it doesn't just all the time saturate the s-ata bus is just ridiculous..

i'm happy with my 128gb mtron raid0 at 220MB/s with at least 125iops or so (and tens of thousands of iops at max). this for possibly less than one 64gb package of this device..

i hoped for more..

 

Something is wrong.

BTW, the drive supports NCQ supporting 32 outstanding requests. It should never experience total system freezing even IF the stuttering occurs. The program itself might but all others shouldn't be affected.

Lots of the X25-M users have laptops and maybe full support isn't there. Most I have seen do not report +200MB/sec that can be achieved in desktops.

The only laptop with full SATA2-300 support I have seen is the HP Elitebook that's reviewed by this site.

 

I've not done any measurements of the drive alone, but my Samsung NC10 netbook (with a Mobi 3500) consumes about 8 watts at idle with the screen brightness on the 2nd from lowest setting (where I normally use it.) It doesn't seem out of line. However, Intel and Samsung are much better in that department. I think you won't see any power savings with the Mobi 3500 over a hdd, but it shouldn't really be worse either. I think someone else said the 3500 consumed more power than the 3000. I'd have to double check the specs.

Specs tend to lie, so it would be interesting if someone could compare the two models on the same system. Who knows if they were even spec'd using the same test methods? I suspect the 3000 will win some workloads and the 3500 will win others.

Someone else asked me to do a zip file test where I extracted 36,000 empty files from a zip file. The Mobi 3500 performed similarly to a hard drive on that test. No stuttering or other issues. I think it's pretty much a worst case test for an SSD, since it involves a lot of small random writes. For most stuff the 3500 screams. There is clearly room for more optimization.

It's probably only a short matter of time before there are a bunch of highly optimized SSD controller chips on the market. For now Intel clearly has the lead, perhaps followed by Samsung. I think Mtron is using an ARM based design which is a lot less efficient (especially when it comes to power consumption.)

You guys are really making me want to open my SSD

 

iaTa, I had gotten to my page from diskeeper Hyperfast. So I think Diskkeeper does have Hyperfast, but I am not totally sure if it is the same thing as is on those apacer drives. I was just still on the floor from seeing an SSD "feature" in a defrag utility. I think I will probably buy diskkeeper as I have always liked a good defragger I give them 2 points for keeping up with and ahead of the game!

 

Of course there's going to be stuttering, you don't use a 3 generation old laptop with SSD
By the way, the speed cap of the thinkpad line is steadily increasing in case you don't know. For the T60 it is about 80MB/sec, for the T61 it is about 100MB/sec, and for the T400 it is about 150MB/sec. I have performed a test on all these systems with my friend's X25-E drive

 

By the way...
Intel 160GB X25-M anyone?
http://www.buy.com/prod/x25-m-sata-...r-warranty-mm-900343/q/loc/101/210477489.html
If you got one don't forget to rep+ and post benchmark while you're at it
It's temporarily sold out but no doubt there'll be some more pretty soon.

 

That price is more reasonable than the price of the 80GB... in a perverse way.

 

that's quite nice.. nice to stay below 1000..

6$ per gb.. could be worse..

 

Those guys are gouging BIG TIME

Those prices will drop in half soon. (or they wont sell a single one)

All the players have fixed the Jmicron junk in their next salvo