Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 The SSD Thread V4, Solid State Drive

views
     
rurushu
post Dec 27 2014, 10:25 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,021 posts

Joined: Jun 2011
From: Shah Alam


QUOTE(horns @ Dec 27 2014, 12:46 PM)
thanks for the heads up biggrin.gif this is one of the things i am waiting for. although it might take a while to populate, at least it's here soon hahaha!

hopefully this also move us away from things like bad usb.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpxZFoNiQ10
https://github.com/adamcaudill/Psychson
*
this is what i hoped would happen... but still cannot neglect the advance of SSDs into the PCIe lanes.... hmm.gif

QUOTE(cherroy @ Dec 27 2014, 10:15 PM)
I don't think the USB3.1 has a big impact.

USB3.0 already exist for years already, still many are still using USB2.0

For storage purpose, speed is not the major concern, but cost is.

There is still a wide gap in term of cost between SSD and HDD.
Accessing data between SSD and HDD, there is little noticeable difference between.
*
hmm.... seems very logical from the way you put it, then i guess can only hope that more and more efforts will be put into making NAND storage option so that it can reach the level of ubiquity of HDD. Then we consumers can both benefit from the reduced price per GB and faster interconnect that can harness NAND storage's potential drool.gif drool.gif
rurushu
post Dec 29 2014, 10:22 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,021 posts

Joined: Jun 2011
From: Shah Alam


QUOTE(marfccy @ Dec 29 2014, 01:07 AM)
even the slowest SSD is still faster than average HDD nod.gif
*
hahhaah.... cannot compare like this, if compare some speed oriented with a capacity oriented for speed, of course the speed wins... laugh.gif laugh.gif
rurushu
post Dec 29 2014, 06:00 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,021 posts

Joined: Jun 2011
From: Shah Alam


QUOTE(horns @ Dec 29 2014, 12:48 PM)
yes. speed is one advantage. the main thing to me is still relative data safety hehe
after the incident of failed hdd, i switched to usb sticks also. however usb sticks are slow for large files.

my simplified comparison is this: for 256gb, you need 4x 64gb usb sticks. i use sandisk ultra usb 3.0 64gb for comparison here. (there are options with faster speed but the price is quite high) the total cost is like MYR 440.00. in terms of speed, it is said to have up to 100MB/s.

now you get a 256gb ssd plus a common external enclosure, say, ssd for MYR 380.00, and external hdd enclosure, MYR 70.00. the total is about MYR 450.00. the price is almost the same. the speed for ssd in external enclosure is about 190MB/s.

this is why i think it's a viable option to me.
*
well, your justification does makes sense, however, i think for current market, storing data using NAND storage is still not a very plausible option, at least from the financial viewpoint, because of the price/GB is still high for SSDs, however, if you mean using it to backup crucial informaions, which i think would rarely exceed the 256GB, then i think it is a good option considering the pricing for 256GB range SSD is now not as unreacable as last time hmm.gif

now i just hope the same can happen to the 512GB capacity SSDs, as speculations from analysts said the involvement of Intel in the 3D V-NAND in 2015 would offset the SSD market in terms of pricing and capacity, forcing prices for large capaciy SSDs to come down drool.gif
rurushu
post Jan 21 2015, 01:01 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,021 posts

Joined: Jun 2011
From: Shah Alam


QUOTE(horns @ Jan 21 2015, 10:20 AM)
you can get it from ramcity.com.au. note that there is a 10% gst 'discount' for international buyers.

as for the price, it's slightly expensive (double of sata ssd's of the same capacity).
*
i dont think the price is "slightly expensive" when it costs 2x of SATA SSD of equivalent capacity sweat.gif

but damn.... hope prices for SATA SSDs can come down faster abit... cry.gif cry.gif
rurushu
post Jan 22 2015, 11:05 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,021 posts

Joined: Jun 2011
From: Shah Alam


QUOTE(horns @ Jan 22 2015, 09:32 AM)
plextor's ram-based cache is relatively impressive. although it's not as good as ramdisk, and we don't need that crazy speed for everyday use, it looks better than samsung's rapid and primocache.
*
I just read up about Plextor's PlexTurbo implementation and the difference between it and Samsung's RAPID.
It seems that Samsung's RAPID is a write-back, which only writes to the SSD when a flush command is issued
while Plextor's PlexTurbo is a write-through, which will writes to the SSD when modification is still commencing.... can't find the correct word to describe it sweat.gif

and it seems that the difference is in the implementation nature itself, rather than the difference between implementation technique... hmm.gif

write-through improves data integrity but write-back improves performance (as only when write is committed then only it writes to SSD)


QUOTE(iRonTech @ Jan 22 2015, 10:05 AM)
cheap low costing, and much better than kingston v300 (after changing to slow nand flash), and no provisioning on ssd340.

the fw update method quite dumb on ssd340, will wipe off the drive data sweat.gif

guess ssd340 no longer available, ssd370 now. ya, for laptop purpose it fast, cheap & good enough, though the 256GB model will double the 128gb write speed.
those scary high speed ssd really good for big large fast require database like tesco/mydin.
*
that M6E BE, you are using it??? drool.gif drool.gif
the price must be rclxub.gif
rurushu
post Jan 22 2015, 05:13 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,021 posts

Joined: Jun 2011
From: Shah Alam


QUOTE(horns @ Jan 22 2015, 01:28 PM)
nice smile.gif to reduce os and app load time, read speed is more important. this is a good choice to go for if budget is a concern.

oh they have a not-so-good firmware upgrade process. still, i think it's not a big deal, as long as they can deliver proper updates hehe
ah my comments about plextor's plexturbo was based on speed found on images only hehe

yeah.. maybe all implementations ram-cache with write-back (i think it's deferred write-back) are slower for some reasons. i'm not really familiar with it. for the purpose of ssd optimizations, my personal preference is still write-back.
*
hahah.... no worries, i also learning to see what are the technologies on offer by the SSD manufacturers because you know,

makes our purchase "wiser" laugh.gif


btw, just found out that Plextor's parent company is Lite-On.... kind of shocked sweat.gif sweat.gif
rurushu
post Jan 23 2015, 01:59 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,021 posts

Joined: Jun 2011
From: Shah Alam


QUOTE(horns @ Jan 23 2015, 10:56 AM)
for now, yes. currently this is the better option to get speed and to free up pcie lanes for better use (like gpu sli setups).
*
every now and then i heard people discussing about using PCIe lanes or not enough PCIe lanes etc, those are conditions IF you are using SLI setup right? other than that, i think your PCIe lanes are pretty much still have some left used most of the time?? hmm.gif


RAID 0 is fast, but doesnt that also means it is very dangerous if something happens to your file? As it will be rendered totally useless....


and also i want to ask, does using SSD with a not-so-stable voltage (for example, living in an area where there are suddenly electricity outage every once awhile) will brick the SSD?? hmm.gif
rurushu
post Jan 23 2015, 10:07 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
2,021 posts

Joined: Jun 2011
From: Shah Alam


QUOTE(horns @ Jan 23 2015, 03:17 PM)
it's not just about multiple gpu setups. it depends on the purpose of that rig. there are some pcie-based stuff, like sound, video capture, nic, wifi, and raid/sata/usb/scsi cards, that can be added to the system to cope with needs. pci-e slots can also be used as a means to replace faulty integrated parts of a mobo.

mainstream systems (like 4790k, z97) usually have less pcie lanes than high-end ones (like 5930k, x99).

due to such limitations, different implementations are adopted by manufacturers to assign and distribute these resources that involve lane sharing (that means there are differences in the number of pcie lanes connected to each slot, something like this, http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-i...oard,3902.html). it's important to check out the mobo manuals and review sites to know more about this, then plan your rig setup ahead before purchase.

we all know the risks of using raid0. we cannot eliminate them, so just prepare for the worst:

1. use it as a boot/software drive, not storage. normally 2x 256gb should be good and large enough.
2. make sure you can recover from disasters, by keeping the latest system images outside the system. (it's much more time saving than doing fresh installs from scratch everytime)
3. store the data in hdd (non-raid), or nas.
bad power supplies will cause damage in electronics. it's better to use UPS in this case. (it's not just about ssd. every component in your rig will be affected and i don't think you wanna risk them too) laptops are relatively better. they have built-in battery for this purpose.
*
oh... that one i read before regarding the PCIe lanes allocation for z97 chipset, i think is 20 lanes, and then x99 is 40 lanes, for maximum of 4x SLI config of 16x 8x 8x 8x... hmm.gif hmm.gif


I see.... my area is really bad in terms of power stability, every once awhile will blackout for like 5 mins, then return to normal, that sudden voltage surge is very damaging to my PC... >.< and yea, plan to get an UPS for the peace of mind sweat.gif

Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0566sec    0.59    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 8th December 2025 - 07:44 AM