Show us your SSD performance

[essenbe]

According to the intel website, it will pass trim, but not in a raid array. I think the confusion was that before the RST 9, it would not pass trim if there was a raid array even if the SSD was not part of the array. The newer intel drivers will pass trim in a raid array as long as the SSD is not in the array. I hope I made sense.

Yes it does. Thank You.
That may be where I got a bit mixed up as well.

Wishmaster, I just read a post on the Intel Forum. It said that there were indications that trim could be passed in a pure software raid, but they were unable to confirm that.

 

[Hopalong X]

Any thoughts on this one? Agility3. $235. $215 after rebate. Rebate takes about 3 months so it would seem from OCZ.
Newegg.com - OCZ Agility 3 AGT3-25SAT3-120G 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Main difference I see is Agility3 4kb IOPS is 50K, standard V3 is 60K and the Max Iops version is 75K below.


Compare to.
Vertex3 $300
Newegg.com - OCZ Vertex 3 VTX3-25SAT3-120G 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Vertex3 MaxIOPS $320- Reviews mixed by owners. DOA or short life. About 12% in newegg reviewers.
Newegg.com - OCZ Vertex 3 Series – MAX IOPS Edition VTX3MI-25SAT3-120G 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Moboard has SATA3/SATA6.0Gbs controller.

Curious on OCZ quality ????? It looks iffy on many of them in the Vertex2.

 

[essenbe]

The rebate, if you get it, will take more than 3 months. Mine took about 4. The Vertex3 is probably one of the faster drives around, but according to reviews it has some issues.

Many here will disagree. I have both a vertex2 and an Intel X25-M. The Vertex will bench faster in some reguards than the Intel, but the Intel seems faster, reads faster and seems to have faster response times. I have had to RMA my Vertex twice, but the Intel is still going strong with no problems. The toolbox is better also.

 

[Hopalong X]

Thanks Essenbe that was the kind of info I was wondering about.

I think I'll do some more looking.

 

[essenbe]

No Problem. It is just my opinion - like noses, everyone has one. But, I do like the reliability of the Intel Drives even if they are a little slower. Thake a look at this, you may find it interesting. The lowly X25-V seems pretty resilent.

 

[Hopalong X]

Essenbe

What I ran across in the same size and price range to Agility3 from Intel. Any ideas here??
Newegg.com - Intel 320 Series SSDSA2CW120G3K5 2.5" 120GB SATA II MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Super speed isn't my main goal. Any SSD out does my spinners.

Reading thru the testing link you provided.

 

[essenbe]

Actually, I am thinking about buying one of those myself. I like them. My only question is, I really only need an 80GB. But, the 120 has better stats and is only about $40 more. Makes more sense to me to buy the 120 even though I only need 80. What do you think?

 

[essenbe]

If this will help this is the test I did with both the Vertex and the Intel. Both with the identical OS and programs on the same hardware. Notice the read speeds of the intel. The vertex has much better write speeds, but with an OS, read speeds and access times are much more important.

​

 

[Hopalong X]

For $40 bucks I know I would go to the 120GB. Better to have and not need.
That will give you about 100-105GB??? usable if I remember correctly.

Going with the fastest isn't important to me.
I can easily OC my CPU to 3.8GHz- had to try it once - but why when it works just fine at 3.08GHz at 28*C and Vcore is 0.87.

One of them they are testing is a 320.

Also went to 5 year warranty on the 320.
Warranty details for the Intel® Solid-State Drive 320 Series - 5-year limited warranty
Intel® High Performance Solid State Drive — Intel® Solid-State Drive limited warranties

 

[essenbe]

Thats right, and about the same thing I have decided. I had read in the news forum about the updated warranty. I guess Intel is pretty confident about their drives.

 

[whs]

Hi Mike, don't get all confused by the various test numbers. In real life they really do not mean very much. For the OS (and I assume you want it for that), the only number that really counts is the access time. And most of the recent models run around 0.1ms. The R/W times are relatively unimportant and if any, it is the 4K and 8K timings because those are the blocksizes relevant for the OS.

With this all being said, I would opt for a Vertex2 because a) it is a lot cheaper and b) it does not have any flaws and issues.

 

[Hopalong X]

WHS

Originally I was planning on one of these but the quality has gone down the toilet.
Newegg.com - OCZ Vertex 2 OCZSSD2-2VTXE120G 2.5" 120GB SATA II MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Click the Feedback tab. 110 of 347 or 32% DOA or DNF < than a month.

We can add 2 of Essenbe's to the list.

$10 more for the Intel 320.

 

[essenbe]

Isn't the Vertex2 last year's model? I thought the new ones were Vertex3's. If that's true, the vertex 2 is $15 less than the Intel 310 and the Vertex3 is about $70 more. Did I get that right, or am I confused about the naming issue?

 

[Hopalong X]

Isn't the Vertex2 last year's model? I thought the new ones were Vertex3's. If that's true, the vertex 2 is $15 less than the Intel 310 and the Vertex3 is about $70 more. Did I get that right, or am I confused about the naming issue?

You are right. Vertex3 is Sata3 and the new model...

Also the 2011 second generation Vertex2 has a newer Sandforce controller which evidently is a major mistake.

Newegg Vertex2 with the original controller was running about the same problem rate as Intel on the 2010's.

The last 4-6 months it appears the Sandforce version that 1 out of 3 second gen are bad on initial order and replacements are just as bad.
End up like you need 3 to get one good one.

I've been doing my homework.
Mike

 

[whs]

Intel is fine too. I have two Gen1 80GB Intels and three OCZ Vertex2. They all work well and have never given me any problems.

My point was to focus on the access time and NOT on the R/W speeds of big blocks that the OS never uses. Under this aspect any SSD that has 0.1ms access time is good. I would buy the cheapest that meets this criterion and has good reliability records because spending twice as much on some fancy recent technology will probably buy you very, very little (for the OS) in real life. But it may get you good bragging numbers from HD Tune and Atto.

 

[essenbe]

Here is a little story to add to your homework folder. The Vertex2 came out with the 34nm nand and performed very well and earned a great reputation. Somewhere around last November (when I bought mine) they changed to 22nm nand and quality suffered. They just didn't tell anyone they changed and used the same name and model #'s. There was a big blowup on the OCZ forums about it. The thing about it that some might question is--- They buy their nand from none other than Intel.

 

[essenbe]

Intel is fine too. I have two Gen1 80GB Intels and three OCZ Vertex2. They all work well and have never given me any problems.

My point was to focus on the access time and NOT on the R/W speeds of big blocks that the OS never uses. Under this aspect any SSD that has 0.1ms access time is good. I would buy the cheapest that meets this criterion and has good reliability records because spending twice as much on some fancy recent technology will probably buy you very, very little (for the OS) in real life. But it may get you good bragging numbers from HD Tune and Atto.

I agree to that. For an OS drive, access time is the most important factor, and the read speeds are more important than write speeds. I've always said that the worst performing SSD is still much faster than the fastest mechanical drive.

 

[tw33k]

Intel is fine too. I have two Gen1 80GB Intels and three OCZ Vertex2. They all work well and have never given me any problems.

My point was to focus on the access time and NOT on the R/W speeds of big blocks that the OS never uses. Under this aspect any SSD that has 0.1ms access time is good. I would buy the cheapest that meets this criterion and has good reliability records because spending twice as much on some fancy recent technology will probably buy you very, very little (for the OS) in real life. But it may get you good bragging numbers from HD Tune and Atto.

Isn't that all that matters? :roflmao:

 

[essenbe]

Reliability fits into that equation somewhere.

 

[Hopalong X]

Intel is fine too. I have two Gen1 80GB Intels and three OCZ Vertex2. They all work well and have never given me any problems.

My point was to focus on the access time and NOT on the R/W speeds of big blocks that the OS never uses. Under this aspect any SSD that has 0.1ms access time is good. I would buy the cheapest that meets this criterion and has good reliability records because spending twice as much on some fancy recent technology will probably buy you very, very little (for the OS) in real life. But it may get you good bragging numbers fron HD Tune and Atto.

Thanks WHS.

I appreciate the input.
I was just pointing out the fail rate has seemed to have gone way up with the new Vertex2 controller.

Even though the Agility3 is much faster I would never notice the difference in what I do.
Quality edge seems to go with Intel.
If they were the same quality which we don't know yet on the Agility3 for $10 more I would go with the Agility3.
So all I can do is base it on the Vertex2 and the Vertex3 MAX IOPS which appears mediocre so far.
Mike