Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
The Solid State Storage Thread
|
Sky.Live
|
 Jan 25 2011, 02:17 PM
|
|
QUOTE(everling @ Jan 25 2011, 11:44 AM) Unfortunately Intel's G3 is specced to 250 MB/s sequential read and 170 MB/s sequential write. Still much slower than SandForce's best. However, there are expectations that the G3 will double capacity for the same price. Coming up sometime this quarter (Janaury-March). Potential buyers may be torn between extreme performance and limited capacity of SandForce SSDs or Intel's good enough performance and twice the capacity. Source: Intel's 3rd Generation X25-M SSD Specs RevealedPeople may think that more performance is better, thinking they'll simply be careful to use their capacity and moving things to and fro from their 1TB drives. But having already owned two SSDs, I'm preferring more capacity and good enough performance myself. I think I can live on anything above 100GB, The new spec of x3 Intel SSD have improved writing speed (170mb/s as oppose to 100mb/s). Doubling the current SSD capacity is god send good news i think, it's annoying that you have to constantly move your data around |
|
|
|
|
|
nabielz
|
Jan 25 2011, 10:44 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(munak991 @ Jan 20 2011, 05:22 PM) does owikh still selling a good price SSD? yeah now he's selling intel x25-M 160gb for 750. damn cheap!! i might get it one. |
|
|
|
|
|
acther
|
Jan 26 2011, 03:54 PM
|
|
|
Intel is getting ready to launch two new 34nm 2.5 SSD drives based on its latest 34nm process.
Codename Emcrest will convert to Intel 510 brand that will guarantee up to 450MB read and 300MB/s write speeds. Let’s not forget that these drives are SATA III 6Gb/s compatible. The specification promises up to 20K IOPs at 4KB read and 4K IOPs at 4KB write.
Intel plans to launch these drives in February and the bigger of two is Intel 510 250GB, which is going to sell for $579 at launch. The smaller one is Intel 510 120GB 34nm drive that will debut for $279 in February. The previous performance king, the X25-E with its 64GB storage and 250MB read and 170MB write, still sells for around €600.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSjinaun
|
Jan 26 2011, 04:04 PM
|
where are my stars???
|
QUOTE(sleepy 1 @ Jan 22 2011, 06:31 AM) Hi, I would like to buy a ssd for my MacBook pro 2009 mode. Thinking of get a 60gb or 80 gb ssd, but I have no idea which one should I choose. Too many brands pop up in my mind. So may I get suggestions from you guys pla? Tq i'm using vertex 2 and its running smooth/fast/responsive  |
|
|
|
|
|
cannavaro
|
Jan 26 2011, 10:42 PM
|
|
|
Bought an OCZ Vertex II 120GB yesterday. Tested on an old amd rig (the SSD is actually meant for my upcoming Sandy Bridge rig  ), results are disappointing. Is it due to the nForce chipset on the mobo? - http://www.biostar-usa.com/app/en-us/mb/content.php?S_ID=175CODE -----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]
Sequential Read : 193.215 MB/s
Sequential Write : 132.463 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 179.805 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 131.007 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 17.338 MB/s [ 4232.9 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 55.267 MB/s [ 13493.0 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 99.916 MB/s [ 24393.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 89.444 MB/s [ 21837.0 IOPS]
Test : 1000 MB [C: 16.9% (18.9/111.7 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2011/01/26 22:17:01
OS : Windows 7 Ultimate Edition [6.1 Build 7600] (x64) HDTune:  |
|
|
|
|
|
kaiserreich
|
Jan 27 2011, 01:56 AM
|
|
|
Looks pretty good to me. Except random read.
Since you have an OS installed, the benching results gets a tad funny. Plus the DuraWrite might have kicked in depending on how many times you have stressed tested the SSD.
Random Write is super, but Random read is indeed a bit low. Try playing some music on the background, it helps in the random read speed. Seriously
PS: 5x1GB is pretty darn hardcore to test an ssd. Try running it at 3x100MB, gives about the same result, minus the write stress on it.
How does it feel running on an old rig? Snappy?
This post has been edited by kaiserreich: Jan 27 2011, 01:56 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
everling
|
Jan 27 2011, 03:17 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(acther @ Jan 26 2011, 03:54 PM) Intel is getting ready to launch two new 34nm 2.5 SSD drives based on its latest 34nm process. Codename Emcrest will convert to Intel 510 brand that will guarantee up to 450MB read and 300MB/s write speeds. Let’s not forget that these drives are SATA III 6Gb/s compatible. The specification promises up to 20K IOPs at 4KB read and 4K IOPs at 4KB write. Intel plans to launch these drives in February and the bigger of two is Intel 510 250GB, which is going to sell for $579 at launch. The smaller one is Intel 510 120GB 34nm drive that will debut for $279 in February. The previous performance king, the X25-E with its 64GB storage and 250MB read and 170MB write, still sells for around €600. Citation would be great, please. I was under the impression that their next release would have been based on their 25nm process. cannavaro, hard to say. Back then, there weren't any devices that could expose substandard SATA 3 Gbps interfaces. The companies could have cut some corners on any part between the SSD and the CPU. |
|
|
|
|
|
881118
|
Jan 27 2011, 05:38 PM
|
|
|
noob question
why intel ssd selling so exp while its r/w speed is slower compare to others brand such as corsair/ocz which have better r/w speed n lower price?
|
|
|
|
|
|
0168257061
|
Jan 27 2011, 08:22 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(881118 @ Jan 27 2011, 06:38 PM) noob question why intel ssd selling so exp while its r/w speed is slower compare to others brand such as corsair/ocz which have better r/w speed n lower price? I also want to get answer from this question  Anyone wanna answer ? |
|
|
|
|
|
HiT-AbLe
|
Jan 27 2011, 11:14 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(881118 @ Jan 27 2011, 05:38 PM) noob question why intel ssd selling so exp while its r/w speed is slower compare to others brand such as corsair/ocz which have better r/w speed n lower price? Because "Intel Inside"  Actually I also want to know why. |
|
|
|
|
|
881118
|
Jan 28 2011, 12:06 AM
|
|
|
Isit only intel ssd got trim?
|
|
|
|
|
|
everling
|
Jan 28 2011, 12:17 AM
|
|
|
Probably the "Intel Inside". Every current SSDs have TRIM. And Intel should have great latitude with pricing, since we can buy Intel 160GB OEM SSDs for only RM 750.
|
|
|
|
|
|
881118
|
Jan 28 2011, 12:55 AM
|
|
|
g3 said to be launch during q1
now wan feb liao
when launch ah?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zhezhe
|
Jan 28 2011, 01:19 AM
|
Getting Started
|
Hi guys and girls, I'm wondering if the both Alienware m17x laptop with the same specs but just the difference is the 256GB SSD and 750GB 7200rpm hard drive. Will they have a huge difference in performance in terms of: 1) gaming 2) applications 3) programming 4) file searching 5) disk wipe 6) installation 7) boot up etc... Thank you for your time and opinion  All effort are deeply appreciate  |
|
|
|
|
|
everling
|
Jan 28 2011, 01:25 AM
|
|
|
1) gaming - depends on the game but some start times and load times may be faster.
2) applications - depends on the application, some yes, some no.
3) programming - from noticeably yes to YES
4) file searching - YES
5) disk wipe - yes
6) installation - yes
7) boot up - yes
This post has been edited by everling: Jan 28 2011, 01:26 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
everling
|
Jan 28 2011, 02:41 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Zhezhe @ Jan 28 2011, 01:57 AM) Hmm.. But the SSD is known for budget-unfriendy. XD It cost around RM1.7k just for 256GB SSD on m17x. Thanks for your opinion anyway!  It really depends on what you plan to do with it. If your primary goal is gaming, SSDs are not very important. If you're a programmer or work with tons of tiny files everyday, then you should consider SSDs. For me, SSDs reduced my compile time of a huge C project from 6 hours to 3 hours. RM 800 well spent and I feel it every time I need to recompile that application. This may be one technology where office workers would see much more value than gamers would. |
|
|
|
|
|
Zhezhe
|
Jan 28 2011, 04:36 AM
|
Getting Started
|
QUOTE(everling @ Jan 28 2011, 02:41 AM) It really depends on what you plan to do with it. If your primary goal is gaming, SSDs are not very important. If you're a programmer or work with tons of tiny files everyday, then you should consider SSDs. For me, SSDs reduced my compile time of a huge C project from 6 hours to 3 hours. RM 800 well spent and I feel it every time I need to recompile that application. This may be one technology where office workers would see much more value than gamers would.  Finally i made up my mind after considering your explanation. Thanks alot!! hehe |
|
|
|
|
|
0168257061
|
Jan 28 2011, 10:48 AM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Zhezhe @ Jan 28 2011, 05:36 AM) Finally i made up my mind after considering your explanation. Thanks alot!! hehe Be careful, once u use ssd, u tarak mau hdd anymore |
|
|
|
|
|
shootthemoon18
|
Jan 28 2011, 03:51 PM
|
New Member
|
hey, guys, i'm considering ssd but i dont know if it does make a big difference for me. with the money spent on ssd, i could also get a better cpu or gpu. please help me! which component do you think i should spend on?
i am a architectural student. the programs i use are photoshop, autocad and 3dsmax.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote
0.0341sec
1.09
6 queries
GZIP Disabled