Show Us Your WEI

[mbreslin]

For an SSD this is one slow disk. Price/performance you're better of to buy a WD raptor.
If you really want an SSD save a bit longer and get a X25-M, one of the best you can get for a decent price

I should have checked back again sooner so your horrible information doesn't sit around unchallenged. Not only is this not true it may discourage someone from this low price ssd for no good reason. Random read/write are what matters for typical windows/gaming use and no platter drive can come close to an ssd. More specifically the x25v is a fantastic os drive upgrade over any platter drive(s), (yes even your outdated velociraptor raid 0 array).

Please refrain from posting unless you've done your research or at least have some clue, thanks.

 

[sygnus21]

Chill man

BTW, his opinion didn't sway me one way or the other. It's simply about price to gig for me. I simply can't see spending $200 dollars for a 50gig drive. I don't deny the performance

Peace

 

[ZaLiTH]

WEI score of 7.6 isn't so bad. Even though WEI isn't a real benchmark, just an indication of how the system works together.

At least MS got the whole idea of "your computer is only as fast as the slowest component" idea right with the WEI...

Lol.

 

[sygnus21]

At least MS got the whole idea of "your computer is only as fast as the slowest component" idea right with the WEI...

Lol.

LOL - true that

 

[Beemerke]

For an SSD this is one slow disk. Price/performance you're better of to buy a WD raptor.
If you really want an SSD save a bit longer and get a X25-M, one of the best you can get for a decent price

I should have checked back again sooner so your horrible information doesn't sit around unchallenged. Not only is this not true it may discourage someone from this low price ssd for no good reason. Random read/write are what matters for typical windows/gaming use and no platter drive can come close to an ssd. More specifically the x25v is a fantastic os drive upgrade over any platter drive(s), (yes even your outdated velociraptor raid 0 array).

Please refrain from posting unless you've done your research or at least have some clue, thanks.

Reasons enough NOT to buy a cheap 40GB SSD.
I have an 80GB SSD, windows and 3 games installed and used 50GB, meaning if you have a couple of games and a 40GB SSD you'll have to put your games on a VERY SLOW HDD, the loading times on a normal HDD (samsung F3 for example) are so slow you completely lose the benefit/fun of having windows booting fast.
If you can't/won't spend the money on an 80GB or bigger SSD you're better off with a raptor, windows will boot slower but still fast and the games you install on it will load alot faster then if you're forced to install them on a slow HDD.

Btw, my outdated....? I have an 80GB X25-M and a 1TB samsung Spinpoint F3 for backups & files, both 1 month old, like the rest of my computer, no raptors

Please refrain from posting unless you've done your research or at least have some clue, thanks

 

[Dave76]

Gentlemen please,

Let's please keep this thread civil, we don't want it to get out of hand.

We all agree that SSDs are an excellent performance improvement and the price needs to continue to drop some more.

I think that we can also agree that everyone has different requirements and expectations.
What may be an acceptable entry point and with what size/performance is an individual decision based on personal preferences.

My OS partition is normally at or below 30GB, a lot of software installed but, no games. My plan is to get an entry level SSD, have just ordered the X25 V, to try out, experiment a bit, enjoy.
This will later fit nicely into the second HD bay on my laptop and will be more than adequate. When the price comes down to an acceptable level for me, will buy a 60-80 GB SSD for my desktop, with hopefully, a much higher performance level and about the same price.
So, for around a $100 I can be an early adopter, help contribute to the manufacturers production level and hopefully help to reduce the price per unit.

For me, the comment "Price/performance you're better of to buy a WD raptor" is not applicable.
For price, agree it's still a bit too high per GB. For performance not so much.

The comparison of a raptor vs a 7200 rpm 32 mb cache standard HD is a price/performance issue for me. Especially now with SSDs price and performance coming around to better levels. This comment is by no means intended to persuade or demean anyone else's preference or choice. It is only my view on this particular matter.

An entry level SSD, like the X25 V 40GB, can be a good decision for some and a no go for others. It's not right or wrong.
It can be used for a second SSD later or backup/standby as for mbreslin when he tests/evaluates, benches his SSD array.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[Seven Eleven]

judging by space that os, apps and games uses right here and right now, smallest SSD i will upgrade to, will be at least 80GB.

because of the price per GB, for files (pics, mp3 etc), classic HDD will still rule for a long time.

 

[Dave76]

Well put, exactly my point.

For you 80Gb is the lower limit, for me I think I can get by with a 40GB as an entry level point.

Will be using a classic HDD for many years, for data storage and for my 4 other computers.

Not interested in paying $250-ish for any ~100GB drive.

This is a perfectly acceptable price point for many people, I'm very happy they are buying them as they will help to bring down the price per GB.

A big thank you to all early adopters.

 

[mbreslin]

The last comment about please refrain blah blah was unneeded on my part.

I only meant to challenge statements that are untrue. "If you can't/won't spend the money on an 80GB or bigger SSD you're better off with a raptor" is one of them. As you know from having your os on your 80gig ssd it is a huge improvement even if you can't fit every single game you play on it. The entire point of my post was to point out to sygnus21 that a very good ssd might not be as expensive as you might think and hence not so far away, as I said in my initial post 100$ might still be too much for him but many probably don't think a good ssd can be had for that price so hopefully others will see this as well. If he buys it or not isn't really the issue it's more a matter of making sure you have the best possible information in order to make a decision.

The x25v is a very good ssd and is much better than any single mechanical drive you can buy, not an opinion, easily verified from a million reviews/benchmarks online. Also I actually own the drive, have tested x25m g1/g2 and currently have 10 ssds in my computer.

Corsair Breaks PC Mark® Vantage World Record Using Force Series SSDs « Corsair Blog I'm number 5 on this list (4 now and corsair is 3). I have a world class storage subsystem and am only interested in having the best information be available to anyone interested. As Dave76 stated above the more people who get into ssds and finance initial r&d, the lower the prices will get for everyone.

My apologies if I at any time sounded confrontational.

 

[angeloelibz24]

Here's mine (HP G60-235DX w/ 4 GB RAM upgrade):


It's cool that my Graphics (Aero) rating went from 3.3 to 4.0 when I upgraded to 4.0 GB RAM.

 

[A Guy]

Here's mine, guess a Barracuda 7200.12 is slow, lol.



A Guy

 

[dw96]

Here's mine, guess a Barracuda 7200.12 is slow, lol.

I seem to get that same number on my Hitachi HDT721075SLA360. Almost all HDD's get 5.9's on Windows 7, for a higher score you need SSD... Pretty sad, knowing I got 7.3 and 7.1 on all other tests...

 

[ZaLiTH]

I did a little bit of tweaking in my BIOS last night... Managed to get my graphics card score up by 0.2 in WEI (they were 6.7)... Seems increasing my Pci-e BUS speed made a nice difference to my machine.

 

[mbreslin]

Coincidentally I was just listening to the pcper.com podcast. #103 last viewer question it's at around 1:14:30. It asks about this exact conversation, raptors in raid 0 versus 1 ssd. Something like "even if all you can fit on the cheapest ssd is the os and you put every app and game on a storage spinning disk you're going to be much better off". Raptors are like 50cents/gb and the best ssds can be 3-4$/gb and yet they still sell tons, it's not an accident. Reliability is better, performance is insanely better.

 

[ZaLiTH]

Coincidentally I was just listening to the pcper.com podcast. #103 last viewer question it's at around 1:14:30. It asks about this exact conversation, raptors in raid 0 versus 1 ssd. Something like "even if all you can fit on the cheapest ssd is the os and you put every app and game on a storage spinning disk you're going to be much better off". Raptors are like 50cents/gb and the best ssds can be 3-4$/gb and yet they still sell tons, it's not an accident. Reliability is better, performance is insanely better.

Yeah, SSD performance is pretty incredible hey... Before I'm done with my current build, it'll get a new CPU (AMD Phenom II X3), better RAM (Corsair Dominator PC8500), new primary graphics card (NVidia GTX285 or GTX 295, keeping my soon-to-arrive 512mb 8800GTS for Physx) and a 32GB or 64GB SSD for primary drive with four 500GB Seagate Barracudas in RAID0... Then I should see a solid 7.5 at least across the board.

But..... It'll take me a while to get there. Lol.

 

[fatedquest]

I have a problem. My processor score dropped from 5.9 to 4.2 after switching to Windows 7 64 bit from 32 bit. What's wrong?

 

[dw96]

I have a problem. My processor score dropped from 5.9 to 4.2 after switching to Windows 7 64 bit from 32 bit. What's wrong?

64-bit requires hardware acceleration (If that's the right way to say it). Since 64-bit is supposed to take more out of your PC to bring you better performance it's usually normal for the numbers to drop a little bit. Interesting how you got down with more than a whole point though... (1.7 exactly).

 

[Beemerke]

Coincidentally I was just listening to the pcper.com podcast. #103 last viewer question it's at around 1:14:30. It asks about this exact conversation, raptors in raid 0 versus 1 ssd. Something like "even if all you can fit on the cheapest ssd is the os and you put every app and game on a storage spinning disk you're going to be much better off". Raptors are like 50cents/gb and the best ssds can be 3-4$/gb and yet they still sell tons, it's not an accident. Reliability is better, performance is insanely better.

And that's where we don't agree.
I don't see the point in having windows boot fast from an SSD and having to wait "ages" for games/apps to load from a slow HDD.
Technically you'll get a WEI/usability of 7.2-7.5 because of your SSD, true, in practice it will be alot lower, 5.*, because every other thing you have installed loads from a slow HDD.
I'd rather have an overall score of 6.* with a raptor, less then an SSD but I'll have alot more usability because on a day to day basis my apps/games will load faster and that will make me alot happier then windows booting fast and whatever else I want to do loading slow.

That they sell tons is easy to explain, alot of people don't want to be "left out". It's fashionable to have an SSD.
They also don't think what they need to install, again, most will go on a slow HDD. If I didn't have the cash for an 80GB SSD, and I actually counted what I wanted to install to be sure it would fit on 80GB, I would've bought a raptor and not a 40GB SSD.

And just to make it clear, I hadn't build a computer in years (last one was a dual P2 1000 with scsi disks and a FireGL 1000 Pro GPU I used for 3D) so I did read up on the new hardware because I wanted to know what I needed and what was overkill.
That's why I have a 5770 crossfire setup and not an overpriced 5870/5970 because the 5770 CF has the best performance/price for my resolution, same for the amount of ram and the CPU.

No need to apologise for being confrontational it happens in a discussion, apart from the last comment but no hard feelings

 

[ZaLiTH]

And that's where we don't agree.
I don't see the point in having windows boot fast from an SSD and having to wait "ages" for games/apps to load from a slow HDD.
Technically you'll get a WEI/usability of 7.2-7.5 because of your SSD, true, in practice it will be alot lower, 5.*, because every other thing you have installed loads from a slow HDD.
I'd rather have an overall score of 6.* with a raptor, less then an SSD but I'll have alot more usability because on a day to day basis my apps/games will load faster and that will make me alot happier then windows booting fast and whatever else I want to do loading slow.

I see your point there, but at the same time, games and programs will read most from a drive when loading something, other than that most of what they do is in resident memory. Having a SSD for your main drive and a standard mechanical spinner (RAID or not) for a secondary drive will still improve overall performance compared to two straight drives.

The basic concept is that the most commonly used data should be stored on the SSD, so that would be OS, background applications (those that auto-start with Windows), and the swapfile.

Although I have to admit an all-SSD setup would own any other HDD configuration, even if the SSDs aren't RAIDed, an SSD/HDD combo setup isn't really governed by the rule of 'only as fast as the slowest component'. There are certain exceptions to that 'rule'..

Now you'll have to excuse me while I go day-dream about the all-SSD RAID0 setup than I will possibly never be able to afford... Lol.

 

[fatedquest]

I have a problem. My processor score dropped from 5.9 to 4.2 after switching to Windows 7 64 bit from 32 bit. What's wrong?

64-bit requires hardware acceleration (If that's the right way to say it). Since 64-bit is supposed to take more out of your PC to bring you better performance it's usually normal for the numbers to drop a little bit. Interesting how you got down with more than a whole point though... (1.7 exactly).

That's what I'm worried about. Maybe something with my Windows installation went wrong