Vertex LE vs Crucial C300

[Tiltevros]

I ordered FastPath today, 10 days delivery.
Well, by then I should have explored the 9211.

fast path will be available at the end of the month not in 10 days becarefull with resellers. (information from LSI channel)

Pricing and availability(1)
MegaRAID CacheCade Software Pack: $270
MegaRAID FastPath Software: $165
MegaRAID Recovery Software: $150
MegaRAID SafeStore Software: $90
Advanced software options are currently supported on the MegaRAID SAS 9260-4i, 9260-8i and 9280-4i4e controllers, and requires installation of a physical key on the controller. Users will be able to download and install advanced software options on the full line of MegaRAID 6Gb/s SATA+SAS controllers using electronic licenses in the second half of this year.

[Anvil]

Tiltevros,

I noticed the prices.
Well, I'll just have to wait, 10 or 20days, it's a long time anyways

Just started testing the 9211, updated firmware and bios, just about to reboot.

I installed the W7 drivers, how do they compare to the Windows 2008 drivers?

[Tiltevros]

use windows 7 drivers

[Anvil]

Part II

Time to revive the thread, I've got a few Vertex 2 60GB I've been playing with for a few days.
They've been through a lot of tests but I'll start a new fresh on my X58A-UD7 slightly OC'd at 4GHz, PCIe @ 105.

I've been using the RST 9.6.4 for the tests.
All drives are FW 1.11

ATTO 2.46
atto_v2_60GB.PNG atto_v2_60GB_2R0.PNG

AS SSD 1.5.xx
as-ssd-bench OCZ-VERTEX2 24.08.2010 00-10-02.png as-ssd-bench Volume_0000 24.08.2010 00-16-47_2R0.png

CDM 3 (default)
cdm_v2_60GB.PNG cdm_v2_60GB_2R0.PNG

CDM 3 (0-Fill)
cdm_v2_60GB_0fill.PNG cdm_v2_60GB_0fill_2R0.PNG

I'll continue using more drives tomorrow and I'll add iometer test later this week.
Now, all I'm missing are a few C300 64GBs to make a proper comparison.


Warning (not for the faint hearted)
The following screenshot shows in bytes the amount of data read/written on these few tests.
rw_single_and_2R0.PNG

It seems CDM is a bit of a killer wrt writes, these few benchmarks compares to a full weeks worth of writes. (I'm investigating this matter as it writes more than one should think)

[Computurd]

Warning (not for the faint hearted)
The following screenshot shows in bytes the amount of data read/written on these few tests.
Name: rw_single_and_2R0.PNG Views: 0 Size: 13.2 KB

It seems CDM is a bit of a killer wrt writes, these few benchmarks compares to a full weeks worth of writes. (I'm investigating this matter as it writes more than one should think)

jesus i never realized it writes that much! you are right, that is not for the faint hearted

that is only if you run the write portion, right? or is there a similar amount of writing if you just run the read sections? I am sure there must be some writing if you run read-only.

nice results from the vertex 2 there. what would be your initial just off-the-cuff impressions of these drives? With your vast knowledge of the different drives out there (god you have one (or two) of everything) where would you place this one? in relation to the intels for instance?


I have been looking at these very hard, considering what their price will fall to when g3 hits...might make a helluva deal.

[Sam_oslo]

Here is my single Vertx2 60GB.
Fresh w7-install, FW 1.11, AHCI mode on ICH10R EVGA SR-2. But this a few days old with older RST, and I've updated to RST 9.6.0 1014 after this bench.



MY ATTO scores is pretty much the same as Anvil's single SSD in big-segment but I'm wondering why it is scoring lower in small-segment and in AS SSD. My drive is scoring lower in 4k-64kThrd, and I'm wondering why. Any tip?

[Anvil]

@computurd,

Quite a few bytes written there

There will be some writing even if you abort the benchmark but not that much, nothing compared to the full test.
Also, it depends on how fast the drive is, a slow drive writes 10-15GB during a full test whereas the SF 60GB is close to 35GB, the big brothers even more.

There is no point in selecting 500MB vs 1000MB, bytes written is almost the same, strange.
I need to do some more tests on this but it looks like there is something wrong/unexpected stuff going on with the CDM test.
A single 100MB test run writes close to 2GB of data from my findings.

I do like the drive, it's hard to tell where I put it, the 100GB LE is faster in benchmarks, they do feel close in real life though.
I need some more time and some pcmv testing to settle my score.

From what I've seen, it makes a great boot-drive.

edit:
@Sam,

It's mostly due to that youre running OS on the drive, my drive is not + it was cleaned before I started testing, your score looks OK at first glance.
AS SSD was the last test I ran so the CDM scores are the cleanest runs.

[Anvil]

3R0 Vertex 2 60GB

CDM standard
cdm_v2_60GB_3R0.PNG

0-Fill
cdm_v2_60GB_0fill_3R0.PNG

ATTO
atto_v2_60GB_3R0.PNG

AS SSD
as-ssd-bench Volume_0000 25.08.2010 01-28-42_3R0.png

[SteveRo]

@ Mr Anvil,
Pretty nice performance for ~$500.
Is this about the best storage subsystem performance for this price point?

[Anvil]

Hi Steve,

Yes, it's about the best at the price point, I expect the C300s would perform about the same though. (using 3Gb/s that is)
The SF drives are somewhat difficult to bench as it's performance depends on the type of data, the C300 simply doesn't care.

For OS drives the SF controller is great, it performs a bit differently once in steady-state, keep in mind that these benchmarks are close to optimal as the drives are cleaned.
In benchmarks, the C300 doesn't seem to change that much, it's performance feels more or less the same even in steady-state.

The SF drives have proven more pcmv friendly in my experience, not sure about the 60GB drive yet.
Hopefully I'll be able to do some pcmv this weekend using these drives.

Here's the pcmv score using a single V2 60GB on my Thuban, slightly OCd, Link
Don't think there are any better pcmv scores running the Thuban on the ORB.

The pcmv score using the Samsung F3 was about 9300 points. (no OC though)
Well, it proves that a "cheap" SSD does improve performance, a lot

[Sam_oslo]

Those 3R0 looks good Anvil, it tempts me to get 2 more drives.

My little single Vertex2 60GB has been behaving really good as OS-disk. It is a good deal faster than my good old Vertex 30GB. MS security essential quick scan finishes in just 10 sec. That's not too bad.



I'm really happy with it so far, but it has been running with a lot of free space. I'm ready to fill it now and I hope it will keep behaving as good.

[Anvil]

Sam,

Wait for my 4R0

Your rig sure looks fast, those Xeons probably need some credit for that Security Essentials performance as well.

[hecktic]

Sam,

Wait for my 4R0

Your rig sure looks fast, those Xeons probably need some credit for that Security Essentials performance as well.

thats what i plan to do with my 4 x C300 256gb but I still dont have a proper Raid Controller Card... motherboard is GA-X58-UD9

[SteveRo]

@ Mr Anvil, you think the corsair F40 40Gb would perform in 3xR0 as well as the vertex 60's?
About $35-40 less per drive here in the states, so approx $400 total for 3.

[Anvil]

Steve,

I would think so.
There is less NAND on the smaller drives, it does make an impact when comparing the LE 100GB (128GB) vs the V2 60GB (64GB)
The Force 40GB vs V2 60GB shouldn't make that much of a difference.

There are a few reviews out there on the F40 and they are all positive.

[Anvil]

thats what i plan to do with my 4 x C300 256gb but I still dont have a proper Raid Controller Card... motherboard is GA-X58-UD9

Why don't you give it a try , all results for the SF or C300 drives are welcome in this thread.

[Anvil]

3R0 vs 4R0 Vertex 2 60GB

CDM standard
cdm_v2_60GB_3R0.PNG cdm_v2_60GB_4R0.PNG

0-Fill
cdm_v2_60GB_0fill_3R0.PNG cdm_v2_60GB_0fill_4R0.PNG

ATTO
atto_v2_60GB_3R0.PNG atto_v2_60GB_4R0.PNG

AS SSD
as-ssd-bench Volume_0000 25.08.2010 01-28-42_3R0.png as-ssd-bench Volume_0000 25.08.2010 18-52-32_4R0.png

It seems the results are ambiguous.

4R0 shows better results for AS SSD, the others are somewhat weird, it might be the stripe size.

[SteveRo]

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen ich10r AS SSD much higher than this - 1391 is a very nice score!

edit - the best AS SSD I could pull down with 4x x25-v - this even with 1231ML-4G - was 1320 - see http://img291.imageshack.us/i/frankensteinsarray.png/

[Anvil]

At the price it does look great

I'll do a few tests on the 9211 and then I'll try some PCIe OC

My best ICH AS SSD score was using the 4R0 LE100+C300 256, the score was 1670 iirc. (at a much higher price though)

[PnoT]

I have an older DFI LANPARTY LT X48-T2R with ICHR9 onboard. Would I see similar results or does the ICHR10 outperform it by a large margin?

[Anvil]

PnoT,

The ICH9R should be very close, it does depend on the ROM bios on your MB though.
(not all MBs are equal in performance)

Just make sure to use the Intel 9.6.X drivers

[PnoT]

@ Anvil

Thanks for the quick response! I was thinking about going with 3 V2 in R0 for some serious bang! for the $$ value but was considering the C300 128mb there for a bit but the investment, at this point, is a little steep for the pocket book.

@ Steve

I'd like to see the smaller drives in a R0 configuration as I don't need the size more so than the performance.

[Anvil]

A few iometer tests, still 4R0 on the ICH

Random Read 4KB, aligned
iometer_4K_4R0_test1.PNG

Random Write 4KB, aligned, QD64
4K_RW_4R0_Vertex2_60GB.PNG

Workstation, aligned
workstation_4R0_Vertex2_60GB.PNG

[Mungri]

I just got my Crucial C300 64 Gb:



It works well on the marvel ports as a single drive, but if I ever buy a second for raid, I would have to put them on the Sata II ports. But at least I will have Sata III capable drives ready for whenever Intel releases a true Sata III motherboard.

I'll wait untill the SSDs go even cheaper still, and pick up a second one of these, 128 Gb would be plenty for Windows / Drvers / benchmarks and several games.

Currently backing up my Sammy drives to the seagate, then I'll raid them and see how much improvement I get.

[Anvil]

Your result looks just fine, great drives indeed.

Hopefully Intel will release 6Gb/s capable MBs soon. (Q1/2011?)