• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Best SSD for S220?

get that one. best for price if your not writing a lot to it. its the best os drive out there
 
It's hard to go wrong with the Intels. There are newer drives coming out that are little faster, but they're on relatively new controllers and hardware.
 
I can't comment on what your drive is getting because I have no data on yours, however based on the review of the actual drive- Vertex 2 (Anandtech), not a post production test of the Vertex LE( legit review) the sandforce drive is consistently faster than any other drive on the market in every test except for the Crucial SATA 3 drive at 6Gbps which beats it on a few.
 
Most reviews use sequential benchmarks. Even random benchmark or traces that are highly sequential. So i wouldn't trust those reviews too much. Reviews where they do REAL tests are useful and interesting, however. Those tests would be something like having a 40GB partition copied to all SSDs, then booting them and start World of Warcraft (pre-installed) for example, and measure the time it takes from a cold boot to starting WoW. Those 'stopwatch' tests are very good and indicate REAL performance; but they are rather rare.

Also, some effects of an SSD can be hard to measure with benchmark utilities. But looking at low-level specs about the SSD, we can predict in what areas it will be stronger:

single queue random read: boot performance, application launch performance
multiqueue random read: application random I/O performance; multitasking
random write: database, server workloads, defragmenting (though irrelevant for SSDs), copying large files
sequential read: general application performance, copying large files

The singlequeue random read would depend entirely on the read latencies of the SSD; we can see X25-M G2 (34nm NAND) do better than the 54nm NAND here. This kind of performance is hard-locked to the latency of the SSDs; no other way to improve these, assuming the access pattern is not predictable.

When i look at SSD performance i look at:
1) sequential speeds (read/write)
2) random read 4K single queue
3) random read 4K multiqueue
4) random write
5) read/write latency (avg/max/std)

Alot of SSD reviews on the web only use highly sequential workloads; which is unrealistic i think for the intended purpose of an SSD; functioning as system drive not as mass storage drive. Though sequential read performance certainly isn't unimportant; its virtually the same as the random read multiqueue performance. Just like the random write performance should be ~95% of the sequential write performance. So for your SSD it doesn't really matter if its sequential anyway; as long as it knows what to read in advance; you need NCQ to make that work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top