X220 Tablet. Want to upgrade with SSD. Better mSATA2 or SSD SATA3

HI, as per title.

I have an i7 core X220 Tablet with 8GB of RAM. 220GB HDD.

Wanted to speed it up with a new SSD Disk.

The options

1) get and mount mSATA2 SSD disk for Operating System and keep the HDD 220GB for data

2) get a speedier SSD SATA3 disk (256Gbyte minimum) and replace the HDD

3) Wait a little and get mSATA3 new T50 for operating system and keep HDD 220Gb

What do you think?


p.s. how to migrate the original windows 7 64 bit from the "old" HDD disk to the new mSATA or SSD?
I do not have any windows CD. I received the laptop as gift without box and I don't have the CD

 

Assuming you don't have a pile of cash to burn and/or a need for absolute best performance in accessing every file in your computer, then #1 is a wonderful option. There are many of us in the Lenovo subforum who chose as such.

Regarding #3, I'm not aware of any concrete proof for or against the mSATA port being able to support anything above SATAII. So, you might want to do more digging on that.

edit: the Lenovo ThinkVantage software has a provision for making recovery DVDs.

 

Search around this forum. This question has been posted about 10 times in the last few weeks. There is a ton of info in the other threads.

 

I vote option one. You don't need speed for storage.

If you made/make the recovery discs you can use those to re-install Windows.

Alternatively, you can can download a Windws disc in the Windows forum, then use it to do a clean install if that's what you prefer. You can download all the latest driver updates from Lenovo's website. Also make a copy of the SWTools folder on your C:\ drive, which contains all the applications and drivers installed on your X220t.

I believe mSATA drives don't support SATA III yet, but I think it's unlikely you'd notice a big difference by using SATA III.

 

I decided on the mSATA initially. However after actually comparing the random 4K and long sequential read/write speeds of the mSATA option to the full SATA SSD, I went with the latter. Since the mSATA ostensibly would be your boot drive, it makes no sense to go with a slower option and still be saddled with the full HDD sucking 5+ watts.

Intel 80GB 310 Series:
$200
Sequential read write: 200 MB/s / 70 MB/s
Random 4K read write: 35K IOPS / 2.6K IOPS

Intel 120GB 320 Series:
~$220
Sequential: 270 MB/s / 130 MB/s
Random 4K: 38K IOPS / 14K IOPS

But my entire notebook installation and loadout usually comes in under 80GB (i'm not compiling any large codebases or doing video editing on this). If you need to have 500GB of storage at the ready, things swing in favor of the mSATA+HDD option.

 

mSATA port should be able to support the same bandwidth that SATA 3 has, given that it is the matter of the controller support which determines the bandwidth allocation at the end of the day. Current existing mSATA drives are not able to even saturate SATA2, so you won't get the kind of speed obtainable with 2.5" SATA3 drives.

I personally went with the SATA3 128GB option, paired with 750GB of USB 3.0 drive. You do need USB 3.0 to squeeze the 7200 rpm hard drive to its fullest in terms of read/write, and this is far more flexible on the field than going with msata with internal HDD.

(Use the spacer mod or the dremel slot mod to fit the 9.5mm drive into the 7mm bay).

By the way, what I recommend is to make a drive image of your drive through the recovery tool in Windows 7, and then use the installation disk or recovery disk to restore this image. I placed my image onto a portable HDD for my own peace of mind. You can make a recovery disc either as a CD or a USB. Look online for instructions on that.

On another note, if you need to use other OS than Windows 7, consider getting a non-Sandforce based SSD. TRIM is essential for Sandforce and many users have suffered from not paying attention to this little note.

 

For the empty minipcie slot, one could either install the WAN card (Lenovo FRU obtainable online for ~$100 or a SD card adapter:

MR04R (SDHC/SDIO Card to mPCIe adapter ver1.1)

You can't boot from the sdcard, but it could be useful as an internal backup storage space. In the event your SSD gets hosed, you could easily read the data off of the sdcard by just removing your expansion panel and popping the card out.

 

Pardon my ignorance: is this an external HDD?

 

Thank you all for your answers.

As internal storage (HDD, msata, and/or SSD, or whatever: for win7+ program + personal data) I need around 150GB, but prefer to have 200GB just in case.

This to be all internal: I do not like to carry with me anything else that is not the X220

 

From what I see the SSD (shall I SATA2 or SATA3??) 256Gb are a bit expensive. But I might give it a try in case other solution are not good.

 

found this:
Runcore T50 6Gb/s 120GB mSATA SSD

 

Why not try Runcore mSATA SSD SATA 3. Does the mSATA x220 port support SATA III? Shouldn't it?

 

The mSata SSD is fast, though not as fast as a conventional SSD.

An mSata disk uses something like 0.x Watts of energy, compared to a 2.5" SDD, which can use up substantial amounts of energy (single digit Watts).

I would summarise as: If you don't care about...

... GETTING THE FASTEST X220 out there, then a (current) mSata drive will be more than enough: option #1

... WHEN you get it, why not wait for next-gen mSata? If nothing else, the old ones will be cheaper: option #3

Option #2 involves a higher energy consumption, a higher cash consumption and an increase in speed that you may not find particularly important to your purpose for the machine - of which I am completely oblivious, so cannot really say anything about it.
Be aware though, you are looking at a 2.5" slot that is 7 mm high. As far as I am aware, any sata3 SSD require modification in one way or another - I recommend you look at a thread entitled "Drives that fit the X220" (or so) here on the forum and/or consult the forum search.

Additionally, I also recommed searching the forum for reports where people actually do set up their own mSata drives. There are some issues with this, if I remember correctly.

 

mSATA is for people who want a fast boot drive, but also don't want to be limited by such small SSD sizes these days. They can do a 80 GB+ mSATA drive for OS and most commonly used programs, and have a large 500-750 GB mechanical drive for data.

 

Energy consumption of Marvell chipset tends to be pretty good imo. M4 is more efficient than the Seagate HDD that I had.

The Runcore would be interesting. The speed should be able to rival most of the typical SATA3s. You do need about 128GB to get closer to the optimal performance of the chips and the controller. Such might be on the expensive side of things though.

 

Energy consumption of the M4 SATA3 256GB is higher than a regular HDD?

I was thinking of choosing option 2 (only one SSD) Crucial CT256M4SSD2 256GB m4 SSD 2.5" SATA 6Gb/s SSD for 370 USD

 

The M4 uses less energy than a 7200 RPM Seagate.

M4 after the firmware flash can get you 500 MB/s in sequential read (I did this flash on my M4 and can confirm to that figure). To me though this speed becomes more of a bragging rights figure.

 

My comment was about the capabilities of the mSATA port, not about the existence of SATA3 mSATA drives.

 

What do you think of using only one SSD (M4 SATA3 crucial 256GB) as main drive for O.S. and data?

 

THe Sd and microSD card is same technology as SSD?

I am saying this because in my android phones (and before on my windows mobile phones) the microSD card get broken (unreadable or unusable) after some months of use (around 4/6) sistematically since I use them (many years now).


This is my main concern about adopting SSD

 

clear. It has been solved now?