tis a shame, you'd think with advancing tech that there'd be less need for spare area...
Printable View
tis a shame, you'd think with advancing tech that there'd be less need for spare area...
I thought this would be worth mentioning for people who might want to buy the OWC Mercury Sandforce based SSD's.
http://anandtech.com/show/3661/under...es-are-equal/3Quote:
I have confirmed with OWC, the specs have changed. The Mercury Extreme is now a SF-1200 based part with lower IOPS. I asked OWC to consider changing the name given that the controller has changed, we'll see what happens.
If you have any questions/issues/concerns I can put you in touch with someone over there that can help you deal with your order. Email me for more info :)
Take care,
Anand
hmm, tis a little bit sneaky of them to do that, don't you think!?
Actually, considering the practical difference for consumers, not even in the same league as Nvidia, or Intel with their promise of TRIM for G1 SSDs.
In consumer applications, you will be hard pressed to meassure more than single digit percentage differences between SF-1200 and SF-1500 (if both use MLC). If they change the price correspondantly to production costs and update their product info to specify SF-1200, i will just shrug at it.
Well yeah....
Changing price and clearly indicating in specs that it's now SF-1200 would be sufficient, but nothing less IMO.
Plus it may be a trap for users who were going to buy it when it was based on SF-1500, but delayed for whatever reason.
Hence one reason why a name change may be in order.....
SandForce seem to have messed up the "exclusivity" firmware issue completely. It's hard to imagine that OWC or Corsair etc are not going to kick back big time on this issue. Why would they bother to invest in marketing a product with an imposed firmware limitation? In any case it seems far from clear that this is resolved if you read the Anandtech article:
"It’s my understanding that the SandForce/OCZ exclusivity agreement is currently only a short term agreement. While the companies are in the process of negotiating a long term agreement, nothing is final yet. There are some measures in place to ensure that you can’t flash an OCZ firmware on a non-OCZ drive (and vice versa) but there’s nothing saying that at some point this won’t change either."
What impressed me was that Corsair seem to have developed the capability to know the product they are marketing and make changes to it, i.e. switching off the power saving feature to save the drives from bricking. That is a welcome development from a reseller that can actually add value as opposed to a reseller that just markets a product.
Yes. The price should be less. OCZ did the right thing when it named its first Sandforce based SSD product line as 'Vertex Limited Edition' as the SF-1500 controllers were given as guinea pigs, OCW should have done the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
If you look at the http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/inter..._SSD_Sandforce . It is still showing the SF-1500 version as product description. People are being deceived, ripped off and paying more for something else. :shakes:
What do you guys think about 2x 50GB OCZ Vertex LE in Raid 0?
That's around 400$ for 100GB of blazing-fast storage space, be it sequential speeds, random speeds, or access times. It's pretty much what I have decided on for now.
Go for it. There will be nothing better than that for sometime.
Yes, GO FOR IT!
Hmm that indeed is pretty slack....Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Particularly since Anand has already raised the issue of potential confusion with them...
And it seems they haven't bothered to lower pricing or at least update the descriptions.
I didn't even realise there was 50GB LE SSD's :)Quote:
Originally Posted by jcool
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Thanks guys, I'll order first thing tomorrow :DQuote:
Originally Posted by SteveRo
Gotta decide between OCZ or (identical) Compustocx drives.
Prices are pretty much identical for me, OCZ tends to have better support (--> FW Updates) but with CSX I can get advance RMAs quick & easy in case something dies... hard choice.
I'd also be pleased if someone who is really "in the know" about SF-drives could drop me some feedback here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=249983
are you guys saying that if you are willing to pay $4/gb this is currently the best drive out there? and 1 of these drives is still faster than 2 40gb intel v drives?
no don't think anyone said that, only thing one of these drives would win in against 2x x25v would be seq. writes i suspect.
But others feel free to chime in if you disagree....
here is a quote from metroid: Go for it. There will be nothing better than that for sometime. I do not recall if it was this thread, but someone said the ocz le is as fast or even faster than 2 40gig v's in raid 0.
just want to confirm cause i can get a 100gig dive for $320 after rebate and cb; might be worthwhile:shrug: or could wait longer for prices to drop more and wait to see what intel brings to the table.
i am in no rush as i am waiting for my sr-2, just thought $320 was a decent deal if this is the drive to get, or may just get a $100 v to hold me over:shrug:
Oh i thought you were talking about 50GB drives, 100gb may be faster "across the board", but not significantly i dont think & for significantly more $
I'm hoping prices come down a fair bit more, then it'll be harder choice between x25m 80GB or SF-1200+ 50-100GB
are the 50 and 100gb drives sf-1200? i thought they were sf-1500. i need to redo my homework. if they are sf-1200; i will not buy one till they fix the issues that i was reading about on anandtech meeting w/sf
i was also talking either 50 or 100gb, but i was kind of thinking 100 cause its a better deal cost wise
i believe this clears a lot up, kinda
http://anandtech.com/show/3661/under...es-are-equal/1
and where oh where is teh JetStream??
I still haven't recieved a reply from Indilinx regarding the JetStream.
Ooh jetstream, sounds cool! ;)
Never heard of it, barefoot's successor?
Okay coming back to this for the 1st time in quite a while, I did warn you I'd be back!! :p:
As you all know I proceeded with an X-25v....
I've found that this indeed is not enough room, I really do need no less than 60GB.
So now that sand-force drives & their iterations (SF-1200, SF-1500 etc) have been in the market for some time.
What is the OS-SSD performance king now, in your well-informed opinions?
Remembering I really don't need a drive much bigger than 60GB.
Although I'm prepared to consider up to 100GB if the case can be made.
Also RAID-0 SSD scratch-disk...
Are JMF618 & Barefoot SSD's still the sweet-spot for low $/GB + high seq/sustained R+W?
Or are there better options around now?
I eagerly await the gurus in this forum's thoughts/opinions!!
And I'm starting a flurry of reading myself, in-order to catch-up with where the market's headed in the past 3.5mth!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
If you don't want to go R0 then the new best bang for the buck is probably the c30064 for something just under $150. :up:
if you have ich10 and would be willing to go raid 0 - consider getting another x25v for around a 100 or so - 2xR0 x25v on ich10 with wbc enabled is a huge performer for an additional ~100. :up::up:
Woah quick off the mark, I've much more to read yet, thanks!
No I just want a single OS-SSD for now, I'll prolly add a 2nd & go RAID-0 in Dec.
So you reckon the c30064 is the best performer now for MLC's @50-80GB?
What about similarly sized sand-force based drives?*
Is there any more progress in TRIM pass-through for Intel's controllers.
Or is it still looking like a pipe-dream?
I do want 2x SSD's for the RAID-0 scratch-disk of course...
What do you reckon are the two best disks for the job there?
Thanks again & night!
*N.B. I do have SATA6G
The vertex2 50 is ~180 so $30 more and less capacity but it is faster in sequential writes vs the c30064.Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
Nothing new on trim in raid - i wouldn't of thought this was so hard :shakes:
Regarding the R0 scratch disk - others should chime in here but if adding an x25v to make 2xR0 is not fast enough sequential writes for you than maybe 2x regular vertex30's (something like 2xR0 r/w seq of ~350/200 mb/s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
Why dont u just go raid0 for only a $100 and install OS on one of the SSD'S?? better to have 2 ssd's as they run faster and have more space then only 1 ssd, 100$ is alot cheaper to then any other 64gb.. P.S im aussie too and have the corsair 64gb ssd selling for only $150, used it once ..Quote:
Originally Posted by IFMU
Yeah I'm thinking maybe I should just stay with X25-V (rather than sell) and add a 2nd?
80GB (approx) will be plenty of space for the dual OS installs I have in mind...
I can always sell my X25-V's in Dec+ & upgrade to the new performance leader; most likely Intel's next-gen?
Would RAID-0 of two X25-V's be faster than the best performing 50-100GB SSD's (MLC) out now?
I recall an Anand review where it topped most areas that count most for an OS-SSD, but that was 4mth+ ago so I'm not sure if that's still true.
Then you've got the issue of degradation, which RAID-0 X25-V's without TRIM don't handle as well as other SSD's.
What about for my scratch-disk, are two V+ G2 or Vertex still the best option out there?
It just needs very high seq/sustained r+w, other characteristics aren't that critical, aside from low $/GB & at least 60GB total capacity.
WC Annihilus
Biker
audienceofone
Anvil
SteveRo
One_Hertz
Metroid
GullLars
naokaji
or Anyone....
I don't suppose you could offer your thoughts on this?
I'd be ever so grateful if you can? Much appreciated!
Thanks SteveRo & Johnny87au for your thoughts thus far.
If I was you I would just get another X25-V. It would be the cheapest way to get the extra space you need. This assumes that you don't have another use for your existing X25-V. (I justify new parts on the basis that the rest of the pc's in the house get an upgrade as a result of a new part in my primary pc) It also assumes that you are happy with the performance of the X25-V. Most people will not notice any difference in performance between the current pick of the crop ssd's.
Intel next gen ssd will most likely come out in Jan 2011. No doubt it will be faster than anything out at the moment, but again I doubt if it will be something most people will notice.
There you go... my 2 cents.
+1 with audienceofone
The Vs are great, the difference between the top performers is negligible for typical desktop usage.
Wait for the G3s before you decide what to do next, meanwhile the 2R0 X25-V would be my choice.
If sequential throughput is what you need for the scratch drive I'd probably go for either the Samsung F3 1TB or the WD Black 1002FAEX 1TB drives, using 2R0.
I'm not quite sure of what you are looking for in performance.
Thanks Anvil,Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
Unfortunately I've only got a WD1001FALS (WD Black 1TB) or a HD103SJ (Samsung F3 1TB)...
Would seq/sustained r+w differences between my proposed SSD RAID-0, & one of these drives (short-stroked) be negligible in real world terms?*
If you know, what exact differences are we talking?
Thanks again/night!
*Let me know if you need me to outline my planned uses in detail again.
**update**
Actually short-stroking only improves random I/O doesn't it?!
did i already recommend 2x x25v? (since you already have 1 right?)
edit - i thought short stroking improved everything (both seq and random).
Max sustained read or write on a WD Black 1TB is 113 MB/s.Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
Max seq read on the X25-V is 170 MB/s, and max write is 35 MB/s. So a pair of them in R0 could be almost three times as fast as the HD in read, but only about 60% in multi-threaded or large block writes.
Most disk access patterns are heavily read-weighted, and more random than sequential -- so unless you're doing something particularly write-heavy, you should be better off with the SSDs than the HD.
It can improve sequential too; the maximum sequential data rate is higher toward the outside edge of the drive. Here's a graph I did that shows typical HD sequential performance as a function of position:Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
Attachment 106350
Thanks for offering your thoughts AceNZ.
Actually I'm wanting to compare a SSDNow V G2 64GB, & OCZ Vertex (or Adata) 30 or 60GB*, to the Black & F3.Quote:
Originally Posted by AceNZ
The X25-V's are being considered for my OS/boot volume, not my scratch-disk.
No this is for a scratch-disk (I outlined my workflow earlier), not an OS/boot volume.Quote:
Most disk access patterns are heavily read-weighted, and more random than sequential -- so unless you're doing something particularly write-heavy, you should be better off with the SSDs than the HD.
I'm considering a 2nd X25V for my OS/boot volume.
Ah thanks for confirming...Quote:
It can improve sequential too; the maximum sequential data rate is higher toward the outside edge of the drive. Here's a graph I did that shows typical HD sequential performance as a function of position:
I wonder what sort of sustained/seq performance boost I'd be getting if I short-stroked it to 500GB?
Judging by that graph it'd be approx. 70MBps...
*Or any other SSD with high seq/sus. R+W & lowest $/GB (don't need much more than 60GB total capacity)
Jalyst,
Samsung F3, short stroked to 500GB, avg 128.8MB/s.
Attachment 106364
Writes would be about the same.
Read performance drops below 100MB/s at ~700GB
Attachment 106365
I don't have first-hand experience with the SSDNow V G2 or the OCZ Vertex, but from what I've heard the published specs can be quite different from achievable performance. You might look on a review site like AnandTech, perpc or LegitReviews to see what they've measured.Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
For a write-heavy scratch disk, you might also consider a SAS 6.0 15K rpm HDD such as the Seagate Cheetah 15K.7 instead of an SSD--particularly if your writes are mostly sequential. The 15K.7 has a 200 MB/s seq write rate, and doesn't wear out when it's written heavily.Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
No, that's 70 MB/s for a drive with an 82 MB/s max -- the equivalent on the WD Black would be about 96 MB/s at the 50% capacity point. From Anvil's post, it looks like the F3 is faster; not surprising, given that it has those ultra-dense platters.Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
Thanks going to see how things go with my short-stroked F3.Quote:
Originally Posted by AceNZ
Is suspect it will be plenty good for the job...
Yeah it looks like the F3's a keeper for my HEPC build.Quote:
No, that's 70 MB/s for a drive with an 82 MB/s max -- the equivalent on the WD Black would be about 96 MB/s at the 50% capacity point. From Anvil's post, it looks like the F3 is faster; not surprising, given that it has those ultra-dense platters.
The Black will go into a HDD enclosure used for backing-up my Mac mini.
Thanks for your thoughts/help!
+1 2x x25v - best value since you already have one and just need one other :up:
I have never been to keen on the scratch disk SSD concept personally. much smarter to set up the F3 as your storage drive. just put the games, and other fast loading things on the ssd, and all pics, video, documents on the F3 is my advice.
64GB JMF618 is about 200MB/s read & 110MB/s write...Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
Not sure how a similarly sized Barefoot 60GB (Vertex or similar) would compare.
Hopefully this will be on the anandtech tool somewhere.
This is obviously substantially faster, but the question remains whether I need that 'oomph'?
Having a entire F3 re-purposed as a scratch-disk is performance enhancing in itself for the intended app.
So I'm thinking of settling on the following:
2x X25-V ..... (OS/boot volume, already own one)
1x F3 1TB .... (Scratch-disk, already own, short-stroked to 500GB)
This saves substantial $ so that there's room for:
2x Green 2TB (Storage volume, yet to buy)
Instead of waiting for my VMM/NAS build in 1-6 months!
Please lemme know what ya'll think of this config. as a whole?!
I currently have an X25-M for OS. I use two external USB drives for storage which I sync with each other as a backup. (Call me paranoid but I also do periodical backups on separate drives that are not normally connected to my pc).
I’ve noticed a few issues with this set up, which would be the same if I was using hard drives connected to SATA.
I use power saving settings so the USB drives go into sleep mode when inactive. When I want to access them I have to wait for them to initialise. That takes time. First you wait for the spin up and then you wait for the access time. I could leave them running all the time but that is a waste of energy.
Certain programs search for all drives when they open, which causes a delay, even if the USB drives are active. For example the Intel toolbox tries to scan all drives to find the Intel drive, which cause an extended delay. If I have saved documents to the USB drive when I open certain programs it will trigger a search of all drives. Same thing with the Recycle Bin. If I delete files in the Recycle Bin that came from the USB drives it creates a delay whilst the OS looks for the drive and then spins it up.
Bottom line is I would be wary of HDD scratch disks. It just makes things more complicated to back up and you could end up waiting for the drives to spin up……which is even longer than waiting for HDD seek times.
The ideal solution is to use only SSD, but that it way to expensive. I’m inclined to try a 32GB USB pen drive, which I can use for frequently accessed and new storage files, which I can then periodically sync with the external usb drives when I connect them.
Thanks for your thoughts,
I do see your point, & I'm now tempted to re-investigate whether I really do need a dedicated scratch-disk.
SSD/s for a dedicated scratch-disk is not an option at this time I feel, as the benefits don't quite justify the cost.
I already own the F3, & I definitely want one more HDD (maybe 2) that has a 2TB capacity.
So it's a matter of deciding whether I use the F3 as a scratch-disk, or merge it with my 2TB* & use that volume as my Storage & High STR bench.
Perhaps the best way to decide this is to dredge-up what I previously determined would be my rough work-flow?
Or then again just go with my instincts and if it works well enough in practise, leave it be?!
*using LVM etc.
I haven't used a scratch drive for years.
If you continually (on a daily basis) write a lot of data (>20GB) I'd consider using the HDD for that purpose, you'd wear out the SSD prematurely.
Most SSDs are "tuned" for let's say 10-20GB per day, giving the 5 year or more life expectancy.
So basically, if you write less than 10-20GB per day I'd use the SSD and forget about the scratch drive.
Having said that, if you do a lot of sequential writes you might as well use the HDD, it's just as fast or faster than most SSD's. (less wear, same speed)
Is there any different between 64GB Crucial C300 1.8" and 2.5" in any other way than the size?
I want to use at in a desktop-PC tho, but can't find a 2.5" in stock. I found a 1.8" in stock, and guess it would be as good, right?
Sam,
Same performance, different connectors, you'd need an microSATA -> SATA adapter. (3.3V)
I've ordered some C300 64GB at komplett and it just got delayed for another 3 weeks. (ordered 6 weeks ago)
Nizzen ordered from Ireland and has already received a few.
Thx, for your replay, Anvil. :)
I wasn't aware of microSATA , and the need for adapter. I don't want to deal with that thing.
Yeah, I was looking for the same drive to get in stock, but it is delayed, again :p: I guess we have to wait, again.
Sam,
I decided to get an Vertex 2 60GB while waiting...
(I'll call komplett tomorrow anyways, I need to know when to expect the C300s, >2 months delivery is not what I expected)
Why don't you go for the 128GB C300, the price is quite nice atm.
I got used to my little Vertex 30GB and I'm afraid 128GB is going to get too much for me. :rofl: , but you are right the new price is tempting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
I've been looking into Vertex 2 60GB too, maybe I should get one these after all. Because that c300 64GB can get delayed again. This is getting difficult now.
Sam,
You can always format the partition size to your liking :)
Using a smaller portion of the available space would only lead to better performance. (over-provisioning)
Why get the c300 64GB instead of the vertex 2 60GB anyway?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
Isn't the latter a better performing SSD overall?
Of course neither are better than 2x X25-V's! :) (cept for some seq. metrics)
I doubt I'd be writing sufficiently enough to degrade the SSD within 2yrs (I doubt id use it much longer than that!)Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
But I don't want my RAID-0 boot volume to be used for that purpose, I will see if a short-stroked F3 is sufficient.
I have also bought 1x WD20EARS-00MVWB0 (latest 667GB platter tech so only 3 platters) for Storage/BU purposes.
Depending how it compares to Samsung's 3-platter 2TB when it's out in a few weeks, I may order a 2nd one.
Thanks everyone for your thoughts/advice...
If anyone's interested in further numbers let me know & I'll see what I can do once I finally commence by entire HEPC/PVR build.
Not long off now, it's a "doozy", I may establish a dedicated build log ;)
Yeah, you are right, but 128GB it going to be too much for my needs. Intel G3 is not far away, so a little and cheaper one would do for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
I need just 1 drive, OS-disk for w7.Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
C300 on the on-board SATA3 should perform better, but Vertex 2 is good option too, I'm waiting for weekend-sale to start, if it shows up I'll hit on that, too.
ah, so if the vertex2 had sata3 (& the mobo) it'd perform better right?
jalyst,
It probably would perform better, how much is hard to tell.
Given the nature of the SF controller, ATTO would surely shine, CDM and/or AS SSD would probably show no difference at all.
So again, it's up to what kind of data you process. (the truth is somewhere in between ATTO and CDM, closer to CDM in most cases)
Sam,
Get a cheap drive and wait for the G3 specs, details could start to surface at the IDF in mid september.
Just got a C300 64Gb and here is the first tests if it helps...
The CDM benchmarks looks OK, theres something fishy with the AS SSD though (read: 4K-64 threads) , could be due to using the Marvell driver.
You should try uninstalling the Marvell driver and redo the benchmark using the default W7 driver. (msahci)
It's a shame vendors of sf1200/1500 controllers don't bother with the sata3 interface...Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
I guess they're not bothering till Intel makes it standard next yr, still others are doing it irrespective with other controllers, so it's kinda lame of them.
So I've scrolled and read through most of this forum. It would appear now that the vortex2 is the best bet. I'm not concerned about price. I just want 2 of the best performing ssds around 50gig apiece. Anyone?
Complete,
Vertex 2 (SF) vs C300 is a close race, at least using 3Gb/s controllers.
You'd be happy whichever you choose to buy.
From what I've read vertex 2 is slighty better in most areas that matter most...
But because the C300 uses a SATA6G (3.0) interface, & if you have SATA6G on your mobo, then you'll get slightly better performance in a few areas.
jalyst, my personal view on the matter is to wait the Intel G3. I can't say when is coming due to NDA but I can guarantee that it will not be better than what the Crucial C300 64GB already offers. It will be a close call, in the end will be size / price / performance ratio which the Intel G3 will offer as much as 80% in that regard. The bottom line and my advice are, don't waste your time with these drives. The Intel G3 will be a must buy due to ........ . That is all I can say for now.
I think you know this but I will say in case you don't. A new motherboard is not needed if the problem is the SATA 3.0. There are many cheap PCI-E 2.0 x 2/4 adapters for example the Asus U3S6 "True Support" USB 3.0 & SATA 6GB Combo add on card for Asus P55 and X58 is being sold for just £24.
I tried the U3S6 and the performance using a G2 is mediocre and certainly less than ICH.
I see an expensive upgrade coming soon but only when ICH support for sata 6, LGA2011 and the G3 are all available. The best rumor I have on the G3 is Jan btw, but it sounds like you might know something different
Damn your NDA. :mad: Some of us really need to know when these drives are going to be available. With UK VAT going up to 20% in January, the difference in price/performance you are talking about gets muddied comparing buying now to waiting, if there's no performance gain likely. I don't want to be buying large numbers of components after January if I can get before then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
I'd prefer G3s for replacing a bunch of drives here, but thanks to the VAT change it may be cheaper in the long term to get some x25-V love now rather than wait and speculate on G3 pricing. Not knowing anything about pricing/availability is killing me. :(
Are you saying that G3 and C300 performance will be ~ the same?Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
The Intel G3 will be a must buy due to ........price?
I'm curious on this as well, I'm in a position where I need to get a new boot disc ASAP (like tonight), torn between an x25-v for 120 at bestbuy, or the m for 220, I could deal with only 40gigs for a month or 2 if I knew the G3 was coming that quickly, otherwise I think I'm better off grabbing the m
any thoughts?
The only word on the G3 anywhere is strictly rumour; it fuels itself. Its similar to all technology advancements in that the day the Intel comes out will be the day after you break down and decide on another drive eheh.
my thoughts exactly. i am so antsy..these barefoots are getting tired....
Yes thats right, if i remember correctly the 1500 has higher iops cant remember to be exact but costs way more and the performance is exactly the same as the 1200..Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveRo
1500 for servers etc
1200 more enthusiast home use
yeah, I bought my 860 maybe a month before the 875 was released, felt kinda burned thereQuote:
Originally Posted by flamenko
but I jumped on the x25-m 80gig last night, after going through the install and getting a chance to play with it a bit, I'm so glad I did, so much more responsive than the 150gig raptor it replaced
My local dealer has just listed OCZ RevoDrive 50GB. It is more expensive than other 50-60GBs, but the price is not too bad for such a speed.
What do you guys think about using this 540/450MBs baby as a OS disk?
Sam
I feel more comfortable using single drives in raid, for 2-4 drives the ICH is great.
If the RevoDrive sported performance beyond the ICH, I would probably have bought it instantly.
Pros
Great performance at a low cost.
Performance wise, none that I can think of compared to 2R0 Vertex 2 on the ICH.
Cons
The firmware is not user upgradable, I for one couldn't live with such a limitation.
There are compatibility issues, visit the OCZ forum.
EVGA looks to be one of the MBs having issues with the RevoDrive. (as a boot drive)
I see. Good to have you around Anvil :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
I knew this was too good to be true, but I didn't know how. I don't want to deal with it on my EVGA SR-2, and FW update is important to me too. I'll keep waiting for c300 64GB to get in stock, or a good sale-price on Vertex 2 60GB.
Interesting, thanks for the insights!Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
2R0 X25-V will have to suffice for me instead of 1x C300 64, 1x Vertex 2 50+, or the mythical G3!
Perhaps in the new year I'll buy 1-2 of these contenders.
yes allow the pricing to level out after G3 launch.
Looks like the X25-V has just been blown out the water:
Corsair Force F40 Review (40GB)
http://www.storagereview.com/corsair...40_review_40gb
Quote:
Originally Posted by audienceofone
aw crap :( sigh...
time to sell my two x25-v's (brand new) and get 2x of these (so long as cheapest prices are comparable) methinks.
Leaked Intel SSD plans, sounds a bit different to what metroid was saying?
http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/14/l...ands-ssd-line/
So even without SATA3 the G3 performs as well as the C300, & at a better $/GB, or can't you clarify both those points at this time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Metroid
Or will it come standard with SATA3 and hence perform better all-round?
I already have a mobo which has SATA3 integrated, I quite like it :D
http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_I...FyJ&templete=2
Unfortunately I've already bought my 2nd X25-V, so ownership of one or two of these G3's will have to come sometime next yr :(
yeah as I recall adding the the U3S6 is slightly different to how the 6G is implemented for my mobo.Quote:
Originally Posted by audienceofone
I couldn't wait for c300 longer, finally got a little Vertx2 60GB, it should do for now.
Fresh w7-install, FW 1.11, AHCI mode. With a few SSD-tweaks, but no manual trim. How does it looks like?
http://img.techpowerup.org/100818/Capture001503.jpg
well here is a vertex LE for comparison, i rarely run this bench cause i hate to write, but its new and i havent had time to play much so....
http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u...e1/LEASSSD.png
I don't like running write-benches either, but it is a good idea to try a few to see everything is OK when you get a new SSD.
Those LE-numbers are exactly like the Vertex2. Is it normal, shouldn't LE be better?.
Try a Iosp too, lets see if can beat this :rofl: :
http://img.techpowerup.org/100818/Capture002010.jpg
[QUOTE=Computurd;4515977]well here is a vertex LE for comparison, i rarely run this bench cause i hate to write, but its new and i havent had time to play much so....
QUOTE]
Does the Vertex LE not bench very well on AS SSD? Those scores look quite weak compared to an Intel. :shrug:
No SandForce drive has proper test results on AS SSD if you are looking for those numbers utilized by the manufacturer. ATTO or the new version of CDM with the test set at 0Fill will work.
OK I forgot about the data compression issue. I assume AS Bench does not allow the data to be compressed hence the low benchmark? If CMD allows all data to be compressed during the benchmark that seems to be going to the other extreme. :shrug:
Maybe a bit OT, but I watch a lot of on-line movies, and they buffer on the SSD. I hate the idea, and want to put it on my RAMDisk.
Anybody knows how to force Flash and Widows media player to buffer somewhere else?
Are you worried about writes? Its really not a problem, it hasn't even been an issue on the first gen drives. The controller is more likely to toast before the nand wears out. It will be obsolete long before it wears out. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
It depends the browser you are using, for Firefox type onto the address field "about:config" then find "browser.cache.disk.enable;true" and change to "false". Check if "browser.cache.memory.enable;true" is set to "true", by default both lines are set to true. You have 12GB of ram so set the windows paging file or cache to 16MB but don't disable it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam_oslo
If for any reason the previous solution did not help then try this
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/fo...l=1#post442160
Enjoy,
gah audience of one with the amount of testing i do with my array i am always worried about writes, others have also told me im paranoid.....but they are just not worried enough LOL:p:
I'll run some CDM it allows you to stop before it writes :)
I am not seeing 0fill on the CDM bench! can you give me a more detailed explanation? I am not familiar with the sandforce drives (benching one) at all,,,,guess i need to read up!
The Sandforce controller compresses data so that it has less to write to NAND. That is what makes it fast. If the benchmark data can not be compressed all the data has to be written and it takes longer. Sandforce performance in real life will be somewhere between AS SSD and ATTO. Bottom line is performance is depended on how compressible the data is.
You can select 0 fill or 1 fill from the File->Test data menu.
The Vertex 2 should be very close to the LE in benchmarks, < 400 is a bit low using AS SSD.
The SF based drives do settle at a lower speed once all cells are used once. (might explain the sub 400 result)
Also, DuraWrite kicks in if you write excessively for a prolonged time.
Note that the LE has 28% OP vs 7% on the 2E drives, I recommend increasing the OP on the drives preset with 7%.
Typical results running AS SSD on a relatively clean drive (not settled/not in "steady-state") should be closer to 450.
I've ordered some Vertex 2 60GB (eta today/tomorrow), I'll compare them to my LE drives this weekend.
What happens when DuraWrite kicks in?Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
Agreed on the OP. That is a key provision for how these drives work so to reduce it seems to be asking for trouble. :shrug:
DuraWrite slows down writes when one writes too much data in a given timeframe, thats all :)
As soon as the writes/timeframe is in balance you regain the speed again.
It's sort of a "keeper" of durability.
So I'm thinking of selling my 2x X25-V's...
And upgrading to 2x Force F40 or 2x 60GB Vertex 2 if they're not much more.*
Sound like a plan, or would ya'll just wait till the 40GB X25-V refresh in Q1 2011?
Hopefully it'll use SATA3....
I'm very happy with my current config...
But it's always nice to have something that performs a "bit" better :D
2011's gunna be one heck of a year:
Intel's 3rd Generation X25-M SSD Specs Revealed ---Anandtech
SandForce Announces Next-Gen SSDs, SF-2000 Capable of 500MB/s and 60K IOPS ---Anandtech
I'm hoping even these will start to become more mainstream :)
OCZ Technology RevoDrive Series 80 ---Amazon
Superfast SSDs are coming, but will they be used the right way? ---Ars (think this article's a bit wrong, but I get the sentiment)
*Assuming these 2 are still the best performing amongst 40-60GB SSD's for RAID-0?
Wait for the G3 reviews.
It looks like the Postville refresh is 3Gb/s, 6Gb/s will probably be available Q2-Q3? 2011.
The X25-V's still is one of my favourite drives, as a boot drive theres not that much of a "real-life" difference Vs the SF/C300.
If you can't wait then I'd say go for SF 60GB or more or the C300 64GB, they are both great drives.
Thanks Anvil,
Yeah the G3 X25-V 80GB should be out very soon, so no doubt reviews will follow.
Unfortunately the 40GB's not due till Q1, & even then I don't think it's SATA3 either.
But you're right.....
I suspect the diff. is so negligible that I'm best just waiting till Q2 when there's X25-M/V refreshes w/SATA3 interfaces.
Hopefully then we'll have next-gen SF and other controllers too?..
Hey any idea how some of the 2R0 PCIe SSD's compare nowadays? (revo etc)
For e.g. to... 2x SF 60GB or 2x C300 64GB in 2R0, utilising ICH10R.
Are any advantages currently too negligible to justify the extra $$?
There's prolly some good threads on this forum about this already.
I'll have a look-see, but if you already happen to know....
Again thanks so much for your time/thoughts, night!
Hi Jalyst, are you deleting a post and then reposting the content of the deleted post in a new post? I only ask as the thread seems to keep going to the top, indicating new content, but when I check it out the content does not appear to have been updated :shrug:
Some might consider that thread bumping. A "bump" may not be as tidy, but it helps everyone keep track of the thread. The answers to your questions in post # 197 have been covered in other threads. If you have looked at the other threads is there a specific question that is not addressed?Quote:
Originally Posted by jalyst
A quick search brings up the following, which is not a comprehensive list. I don’t mean to be awkward and I like to help if I can, but is there any info you need that is not covered in these threads?
A 2 page thread on the Revo drive here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=254139
A 4 page thread here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ght=revo+drive
A 2 page thread here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ght=revo+drive
A 2 page thread on the Anglebird variation to the Revo drive here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ght=revo+drive
A single page thread here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ght=revo+drive
A 2 page thread on 2 x C300 in raid 0 here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ght=revo+drive
A 3 page thread on 2x OCZ Revo drives raid0 or 2x New Crucial SSD's!? here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ght=revo+drive
A 4 page thread on the C300 64GB drive here:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=254451