TRIM is a command that helps to maintain the performance of an SSD against file fragmentation. Older SSDs did not have support for TRIM, and thus will eventually perform slower and slower and the SSD gets more fragmented.

SandForce is a controller, something like a firmware.

SSDs doesn't have a particular standard at this time, other than adopting most from SATA.

If you want much more detailed information, google for it.

It was about two decades of HDD before SSD appeared in the consumer market. Might take another similarly long period to find a replacement.

SSD's primary strength isn't its maximum read/write speeds (1.x to 3 times faster), but its extremely short latency (50 to 150 times faster). The much shorter latency is the reason SSDs are unbeatable by HDDs.

Will the RM 3K desktop with an SSD be slower, as fast or faster than the RM 8K desktop with a HDD at launching 50 programs? It may be interesting to see such a youtube clip.

The current generation of Intel's SSDs are out-classed by SSDs with SandForce controllers. It remains to be seen if Intel's 3rd generation of SSDs, coming out within the next few months, will be better or not.

If you want more capacity than Intel's 80GB or Corsair F60's 60GB, you could consider Kington's SSDNow V Series 128GB (product no: SNV425-S2/128GB) for about RM850 at PC-Zone. It is a budget type SSD so it is not as good in performance compared to the first two, but it will still crush a Velociraptor and does have a lot more capacity.

Viewnet also carries it, for RM799. But I do not know if it is also the SNV425-S2/128GB. Do not buy it if it is the older model as that has serious performance problems that is boycott-worthy.

This post has been edited by everling: Sep 29 2010, 09:11 PM

I don't really know. It might be because yours is running under emulated IDE mode, as shown by the "pciide" in your screenshot.

To change this to native AHCI mode, you'll need to change the BIOS settings and reinstall the OS. But I can't guarantee that it will fix the problem.

---

Added on October 6, 2010, 2:26 am
Source: Intel's 3rd Generation X25-M SSD Specs Revealed

It's only sampling today?! No!!!

Interesting paper specs though.

This post has been edited by everling: Oct 6 2010, 02:27 AM

Viewnet is selling Kingston SSDNow V Series 128GB (SNV425-S2/128GB) for RM 780 if you pay in cash.

I don't know if it is this particular SSD I got, the batch or a quiet subpar release, but it doesn't perform as well as my previous one on random access.

It is the cheapest on a RM/GB basis. But the one I got from Viewnet doesn't perform fully to my expectations.



Benchmarks from the Kingston SSD I bought in May.


I installed Windows XP (no OS TRIM support) and have been using it very roughly since then.


It sure held up pretty well with it's internal TRIM support.


The new Kingston SSD of the same model bought this week. Installed Windows 7 on it.



A snapshot of the biggest difference between the old and the new:



I think the problem is the firmware. The versions reported are different.

This post has been edited by everling: Oct 8 2010, 01:24 AM

You mean the results for my first SSD after 5 months of wear and tear? That is normal for any SSD after they have been "used". But their performance probably will remain stable after that because of TRIM.

Older SSDs without TRIM support will continue to degrade in performance until they perform worse than HDDs. This is the reason why the older version of the Kingston SSDNow V Series 128GB should be boycotted, as it did not have TRIM support.

Also, OSes without TRIM support (eg: Windows XP) should not be used with SSDs that do not have internal TRIM support, which the newer Kingston has.

It didn't. The first two screenshots were from May and the next two screenshots were of the same SSD today. In terms of sequential read, it only dropped 6MB/s. In terms of random access, it did also dropped but they're still far more superior to that of HDDs.

First SSD, fresh (May) and used (October):


I expect that the performance of the SSD will maintain about the same as the second screenshot five more months from now, thanks to TRIM.

Second SSD, fresh (October):


Samsung F3 HD103SJ and Western Digital Caviar Green WD10EADS


As you can see, it will take a far more serious performance loss before modern SSDs will perform worse than HDDs.


SandForce SSDs still uses TRIM. SandForce's primary performance advantage comes from that they compress the data and use data deduplication (removing duplicate data) to reduce the number of read and writes significantly.

This post has been edited by everling: Oct 8 2010, 04:15 AM

Well, clearly something is wrong or misleading with that spec, as there are a number of people whose Intel G1 and G2 SSDs have reported already exceeding that spec and not suffering any problems.

I have a weird problem with my new Kingston SSD with my Windows 7 64-bit.

Sent it back to the shop for testing and it tested fine on an Intel platform. Took it back and reran the tests on HD Tune and the problem shows up. BUT, when I jiggled (moved) any application window about, the performance on both the normal benchmark and access time shoots up and stays up as long as I keep jiggling the window. Tried installing the latest AMD drivers for everything, 10.9 on graphics, South Bridge and AHCI and still no change (poor performance when idle and expected performance when a window is jiggling). The North Bridge Filter won't stay installed.

Using CrystalDiskMark 3.0 and HD Tune's File Benchmark, I get the expected normal performance of over 200 MB/s read and 100 MB/s write.

I am all confused now.

SSDs should be guided by Moore's curves as it is based on transistor technology. Expect it to double in capacity at the same price point every 18 months. An alternative interpretation is for the same capacity to reduce in price by 50% every 18 months.

The current expectation for a 50% price drop is within this three or six months. Depending on when Intel finally releases their 3rd generation SSDs. Unfortunately, Intel's offerings will not be as fast as those based on SandForce's (a competitor) SSD controllers used in SSDs like OCZ's SSDs. But Intel's offerings will still be a huge improvement on HDDs and they will be much cheaper than their competitors.

From a review I read on them, they were rather overpriced and its performance leaves much to be desired.

Do you have any new technology in mind?

Because HDDs was the main storage technology for well over two decades. It is only in the last few years that we saw the introduction of SSDs as a serious alternative main storage technology. And it took well over a decade to get Flash technology from thumbdrives into SSDs.

As far as I know, we don't have yet another serious alternative storage method out in the market in some manner at this time. Because of this, I doubt that we would see yet another serious main storage technology to appear by 2016. And even if it did, I doubt that it would be affordable to the masses, like SSDs are now, by 2016.

Paying hundreds of ringgit extra just to extract from rar files doesn't really sound cost effective. Besides, if those rar files are mostly video or ISO images, access times is not a main issue as it should be mostly sequential read and write.

RM9/GB is only a little cheaper than here. At least when you're looking at most SSDs. But if you just want an SSD, we have much cheaper options, than what you have seen, like Kingston's cheaper series.

This post has been edited by everling: Oct 25 2010, 02:57 PM

If you would be happy with an SSD performing just a little better than a HDD, then any decent SSD will do as they will all easily outperform the Velociraptor. Since RM/GB is a main concern, you should consider Kingston's V Series 128GB (product no: SNV425-S2/128GB). I bought one from Viewnet in cash for RM780, otherwise it was supposed to be RM799 then.

For reference, here's a simple price analysis, but it is two months old and didn't list Viewnet.

Lousy is relative.

In my experience, building a huge application from source code on a Samsung F3 1TB took me six plus hours. Then I later got another Kingston SSD and then move the build process into there. The new build time on the otherwise same machine? Three plus hours.

And then later I got a brand new i5 laptop and moved the same Kingston SSD onto it to do the same job. The time taken? Two plus hours.

What this means is that I got a much bigger performance improvement from a "lousy value series" than I would have putting down money to upgrade my Phenom II X3 for an i5.

On a cost/GB ratio and for the capacity given, while being a "lousy value series", it still has significant value for people upgrading from HDDs.

I just wish the SSD manufacturers will start ramping up capacity as opposed to performance. A 'slow' 200 MB/s read/write is good enough if it allows us to buy affordable 256 GB SSDs or even 512 GB SSDs.