Best performing/value SSD or duo, at 40-100GB?

[Biker]

To date I have never run Toolbox on them.

However I have broken my most used array once and secure erased each drive before rebuilding (same time as I flashed to the most recent firmware) so that equals one secure erase and rebuild in over 6 months daily continuous usage.

Having said that it is essential to note that I have set up both arrays so that the vast majority of usage is reads. Writes are kept low on both of them. Obviously this usage pattern is very different from an OS array.

[WC Annihilus]

A heads up, the Kingston branded X25-V drives are currently $75.56 on Amazon right now. TRIM and SSD Toolbox can be enabled through a workaround. I grabbed 3 of them myself, still debating whether to RAID them or just use them as separate drives for OS/apps and games.
http://www.amazon.com/Kingston-SSDNo...9897665&sr=8-1

[SteveRo]

A heads up, the Kingston branded X25-V drives are currently $75.56 on Amazon right now. TRIM and SSD Toolbox can be enabled through a workaround. I grabbed 3 of them myself, still debating whether to RAID them or just use them as separate drives for OS/apps and games.
http://www.amazon.com/Kingston-SSDNo...9897665&sr=8-1

I may have just got the last two - great deal - $150 bucks! THANKS!

[jalyst]

TRIM and SSD Toolbox can be enabled through a workaround.

Is this the work-around you're referring to?
http://ssdtechnologyforum.com/Thread...pid=845#pid845

I may have just got the last two - great deal - $150 bucks! THANKS!

You bastard, the OP should get 1st dibs! jk

Are these things definitely exactly the same as the official Intel drives?
Somehow I just feel more comfortable going for the Intel ones....

I would not hold my breath waiting for a raid trim pass through solution.

What do you mean by this, do you think they'll never come out with such a solution?
Are all the rumours just "hot air" in your opinion?

[WC Annihilus]

Is this the work-around you're referring to?
http://ssdtechnologyforum.com/Thread...pid=845#pid845



You bastard, the OP should get 1st dibs! jk

Are these things definitely exactly the same as the official Intel drives?
Somehow I just feel more comfortable going for the Intel ones....

Yes, that's the one, though the original guide in on Overclock.net
http://www.overclock.net/ssd/656984-...-40gb-ssd.html
Also the Toolbox workaround:
http://www.overclock.net/ssd/660723-...ssd-intel.html
Internally, yes they are identical to the Intel drives. Official support is a bit dead as they've been EOL'ed due to issues with Intel. At the price I got them for though, I couldn't pass it up. Shame the deal is kinda dead now

[Ao1]

What do you mean by this, do you think they'll never come out with such a solution?

No doubt it will happen, it's just when. Intel have not committed to a time frame so I just assume later rather than sooner, but who knows. Intel could really do with raid support now that they are no longer in the top performance slot, so its in their interest to get it sorted out.

Image backup? Simple. Win 7 > Control panel > Backup & restore > Create a system image.

[jalyst]

Intel could really do with raid support now that they are no longer in the top performance slot, so its in their interest to get it sorted out.

You're not wrong there!

Image backup? Simple. Win 7 > Control panel > Backup & restore > Create a system image.

It'll be the 1st time I've used Windows in over 4yrs, mostly use OSX, & sometimes Linux/BSD/Solaris.
4am, definitely good-night!

[lowfat]

I may have just got the last two - great deal - $150 bucks! THANKS!

Damn, back up to $100.

[Computurd]

jaylst please copy/paste the exact question that you need answered. there are many possible questions there in those posts. or even that single post. if you quantify EXACTLY what you are needing to know i guarantee you that the 'storage guys' will jump right in and help. its just a little hard figuring out what exactly it is you are asking .....

[jalyst]

For the price - hard to go wrong with x25-v's, only hassle is breaking the array to run intel tool box - how often?
Probably depends on how often you write to them - i would hope monthly or even quarterly would be often enough for most usage patterns.

So this toolbox you refer to is separate to TRIM, it must be run irrespective of whether I'm in a stripped array?
How regularly does it have to be run compared to TRIM (OS drives), & does it take long?

Yeah I guess having no TRIM is not a "biggy"....

I think there's fairly sophisticated imaging tools both in Linux and Windows nowadays.
So I could image just before I do an erase, and then restore back to the same state.

Hopefully it won't take long, and hopefully I don't have to do it more than once a mth.
Or it'll start to get very tiresome very quickly!

Plus just having to remember to re-image/wipe/restore is a PIA.

[Ao1]

The Toolbox is only really required if you want to TRIM but are running a non W7 OS. In that scenario you can use the Toolbox to either manually run TRIM or you can set TRIM to occur to a schedule of your choosing. TRIM via the Toolbox takes less than a couple of seconds, unless you are using System Restore. TRIM has to tip toe around the System Restore files so it takes longer. How long I have no idea because I don’t use System Restore.

The Toolbox does offer a few more features. You can check the SMART data of your drive and you can run a diagnostic test. My set up has auto trim however I still use the Toolbox for these features. I can run a manual TRIM if I want to as well.

Intel recommends running (a manual/ scheduled) TRIM once a day. I think this is more to do with reducing wear than maintaining performance. My secondary PC has not been TRIMMED once and I don’t see a performance drop, although I don’t use it anywhere near as hard as my main PC.

If you are not benching or continually writing lots of files you have nothing to really worry about if you don’t have TRIM.

For info on the requisites for Toolbox check out the User Guide:

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/down...18455&lang=eng

[jalyst]

Intel recommends running (a manual/ scheduled) TRIM once a day. I think this is more to do with reducing wear than maintaining performance. My secondary PC has not been TRIMMED once and I don’t see a performance drop, although I don’t use it anywhere near as hard as my main PC.

Why do they recommend a scheduled/manual TRIM once /day if one is running in a configuration whereby it should occur automatically?
Are they concerned the right scenario won't present itself often enough for TRIM to kick-in regularly enough?

Thanks for explaining toolbox in-depth, nothing special by the sounds.
Just for polling smart data and running some diagnostics on each SSD.

Manual TRIM hopefully shouldn't ever be needed, as the two OS's I'll use support TRIM.
Unless of course I go for 2x X25-V, in which case I won't be able to pass a manual TRIM anyway!

**********

I had a chat with Anand and outlined my workload as best as I could...*
And he reckoned the performance benefits wouldn't be worth it or noticeable for me.
Particularly considering that 2x X25-V costs slightly more than 1x X25-M.
But I'm still not yet 100% convinced....

*there's still little I know in-terms of all the apps/process that'll be in place between the two operating systems until I dive into it all.

[Ao1]

You don't need to run a manual/ scheduled TRIM via the Toolbox if TRIM via the OS (W7) is working. There is nothing stopping you doing it but it not necessary. The questions you are asking can mostly be found on Intel site.

[jalyst]

My point was why do they recommend it if TRIM is kicking-in normally in Win7, & hence auto-reducing wear & maintaining performance.
But never-mind, I'm more interested in assessing which of the two configs to choose: 1x X25-M or 2x X25-V. I've some further reading to do.

[SteveRo]

you should be able to compare numbers from anand's last article on the 2x x25-v to this - http://www.anandtech.com/bench/SSD/65
Looks like anand is reorganizing this page - should be nice!

[jalyst]

I'm trying to decide between 2x X25-V, 1x X25-M 80GB, or 1x OWC Mercury 50GB (unlikely)
I'm almost settled on 2x X25-V's, but I'm having a hard time justifying their slightly higher cost.

It's hard to explain my workload in detail at this stage, all I know is it'll house....
*Win7 & some multimedia related apps
*Stripped-down Ubuntu + MythTV + XBMC/Boxee + maybe LXDE & NAS related s'ware.

It'll primarily be a media playback, media capture/transcode, & storage/bu device. i.e. HTPC/PVR & to a lesser extent, NAS.
There'll be at least one 1TB 7.2k drive for storage, & this is prolly also where captured DVB will be dumped.
LT I have plans for a dedicated NAS device with a more sophisticated array/config of HDD's.

I wonder how 2x X25-V performance compares "across the board" to these two drives & the Corsair F100? (100GB SF-1200)
Do the Anandtech bench tools allow one to see all this, or are there supplementary resources?*
And I wonder how their performance differences compare to their price differences??

I'm concerned my usage pattern will be random enough to accelerate degradation of 2x X25-V's in RAID-0.
Hence requiring me to set aside more space than I can spare to mitigate it...
To be safe, I'm pretty sure I'll need 60GB for both OS's, their apps, page file etc, but I'd be surprised if I need more than that.
Will I notice enough of an advantage in my workload to justify their higher cost & potentially higher rate of degradation/wear?

Sorry for the double-post, thought there might be users here not subscribed to the other thread that can help, thanks/night.

*Anand's X25-V RAID review seems to include Mercury 50GB & the X25-M in all the benches, but no Corsair F100.
*I'll need to analyse this data more carefully soon to help me towards a decision....

[jalyst]

So GullLars has recommended 1x X25-V/M, 2x Kingston V+ G2 64GB, + my storage disks (which initially will only be 1 or 2 1TB HDD)
The idea being that the X25-V is the OS-SSD, & the RAID-0 of Kingston's is my scratch-disk with high sustained r/w.
Does everyone else agree with this basic concept (seems pretty sound to me), perhaps you agree with the topology but not the disks picked?

Thanks for clarifying,

Are there any SSD's with similar characteristics to the V+ G2, but with a smaller capacity? e.g. 30-40GB
I'd rather spend less money on the RAID-0 scratch disk if I can.

As per your suggestion for the OS disk; I'll prolly just get 1x X25-V or "maybe" 1x X25-M if I can find an excellent deal.

Thanks so much for your time!

The Kingston V+ G2 is based on the controller JMF618, and the 64GB version performs roughly: 200(+)MB/s read, 110MB/s write, 5000 IOPS read, 1500-3000 IOPS write (there have been variations in reviews). What is clear is this is an SSD well suited for use as a scratch-disk, meaning a place to be working on data that requires good bandwidth and at the same benefits from accesstime and IOPS.

I would go for Intel SSDs because of the price pr GB and performance. If you find a SandForce SSD to roughly the same price pr GB (i'd say up to 10% more) i'd go for that. As far as i've seen, SandForce SSDs have been to expencive this far compared to alternatives.

Like i said in the last message, if you are going to be working on the data on this machine, a combi of OS-SSD, workspace SSD, and HDD storage will deliver highest value. If you can use 128GB workspace/none-core apps/games, a RAID-0 of Kingston V+ G2 64GB will give you 400+ MB/s read and 220MB/s write, with good enough IOPS.

[jalyst]

Kingston V+ G2 64GB are too expensive here in Oz....
http://www.staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/...ow+V%2B&spos=1
Possibly the best price I could get inc. post is $274 => $548 for two.*

OCZ Vertex turbo 60GB which I "think" has the same qualities (perhaps better?)
is $355 inc. post.
http://www.staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/...x+turbo&spos=1
However unlike Kingston, OCZ also make a 30Gb version!
It's not showing-up on this engine, but I checked with OCZ & apparently it's available in Australia.

Assuming that's true, then I'd be surprised if the 30GB version is any more than $205 inc. post.
That's $410 (maybe less) all up versus $548 for the SSDNow V+ 64GB.

OCZ vertex (non turbo) 30GB does readily show-up on Static Ice...
http://www.staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/...+vertex&spos=1
It looks like I could get it for $176 or $352 for two, that's $196 less than the V+ drives.

60GB is more than a BD and I suspect is still plenty of space for a scratch-disk right?
That way my wallet isn't so sore after also buying 1x X25-M 80GB or 1x OWC Mercury 50GB!

Is the whole premise of having a dedicated scratch-disk with excellent seq. r/w sound IYO?
Do you think 60GB is too small, if so why?
Do you know of other makes/models with similar seq. r/w performance to the V+, but better $/GB or sub-64GB capacity?
Of the two OS-SSD's I'm considering, which would you pick? (n.b. I may add a 2nd one later and do RAID-0)

Any thoughts/advice greatly appreciated!
Thank-you.
*N.B. this engine isn't the "end all and be all" of Oz pricing, but it often has the best.

[Anvil]

Without knowing exactly what this scratch drive is for I'm starting to think that a 2R0 HDD array can be an option.

The 1TB Seagate 7200.12 or the Samsung F3 would in a short stroked array give you sustained sequential throughput in the 200-250MB/s range for both reads and writes.
(and on top of that about 500-750GB of space in that high throughput zone)

It certainly would be cheaper, this way you can opt for a "better" SSD drive for booting. (e.g. 2R0 X25-V's or a single X25-M G2)

[WC Annihilus]

Err, GullLars is actually slightly mistaken in the model he mentioned. It's not the V+ that's based on JMicron, but the plain V series. The V+ series is based on the second generation Samsung controller. So actually you're looking at a price closer to $200-230 per drive:
http://www.staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/...S2/64GB&spos=1

If you go that route you need to make sure it's a second generation V series drive, with model number SNV425 (not SNV125 like the first generation).

But based on your usage described above, I'm thinking you might be better off just sticking with HDDs as Anvil suggests. Is there any particular reason you want SSDs for scratch disk? SSDs are certainly nice but if you're concerned about cost you don't want to get too caught up in the fever. HDDs are still a perfectly viable option.

[Anvil]

Kingston are changing too fast

V Gen2 = JMF618 (according to pcper Link)
V+Gen2 = Toshiba T6UG1XBG (according to benchmarkreviews Link)

[WC Annihilus]

Ah, didn't realize there were 2 generations of the V+. Regardless, the point is GullLars meant the plain V series G2 drives, SNV425.

[jalyst]

Some good points guys,
I like his concept but if i could get cost down by using 30GB drives that also have lower $/GB that'd be ideal.

What do ya'll think of my suggestion of two OCZ vertex 30GB instead of the V G2 64GB?
Or would seq. R/W be dramatically lower for relatively minimal $ reduction?

[Anvil]

Actually, I was about to bring in the Vertex series into the equation, they are excellent on GC and should do well in an array *but* they are about to go EOL.

Beware that the Vertex 30-60GB aren't as fast as the 120-250GB ones, throughput varies a lot, it looks like it depends on what NAND you're getting.
The Agility series would be an option as well, they have the same issue with NAND, some are great and some are not.

With the SF drives emerging (e.g. Vertex 2) I think you should hold off a bit, prices might change as well within a month or two.

[jalyst]

Good point thanks for that, so long as I can get seq. r/w close to the V G2 64GB I'll be happy.
I may proceed with only the OS drive for the time being...

Although maybe I should see how prices/sizes settle for SF-1500 drives too?
As in a few weeks the OWC Mercury (or cousin) might be much more attractive Vs the X25-M!

Hmm can't really wait though...
Perhaps I should get a X25-V in the meantime & sell when things are clearer?