G-Skill Falcon 128gb Quick Benchmarks

G

Godzra

n00b
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
28
Got my 128gb Falcon today, updated to 1571 firmware first, then ghosted from my raptor 150.

System Specs
Gigabyte p35-ds3l Ver 2
E8400 CPU
3gb DDR2 667
Fat32 XP Pro
Native Mode Sata on in Bios
Ghosted with mini XP Shell and Ghost32
AHCI OFF


First Impressions are WOW! Program loads seem instant. I need to do some more testing tonight.

SSD on the Left Raptor 10K on the right
ssdcomp.jpg

ssdghost.jpg
 
Last edited:
Have had it installed for a couple of days now, all I can say is WOW, It surpassed my expectations. Great Product.



One more benchmark.
ssdhdtune.jpg
 
These indilinx based drives are allot of fun. I've got a 60GB Vertex and there is little room for debate on the subjective "feel" of an SSD vs hard drive. Everything is quicker.
 
I just picked up a pair of Intel X25-M 80GB drives to play with. I tried installaing Windows 7 on them but it didn't want to work. I'm still working on that issue.

Should be fun though.
 
What games do you typically play? Any comments on game load times, etc? Do you get tired of waiting for other players to join the game as their level loads?
 
ironforge said:
What games do you typically play? Any comments on game load times, etc? Do you get tired of waiting for other players to join the game as their level loads?
Click to expand...

I only really play Battlefield 2, Load time is way down - I have not timed it yet but if I made a guess Raptor = 25 to 30 seconds load vs 6 to 10 seconds on the SSD Falcon.

I have only had it installed for a couple of days and played a total of 30 minutes of BF2 on it, I was usually close to first in maps on the Raptor so I will be twiddling my thumbs for sure now.
 
Sort of stinks in multi-player you have to wait for others, but at least it lets you get ready before everyone else. Sometimes there is a class limit of 1 or 2, so it lets you nab that first, or pick the team you want first (IE defense or offense in TF2).

I would easily jump on an SSD if it weren't for the price. It makes me think twice. I only have a seagate 7200rpm.
 
Still very fast. I have not trim/wiped yet seems to be holding performance perfectly. This is my main home rig so it gets 5 or 6 hours of average daily use.

I wanted to check to see if I should run the trim command.

Just a update for people thinking about Indilinx based SSDs

ssdcomp2.jpg
 
Dan_D said:
I just picked up a pair of Intel X25-M 80GB drives to play with. I tried installaing Windows 7 on them but it didn't want to work. I'm still working on that issue.

Should be fun though.
Click to expand...

If you are installing from Windows there is a bug that Microsoft acknowledged is an install-killer. In case you aren't, you ought to boot-install.
 
What unit are results in? What does 1.900 mean, for example, on the Raptor test in the 4KB write cell?
 
mikeblas said:
What unit are results in? What does 1.900 mean, for example, on the Raptor test in the 4KB write cell?
Click to expand...

Left side is read in MB/s, right side is write in MB/s, for seq/512KB/4KB...

At least that's what the pics say...
 
Decimal megabytes, then? 1.900 * 1024 * 1024 == 1992294.4. Or is some sort of averaging going on?

I think that IOPS would be a more useful number, and I'm trying to figure out how to convert the provide results into that amount. 190000 bytes/second would mean 463.867 IOPS, which is also kind of odd, unless some averaging is taking place.
 
ironforge said:
Sort of stinks in multi-player you have to wait for others, but at least it lets you get ready before everyone else. Sometimes there is a class limit of 1 or 2, so it lets you nab that first, or pick the team you want first (IE defense or offense in TF2).

I would easily jump on an SSD if it weren't for the price. It makes me think twice. I only have a seagate 7200rpm.
Click to expand...

What? So YOU'RE that guy that's always loading at the same time as me. :p
 
ironforge said:
Sort of stinks in multi-player you have to wait for others, but at least it lets you get ready before everyone else. Sometimes there is a class limit of 1 or 2, so it lets you nab that first, or pick the team you want first (IE defense or offense in TF2).

I would easily jump on an SSD if it weren't for the price. It makes me think twice. I only have a seagate 7200rpm.
Click to expand...

Depends on the game, BF2 you can get in right away most times, and nab vehicles and such first.

Always was awesome with my Raptor X back in the day, as I beat out almost everyone.
 
mikeblas said:
Decimal megabytes, then? 1.900 * 1024 * 1024 == 1992294.4. Or is some sort of averaging going on?

I think that IOPS would be a more useful number, and I'm trying to figure out how to convert the provide results into that amount. 190000 bytes/second would mean 463.867 IOPS, which is also kind of odd, unless some averaging is taking place.
Click to expand...


From the Crystal Mark Website -

Key Features
◦Sequential reads/writes
◦Random 4KB/512KB reads/writes
◦Text copy
◦Change dialog design
◦internationalization (i18n)
Important Notice
◦"MB/s" means 1,000,000byte/second.


I believe the results are a average of five test each.
 
mikeblas said:
Right, that one. What's it mean?
Click to expand...
I did not author the software so I am not sure how that data set is implemented. I would suggest you contact the creator for more information. It is a fairly small download, you could google and test to try and satisfy your curiosity.

You seem somewhat obsessed with it? Do you have some other motive?
 
Obsessed? I've asked you one question about it: what's it measuring? If you don't know, that's fine -- I can go figure it out. I assumed that, since you were posting your results, you understood what they meant. When I run the test against my spinning media, I get substantially better results than you did, and I'm curious about the difference and wondering if I ran the test correctly.
 
I just received my new 256GB Falcon SSD...just finished updating the firmware to 1571-- which was pretty simple I might add...only bad thing being that unlike the OCZ drives which use the same controller, everything gets erased with the G.Skill flash method...is it true that I need to be using the erase/TRIM tool every day to keep performance levels up?

also I frequently reformat my system and was wondering if I should be using the HDDErase tool to erase the drive before installing the OS...is it the same as writing zeroes to the drive with my mechanical hard drives and/or the same as using DBAN or KillDisk?
 
mikeblas said:
Obsessed? I've asked you one question about it: what's it measuring? If you don't know, that's fine -- I can go figure it out. I assumed that, since you were posting your results, you understood what they meant. When I run the test against my spinning media, I get substantially better results than you did, and I'm curious about the difference and wondering if I ran the test correctly.
Click to expand...

I count you asking four questions about this benchmark in this thread (not one as you claim)? It does seem somewhat obsessive to me. Sorry if I hurt your feelings, not intended.

I originally tried/tested CrystalMark as an apples to apples comparison to others with the same drive.

Congratulations on your results on regarding “spinning media”, I am happy for you. I posted this information for others interested in the Indilinx bases SSDs. I included the WD Raptor test because it was identical hardware/OS configurations - which I had upgraded from.
 
polonyc2 said:
I just received my new 256GB Falcon SSD...just finished updating the firmware to 1571-- which was pretty simple I might add...only bad thing being that unlike the OCZ drives which use the same controller, everything gets erased with the G.Skill flash method...is it true that I need to be using the erase/TRIM tool every day to keep performance levels up?

also I frequently reformat my system and was wondering if I should be using the HDDErase tool to erase the drive before installing the OS...is it the same as writing zeroes to the drive with my mechanical hard drives and/or the same as using DBAN or KillDisk?
Click to expand...

I posted a follow up test in this thread, I have not run the trim utility yet. I do not seem to have taken a big performance hit after three weeks of use.

I am the exact opposite of you as do I not like to take the time to reinstall/configure my system, I have actually not scratch installed Windows on my main system for several years. In this install I ghosted my OS to the Falcon 128 - It is even fat 32 vs NTFS file system and I seem to be getting good results so far under this scenario.
 
Godzra said:
I posted a follow up test in this thread, I have not run the trim utility yet. I do not seem to have taken a big performance hit after three weeks of use.

I am the exact opposite of you as do I not like to take the time to reinstall/configure my system, I have actually not scratch installed Windows on my main system for several years. In this install I ghosted my OS to the Falcon 128 - It is even fat 32 vs NTFS file system and I seem to be getting good results so far under this scenario.
Click to expand...

interesting that you are running it on XP which is not even optimized for SSD's and getting good results...at least Vista is somewhat (not fully) SSD compatible...I'm thinking about installing Windows 7 RC with mine or Vista SP2 at the least
 
Godzra said:
I count you asking four questions about this benchmark in this thread (not one as you claim)? It does seem somewhat obsessive to me. Sorry if I hurt your feelings, not intended.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you've not seen true obsession, and can't yet distinguish it from curiosity. All of my questions are to the same end--what are you measuring? You've shown some numbers and apparently believe they're an indicator of very good performance, but it's not clear to me what they really mean.

Godzra said:
Congratulations on your results on regarding “spinning media”, I am happy for you. I posted this information for others interested in the Indilinx bases SSDs. I included the WD Raptor test because it was identical hardware/OS configurations - which I had upgraded from.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I'm interested in the SSD drives, too. As far as I can tell, they're quite expensive, particularly compared to the performance and storage they deliver.
 
mikeblas said:
Perhaps you've not seen true obsession, and can't yet distinguish it from curiosity. All of my questions are to the same end--what are you measuring? You've shown some numbers and apparently believe they're an indicator of very good performance, but it's not clear to me what they really mean.

Thanks! I'm interested in the SSD drives, too. As far as I can tell, they're quite expensive, particularly compared to the performance and storage they deliver.
Click to expand...

I am running the synthetic read/write benchmarks to use as a gauge, I know my drive performance is much better in day to day use, I am just trying to quantify it. If you would like to dissect CrystalMarks testing procedures more power to you. I believe he has the source available on his website and is open to feedback as well. Would you say the CrystalMark benchmarks you ran on your setup seem to be a good indicator of the read /write performance you are experiencing with your configuration? I had a nice opportunity to compare exact configurations hardware and OS when I swapped the mechanical drive for the SSD.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or in this case value, I am enjoying my Falcon every day, I am seriously considering by another ;)
 
These drives can be flashed with the ocz firmware. Which will void ya warranty, but will be able to flash without losing contents on drive and be able to use there commands you need just a fyi.
 
is the 'sanitary erase' program an OCZ Vertex exclusive or can it be run with any SSD regardless of manufacturer?
 
Far as I have seen can only be run on the falcon and vertex same controllers, and the falcon will actually be reconized as a ocz
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top