Actually I meant was...
I just missed the extra l. Thus my confusion of what was being re-stated. Still didn't see it till your post. Guess I REALLY do need to start wearing my reading glasses more. Something I hate doing as I have to admit to myself my eyesite is isn't what it used to beSATAlll is usually associated with the newer motherboards motherboards that use DDR3 memory.
Anyway my apologies
Thanks.
It's OK Drew, I do the same thing...with glasses.
More confusing is that SATA II is 3Gbs and SATA III is 6Gbs and people get the Gbs and the SATA versions transmogrified in their head. (That's a Calvin-used word)
Is the Sandforce SF-2200 (SF-2281) series controller something everybody should avoid at all costs, or is it an issue only with very specific applications and/or scenarios?
The reason I ask is that a number of SSD's which use this controller have probably taken a small hit price wise because of it (like some models of Kingston, Sandisk, OCZ) and... would that be a worthwhile advantage for most consumer users?
Guys if i have a ssd as cache using isrt should i use diskeeper or not?
Hi,
Just run that CrystalMark software with my new Plextor M5P 512 GB. The SSD is running in a 3 Gb/s system not in a 6 Gb/s one despite my laptop having a sec gen Intel I7!
Afterall I'm very happy with the real world performance (booting is now at 20,6 sec and SW opens in a click!)
I let you here the tests for the original Seagate Momentus 7200.4 and the Plextor M5P 512GB.
Regards,
paulo
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : Crystal Dew World
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]
Sequential Read : 257.667 MB/s
Sequential Write : 236.913 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 214.244 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 223.766 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 23.837 MB/s [ 5819.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 37.807 MB/s [ 9230.3 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 202.350 MB/s [ 49401.9 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 180.421 MB/s [ 44048.1 IOPS]
Test : 1000 MB [C: 9.8% (46.7/475.5 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2012/09/25 23:08:15
OS : Windows 7 SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)
Some may remember I have my browser's temp files data now on my ramdisk.
I dont regret this decision, I since discovered (when it got full) that the amount of writes using browsers does reaches insane proportions, eg. 1 hour of browsing managed to fill my 1 gig ramdisk. So I have concluded my own browsing if writing to ssd would probably be writing in excess of 10 gig a data a day with temp data. Bear in mind when watching things like youtube videos they are also written to browser cache. Its no longer an issue for me with the size of ramdisk as I have set limits for storage the browsers can use. But in terms of ssd write performance I would suggest to anyone with enough ram to either move temporary internet files to a hdd or to a ramdisk.
I use IE9 and I just set 9MB as a limit for temp files, but it will go a bit higher than that.
Have a look at the Samsung 830 256GB, in this SSD endurance testing thread.
SSD Write Endurance 25nm Vs 34nm
(PiB) 4.48 = 5.04 PB (Petabyte) = 5,040 TB = 5,040,000 GB
It's showing signs of wear but, still going.
The average desktop user writes between 7-10 GB worth of information per day.
You can figure out your average writes and do your own calculations.
The easy one, let's use 20GB per day of writes:
7.3 TB per year
5040TB/7.3 = 690 years
Even 100 GB per day still gives you 138 years, not bad.
Even if you get half the SSD life Christopher did your still looking at a lot of writes and a lot of years.
This would mean the 128GB model (quick extrapolation) might get 345years at 20GB/day and 69 years at 100GB/day.
A fifth of that is acceptable.
Not saying reducing writes on SSDs is bad.
I don't worry about writes to SSDs anymore.
The rumors about SSDs being fragile are grossly exaggerated.
Last edited by Dave76; 26 Sep 2012 at 23:02.
hey guys,not sure if this is the correct thread to ask this,but after hearing quite a lot about SSD's and whatnot i have finally decided to try one out for myself. As i have never EVER tried out a SSD before,i know nothing about them other then that they are like really fast. SO for now i choose this one: 30GB OCZ Vertex Series SATA II SSD Solid State Disk for notebooks and desktops
Its available at a local shop near my place which is really rare and costs arnd 38US$ new. Should i go for it?
I will be only running my OS and the current game whichever it is im playing on it.
I would ditch that in favor of a larger, more up to date SSD. As of right now, Newegg has the Samsung 830 on sale for $79.99. Honestly, by the time you get Windows 7 loaded on there, with updates, you are getting close to filling up that SSD. 128GB is what size most people start out with, as it has plenty of space and has better performance than smaller drives.
Quote