anyone has T61P with 64GB SSD ?

How is the speed and performance overall? is it like 10 times or more faster than regular 7200RPM disk?

 

I don't think it's 10 times faster...

I saw a video comparing an HDD to SSD and the difference in performance is significant but I wouldn't say super-amazing or anything, especially since SSD is so expensive at the moment. Not yet worth the price tag, IMO.

 

SSD with 2GB or 200GB 7200RPM with 4GB both at 2.5Ghz 6mb cache ?

i want the fastest performing thinkpad to replace my superslow T42P that seems cant handle my workload these days (2.1Ghz , 2GB , 60GB 7200RPM)

i dont want to get a sager with quad core just for the speed and lose the usability

 

I agree that it's not worth the price tag unless you really work in an environment with considerable vibration.

It really depends on what you're doing with the SSD as well. Most SSDs these days are not any faster than traditional hard drives when it comes to sustained file copies, &tc.

But there is an undeniable "wow" factor with them.

 

Actually, its the sustained transfer rates that make the ssd so much different than the hard drive. Hard drives have a significant reduction in transfer speeds when larger transfers are necessary whereas ssds do not

 

if working is a sustained transfer then its my target because i keep using the following softwares between 12-18hrs a day:
thunderbird
firefox tons of windows and tabs
kaserspy anti-virus (which i feel whats killing my processing)
openoffice
securecrt
gtalk/msn etc..

and my T42P no longer can handle the load not sure is it processor wise or ram wise or harddrive wise

 

Whoops. My bad on the transfer speeds, then.

 

then you mean it will act really fast for what i want todo ?

 

Frankly, I think getting a SSD that's about the cost of the laptop now is very premature. Try for a high-density 7200rpm one. It's fast, but a lot cheaper.

 

what is the high-density 7200rpm ? its different than the 200GB listed on lenovo's website ?

 

I believe that SSD's have the same read/write transfer speeds as a 7200 rpm drive. I don't think the "large file" transfer rates mean anything at all. Who's ever had file reading speeds drop off after some time? What's good about them is:

1. very small power consumption
2. completely quiet
3. less heat, less fan noise
4. no seek times

Is that worth the +$600 or whatever? Not for me. First, try to get as much RAM as possible. This will put a lot of your programs in disk cache and it'll be the exact same as an SSD (although keep in mind that the disk cache will only be 3GB ish). Too bad the motherboard doesn't support 8gb of ram.

 

I don't really understand why people try to compare ram to the performance of an ssd and, more importantly, why they try to credit the amount of ram to speed performance of their system.

In my opinion, very few ever reach the full potential of their ram because they are using disk caching and whatnot that creates 'virtual ram' (if I may use this term) within the hard drive.

Even if one gets more ram, this pagefile is still in use unless shut right down and eliminated.

For the most part, ram speed pertains to programs running faster while open and held within the ram during its use.

SSD speed, however, comes from the significant difference in access time when a program is started or accessed and information read from the ssd (.2ms) in comparison to the hd (15ms). This is where you see decreased startup time and much quicker startup of all applications. To the gamer, I have heard that the ssd is a huge performance boost as information for the game is being accessed on a continuous basis and this increase is very significant when being retrieved by an ssd.

With respect to the read/write speeds of an hd compared to a ssd, they are no longer similar as a typical read/write benchmark of some ssds level off in excess of 100MB/s and hold that through sustained and continuous use.

This is not so with a hard drive and anyone who has seen hdtune/hdtach results know that sustained results showing the hd dropping significantly in a very short period of time. Simply, the graph of a hd is a very quickly declining slope whereas the ssd remains constant.

Presently, the ssd seems to be the toy of the rich or the addicted for the most part.

Watchout though....with the release of the Supertalent 120Gb at the $600 range...times are changing very quickly.

Allanw, you were absolutelty right in your 4 points but the entire spectrum must be considered.

 

so whats closest to SCSI disk ? SSD or HDD 7200RPM ?

 

Hello,

I've got a t61P with the newest 64GB OCZ SATA-II SSD (replaced gen 1 samsung SSD).

I love it, SSD in general, I've posted here before - I won't go back to a non-SSD based laptop. Example, I am putting SSD's in my two other machines I use on a regular basis, one being a new MBP.

One small issue I cannot seem to solve is to get the OCZ drive to be seen by the T61P running with SATA-II and NCQ, the Intel matrix storage console still shows it as a generation 1 and NO NCQ. I haven't had time to spend trying to resolve this issue yet. Anyone have any input on how to change it to SATA-II in Vista Prem 64-bit?

Tom

 

whats the RPM on SSDs ?

 

ROFL. Couldn't help but laugh ;P

SSD = Solid State Disk. There are no moving parts, hence, no revolutions per minute.

 

hehe my bad

how to compare SSD with 15K SCSI for example?