Finally deciding to get a SSD hard drive

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

  1. Posts : 296
    Windows 7 Professional
    Thread Starter
       #21

    @ Dave76

    Given the fact that both the Crucial and OCZ SSD's cost 40-70% over the Kingston V100 it's really a no brainer for my decision. Others compared a 7200.12 to a WD Black and say it's a lot better and that's with just a 3ms reduction. Comparing my old 74GB Raptor to a VelociRaptor which both has a 7ms access time, the difference is only the SATA connection speed SATA-150 vs SATA-300 and read/writes times 70mb/s vs 105mb/s but benchmarks and real world performance shows the VelociRaptor pulls ahead a lot.

    Considering the difference of only .2ms which is not even a 1ms with higher write speed over Crucial 40mb/s and a $40 reduction on the price tag. It's really no competition, if I were only to save $20 then I may have a dilemma. I'm almost positive a few months down the Kingston can probably be found for $80 which would give me 128GB RAID 0 option, 1.5x more read/writes times and only a $40 price bump from the Crucial now and the same cost as a OCZ right now. That's 64GB more disk space with reads speeds of the Crucial in SATA-600 (400mb/s) and write speeds of the OCZ (250mb/s) if I decide in the future go the RAID option.

    I only considered getting a SSD because of the promotion going on for the Kingston right now, at regular price it would cost me $135 for the Kingston and obvious I would choose the Crucial over the Kingston both a regular price. On top of all that, I never considered a SSD to begin with, I'm perfectly happy with my 7200.12 in RAID right now.

    Anyhow, I'm in the process of placing an order for the Kingston SSDNow V100 64GB along with a Seagate 7200.12 1TB and a MSI N460GTX HAWK 1GB videocard as an upgrade to my current XFX HD 5770 1GB.

    Hope it all works out, thanks again to all for the inputs.
      My Computer


  2. Posts : 12,177
    Windows 7 Ult x64 - SP1/ Windows 8 Pro x64
       #22

    Sounds like you've made up your order.

    Enjoy, I'm sure you will like it.
      My Computer


  3. Posts : 11,424
    Windows 7 Ultimate 64
       #23

    Nemix77,
    You'll be amazed at this upgrade of drives and GPU. Let us know how it all works out. Post some benchmarks before and after and some pic's !
      My Computer


  4. Posts : 296
    Windows 7 Professional
    Thread Starter
       #24

    Thanks. linnemeyerhere

    I really like to do a before and after pic but I'm not sure I can squeeze in the time to do so with with my schedule but I'll give it a shot. I'll take a picture of my XFX HD 5770 with Thermalright HR-03 (4 Heatpipes) 120mm Fan tonight before it's sold.

    Another thing that made me jump into SSD is the fact that AMD AHCI drivers finally supports TRIM in the 10.11 package according to Crytalmark: AMD trim command support via AHCI driver? - GSKILL TECH FORUM

    Couldn't be a better time for me to buy a SSD. Promotional Price + AMD TRIM Support = Win

      My Computer


  5. Posts : 12,177
    Windows 7 Ult x64 - SP1/ Windows 8 Pro x64
       #25

    A good SSD benchmark: AS SSD

    The upper left corner tell you the firmware version, driver version, if it's aligned (green font=ok, red font=bad), and total space.

    This has many SSDs so you can compare the AS SSD scores.

    AS SSD Benchmark thread
      My Computer


  6. Posts : 296
    Windows 7 Professional
    Thread Starter
       #26

    @ Dave76 and everyone else who joined/helped with the thread.

    I have good and bad news:

    The good news is, I've placed my order and all things are to arrive early next week and I'm finally done with hardware upgrades for this year.

    The bad news is, I decided not to go SSD and chose a WD Caviar Black 640GB SATA-600 + Seagate 7200.12 1TB instead and still got the MSI GTX 460 HAWK.

    Ultimately, I came down to my self conscious and now so much the extra cash. I cannot explain it but ultimately I chose to stay on a regular hard drive, though I thinking WD Raptor 150GB (add to basket button) during checkout but noise complaints from user reviews put me off.

    I've learnt so much about SDD's from this thread and for future reference I know I won't have a difficult time picking out the right SSD hard drive.

    I'm really looking forward to the MSI GTX 460 HAWK (overclocking ability). And now with the extra cash, I'm thinking of buying a Asus Xonar DX PCI-e souncard possibly in 2011.

    Thanks again everyone.
      My Computer


  7. Posts : 1,364
    Win7 Ultimate x64
       #27

    whs said:
    The OCZ Vertex 2 50GB costs almost double the price of a Kingston SSDNow V100 64GB here in Canada: $100 vs $170
    I did not want to misguide you. But I am obviously not aware of the Canadien prices. I only know the US and the German prices - the German prices being outrageously high too.

    When i get home, i'll be setting up 2 x OCZ vertex in raid 0
    .
    This will give you nice numbers from the measurement tools. But for real life it will make little difference as compared to a single SSD because the access time does not change - Raid or no Raid.
    Thanks for your reply whs.

    Was not aware it would not make much difference. We have run Raid 0 on spinners, which appeared faster. Need to do some more research me thinks.

    Still need more info on the faster sata, as the mobo has 2 of them, along side the 6 standard ones.
    Can't do much whilst i am on the mine site as the connection is very slow and time on public computers is limited.

    cheerio

    Jon
      My Computer


  8. Posts : 12,177
    Windows 7 Ult x64 - SP1/ Windows 8 Pro x64
       #28

    Glad that you got your order in Nemix77.

    The Hawk sounds nice, sure you will enjoy it.

    Next time, when your ready, I'm sure you will able to find more 'opinions' on just about anything

    The other thing no one remembered to mention, the Gen3 SSDs are due to come out in the next couple of months.
    They are supposed to be faster and cheaper, the rumor is that they may be as much as half the current price.
    I'll be impressed if they're 30% less.
      My Computer


  9. whs
    Posts : 26,210
    Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
       #29

    Thanks for your reply whs.

    Was not aware it would not make much difference. We have run Raid 0 on spinners, which appeared faster. Need to do some more research me thinks.

    Jon, It seems to be a common misconception to propagate the Raid0 experience people have with spinning disks onto the SSDs - at least for now.

    The extra speed you get from Raid0 is because it alternates the block writing between the raided disks and you therefore have a parallel write operation. That is a definite advantage when you move large amounts of data - especially in sequential mode.

    However, for the current SSDs which are limited in capacity (and that will certainly change over time) and are primarily used for the OS, the data transfer speed plays a minor role. The operating system does not read or write big chunks of data (with maybe a few rare exceptions when you install a big program or edit a large video). The name of the game here is Access time. But a SSD Raid array has the same access time as a single SSD. I therefore think that in daily operations you will see little difference in performance between a single SSD and a SSD Raid0.

    This will change the day we can afford 500GB or 1TB SSDs where we store and manipulate all our data. And if you want to practice for that day, that is a good thing too.
      My Computer


  10. Posts : 1,364
    Win7 Ultimate x64
       #30

    whs said:
    Thanks for your reply whs.

    Was not aware it would not make much difference. We have run Raid 0 on spinners, which appeared faster. Need to do some more research me thinks.

    Jon, It seems to be a common misconception to propagate the Raid0 experience people have with spinning disks onto the SSDs - at least for now.

    The extra speed you get from Raid0 is because it alternates the block writing between the raided disks and you therefore have a parallel write operation. That is a definite advantage when you move large amounts of data - especially in sequential mode.

    However, for the current SSDs which are limited in capacity (and that will certainly change over time) and are primarily used for the OS, the data transfer speed plays a minor role. The operating system does not read or write big chunks of data (with maybe a few rare exceptions when you install a big program or edit a large video). The name of the game here is Access time. But a SSD Raid array has the same access time as a single SSD. I therefore think that in daily operations you will see little difference in performance between a single SSD and a SSD Raid0.

    This will change the day we can afford 500GB or 1TB SSDs where we store and manipulate all our data. And if you want to practice for that day, that is a good thing too.
    Thank you for explaining in terms i can understand. Since, as you say, the ssd is primarily used for the OS, and programs, it would be better served to run single ssd.
    Then we can use the second one on another comp, like mine.

    Jon
      My Computer


 
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

  Related Discussions
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:49.
Find Us