SSD - Money well spent.

I put an aftermarket SSD into my Satori P170EM. This thing is fast, it is the 120GB OCZ VTX3-25SAT3-120G Vertex 3 Solid State Drive. It is very noticeable when installing programs and loading applications. I had to reinstall windows 7 3 times on my Satori, with a normal 5400 RPM HDD it took 20-30 mins, now it takes only 10 mins. This is amazing and i recommend it to anyone.

 

Thanks for the input

I can't believe I was actually considering using a HDD Hybrid as my main drive. I now went with a 830 Samsung and I can't wait to see the results!

 

I was going to do that as well, but I read more into SSD and seen the huge gap between them.

 

The reason I was considering that was because I bought a Sony Vaio Z two years ago which also has a SSD, but it is a relatively cheap and slow SSD, it seems. The only thing I saw improvements in was the Windows booting time, and even that was about 10-15 seconds faster than a standard HDD, so I thought they're all like that.

Only later on I found out the huge improvements that today's fast drives seem to have and made the switch right away.

Edit: Oh, MAN...I just read an old review on my Sony Vaio Z and its SSD speed. Look at this stuff, just look at it:



No wonder I didn't think SSDs were fast, that's horrible. For reference, here's the Samsung 830 real world test made by hackness:

 

Just two days ago, I bought my Crucial M4 256GB because the price from Newegg went down as low as $199 with free shipping. The next day, I saw the Samsung 830 256GB for $190 with free shipping. I went to check on my order to see if I could cancel it so I can save $10 on a much better SSD, but my order was already in my office! LOL. Damn, Newegg. It's like they knew so they shipped mine overnight. The label said from California (I'm in NY) and ground shipping was used. I then checked to see the return details and it wasn't refundable, only exchange. Just my luck!

Anyway, HDDs have been the greatest bottlenecks for high end machines. There's absolutely no reason not to get SSDs anymore. The prices are dropping like crazy everywhere.

 

No idea where you're getting Samsung as a "much better" SSD. Crucial M4 is one of the best SSD's out there and is super stable.

 

samsung have the fastest read/write speeds

 

Samsung is indeed quicker, but extremely insignificantly so. We're talking milliseconds, here. Negligible, really.

I think Samsung is better, though, because it has a much lower fail rate than the M4. The Samsung is an enterprise-grade SSD, a true working horse according to everything I've read about it. Not that the M4 is a bad SSD, not at all, but it is indeed a bit less stable all in all.

 

this is what i get on my crucial m4 512gb

 

Whatever, Intel 520 pwns all of the mentioned drives. Although, it's more expensive

 

Cool, but the test that hackness ran was 50MB and not 1000MB, so I'm not sure it is indeed apples to apples. Look at the difference between the write tests.

Whatever, implementing FancyCache pwns all of these combined

 

i just loaded the software and ran it. let me go and do the exact same setting.

edit: happy now. so not much difference or does this slight difference mean more than i think.

 

Huh.

Maybe it's the 512GB size vs 256GB? It's considered that larger is faster.

Anyway, the read speed is indeed awesome, but the write speed is not up to par on anything but the 4K writes. Will need to research on this.

 

My 120GB OCZ VTX3-25SAT3-120G Vertex 3 Solid State Drive

 

Here's the important data (the IOPS):

Code:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
                           Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

           Sequential Read :   498.610 MB/s
          Sequential Write :   259.260 MB/s
         Random Read 512KB :   422.503 MB/s
        Random Write 512KB :   263.262 MB/s
    Random Read 4KB (QD=1) :    20.480 MB/s [  5000.0 IOPS]
   Random Write 4KB (QD=1) :    67.233 MB/s [ 16414.3 IOPS]
   Random Read 4KB (QD=32) :   203.368 MB/s [ 49650.5 IOPS]
  Random Write 4KB (QD=32) :   230.438 MB/s [ 56259.3 IOPS]

  Test : 1000 MB [C: 72.9% (324.7/445.6 GB)] (x5)
  Date : 2012/08/11 21:42:16
    OS : Windows 7  SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)

My M4 is full of crud so there are marginal decreases in speed as opposed to when empty.

 

My 500gb Seagate HDD

 

My vertex 4 256 puts the corsair force 3 120 in my desktop to shame
Sad thing is I paid almost the same price for it a year ago.
...tapatalk...

 

1- The various speed parameters indeed increase with increasing size of the SSD, but kind of tapers off after 256GB so whereas there's a considerable difference between the 128/256 sizes, the 512 to 256 is less pronounced.

2- When I was placing my order for an SSD it all boiled down to Samsung 830 vs. Crucial M4 vs. Intel 520s. After much research the differences are really negligible. Intel has the name and the trust of consumers and the improved Sandforce controller (which is causing some people to be nervous since the original sandforce wasn't stable) but is much more expensive. Samsung is very stable but lackluster in absolute numbers in comparison to the Intel 520, and the Crucial M4 is probably the most tried and test SSD out there at this point with the excellent Marvell controllers ..etc. In benchmarks each beats the rest in some sector of tests. After many many googles the result is this:

Get the cheapest of those three with the best deal/warranty.

 

Do some research. Use Google and see what you get. Tom's Hardware puts Samsung 830 in tier 1 while Crucial M4 is tier 3. I'm not saying M4s are bad, but 830 is superior.

 

OK, I've done my research.

As NeoCzar said, the rule of thumb here is that they're all pretty fast, the difference will hardly be noticeable by the vast majority of home users, so saying stuff like MINE IS FASTER!!1 is indeed moot.

With that being said, first, the terms:

Sequential read/write - writing or reading data in large, organized fashion, such as copying a large file, reading from a compressed data file which many games seem to implement, I/O to an organized large cache or page files, etc. This is actually the most noticeable for us users simply be copying large files around.

4K read/write - reading and writing in small, all over the place, tiny files, i.e: loading DLL files, which means overall Windows performance under the hood. Faster 4K reads and writes means snappier Windows user experience (by a small margin, of course).

And now, here are the results:

The Intel 520 is indeed the fastest of these three when it comes to write speeds. Amazingly fast 4K writes, low power consumption on load, all around a very nice performer. It's read performance isn't the fastest of them, and it doesn't take the lead in every test out there, but it is indeed snappier. Then there's the whole Sandforce fiasco to consider, but Intel provides 5 years of warranty. Not that it'll do you much good if your drive dies on you, but that probably won't happen with today's Sandforce.

The Samsung 830 is the clear winner when it comes to sequential reads and writes. It's quite a fast little drive when copying stuff around and reading large files. However, its 4K writes are indeed lower than expected, which is a shame. This means that the Samsung 830 is a paper tiger, mainly excelling at superficial large files transfers, less so when it comes to actual system performance. Unless you use your drive as a file server to copy files around on a regular basis, I would say the Samsung is a letdown for average everyday usage.

The Crucial M4 has indeed much lower sequential reads and writes than both of the guys above, but its 4K write speed is just right, providing a somewhat snappier user experience than the Samsung 830. A nice little drive that doesn't excel, but provides an adequate performance all around.

Following my research, I am a bit disappointed with the Samsung 830 I've chosen. I won't cry myself to sleep about it, since we're talking milliseconds here, which means a second or two here or there of real world performance, but at least now you know which drive to aim for. Maybe I'll try replacing my Samsung with the Intel 520 if they haven't started working on my order yet.

 

Is there much of a difference in an aftermarket SSD like the OCZ one and the Intel 520 series SSD that Sager is putting in their laptops now?

 

In terms of real world speeds, no. The differences tend to be minimal. In terms of reliability, yes.

 

So there is no large performance difference between..say, an Intel 520 series and a OCZ vertex 3? I haven't kept up with SSDs for a long time, but I recall Intel and OCZ both being great reliability. Is this the general consensus?

 

I think Intel and Samsung are deemed as the most reliable SSDs. Aren't too familiar with the others. Some test on different ssd speeds:

OCZ Vertex 4 128GB Solid State Drive Review (with 1.4 R6 firmware) - Benchmarks - PCMark Vantage Hard Disk Tests :: TweakTown USA Edition

OCZ Vertex 4 256GB SSD Review > Benchmarks: Real-World Applications - TechSpot Reviews

 

If you mean the OCZ Vertex 4, then yes, the performance difference is drastic, these are extremely fast drives. I'd guess maybe a 3-5 seconds difference in loading times from 'slower' SSDs, which is a lot.

Here, see for yourself:
AnandTech - OCZ Vertex 4 Review (256GB, 512GB)

You do lose some reliability, though, as they are prone to issues and reports of drive failures have been seen around. Since it costs even less than a Samsung or an Intel 520 here in Europe, it might be worth considering.

The Intel 520, according to many tests, is indeed pretty fast, but not as fast as the OCZ Vertex 4. In turn, you get quite a bit more reliability as well.

Edit: yeah, there seems to be quite a difference in performance between the 128GB and 256GB of those drives.

 

Sequential speeds are only really relevant with large file transfers which is rare. 4k is more critical since it represents how the system handles system files.

 

Ok cool, thanks for the info! SSDs are still way too expense to be buying over 120GBs, imo. I suppose I'll just stick to the Intel 520 series. I plan on purchasing a NP9130 soon.

Edit: While on the subject of SSDs and purchasing a new Sager.. On their website, I'm customizing my options and they have a primary and secondary hard drive bay. Does anyone know which one to choose the SSD for so that they'll load the OS onto it? Or does it not really matter since I should be wiping the HD when I get it?

 

It won't matter, they bother are Sata III which is 6 GB/s the only place you wouldnt want a SSD is if you have a Hard Drive Caddy which that slot is Sata II (3 GB/s)

 

NP9130 only has one hard drive bay, and it is SATA III. mSATA and Optical drive bay are SATA II. I would opt for the SSD in the primary drive bay and that's where they'll install the OS if you order your OS with the system.

 

They have an option to take out the optical drive and install an SSD. Do you know if they would both be connected to SATA IIIs? I plan on buying an external optical drive since I rarely use it.

 

Only the main hard drive slot is SATA III. Optical drive and mSATA are SATA II.

 

Sorry my apologies I just assumed he was talking about the P170EM

 

does anyone know what the difference is between these two?

Newegg.com - OCZ Vertex 4 VTX4-25SAT3-512G.M 2.5" 512GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Newegg.com - OCZ Vertex 4 VTX4-25SAT3-512G 2.5" 512GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

I can't seem to find out why the first one is soo damn cheap compared to the second one?

 

(M) - uses Micron/OCZ branded NAND

 

How much will the SATA II hinder the performance? Also, is this typical of all laptops or just Sager right now?

Sager and resellers offer a free upgrade to a 750GB 7200 8gb ssd hybrid only for the primary drive. Think I could ask them to give me the upgrade and 60gb SSD but have them switch the drives around or do it myself later?

 

Take the upgrade and buy SSD from elsewhere. Also, you can request sager to put the HDD in the optical bay for you, but it takes like two minutes if you don't mind doing it yourself.

For real life performance, you don't notice much difference between SSD in sata ii or sata iii. You'll see it more in benchmarks, etc.

Not sure about Dell and others, but hp uses sata ii for optical drive and sata iii for hard drive. Makes sense because optical drive would never use sata iii speeds. Also, laptops with two designated hard drive slots come with sata iii these days

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2

 

Good point.. the 510 series 60gb on newegg is -30% of Sager's price for the SSD ($125 from sager;$85 from newegg).

Where do you find optical drive caddies? I can't find one specific to the 9130

 

My two options are OCZ Nocti 120GB SSD 280/260 Mbs Read/Write and Crucial M4 128GB SSD mSATA 500/175 Mbs Read/Write (the OCZ costs $50 more) from logical blue one - Logical Blue One - Horize P150EM Clevo Notebook

Other than the read/write speeds, what else should I know about the two? And how important is the write speed (I'll have to use this in the Sata ii space unfortunately)

 

Crucial's reliability rate is fairly high where OCZs has been low in the past... not sure about the Nocti but usually SSDs by Crucial, Samsung and Intel are considered the most reliable in terms of longevity.

 

QFT. To the OP, keep a close eye on slickdeals.net. SSD prices are dropping like crazy and they have deals posted for various brands all the time. Once you see one of the three brands mentioned above with the price tag to your liking, you grab it. I did when I saw the Crucial 256GB drop to $199 but unfortunately for me the Samsung 830 dropped to $190 the day after and my shipment from Newegg was already in my office (overnight shipping for free!)

EDIT: Speaking of slickdeals.net, 128GB Crucial M4 is down to $80 right now (via buy.com). The lowest it has ever gone prior to today was $84 about a week and a half or so ago.

 

I decided to just start a thread to help out whoever needs it.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/hardware-components-aftermarket-upgrades/683074-ssd-deals.html

 

Here are my speeds with a 256GB MyDigitalSSD installed in the mSATA port of my Sager NP9130:

Clearly, not as fast as the Samsungs/Intels/Crucials, but its fast enough for my purposes (OS drive).

For comparison, this is the speed of the 750GB HDD that's also on the laptop:

 

You will get slower mSATA speeds as that a SATA II port, the full SSD's which you put in the hard drive bay is on a SATA III port so you get almost twice the speeds. But its still much faster then a regular hard drive.

 

Those hdd speeds are impressive.

...tapatalk...

 

That's the exact ssd I put in my desktop. First ssd I've owned. It is such a difference. It's nice to click something and have it do it right away! The overall responsiveness is like back in 2001 when you doubled your RAM!