GSkill Titan 128 Gig SSD drives are in

M

MassiveOverkill

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
1,748
SSDGoodness.jpg


I'll be using 1 for my OS, and the other 3 are for sales laptops, but I'll set 3 up on striped RAID on my ICH9 before doing so. Downloading Windows 7 as I type this and prepping my existing 640 7200.11s for backup and firmware update.

I got 20 more coming in for the rest of the sales force. :D

1 Drive performance...............sorry all I have is HDTune

SSD1Drive.jpg


This was booting off my old Matrix RAID 640's..........firwmare upgrade went fine btw.

UDPATE:

InitialDrives.jpg


5DriveRAID0.jpg


AdvancedPerformance.jpg


128KB test

1stRun.jpg


Same test after rebooting

2nd128KB.jpg


4MB test

3rdRun4MB.jpg


4KB test

4thRun4KB.jpg


HDTach

HDTach.jpg
 
does it stutter?
Click to expand...

Good question, i checked on newegg and some reviewers are saying that you need to turn off indexer and make sure write cache etc is on, otherwise performance can hit 0.1MB/s. I also seen a reviewer mention that playing MKV's of the drive could also result in stuttering playback, but didnt happen when played off his 5400rpm drive. So my guess is that these still show some symptoms and is probably enough to put me off them for now, as i have been waiting for some good/cheap SSD's.
 
So far no stuttering, but I haven't been able to mess with it too much, still trying to load drivers. Write cache and advanced performance was disabled on the first run, so I enabled on the second run and numbers were identical, which leads me to believe the dual J-micron controllers must be doing a bang-up job. I'm sure it would make more of a difference on an OS drive (which I did remember to enable off the bat when installing Windows 7).

Someone over at OCZ forums made an SSD tweaker utility which I used on my Windows 7 install.
Hopefully tonight I can get some RAID benchmarks.
 
Windows 7 detects and is optimized for SSDs off bat. I remember hearing somewhere that Win7 doesn't have the stuttering issue.

BTW, try using something other than HDTune.. the burst rate is smaller than the max....
 
OK, why does mine look like this......




I have an Abit IP35-Pro with the SATA drivers installed. This is the same way it looked when I first hooked it up and the board was in IDE mode. It just won't go over 150GB/sec.

Why is your burst rate lower than your max speed and why don't I get a temp reading?

Questions, Questions........:confused:

PS. Just thought I'd add a few things....

I've had this drive for a week and plenty of time to play. That screen shot above was done after installing all the tweaks except the partitioning tweak for XP, and I'm running XP Pro. There's no stuttering and I'm pleased with the drive except for that 150GB/sec cap.

I've tried adding a review 6 different times in the last few days but got disgusted with the site's downtime problems that kept erasing my posting drafts.
 
If you're capped at 150MB/s that way, it's stuck in SATA I mode. Either your chipset on the mobo is limiting it or something is causing it to operate in SATA I mode (150MB/s max, period).

If this is a laptop with an ICH7 chipset for the drives, it's limited to SATA I, just found that out recently myself - newer chipsets don't have this ludicrous limitation. That's the first thing that jumped out at me when seeing that pic...

Temp readings on SSDs are irrelevant, I'd say. Just extra circuitry on the hardware that doesn't need to be there.
 
That's what I was thinking about the stuck part, but the storage manager says.....




or is there something else I'm missing?

I agree about the temp thing, but he's getting it and I'm not? Doesn't sound right to me.

My board is an Abit IP35-Pro with a ICH9R chipset.

My burst rate is a little over 150GB/sec.

If you'll notice the OPs burst rate is about the same as mine but yet his top speed is over the 200GB/sec max that's advertised. He must have gotten a Super-Set!

I really like the drive!

I'm just trying to figure out what's going on!
 
Very nice. Might need to upgrade my OS Drive on my lappy :)
 
Anyone else wondering why his benchmark is reading like a rotating drive, rather than a flat across the board typical SSD graph? (leaving room for spikes here and there of course)..

Weird that it looks more like a HDD graph than an SSD graph...
 
I've had my two for a few weeks now... here's my thread over at XS...

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=215259

Can't express how happy I am with these... and no stuttering on an ICH10R. Only slightly slower copying when writing a 13GB folder full of a couple million files...
I do a fair amount of multitasking, but admit I don't do as heavy write ops as some of you do.

Everything is snappy as hell and my game level load times have been reduced substantially over 3 VR's in RAID0.

I thought I was going to have to return these and pay the extra money for the vaporware Vertex's because they don't have the cache. I was wrong - I'm keeping these. The dual RAID0 internal controllers really seem to be doing the trick and I'm thinking of buying 2 more for my other box - wish they came in 64GB versions....
 
and no stuttering on an ICH10R
Click to expand...

You mention no stuttering, but then on your mini review on xtreme you say that you seem to get stuttering when multitasking. Which one is it? Also did you have them raided?

The reason i ask is that i want to get one, but if they have stuttering then no way, i dont even get that with slow 5400rpm drives and im not going to put up with it on a SSD, if you were running them raided when you made the post at xtreme it might also give less stuttering than somebody who uses just 1 (like i might), in which case its a definete no-no.
 
Toytown said:
You mention no stuttering, but then on your mini review on xtreme you say that you seem to get stuttering when multitasking. Which one is it? Also did you have them raided?

The reason i ask is that i want to get one, but if they have stuttering then no way, i dont even get that with slow 5400rpm drives and im not going to put up with it on a SSD, if you were running them raided when you made the post at xtreme it might also give less stuttering than somebody who uses just 1 (like i might), in which case its a definete no-no.
Click to expand...

Upon initial installation and restore of all of my apps, fresh out da box, I noticed some pauses during some very heavy write ops. I do not notice that now - it just doesn't happen. I only get some pauses during massive large million-file writes to the array. And none of these appear as "stutters" or lockups" or anything, more just a slower write operation.
As I stated in the review, the only thing that has changed is I installed Diskeeper's Hyperfast. After a day or two of that thing running, all of the weird install write pausing went away. I'm not saying Diskeeper fixed it, but that's what happened. The SSDs have been in RAID0, 128K stripe since day one.

If you'd like me to run any tests I can, let me know.
 
the only thing that has changed is I installed Diskeeper's Hyperfast.
Click to expand...

I've been using that also and don't know if it's doing anything or not.

I started using it @ 4 days after the initial SSD install and I haven't noticed any differences.

I did think that maybe it was the cause of my weird HD Tune test.

But Noooo, it doesn't make any difference.
 
The Intel X25-M 80G is now 380.00 at Newegg. I'd recommend going that route for a single drive. They seem to handle random writes fine. Or wait till the Vertex is available, it seems OCZ is confident that this is going to be a stutter-free drive.
 
Griff805 said:
OCZ is confident that this is going to be a stutter-free drive.
Click to expand...

Hah, they said the same damn thing about everything they made since the v1 drives. I'll wait for reviews before believing them, even with the added cache.
The only change they needed was to slap 32mb of cache on the Jmicron controller when moving to v2 and it would have probably been fine but instead they come up with the hairbrained SS scheme and push that on customers after initially denying the problem.
 
novadude said:
Hah, they said the same damn thing about everything they made since the v1 drives. I'll wait for reviews before believing them, even with the added cache.
The only change they needed was to slap 32mb of cache on the Jmicron controller when moving to v2 and it would have probably been fine but instead they come up with the hairbrained SS scheme and push that on customers after initially denying the problem.
Click to expand...

I agree- i'm in no rush to jump on the OCZ train again. However, if after they come out, and other people find they are working great, then i'd go for them. As of right now though, i'm just saving up to go SLC- It's just not worth it to me to deal with all the crap that MLC can cause if not done right. If intel were cheaper, i'd go that route though-
 
MassiveOverkill said:
UPDATE: See first post
Click to expand...

It's too bad you can't go higher on the stripe size for that RAID controller, because I believe that would give you a very noticeable increase in speeds.

Can you run a CrystalDisk benchmark on that setup? I am very interested in the 4k random writes--
 
Griff805 said:
It's too bad you can't go higher on the stripe size for that RAID controller, because I believe that would give you a very noticeable increase in speeds.

Can you run a CrystalDisk benchmark on that setup? I am very interested in the 4k random writes--
Click to expand...

I had to break the array apart as I have alot of work still to do. I can only do the test on my work machine because it has all 6 SATA ports available whereas my Gaming rig at home has some ports blocked by the GTX260. I'll have a bunch of these on hand for a few weeks at least so when things slow down, I'll redo the tests with various stripe sizes if time permits.
 
I wish these came in like 32gb variant....I dont need all that space for OS
 
Old Hippy have you specified the drive offset for the partition? XP uses an inefficient offset for SSD's (which from your screen shots it appears you are using). There is a lot of good information on this on the OCZ forum:

http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=48309

I'm currently using an offset of 128 for my 128GB Titan with Vista x64. I'm using a 965 board with an ICH9 (Abit AB9). The Sandra read tests put it at 162MB/s which is right in line with Legion's result of 166MB/s. I was able to clone my existing OS using Microsoft's imagex which does not create or modify the partition. I also moved the paging file to the spindle drive, turned off defragmentation, turned off indexing, enabled write caching, and disabled superfetch.

I have not run any other tests aside from Sandra, but I can say that boot time is much improved and loading game levels in WoW takes about half as long (loading into Dalaran took about 7-9 seconds on my old 74GB Raptor, 3-4 seconds on the SSD). The system feels very responsive and it has been one of the most noticeable upgrades that I have done in years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top