2xVelociraptors vs 2 x-25 ssd raid 0 screenshots

P

Putz

I have a custom title
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
5,477
for anyone wonder how much faster it might be, aside the fact the ssd feels way faster

this is on vista, intel x48 ICH9R

raptors
10kraptorraid0.jpg


x-25's after alot of use

capturexjq.jpg
 
Last edited:
Since Crystal Drive Mark never issues more than one pending I/O at a time, so your numbers might not be too useful for showing the difference between the two setups.
 
HOLY COW. So if I have a drive thats far faster than another. Then I test them in an even faster situation, the faster drive is STILL faster? OMFG!!!! What a waste of bandwidth, I wish the mods around here would start issuing warnings for such nonsense threads.
 
Its still useful to compare the two setups, even if the actual MB/s numbers arent as good as they could be. That sequential write speed seems pretty low, but I would guess that's because of the stuff in the background probably.
 
Then why bother with numbers at all? Just say that one is faster, and admit that you don't know exactly how much faster it is.
 
jay2472000 said:
HOLY COW. So if I have a drive thats far faster than another. Then I test them in an even faster situation, the faster drive is STILL faster? OMFG!!!! What a waste of bandwidth, I wish the mods around here would start issuing warnings for such nonsense threads.
Click to expand...

What crawl up your ass and died?

Thanks OP for the screen shots.
 
Nothing, but to shout "Eureeka" from the rooftops because an SSD in raid is faster than a raptor hardly seemed threadworthy. He had no real reason to post this other than to say "LOOK AT ME GUYS I HAVE RAID SSD" I could understand if he had a question (of any sort) and needed to post those those screenshots, etc then so be it. It seems everyday theres a new thread or two about SSD being fast. We know this..... It gets tiresome is all. ( and no, it may not be 2 threads a day but it seems like for a while there it was) And especially it irks me when people are actually here asking for help and their thread gets bumped to page 2 because of these useless threads. Bah, /rant off.
 
I agree that its harmless to have threads like this, but these exact numbers have been posted before :/
 
i think just about every one on the forums has top end hardware, this is the wrong forum to come to to brag about hardware because someone ALWAYS has something bigger, better and faster.

however is was nothing more than for someone like myself who had a pair of velociraptors wondering if or how much difference theyd gain for the money, nothing more, and the was nothing on page one similar other wise i wouldn't have posted
 
jay2472000 said:
HOLY COW. So if I have a drive thats far faster than another. Then I test them in an even faster situation, the faster drive is STILL faster? OMFG!!!! What a waste of bandwidth, I wish the mods around here would start issuing warnings for such nonsense threads.
Click to expand...

I'm no English teacher or anything but i don't see the "faster" situation

same pc, same raid controller, same raid 0, different drives.
 
Threads like these are worthless, but not because of jay12345678's reasons. They're worthless because SSDs are the king of worthless synthetic benchmarks. Use both systems for a week and give me your overall impression. From what I've seen and heard from people who actually use these things and don't get caught up in benchmarks (myself included - spent a couple weeks with an OCZ Vertex a few months back), SSDs are NOT worth the money for the vast majority of single-user usage patterns.
 
boring...
Do some program install times from iso files, read and write file copy times and program load times. Then we'll get the idea of is it worth it and by how much.

Those would be some very valuable informations to lots of people trying to decide on what to do.
Thanks! :)
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
Threads like these are worthless, but not because of jay12345678's reasons. They're worthless because SSDs are the king of worthless synthetic benchmarks. Use both systems for a week and give me your overall impression. From what I've seen and heard from people who actually use these things and don't get caught up in benchmarks (myself included - spent a couple weeks with an OCZ Vertex a few months back), SSDs are NOT worth the money for the vast majority of single-user usage patterns.
Click to expand...

I didn't have the Velociraptor, but I did upgrade from a dual 150gb raptor raid 0 to a single X-25M. I instantly noticed the benefit of the random access times, with applications opening instantly or at least near-instantly. The file transfers were also noticeably faster.

IMHO it's hard to overstate how much of an user impact the random access speed improvement has.
 
Neb said:
I didn't have the Velociraptor, but I did upgrade from a dual 150gb raptor raid 0 to a single X-25M. I instantly noticed the benefit of the random access times, with applications opening instantly or at least near-instantly. The file transfers were also noticeably faster.

IMHO it's hard to overstate how much of an user impact the random access speed improvement has.
Click to expand...

yep benchmarks are one thing but the whole "feel" of everything is much faster, load times on say oblivion is half what they used to be when changing area/zones
 
Neb said:
IMHO it's hard to overstate how much of an user impact the random access speed improvement has.
Click to expand...
It might be hard to overstate the impact, but the value derived from that impact is another question.
 
Neb said:
I didn't have the Velociraptor, but I did upgrade from a dual 150gb raptor raid 0 to a single X-25M. I instantly noticed the benefit of the random access times, with applications opening instantly or at least near-instantly. The file transfers were also noticeably faster.
Click to expand...

You sound just like Anandtech did in the review that convinced me to buy the Vertex. I was not impressed with it. Aside from the lack of noise, the only time I saw any kind of appreciable difference in daily use was in launching apps immediately after a fresh boot. Otherwise the combination of superfetch and a velociraptor made it pretty much a wash. I did extensive testing on boot times and level loads and never found more than a second or two of difference. Whoopie. A very underwhelming experience overall. Perhaps the X25-M is worlds better, but I'm not willing to take that $300+ chance after what I've seen and read.

IMHO it's hard to overstate how much of an user impact the random access speed improvement has.
Click to expand...

And yet people manage to do it all the time :p
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
Threads like these are worthless, but not because of jay12345678's reasons. They're worthless because SSDs are the king of worthless synthetic benchmarks. Use both systems for a week and give me your overall impression. From what I've seen and heard from people who actually use these things and don't get caught up in benchmarks (myself included - spent a couple weeks with an OCZ Vertex a few months back), SSDs are NOT worth the money for the vast majority of single-user usage patterns.
Click to expand...

I disagree and you can pry my ssd from my cold dead fingers :p
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
You sound just like Anandtech did in the review that convinced me to buy the Vertex. I was not impressed with it. Aside from the lack of noise, the only time I saw any kind of appreciable difference in daily use was in launching apps immediately after a fresh boot. Otherwise the combination of superfetch and a velociraptor made it pretty much a wash. I did extensive testing on boot times and level loads and never found more than a second or two of difference. Whoopie. A very underwhelming experience overall. Perhaps the X25-M is worlds better, but I'm not willing to take that $300+ chance after what I've seen and read.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I have no experience with the Vertex but my personal experience with the X-25 showed dramatically faster boot times (even including the raid to non-raid difference) and large program load times (haven't had too much experience with load times as I haven't had time to play games recently). Even with superfetch the overall user experience improved quite a bit. But as always, YMMV. :D

If I had the cash I'd pick up a Vertex just to see what the difference is, as most everything I've read has stated that the Vertex is a fast drive if you do the proper updates and such on it.
 
I agree with Thundercat165 ( C wUT I did therrre? you take a jab at me, Im game to jab back) that while we know SSD's are awesome on synthetic benchmarks, I think for most general usage theyre not all theyre cracked up to be. Not to say some wont benefit, but putting an ssd into a 11 yr old Dell isnt gonna make grandmas email open any faster.
 
jay2472000 said:
I agree with Thundercat165 ( C wUT I did therrre? you take a jab at me, Im game to jab back) that while we know SSD's are awesome on synthetic benchmarks, I think for most general usage theyre not all theyre cracked up to be. Not to say some wont benefit, but putting an ssd into a 11 yr old Dell isnt gonna make grandmas email open any faster.
Click to expand...

no one is talking about your grandmothers computer, as for noticeable its probably the best upgrade or most noticeable ive done on my own PC in years
 
CanadaOwnsJoo said:
no one is talking about your grandmothers computer, as for noticeable its probably the best upgrade or most noticeable ive done on my own PC in years
Click to expand...

I was :cool:
I used the "grandmas computer" as reference to the majority of home pc's.
Also, if its not too much trouble, would you mind benching them again, but correctly this time without "steam downloading a half dozen games in the background while i ran the tests" ?? Thanks.
 
the raptors are out of the pc now i just ran it quit before i yanked them to see but i can run it on the ssd's again sure, if image shack is working, alot of my other links looks like someone hacked image shack or something lol
 
I am considering SSD in Raid 0 to replace my HDD Raid 0, so I found your post useful, so please post a lot more benchmark comparisons! ATTO?

From my readings, I have come to the conclusion that the Intel SSD is superior to any of the others and I don't believe I have seen a good comparison of them in Raid 0. Of course what I want to know is if one Intel is enough for me or should I get two in raid zero.

Frankly, though, with a wife and other priorities (remodelling), it is a lot to spend. I am hoping SSD's come down significantly in price. Right now they are for enthusiasts, and while I am enthusiastic, I don't yet see the value for money. So maybe one Intel would be good ... some of my scientific applications take a while to load, some of the papers I write are huge because of embedded files in charts etc., sometimes the periodic 'save' takes a lot of time and that is where I might want the SSD to assist.
 
update the original posts with new ones since the ones on image shack look to be all messed up
 
I'm using both Vertex and intel SSDs. They are extremely close, if not the same, in user experience. The Vertexes are hella fast in R0, which I DO notice over the single X-25M doing file copies and such. And to the guy who didn't notice a diff... I came from 3 Velociraptors in R0 to 2 120gb Vertexes in R0, and it blew my socks off. Absolutely worth every penny. I love my Vertexes. They have changed the way I use my computer.
Posted via [H] Mobile Device
 
I agree about access time being a bigger factor in day to day usage than sequential transfer. The HD is seeking all the time, but only rarely does it transfer at full speed during app loading/Windows booting, etc. I went from Cheetah 10k.7s to 15k.5s (Ultra 320) as my OS and game drives, and the difference is obvious. The only thing keeping me from SSDs for this job is SSDs at this size/performance level are still infant technology as far as I'm concerned. This may well be my last set of high performance mechanical hard drives, but they're still going to be sufficient for a couple more years doing what they do now. I guess there's always the option of getting a couple more and striping them too.

Dustin
 
@Brahmzy: what s this "[H] Mobile Device" you keep posting from?

OP sorry for the OT...
 
The [H] Forums mobile site from my iPhone...

Check out the drop down on the bottom left of this page (Mobile). It's kicks ass and is hella fast - near-instant page loads.
 
Why not an SLI 7800GTX vs SLI 8800GTX comparison? Top products of two different generations. Just as relevant!
 
dustNbone said:
I agree about access time being a bigger factor in day to day usage than sequential transfer. The HD is seeking all the time, but only rarely does it transfer at full speed during app loading/Windows booting, etc. I went from Cheetah 10k.7s to 15k.5s (Ultra 320) as my OS and game drives, and the difference is obvious.
Click to expand...
I'm confused. Isn't the latency on your 15K.5 drives substantially lower than that of your 10K.7 drives?
 
Oh. I was confused, indeed: I somehow read that he thought access time wasn't as big a factor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top