Sony Z: why do I want SSD again?

About to pull the trigger on a new Z, looking at these models (Singapore):

VPCZ135GG/BI --- S$ 2,599.00 (HD, no DVD)
VPCZ126GG/B ---- S$ 3,299.00 (SSD, DVD)
VPCZ116GG/B --- S$ 3,099.00 (SSD, DVD)

My laptop is left on most of the day, often downloading (lots of disk access), what will I gain by going the HD route?

Thanks

 

Depends on what you do most of the day. But if it's like you say downloading, it CAN be better to take the HDD (as in not really any degradation over time).

Although i must say my SSD version is still as fast as when i bought it (if not faster) and i got it like 6 months (and use it about 10 hours a day), with downloading and all included so.

It's probably more of a preference thing.

 

Is it much faster to boot/load programs?

 

Yup. Once you use an SSD you can't really go back. It's absurdly fast at things like opening programs, waking, booting, and working with things like photoshop.

 

There's also the question of: do you really need the DVD drive? If not, you can get the HDD version, then upgrade that to use an SSD.

 

No. I'd rather have the disk space.

Could I just swap out the HDD for an SSD later, or would I have to install it in the DVD bay as per the directions I've seen in here?

And what about fan noise - would going the SSD route be quieter, or is fan noise (under everyday use) a non issue anyway?

 

Yes you could change to ssd later. Remember if you order the hdd version you lose the optical drive as the hdd models ship with the hdd in the optical drive bay. And, yes an hdd does produce a small amount of noise.

 

This is the inside of the Z:



Yellow box: where Sony's SSDs sit
Red box: Optical drive / HDD sit here

Swapping HDD for your own (2.5") SSD is straight-forward, nothing extra is needed. The yellow box's space is too small for 2.5" drives.

I think the majority of the heat is generated by GPU/CPU, changing it to SSD probably does not reduce it by much. If you do graphics intensive stuff you're always going to get fan noise, just like all other performance laptops out there.

 

Sounds good to me. I think I might go that way and steer clear of the proprietary drives. I've replaced enough drives in the older series to know what a pain they can be.

So is the fan, in general, silent for general day to day Web surfing and so forth?

 

why are you not just going for a dual ssd setup, swap out the dvd for a hdd caddy and throw in a 2,5 inch hdd. you get both, a super snappy system AND massive storage space.

 

Well that's kind of the original question: right now, going for SSD will cost me considerably more money, put me in an older model, and I lose several hundred GBs of storage, so how much will I gain by going solid state?

I know this is a bit of a 101 question, but surprisingly it's not in the FAQ.

 

That's because FAQ is not supposed to teach you basic stuff, only specific stuff related to Z. You can read plenty on SSDs elsewhere and not waste anyone's time asking rhetoric questions (it's pretty obvious you've made up your mind and want HDDs for reasons you've mentioned, i.e. you already answered your question for yourself before you even posted the thread)

 

No, not really. He seems like he knows what he wants, but he wants to see if all the hype surrounding the SSDs in the Z are actually true/worth his money.

@tool: What do you mean by "older" model? You mean VPCZ11/VPCZ12? they're the same design as the VPCZ13, except the VPCZ13 has more options and the latest processor. Like many have said before, you will notice a very big difference between HDD -> SSD... that you may not want to go back (unless you've got like 4 Velociraptors in RAID0 or some thing).

If you want, you can always try the new Seagate Momentus Hybrid drives with 4gb of SSD + a 500gb HDD. Apparantly the speed difference is quite astonishing (because the algorithm that tells the drive what to store within the 4gb of SSD is very effective at doing so)

 

Correct. I'm still trying to make up my mind. It's a trade-off, isn't it?

The only SSD I've had first hands with is my iPad - if that counts.

Yes. There's so little information about what's changed between the models other than the obvious and outward spec variations. I'd be interested to know if any of the niggling complaints have been quietly addressed or tinkered with, like fan noise, wif-fi issues, screen lines, colour oddities, weak hinges, and so forth. Is there really no advantage in buying a newer model?

Can you give me some real world examples?

That's certainly an interesting prospect. Not sure what to think of that. There appears to be some question marks over its reliability, but it's something of a bargain otherwise.

 

The problem is that the merits of SSD vs mechanical drives have been discussed ad nauseum.

The bottom line is whether YOU FEEL the benefits (and I won't get into it) are worth the $. No one knows your own use, financial situation etc.

You know the #'s already. Not really sure what else anyone can tell you.

Real world #'s? Loading windows is several times quicker on my SSD laptop than a previous 7200 rpm.

 

Thanks, but where?

Well no, actually I don't know.

I don't particular care about boot times. I mean, yes faster is nice, but whatever. It's not a dealbreaker.

I'm asking day to day, do you find the SSD more responsive in a way you can articulate? I'd like some examples, not just platitudes.

I'd also like to know if there's a difference between the SSD drives in different models that's worth knowing about. You can't find these things out in the shop. They don't have a clue. Nor is Sony's site or any review helpful.

I'm also a little concerned about reliability over time. It's hard to get a thumb out in the wind on that one.

 

SSD = expensive

HDD = cheap

 

My first experience with SSD is with the Z. The speed increase in day-to-day use still amazes me (and this after 6+ months). Four things that really showcase the SSD's speed:

1) Startup times of programs. I am used to the wait of programs when I start them up - anywhere from 1-5 seconds, on average, to up to 10+ seconds for things like Visual Studio. With the SSD, It's a rare program that doesn't start in 1 second or less. These are subjective numbers, I know, as I've never timed them. Starting VS now takes under 3 seconds (just tried it - and that with 30+ windows open, including a browser with 12 tabs, and about 4 gig of ram in use). Also, at startup, I love how the splash screens of my startup programs flash by on the screen in machine-gun style. Some of those, like the Brother control panel software for my printer, used to take 10 seconds on my old laptop from when it appeared to when it disappeared. It's a pleasure to log in now as I know I can start working almost instantly. Before, I'd wait until the laptop booted, then log in, then go get a coffee before I could start.

2) Install times. This blew me away when I first got the Z. I had to install a lot of software to get my development environment up. Smaller programs installed while I briefly looked away so that, when I turned back to the screen, I thought the installer had crashed or something. Honestly, for the first time in my life, installing programs was a *pleasure*.

3) Menus. I am used to clicking the start menu, and waiting for the menu to generate, then clicking the Control Panel sub-menu, and waiting for that menu to generate, etc. Other menus that I'm used to waiting for are right-click menus on files. Sometimes, on my old system, these would take up to 5 seconds to generate, no kidding. Now, everything is instant. In the odd time when there is a pause (of 1 second or less), I'm surprised.

4) Windows explorer. Browsing my file system is now instant. Opening folders, especially those that contain tons of files/subfolders, is instant. No need for timing numbers here - it is instant. Click C:\Windows, or C:\Windows\System32, and see how long it takes? I hated (in XP) seeing the little searchlight icon flashing back and forth while the drive tried to cough up its contents. Now, everything is instant.

To reinforce all this, I just got a new server - I7-920, 9 gig ram, 7200 rpm drive. The experience for me when I am on it is nothing short of sluggish. It reminded me of how the Z has changed my expectations for my computing experience.

As I said, all timing numbers are subjective. I hate overly-enthusiastic "rose-colored-glasses" type reviews, but the Z has forced me to make one. It's been the best computing purchase of my life - well, maybe 2nd best next to my Apple IIe in 1983.

-Peter

ps. Ok, to temper this post - your concerns about reliability are good ones. RAID0 is inherently susceptible to the potential for data loss - if one drive fails, you lose your data. I run daily backups, and have the extended warranty. Not much more I can do to lessen that risk.

 

I think it would help OP decide if he can try a machine with SSD himself. If there isn't a Sony B&M store within reach, he can try a MacBook Air.

 

Lack of heat while using less energy to do the job better.

 

but we must take out the case of x18, and that will void the warranty .
Until now, i see nobody here complain about SSD failing .

Is the raid 0 on vaio z12 can be failed at any time?

 

My Intel X25M in my mediacenter up and died for no reason a couple months ago after not even 2 years in service. The failure rate may be low, but it's certainly not zero. Zetto, I don't understand why you are making an assumption that Intel is more reliable than Toshiba. Do you have some data?

 

The combination of Superfetch and Readyboost can dramatically decrease startup times for HDD users. Superfetch preloads applications based on your usage patterns, and they're subsequently swapped out if not used quickly. Readyboost makes sure that they're swapped out to solid state storage, with much faster random read times.

So HDD users, buy a fast SD or MS (whichever one you don't use regularly), enable Readyboost for it, and leave it in.
Vista users can only use up to 4 GB -- W7 users can have even larger Readyboost drives, and also use the faster ExFat file system.

Another trick is to set %TEMP% to an SD/MS card. A substantial amount of IO traffic goes to %TEMP%, and it's usually small random read/writes too, where the benefit of solid state is the highest.
So what if the card has a finite number of write cycles -- it's cheaply replaced, unlike an SSD.

 

Surely if the failure rate is statistically significant no-one would/should go near them. That would definitely be a dealbreaker for me.

 

SuperFetch in Vista drove me nuts with the constant disk caching so I disabled it right from the outset. I haven't tried it in 7, is it any better?

 

And what is the effect on battery life of leaving an SD in?

 

Define "better". It's supposed to do lots of disk caching. The idea is that it learns that you use Excel in the 10 AM to 5 PM timeframe, so it preloads the Excel binares before 10 AM. You get disk activity (in idle time) before 10, and then when you start Excel, it will already be in memory (or swapped out to a Readyboost device). This activity takes place at the lowest priority, meaning it won't compete with programs you run that may need disk access.

 

Very low. Even if writing constantly, the power usage of the MS is less than 100 mA, and usually way less. Camera use has ensured that the power consumption is minimal.

 

I went from a SZ680 with HDD to a Z11 with SSD.

The Z11 is so fast I am astounded everyday. I do some web development and I am so much more productive on this machine because everything seems nearly instantaneous. Like Peter mentioned, programs just pop up when you click on them. And because it boots so fast, it's no longer a huge inconvenience to have to restart the system. A full restart cycle takes less than a minute.

The funny thing is, I didn't order this machine. If I had ordered it myself I would have chosen the HD because I thought I needed 500GB of disk space. Now I'm glad I have the 256GB SSD instead.

 

I'm getting more and more convinced to go SSD, just out of pure speed greed.

 

^Do it, it's amazing the difference it makes.