• 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.

Help recommending an SSD for gaming

J

Jon55

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
2,349
I'm finally looking to make the jump to SSDs but am a bit confused on what to get. I know there's lots of deals going on right now, and a trip to Fry's earlier today only confused me more. I'm looking at 128GB minimum with a price point of around $200. Gaming is what I primarily do, but I usually have a torrent client running in the background (legit stuff, not piracy). I have a 2TB WD Green drive and a 1TB WD Black drive for storage, so naturally I'd put the downloads folder for the torrent client on one of those, and use the 1TB black drive for the page file. But I just don't know what brand to go for. Any recommendations/links are welcome. Fry's had a few different Corsair drives and a Patriot drive (not sure about the reliability of those). But as I said, gaming will be the more primary use.

I have an i5 760 OC'd, but the ASUS motherboard its running on doesn't have SATA 6, so I'm fine with getting a SATA 3 drive.
 
I recommend the Crucial C300 SSDs as they are the best bang for the buck SSDs out now. Even though you don't have SATA 6.0Gb/s, the Crucial C300 would still be faster while connected to SATA 3.0Gb/s than many other SATA 3.0Gb/s SSDs out there.

I don't recommend any Sandforce SF1200 or SF1500 based SSD at the moment as their real world performance is significantly lower than what's stated in the specs. Corsair and Patriot have some if not all Sandforce SF1200/SF1500 based SSDs.
 
Poke around the Data Storage Systems forum for tons of info.

The general 'state of SSDs' is that we are headed into a a new generation in the coming month or three. New offerings from Crucial, Intel, and SandForce (the SF-1200 controller chip running the current generation of OCZ, Corsair, Patriot, ADATA, etc.) are looming (Crucial and SandForce drives in a week or two are expected, but not in concrete).

For the current generation, Intel X25-M G2 and Crucial C300 usually get top nods. The C300 is on sale at newegg currently: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148348

Another thing to consider, only a rather specific segment of gaming particularly benefit from SSDs. MMOs and other games that require a fairly large amount of data to be loaded periodically can have that load time sped up. Other gaming is mostly neutral to an SSD. That's not to say the general usage and multitasking isn't effected greatly. But you may want to consider what your expectations are.
 
as long as you catch that sale that 128gb c300 posted by havermeyer is a great drive & at a good price. Considering the current state of the SSD market though you may be better off waiting since it doesnt sound like this is mission critical. Basically all the big names in the SSD market should have new drives int he next couple months.
 
bastage said:
as long as you catch that sale that 128gb c300 posted by havermeyer is a great drive & at a good price. Considering the current state of the SSD market though you may be better off waiting since it doesnt sound like this is mission critical. Basically all the big names in the SSD market should have new drives int he next couple months.
Click to expand...

Thanks so much for the help guys. I guess my question as far as next gen. SSDs go is will they actually be any cheaper than the current offerings? At this point, I'm really looking to get an SSD. I want the speed. Because from what I've been seeing/reading so far on the next gen. stuff that's come out, price points don't look like they've moved much, if at all.
 
+1 on the Crucial C300 unless you want to wait a month or so for the new crop of drives.
 
Jon55 said:
Thanks so much for the help guys. I guess my question as far as next gen. SSDs go is will they actually be any cheaper than the current offerings? At this point, I'm really looking to get an SSD. I want the speed. Because from what I've been seeing/reading so far on the next gen. stuff that's come out, price points don't look like they've moved much, if at all.
Click to expand...

They're technically cheaper in the sense that you're getting more performance for the dollar than with the older gen. There is a chance that they may be a little cheaper.
 
Danny Bui said:
They're technically cheaper in the sense that you're getting more performance for the dollar than with the older gen. There is a chance that they may be a little cheaper.
Click to expand...

I see. Meh, I may just pull the trigger anyway on the C300. That's odd though, I thought the SandForce controllers were generally highly praised. Would they really be that much worse? It's just that the Patriot and Corsair drives at Fry's were all around 120/128 GB and about $200 (some $20 under that).

While I'm at it, I might as well ask another question that's on my mind. I've currently have 4GB of RAM (DDR3 dual-channel). I notice that I can hit 50% of that pretty easily after all the startup programs have loaded and while running an intense game, so I've been playing with the idea of tossing in another 4GB for the heck of it. I know Windows uses more RAM the more you have, so I have to wonder if it wouldn't make use of that extra RAM. It never hits the ceiling of the current 4GB I do have, comes close sometimes, but never all the way. And I can't help but wonder if an extra 4GB would allow Windows to go higher. I'm using Windows 7 64-bit, btw.
 
Last edited:
Jon55 said:
I see. Meh, I may just pull the trigger anyway on the C300. That's odd though, I thought the SandForce controllers were generally highly praised. Would they really be that much worse? It's just that the Patriot and Corsair drives at Fry's were all around 120/128 GB and about $200 (some $20 under that).
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, what those praisers did not realize was that the Sandforce SSDs were tested with benchmark programs that only used highly compressible data. As such those Sandforce SSDs were shown to be really good. However incompressible data makes up a vast majority of the data used/sent/spread/streamed/etc on a hard drive. As such, in real world situations, those Sandforce SSDs were shown to actually be significantly slower than what the specs stated when using real data. In fact, those Sandforce SSDs were found to be slower than Intel's SSDs.
Jon55 said:
While I'm at it, I might as well ask another question that's on my mind. I've currently have 4GB of RAM (DDR3 dual-channel). I notice that I can hit 50% of that pretty easily after all the startup programs have loaded and while running an intense game, so I've been playing with the idea of tossing in another 4GB for the heck of it. I know Windows uses more RAM the more you have, so I have to wonder if it wouldn't make use of that extra RAM. It never hits the ceiling of the current 4GB I do have, comes close sometimes, but never all the way. And I can't help but wonder if an extra 4GB would allow Windows to go higher. I'm using Windows 7 64-bit, btw.
Click to expand...
Adding 4GB of RAM won't hurt. It may in fact allow Windows to go a little higher.
 
Last edited:
You may want to change the wording to compressible/incompressible data, for clarity :)

I might bite on the C300 deal, though Amazon has it for $20 more and they have a much nicer return policy.
 
Danny, you are amazing dude. Thank you. And thanks to everyone else.

I'll pick up that C300 and maybe an extra 4 GB.
 
Danny Bui said:
However incompressible data makes up a vast majority of the data used/sent/spread/streamed/etc on a hard drive
Click to expand...

By bulk, sure, but the stuff that you want quick, your OS and apps, are pretty compressible.

My media goes on my media drives, my OS and apps go on my SSD. So the incompressible data goes where I have a bunch of free space, and the stuff I want to be quick goes where I have the speed.

The one question I have is game textures. Aren't they usually compressed?

I know that Anand at least tests with incompressible data, and in his latest article on the Intel 510 showed the sf-1200 drives to write faster than the x25-m g2 with incompressible date. Reads went the other way, with both drives running at over 200MB/sec. He also built his own bench designed to be close to real world, where again he shows the sf-1200 to be faster than the x25-m g2. (Sorry, I know logical fallacy - Appeal to Authority.)

In my sig I list a sf-1200 drive, I'd bought a Barefoot drive and received the sf-1200 drive in exchange after the first drive died. I really don't have a horse in the race, just looking for more info.
 
Last edited:
IMHO Danny is overcritical of the SF drives because they dont in the real world get the marks that they are rated at. I Own a SF drive (Vertex 2) And I have owned several intel's (2x 1st gen mainstream drives, a 2nd gen mainstream & a 2nd gen value drive). Of all the drives there is not a clear cut winner of who is fastest when using on a day to day basis. Bottom line is take the benchmarks with a grain of salt. Biggest most important factor in SSD's is in my opinion capacity. The more you can fit on the drive the more thats going to get the speed boost. Where as if only your OS is on the SSD your going to be getting the same load times in apps that you always have..
 
Are there any good/decent priced PCI-E SATA 6 cards out there? My motherboard is limited to SATA 3 but I had been toying with the thought of picking up a PCI-E SATA 6 card, but only came across ones that were $30. And I mean at that point, why not just put that money towards a newer SATA 6 capable motherboard?
 
Last edited:
Decibel said:
By bulk, sure, but the stuff that you want quick, your OS and apps, are pretty compressible.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure about that.
Decibel said:
The one question I have is game textures. Aren't they usually compressed?
Click to expand...
They are. But then they're uncompressed IIRC.

Decibel said:
I know that Anand at least tests with incompressible data, and in his latest article on the Intel 510 showed the sf-1200 drives to write faster than the x25-m g2 with incompressible date. Reads went the other way, with both drives running at over 200MB/sec. He also built his own bench designed to be close to real world, where again he shows the sf-1200 to be faster than the x25-m g2. (Sorry, I know logical fallacy - Appeal to Authority.)
Click to expand...
Judging from the comments over in the Data Storage subforum, it seems that Anandtech's testing methodology, despite the intentions, may be insufficient and incorrect.
bastage said:
IMHO Danny is overcritical of the SF drives because they dont in the real world get the marks that they are rated at.
Click to expand...
I apply a similar thought process to SSDs as I would to PSUs: If it can't meet the stated specifications under real world conditions, I don't recommend that part at all.
bastage said:
I Own a SF drive (Vertex 2) And I have owned several intel's (2x 1st gen mainstream drives, a 2nd gen mainstream & a 2nd gen value drive). Of all the drives there is not a clear cut winner of who is fastest when using on a day to day basis.
Click to expand...
Just wanted to add a counterpoint to this: There are other people that say/claim that they can tell the difference between a SF and Intel SSD in real world usage. However there are others, like bastage, that can't tell the difference.
Jon55 said:
Are there any good/decent priced PCI SATA 6 cards out there? My motherboard is limited to SATA 3 but I had been toying with the thought of picking up a PCI SATA 6 card, but only came across ones that were $30. And I mean at that point, why not just put that money towards a newer SATA 6 capable motherboard?
Click to expand...

PCI? PCI is gonna severly limit the performance of any SSD out there. Did you mean PCI-E? If so, $30 is rather cheap for a SATA 6.0Gb/s PCI-E card. Then again it's probably on the low-end of quality. IIRC, $50 to $60 is where you start getting good PCI-E SATA 6.0gb/s SSDs.
 
Danny Bui said:
PCI? PCI is gonna severly limit the performance of any SSD out there. Did you mean PCI-E? If so, $30 is rather cheap for a SATA 6.0Gb/s PCI-E card. Then again it's probably on the low-end of quality. IIRC, $50 to $60 is where you start getting good PCI-E SATA 6.0gb/s SSDs.
Click to expand...


Hah, yes, I meant PCI-E. Yikes, $50 to $60? Forget that. I was turned off by $30.
 
Danny Bui said:
I'm not so sure about that.
Click to expand...

Quick test c:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office, 665MB. Zipped (right click, send to), 368MB.

Steam (Just HL1, hey I'm at work...) 516MB to 255MB.

Judging from the comments over in the Data Storage subforum, it seems that Anandtech's testing methodology, despite the intentions, may be insufficient and incorrect
Click to expand...
I haven't spent too much time over there, but I just ran a quick search on SandForce and didn't see the major negativity you indicate. Do you have a particular thread in mind? I'm on the fourth page of search results.

I apply a similar thought process to SSDs as I would to PSUs: If it can't meet the stated specifications under real world conditions, I don't recommend that part at all.
Click to expand...
We knew from the beginning that the compression issue was a factor with SandForce drives. The controller makes it virtually impossible to bench it real world, so all you get is hearsay. It's still one of the single best upgrades I think I've made in years.

Of bigger concern to me is OCZ, but they've been shady SOBs for years. Their current behavior isn't helping me want to ever give them a dime.

I still think that when setting up your storage subsystem you need to use the proper tool for the job - a SSD for OS and apps, spinning platters for media. Which happens to hit the SandForce controller's strengths; with the caveats of slower performance with compressed data, inconsistent benchmarks and conservative garbage collection.

It's an interesting dichotomy, the choice between less writes and pure speed.
 
Decibel said:
Quick test c:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Office, 665MB. Zipped (right click, send to), 368MB.

Steam (Just HL1, hey I'm at work...) 516MB to 255MB.
Click to expand...

Huh? I was thinking more along the lines of the "OS and apps" aren't compressed when you're using them. Just re-read what you wrote and I misunderstood it.

Decibel said:
I haven't spent too much time over there, but I just ran a quick search on SandForce and didn't see the major negativity you indicate. Do you have a particular thread in mind? I'm on the fourth page of search results.
Click to expand...

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1564216

Decibel said:
We knew from the beginning that the compression issue was a factor with SandForce drives. The controller makes it virtually impossible to bench it real world, so all you get is hearsay. It's still one of the single best upgrades I think I've made in years.
Click to expand...
And that one flaw is enough for me to not recommend the current Sandforce SSDs.
Decibel said:
Of bigger concern to me is OCZ, but they've been shady SOBs for years. Their current behavior isn't helping me want to ever give them a dime.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
if you go for a Pci-e add in card you might as well get a raid controller and run two ssds in a Raid-0 off it.
 
Spooony said:
if you go for a Pci-e add in card you might as well get a raid controller and run two ssds in a Raid-0 off it.
Click to expand...

At that point I'm spending more than it would cost to just buy a new P67 based motherboard from say ASUS, which would already have SATA 6 and USB 3. So for me at least, that's not worth it. Even just the PCI-E card itself would be a good chunk of change towards a new motherboard.
 
With the c300 at about the same cost per gb as a sf drive get the c300 for sure. But if you get notably more capacity from something else then the extra capacity would do you well. Even if it is from a refurbished illindux drive that have been cropping up for a buck a gb lately. Then even most if not all apps, games and everything else other then archived data could go on the ssd.

Just avoid the new ocz ssd's and anything that doesn't have trim.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
bastage said:
Unfortunately I cant tell if that is sarcasm or not. Either way though I know the saying.. I use it frequently.
Click to expand...

Sarcasm from me? Nah, I really don't know what that saying means.
 
Jon55, I'm receiving my C300 128GB tomorrow. It's my first SSD as well. Let me know what you decide.
 
Jon55, I received my C300 drive, and holy shit it is fast. I hope these images help you. I took two images, one was before I used the Intel AHCI driver and one is after I installed it with the latest. This drive screams man.

Before:

HcD1r.jpg


After:



I hope that information helps you with your purchasing decision. It was shipped with the latest firmware. Just switched my SATA mode to AHCI in the BIOS and installed Windows so fast. :cool:
 
Nope, Sata 3Gb/s. Using it on the onboard SATA controller of my P5Q Pro (Intel P45 Chipset).
 
It's...beautiful *tear* Thanks for posting those benches. I'll definitely be looking into picking one up.
 
Jon55, I hope you decided to get an SSD. I see you posted another thread about moving to RAID0 with physical disks. Spend the extra cash and get a single SSD... I'm serious man, you will NOT regret it. It's intense.
 
Cmustang87 said:
Jon55, I hope you decided to get an SSD. I see you posted another thread about moving to RAID0 with physical disks. Spend the extra cash and get a single SSD... I'm serious man, you will NOT regret it. It's intense.
Click to expand...

Haha I was just toying with the idea. But I actually just got back from Fry's. I picked up a Corsair F120. My God this thing is fast. Once you go SSD you can't go back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top