Show us your SSD performance 2

[paulobao]

Thanks

 

[Fantail]

New life for laptop

SSD - OCZ Vertex Plus 120 sata ii (W7 Pro installed, might reinstall with home premium seeing how I realy don't need XP mode like I thought I would)
Dell Laptop d-820 (96' ish designed for XP) Centrino Duo 1.6 4 gigs ddr2

Processor 4.6
Ram 4.6
Graphics 3.5 / 3.2
Hard Disk 6.9

Boot time 31 seconds. Shutdown time 5-6 seconds.
Note; Laptop used mostly at camp off grid solar power, (12v -to- 19.5v converter). With the SSD the total avg power draw is about 1/3 less amp. DC 2.5 before, avg 1.7 with ssd, keep in mind this is not a high end laptop even in it's day. Ment for business jazz. I mainly use it to run a few spreadsheets, track solar info, dvd player, view photo's etc.

 

[Hopalong X]

SSD - OCZ Vertex Plus 120 sata ii (W7 Pro installed, might reinstall with home premium seeing how I realy don't need XP mode like I thought I would)
Dell Laptop d-820 (96' ish designed for XP) Centrino Duo 1.6 4 gigs ddr2

Processor 4.6
Ram 4.6
Graphics 3.5 / 3.2
Hard Disk 6.9

Boot time 31 seconds. Shutdown time 5-6 seconds.
Note; Laptop used mostly at camp off grid solar power, (12v -to- 19.5v converter). With the SSD the total avg power draw is about 1/3 less amp. DC 2.5 before, avg 1.7 with ssd, keep in mind this is not a high end laptop even in it's day. Ment for business jazz. I mainly use it to run a few spreadsheets, track solar info, dvd player, view photo's etc.

Sounds like a great upgrade.

 

[cytherian]

What do you guys think of hybrid SSD? I know for some, they wouldn't give it a second look. But it looks like Seagate finally got the latest firmware issues corrected with their hybrid Momentus line. It's so tempting to get 750Gb for "near" SSD performance at less than what you'd pay for a quality 256Gb SSD.

Another thing... Sandisk recently came out with "Ready Cache". It's a 32Gb card (just $55 on Amazon right now) you install in your system that essentially creates a virtual hybrid SSD, using your existing hard drive.

 

[Britton30]

A hybrid HDD may be a good upgrade. From what I've read w7 handles caching well and your write/read speeds will be somewhere between a Raptor and a SSD.
I think the cache card will offer similar performance.

 

[Hopalong X]

My Honda minivan is "near" as fast as a Porsche 911 Turbo S.

"Porsche SSD there is no substitute."

 

[Britton30]

My Honda minivan is "near" as fast as a Porsche 911 Turbo S.

"Porsche SSD there is no substitute."

:roflmao:

 

[whs]

I don't own a hybrid, but I have read very controversial comments about it. I guess it is a matter of trying.

Given the choice of a 250GB SSD and a 750GB hybrid I would always vote for the SSD. Very few people will have a need to put more the 250GBs of stuff on a fast access device. And the rest can go on a normal HDD - even an external.

I run 4 laptops on 60GB and 90GB SSDs plus external devices and never had a need for more space on the internal disk. Most space is taken by the images and videos and that goes to the externals anyhow.

I am always stunned by the disk space requirements that some people seem to have. On this desktop here I have a 60GB Vertex2 from where I run Windows7 and Virtual Box with Windows 8 and Ubuntu - and I have 20GB of free space on the Vertex. All my user data is on one of the internal HDDs though.

 

[cytherian]

I think your average computer user is not a very good steward of their computer. I've gotten to see the computers of family and friends over the years. Only once did I find someone who had a well maintained file system. Most of the time people copy files someplace and then forget about them. I've seen in some cases people having duplicates of the same files as well. So... letting random activities like this progress and eventually you end up with a drive consumed with clutter.

The problem is that people learn how to use a computer, but not maintain it. A Mac is pretty good about shielding the user from burdens like defragging and deleting temp files. While Microsoft finally added a fairly useful "disk cleanup", the default defrag program is extremely limited and not very effective if you've got less than 25% disk space free. And the problem with how it works is that if you schedule it automatically, inevitably the defragging will take place while you're in the middle of something and processing performance slows down quite a bit.

I have a large music archive that takes up 30Gb of space, and I need to keep it local. However, I also have a lot of video files as well and after doing some inventory checking, I've realized that there is plenty of stuff on there that I rarely access. I've moved that off to an external storage drive.

 

[ICIT2LOL]

Have just fitted a SanDisk Extreme 120GB to my old Toshiba A200 laptop and it is just flying but am just wondering what everyone thinks of these AS SSD test results as I am not overly familiar with what they mean, as compared to some of the other shots I have seen they don't scrub up too well.

I bought this drive to try and usually use Samsung 830 or the Crucial M4 but it is a marked improvement on the old HDD with a boot of 28 seconds to login.

 

[essenbe]

John, the Sandisk is rated at 550/510 but that's SataIII. Sata II I would think, would be faster than that.

 

[ICIT2LOL]

John, the Sandisk is rated at 550/510 but that's SataIII. Sata II I would think, would be faster than that.

Ah now you have me at a disadvantage there mate as I don't quite get what that means. Is it because I am running an old machine with DDR2? or the way it is set up in the BIOS or something?
I mean I can't complain about the increase in speed in fact it totally took me by complete surprise as I only had 2GB RAM and that small CPU in for starters.

I will have a Google and see what the difference is between II and III

 

[essenbe]

If you have DDR2 memory, I can just about assure you, you do not have sataIII. Sata is the Interface, sataIII is 6 Gb/s and sata II is 3 Gb/s. It's just a faster interface, but it doesn't make that big a difference. I would think you have it in AHCI mode in BIOS.

 

[ICIT2LOL]

If you have DDR2 memory, I can just about assure you, you do not have sataIII. Sata is the Interface, sataIII is 6 Gb/s and sata II is 3 Gb/s. It's just a faster interface, but it doesn't make that big a difference. I would think you have it in AHCI mode in BIOS.

Ok yes I was just curious essenbe I cannot find any ref to what the machine supports except that the machine CPU may run a 64bit 7 which I think I might get because the board I originally put the OEM on is defunct and I am getting the "warning" for that OEM (32bit) I used then and now have flipped it into the laptop so unless M$ take pity on me I shall have to get another.

Otherwise I shall have to go back to the dreaded Vista or a Ubuntu OS

Never rains but it pours eh?

 

[whs]

John, you are OK. Given your base hardware, that's all you can expect.

What Steve is saying pertains to a more modern sata interface (that you do not have). But since it gives you a significant performance improvement over the old HDD, you should be happy.

 

[ICIT2LOL]

John, you are OK. Given your base hardware, that's all you can expect.

What Steve is saying pertains to a more modern sata interface (that you do not have). But since it gives you a significant performance improvement over the old HDD, you should be happy.

Thanks Wolfgang yep the machine is five years old now and as you say the performance is that much faster its scary. The old Vista set up was areal slow coach of a thing so it makes a good backup for my main laptop.

I see now how much how getting the bloat off is such a bonus

 

[sygnus21]

If you have DDR2 memory, I can just about assure you, you do not have sataIII. Sata is the Interface, sataIII is 6 Gb/s and sata II is 3 Gb/s. It's just a faster interface, but it doesn't make that big a difference. I would think you have it in AHCI mode in BIOS.

Just to be clear on this,

What is being alluded to here is that SATAll is usually associated with the newer motherboards that use DDR3 memory, whereas the older "DDR2" motherboards didn't utilize SATAlll interfaces. They're not related, it's just one way to tell look at features associated with a part.

Example - If someone says they have 8gig of RAM, I can infer they have a 64-bit OS as opposed to a 32-bit.

 

[Britton30]

If you have DDR2 memory, I can just about assure you, you do not have sataIII. Sata is the Interface, sataIII is 6 Gb/s and sata II is 3 Gb/s. It's just a faster interface, but it doesn't make that big a difference. I would think you have it in AHCI mode in BIOS.

Just to be clear on this,

What is being alluded to here is that SATAll is usually associated with the newer motherboards that use DDR3 memory, whereas the older "DDR2" motherboards didn't utilize SATAlll interfaces. They're not related, it's just one way to tell look at features associated with a part.

Example - If someone says they have 8gig of RAM, I can infer they have a 64-bit OS as opposed to a 32-bit.

What Steve alluded to is that if John had a board that only supports DDR2, It does not have any SATA III ports. SATA II is associated with older boards.

 

[sygnus21]

If you have DDR2 memory, I can just about assure you, you do not have sataIII. Sata is the Interface, sataIII is 6 Gb/s and sata II is 3 Gb/s. It's just a faster interface, but it doesn't make that big a difference. I would think you have it in AHCI mode in BIOS.

Just to be clear on this,

What is being alluded to here is that SATAll is usually associated with the newer motherboards that use DDR3 memory, whereas the older "DDR2" motherboards didn't utilize SATAlll interfaces. They're not related, it's just one way to tell look at features associated with a part.

Example - If someone says they have 8gig of RAM, I can infer they have a 64-bit OS as opposed to a 32-bit.

What Steve alluded to is that if John had a board that only supports DDR2, It does not have any SATA III ports. SATA II is associated with older boards.

I'm sorry, but I thought that's what I said :huh:

I guess it's your way of clarifying what I said

 

[A Guy]

Just to be clear on this,

What is being alluded to here is that SATAll is usually associated with the newer motherboards that use DDR3 memory, whereas the older "DDR2" motherboards didn't utilize SATAlll interfaces. They're not related, it's just one way to tell look at features associated with a part.

Example - If someone says they have 8gig of RAM, I can infer they have a 64-bit OS as opposed to a 32-bit.

What Steve alluded to is that if John had a board that only supports DDR2, It does not have any SATA III ports. SATA II is associated with older boards.

I'm sorry, but I thought that's what I said :huh:

I guess it's your way of clarifying what I said

Drew, you said SATAll is usually associated with the newer motherboards I know you meant older MBs, which is what Gary was pointing out

A Guy