Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
7 Pages  1 2 3 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 The SSD Thread V2, Faster Better Greener Unbreakable!

views
     
everling
post Jan 16 2012, 03:47 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
SSD write is actually a lot more durable than it sounds, even if it is limited at 3,000 writes per block. Say you get an Intel 320 160GB and then write 160GB to it every day, it will easily last you for 5 years and have an upper limit of 8 years and 2 months.

Most small and medium businesses will find it impossible to exhaust any given SSD's write limit and most large businesses will find it very challenging to accomplish. When Cyclonechuah says write-intensive, it means writing more than 1x the SSD's storage capacity per day. And by per day, I mean every day, including weekends and holidays. So it really depends on how and where the SSD is going to be used. And it is possible to roughly estimate how long any SSD would last you, and most estimates actually over-estimate how much writes you'll consume.

This post has been edited by everling: Jan 16 2012, 03:54 PM
everling
post Jan 16 2012, 04:06 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(Mr.Lonely @ Jan 16 2012, 04:00 PM)
read shouldnt be a problem but write yes  smile.gif
*
At 10GB per day for 30 days, write is not a problem either. doh.gif


Added on January 16, 2012, 4:08 pm
QUOTE(Dackson @ Jan 16 2012, 03:59 PM)
Then should be ok. Mostly 10GB for a day up to 1 month, project done. Probably i will direct out put the data directly into storage rather keep it on SSD. Hope storage possess high reading rate.
Just SSD can handle millions (10-100) of read as single input or not ?
*
You can keep it on the SSD, unless you have better things to do with the SSD that needs the space.

There is no read limit, so it would be safe to assume that it won't be an issue.

This post has been edited by everling: Jan 16 2012, 04:08 PM
everling
post Jan 20 2012, 12:11 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(ah_fong @ Jan 20 2012, 10:33 AM)
planning to get ocz vertex3 max iops ! u guys got better opinion ?
*
Max IOPS is mostly marketing, very much like gaming RAM, and it is very unlikely that end-users will feel a difference between a Vertex 3 Max IOPS and a regular Vertex 3 - even more so once your honeymoon with your new SSD is over.

If you don't have an SSD, any decent SSD will make you swear off HDDs for your boot drive. If you already have an SSD, the only reason you should upgrade is to increase your storage capacity. Anything else and you're just burning money for the luxury; better to save a little to spend on a GPU upgrade or something else.
everling
post Jan 20 2012, 08:17 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(ah_fong @ Jan 20 2012, 07:28 PM)
im new in ssd ! tats mean jz get agility3 enuf ? already planning 7970 ! haha ! jz dunno whether 750w bronze psu enuf or not
*
Yes, the Agility 3 will be enough for your situation.

Games are optimised to minimise the impact of slow HDDs as much as possible, so SSDs are unlikely to improve performance for some games. You are likely to see a bigger performance difference in your OS boot up, web browsing, virus scans and etc than you would in your games by changing to an SSD.
everling
post Jan 21 2012, 01:25 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(Shufflerz @ Jan 20 2012, 08:19 PM)
Does the capacity affect the speed?
I have 1 Samsung 830 128GB on hand.
Don't know whether to keep it myself or sell it off.
Anandtech YouTube video review mentioned about speed differences between 128GB & 256GB.
*
It isn't exactly the capacity that effects the performance, but the number of NAND chips. The more NAND chips you have, the better it can divide the data amongst them; it is very much like RAID-0. 256GB would naturally have more NAND chips than a 128GB SSD.

QUOTE(altung @ Jan 20 2012, 08:43 PM)
Hi, wanna ask smile.gif

I planning to replace my current SATA HDD 2,5" (for laptop) and my friend suggest to buy SSD to replace it but my laptop is Acer Aspire 4930. My questions are:

1. Is my laptop able to use SSD ? since I need to buy the SSD casing that fit with my laptop character
2. How much is the current price for SSD ? because when I check on here, the price is almost same as 2,5" HDD

Thank You
*
1. I can't guarantee 100%, but it is very likely that your laptop will be able to handle an SSD. I had an old laptop with similar specs and it worked fine.
2. A lot of 120GB or 128GB SSDs are at the RM599 price point.

QUOTE(AlphaBeta @ Jan 20 2012, 11:18 PM)
Is Kingston HyperX 120G good SSD? I heard SF chip is bad. any idea?
*
It seems that most of SF's problems have been fixed recently. Regardless, I feel that it is overpriced because you're not likely to be able to distinguish the performance difference for the given price premium.
everling
post Jan 21 2012, 11:20 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(AlphaBeta @ Jan 21 2012, 10:54 AM)
what SSD do you recommend then? I find that Kingston is the cheapest.
*
The Vertex 3 is cheaper and there are plenty of decent 120/128GB choices at the RM599 price point.
everling
post Jan 22 2012, 03:16 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(Dackson @ Jan 22 2012, 02:26 PM)
It is all in that article. It's nice if you don't mind plugging it in to your motherboard's PCI connector or the insane price.
everling
post Jan 27 2012, 11:02 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(owikh84 @ Jan 27 2012, 09:04 AM)
It's ok. The SSD is still playing its role to be A LOT faster than any conventional HDD. Access/seek time under 1ms is more important & noticeable during apps loading.
*
+1

All this chasing for top performance seems quite unnecessary, because 90% of the performance difference that you can feel can be had with any SSD. It'll be an extremely rare occasion when you can feel the value of 500MB/s read/write.
everling
post Jan 27 2012, 04:30 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(koolzuru @ Jan 27 2012, 04:23 PM)
Need some opinion on ssd. Which one is a better choice between 2x intel 320 80gb ssd on raid0 or 1x intel 320 160gb ssd? I choose intel of the reliability.
*
1x Intel 320 160GB. Less wires to mess with and you don't need to worry about or configure the RAID array. Its performance will be more than adequate.
everling
post Jan 27 2012, 06:17 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(chaics85 @ Jan 27 2012, 04:48 PM)
a question for u guys that i not so clear abt:

whenever i copy/paste few GB of files, my computer lags everytime i tried to open softwares/browsers/music players etc.
my pc spec is at my sig. Is it due to slow hdd? not enough ram? or CPU?
if its abt hdd, will i get performance boost if i add in an intel 320 ssd??

appreciate someone can help me..  thx
*
Yes, this is indeed because of your HDD. It will end up trying to copy your files and load your programs at the same time and your HDD's slow access time will then cause a severe performance loss. More RAM or a faster CPU will not help because the bottleneck is at the HDD. SSDs access times are roughly 100x faster than HDDs, so you may find it difficult to notice the lag or it won't bother you as much. You will definitely experience the difference if your OS and applications are on the SSD. Come and join us! thumbup.gif
everling
post Jan 30 2012, 09:41 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
I think they interpreted the word "Flash" for flash memory cards. You should challenge them on this.
everling
post Jan 31 2012, 12:58 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(wKkaY @ Jan 31 2012, 02:49 AM)
What shops in KL stock the 300GB Intel 320?
*
Seems like only Viewnet has them on their price lists. No idea if they have local stock however.


everling
post Feb 8 2012, 12:21 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(fr0sti3 @ Feb 7 2012, 10:52 PM)
hmm besides slower R/W speeds, any downside of using SATA3 ssd in a SATA2 slot?

i'm planning to get my second corsair force3 120GB for my sata2 lappie since pricing of sata3 & sata2 ssd is quite similar

thanks for your time smile.gif
*
If the pricing is quite similar, then there is no real downside.
everling
post Feb 10 2012, 08:47 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(Foo Mun @ Feb 10 2012, 07:59 PM)
I think Intel SSD have less problem right? Others brand like always seen other people complain about BSOD...
*
It does have less problems.

If your budget is really tight, I'd suggest buying Kingston V 100 64GB. I think you would get 64GB (59.6GiB) of actual capacity while the other SSDs will give you much less. While it may be slower than either Intel or the others, you will still feel the difference between an SSD and a HDD, and we also haven't heard of any problems with Kingston.
everling
post Feb 13 2012, 09:22 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(jinaun @ Feb 13 2012, 08:08 AM)
i was thinking of getting pcie based drives instead of sata

i think i saw a revodrive 3 x2 in viewnet .. 240GB .. the quoted price was 2.4K

any benefits over sata?

or get 2 vertex 3 in raid 0?
*
The benefits depends on how you used a PCIe or RAID-0. Home user or gamer? 99% of the time, it will be terrible bang-for-buck.

QUOTE
But a relative strength in all of those benchmarks doesn't necessarily translate into a positive gain in user experience. Does an extra 25% jump in testable data throughput cut your Windows boot time or make backing up a game on Steam faster by a corresponding percentage? Does it even directly translate into file copies that finish that much faster? Not at all.

So, here's the thing. Yes, there are clear cases, particularly if you're a power user, where owning a motherboard with 6 Gb/s is going to allow your 6 Gb/s-capable SSD to shine. However, if a friend were to ask us if he should hold off on an SSD purchase until he could upgrade his old Core 2 machine to something newer with 6 Gb/s connectivity, we'd say no. For someone using a hard drive today, a fast SSD (even one artificially hobbled by a 3 Gb/s port) will yield massive and immediate gains in nearly every aspect of computing.

Snagging one that does work with 6 Gb/s link rates ensures you get the most out of it after an upgrade, sure. However even Intel's SSD 320, based on an older proprietary controller constrained to 3 Gb/s remains an admirable piece of hardware.

user posted image

We've used this chart before, but it tells a compelling story. There's a huge gap between the cluster of SSDs, the high-end hard drive in the middle of the graph, and the low-end hard drive in the upper right-hand corner. You have to zoom in quite a bit, though, to distinguish between high- and low-end SSDs. At the end of the day, even if you're a fairly hardcore enthusiast, there's fairly little sense in agonizing over which SATA 6Gb/s SSD is the fastest. As we mentioned, even Intel's 320 still stacks up remarkably well.

So banish any thought that you must save for the newest, most expensive, and highest-rated SSD. If you have the money for a platform upgrade, there are certainly measurable gains to be had from upgrading to a SATA 6Gb/s-capable motherboard and the best solid-state drive. On a tighter budget, however, buying the SSD that everyone says is the fastest isn't as important as buying an SSD you can afford, particularly if it means replacing a hard disk as your system drive.

Source: Buy The SSD You Can Afford, Not The Fastest One

The Real-World Tests page will further hammer in the message.

This post has been edited by everling: Feb 13 2012, 09:26 AM
everling
post Feb 14 2012, 04:06 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(fixgd @ Feb 14 2012, 03:03 PM)
Ssd can get bad sector problem like hdd?
*
Not impossible, but very unlikely to happen. And if it does happen, it is less worrying than when it happens on a HDD.
everling
post Feb 19 2012, 01:24 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(fixgd @ Feb 19 2012, 12:52 AM)
okay let say im buing a hp dm1-4018, and i want to change the hdd to ssd, which one is okay? i see that all mentioning that not all mobo have sata 3, but is that dm1 come with sata 3?

and what which ssd u all suggest me to buy for that dm 1 for a budget let say 300 ringgi?
*
SATA 3 (aka SATA 6.0 Gbps) is backwards compatible with SATA 2 (aka SATA 3.0 Gbps). You will lose maximum performance, but that is acceptable for your situation.

But unless you can have both HDD and SSD running in your laptop at the same time, your budget of RM300 will not be sufficient. For RM300, your only first-hand option would be an Intel 40 GB SSD. Everything else seems to be at least RM350, which are 60GB SSDs. Or you could buy second-hand SSDs. However, these capacities are much to small when compared to to the DM1's default HDD capacity of 640GB. Unless you do not need most of the capacity or you can have both SSD and HDD at the same time, buying an SSD will be a bad idea for you. A similarly sized SSD will be Intel's 600GB SSD that goes for RM3599.

This post has been edited by everling: Feb 19 2012, 01:26 AM
everling
post Feb 19 2012, 01:55 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
Any SSD will be at least 4x better than a HDD, even a cheap budget one like Kingston.

I have poisoned a good friend of mine by selling him an old Kingston cheaply, and now he can't live without an SSD and wonder how people can live on HDDs. And there was the other time when I sat down on a computer and I wondered if its Windows 7 had crashed during boot, but it turned out that it was simply loading from the HDD like normal. Once you have been properly poisoned by any SSD, using HDDs will frustrate you.
everling
post Feb 23 2012, 10:02 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(silverpeas @ Feb 23 2012, 07:24 PM)
There seems to be quite a lot of misunderstanding and sarcasm in the comments in that article.

It is good to do such analysis, so that we may know of the potential future of NAND memory and work to mitigate it. But we also have other potential technologies already in the works that may render NAND memory obsolete by 2024. NAND may be doomed, but SSDs can still improve.

And even if all possible alternate technologies are dead-ends as NAND's successors, HDDs will still lose to NAND-based SSDs in random read/write performance, probably forever. Don't worry. icon_rolleyes.gif
everling
post Feb 26 2012, 02:39 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
3,591 posts

Joined: Feb 2008
QUOTE(limhongwoon @ Feb 26 2012, 02:02 PM)
I think better buy it from Newegg, anyone want to join it ?
*
I'm not interested, but I am curious about how the warranty would work.

7 Pages  1 2 3 > » Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.3040sec    1.58    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 1st December 2025 - 10:52 AM