• A Great friend to the HardForum with a great kid that he is trying to get a scholorship to continue his schooling. Please give hime a vote! Only 24 hours left! Thanks.
    If you have an VOTE FOR KEENAN!

SSD Decisions

DeaconFrost

DeaconFrost

[H]F Junkie
2FA
Joined
Sep 6, 2007
Messages
11,610
Is there any official release date for the Vertex 3 drives? Should I wait for one of those, assuming it is going to be released soon, or should I spring for one of the Crucial RealSSDs? I'm looking at the 120 GB size.
 
If you want something reliable, not the fastest but probably the least troubled drive, get Intel X25m G2 120gb.

Im personally waiting to see how the G3 n C400 do before i make my decision, OCZ is out of my list with all their shaddy things on the Vertex 2 with changing from 34nm to 25nm. To me the most important thing is to have the least issues with a drive, then speed.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
I'd agree with that. I'd give up some performance in exchange for reliability.
 
DeaconFrost said:
Any reasoning behind that? I'm not disagreeing, I'm just curious.
Click to expand...

I've had 9 SSDs including Intel 80GB G1s & G2's, Vertex 2s, GSkill Titans, and my Crucial 256GB C300 is the best single drive I've ever used.

Intel drives are great even though I had 3 fail, but the Crucial drives are a cut above.

And yes I'm using the latest (006) firmware.
 
I had a gift cert to burn, so I put it towards a 64GB C300 for my laptop. I'll be installing today. For my tower, I'm going to get a larger one, but I'm waiting to see if the C400s will be coming out soon. If not, I'll just grab a C300, assuming I'm happy with the smaller one. Thanks for all the info.
 
If you can wait till the end of the month, I would say wait. Several new SSDs are scheduled to be released soon, there's no reason to not at least wait till they come out and get reviewed. However, if you can't wait, most SSDs are getting heavy discounts lately in anticipation for the new drives.
 
alphataru said:
If you can wait till the end of the month, I would say wait. Several new SSDs are scheduled to be released soon, there's no reason to not at least wait till they come out and get reviewed. However, if you can't wait, most SSDs are getting heavy discounts lately in anticipation for the new drives.
Click to expand...

Yep, waiting on the Vertex 3 or C400 - both are due out next Monday...
 
I figured I'd try out the C300 in my laptop, and I'll probably be going with a C400 128 GB for my tower.
 
Remember the Marvell controller used in the c400 is the same controller that is in the Intel 510 series SSD's & the corsair performance 3 ssd's that are both already for sale on newegg. So between the 3 buy whichever you think is going to give you the best post sale support.

Vertex 3's are automatically out of the running because there made by OCZ & there freeking shady.
 
bastage said:
Remember the Marvell controller used in the c400 is the same controller that is in the Intel 510 series SSD's & the corsair performance 3 ssd's that are both already for sale on newegg. So between the 3 buy whichever you think is going to give you the best post sale support.
Click to expand...

Bad advice. They have the same controller, but the firmware for the Micron C400 / Crucial M4 is written by Micron engineers, and will likely result in different performance than other SSDs with the same controller.
 
john4200 said:
Bad advice. They have the same controller, but the firmware for the Micron C400 / Crucial M4 is written by Micron engineers, and will likely result in different performance than other SSDs with the same controller.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. Thats why I said buy whichever you think will give you the best Post Sales support.
 
bastage said:
Exactly my point. Thats why I said buy whichever you think will give you the best Post Sales support.
Click to expand...
Well the C400 is rumored to have 410/210 sequential read/write, so it seems not tuned like the 510 (big sequential), the C400 with the same marvel might be tuned like the C300 for big random read/writes, in a couple of weeks we will see.
 
bastage said:
Exactly my point. Thats why I said buy whichever you think will give you the best Post Sales support.
Click to expand...

You sound confused, and your advice is not good. The firwmare that comes with the drive has little to do with "post sales support". But the firmware does affect the performance of the drive. And the firmware of the C400 is different from the firmware of the other SSDs you mentioned.
 
Last edited:
Abula said:
Well the C400 is rumored to have 410/210 sequential read/write, so it seems not tuned like the 510 (big sequential), the C400 with the same marvel might be tuned like the C300 for big random read/writes, in a couple of weeks we will see.
Click to expand...

Actually, 415/(265,175,95) depending on capacity (256+,128,64). And it is not a rumor, you can see it on Micron's website:

http://www.micron.com/partscatalog....cts/parametric/solid_state_storage/client_ssd

I agree with you that it is likely that the C400 will have better non-sequential performance than the Intel 510, since Micron apparently tuned the firmware for the C300 for high non-sequential performance, and I guess they will try the same thing with the C400.
 
john4200 said:
You sound confused, and your advice is not good. The firwmare that comes with the drive has little to do with "post sales support". But the firmware does affect the performance of the drive. And the firmware of the C400 is different from the firmware of the other SSDs you mentioned.
Click to expand...

Not confused at all. Part of post sales support is updates to ensure everything works to its fullest potential.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
bastage said:
Not confused at all. Part of post sales support is updates to ensure everything works to its fullest potential.
Click to expand...

Do you know what firmware is? If so, why do you think the firmware that COMES WITH THE SSD has anything to do with "post sales support"? Firmware updates are not likely to have much effect on performance -- they are usually just bug fixes.
 
john4200 said:
Firmware updates are not likely to have much effect on performance -- they are usually just bug fixes.
Click to expand...
Its not super comon to increase performance, its more comparabilities and bug fixes, but it happens, for example Intel on the X25m 160gb released a new firmware 3 months after release increasing the sequential writes from 80 to 100.
 
john4200 said:
Do you know what firmware is? If so, why do you think the firmware that COMES WITH THE SSD has anything to do with "post sales support"? Firmware updates are not likely to have much effect on performance -- they are usually just bug fixes.
Click to expand...

99% of everyone will take no bugs and slower performance over a fast buggy drive. And as already pointed out firmware can effect performance.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
bastage said:
99% of everyone will take no bugs and slower performance over a fast buggy drive. And as already pointed out firmware can effect performance.
Click to expand...

You are not making any sense. Your prior advice is terrible. One should not decide between the SSDs based solely (or mostly) upon "post sales support".

The C400 has different firmware from the other SSDs. Therefore, the immediate performance of the C400 is likely to be significantly different from the other SSDs. It is likely that the C400 will have higher 4KB random read and write performance than the other SSDs, but lower sequential performance. That would be the criteria that most people base their decisions upon.
 
Last edited:
Abula said:
Its not super comon to increase performance, its more comparabilities and bug fixes, but it happens, for example Intel on the X25m 160gb released a new firmware 3 months after release increasing the sequential writes from 80 to 100.
Click to expand...

That is one reason why I wrote "are not likely" rather than "do not". But you do realize that it is not relevant to this discussion? The firmware that ships with the SSD is obviously the major factor in determining the performance of the SSD, not any hypothetical future firmware updates.
 
john4200 said:
You are not making any sense. Your prior advice is terrible. One should not decide between the SSDs based solely (or mostly) upon "post sales support".

The C400 has different firmware from the other SSDs. Therefore, the immediate performance of the C400 is likely to be significantly different from the other SSDs. It is likely that the C400 will have higher 4KB random read and write performance than the other SSDs, but lower sequential performance. That would be the criteria that most people base their decisions upon.
Click to expand...
so what your saint is that you should base your purchase off the initial firmware only. Well anyone with a vertex 2 will tell you otherwise. Post sales support and future updates make all the difference. Of wich intel corsair and crucial are all well known for being very good at.
Posted via Mobile Device
 
bastage said:
so what your saint is that you should base your purchase off the initial firmware only. Well anyone with a vertex 2 will tell you otherwise. Post sales support and future updates make all the difference.
Click to expand...

I did NOT say that. I said that your advice was bad, the major criterion should NOT be "post sales support" -- that implies that the SSDs are basically the same, which they are not.

I think I see where your confusion is coming from. You apparently think the Marvell controller situation is similar to the Sandforce controller situation. The fact is that the situations are quite different. Sandforce insists on controlling the firmware themselves, so every SSD with a Sandforce controller will have firmware written by Sandforce, and the only differences among Sandforce SSDs with the same controller will be where Sandforce deliberately turned features on or off in their firmware.

With Marvell, the situation is different. Marvell does not insist on controlling the firmware. It seems that there is a reference firmware from Marvell, sort of an example, and some of the other SSD vendors have written their firmware without making many changes to the reference firmware. But in the case of Micron, they have made major changes to the firmware. They talked about that back when the C300 first came out, they thought the reference firmware performance was too "hard drive like". Apparently, Micron made drastic changes to achieve higher 4KB random performance.

Anyway, things should become clear once we see some AS-SSD benchmarks of the Crucial M4. It is likely that they will be significantly different than benchmarks of the Intel 510 and the Corsair P3.
 
john4200 said:
I did NOT say that. I said that your advice was bad, the major criterion should NOT be "post sales support" -- that implies that the SSDs are basically the same, which they are not.

I think I see where your confusion is coming from. You apparently think the Marvell controller situation is similar to the Sandforce controller situation. The fact is that the situations are quite different. Sandforce insists on controlling the firmware themselves, so every SSD with a Sandforce controller will have firmware written by Sandforce, and the only differences among Sandforce SSDs with the same controller will be where Sandforce deliberately turned features on or off in their firmware.

With Marvell, the situation is different. Marvell does not insist on controlling the firmware. It seems that there is a reference firmware from Marvell, sort of an example, and some of the other SSD vendors have written their firmware without making many changes to the reference firmware. But in the case of Micron, they have made major changes to the firmware. They talked about that back when the C300 first came out, they thought the reference firmware performance was too "hard drive like". Apparently, Micron made drastic changes to achieve higher 4KB random performance.

Anyway, things should become clear once we see some AS-SSD benchmarks of the Crucial M4. It is likely that they will be significantly different than benchmarks of the Intel 510 and the Corsair P3.
Click to expand...

The Situation is a hell of allot more alike then you give it credit for. Performance will not be drastically different in any of the drives. Some performance difference, yes, But not drastically by any means. Because if someone does something special to make there's drastically different the others will reverse engineer it & do the same. None of the 3 mentioned are going to be outsold off the basis of not providing an update to match it.

To base a drive simply off of the shipped firmware is ridiculous. Basically every PC part an enthusiast buys anymore can have the firmware updated to improve performance & fix bugs. Most firmware updates happen to resolve issues. But not all. & for a high end enthusiast part (as every one of the discussed 3rd gen ssd's are) performance increases are not unheard of by any means. Basically the same concept as a driver or bios update except more intrusive since SSD's do not us specific drivers such as your video card.

You seem to be of the opinion that Crucial is infallible. Well no matter how much R&D & testing occurs they can not make a perfect product right out the door. neither can Intel, Corsair or any other hardware manufacturer in existence.

Bottom line is that the support you get for that SSD in 6 months or a year from now is more important then a small performance difference now. Well at least unless you plan on buying a new one every couple months.
 
That is just nonsense. Clearly you are confused about SSD firmware, and have no intention of learning about how SSDs work. I just hope no unsuspecting novice gets lead down the wrong path by the nonsense you are spouting.
 
john4200 said:
That is just nonsense. Clearly you are confused about SSD firmware, and have no intention of learning about how SSDs work. I just hope no unsuspecting novice gets lead down the wrong path by the nonsense you are spouting.
Click to expand...

Sure.. That or they can just blindly buy whatever has the fastest benchmarks with no regards for what there investment will perform like in a few months.. Either way..

& I would appreciate it if you stopped calling me confused about a subject that you so clearly have proven yourself ignorant in.
 
You are confused, and as is becoming increasingly apparent, quite ignorant about the functioning of SSDs. I am not going to waste my time trying to educate you on how SSDs work. But here is a point that, if you consider it carefully, may help to get you on the path to understanding, if you are willing to put in some time to research and think about the subject.

The Crucial C300 SSD has significantly higher random 4KB performance than either the Corsair P3 or the Intel 510, but lower sequential performance. All these SSDs use the Marvell 88SS9174 controller (the C300 has the -BJP2 version, the others have the newer -BKK2). Which is more likely, that Marvell introduced a revised version of their controller that forces the random 4KB performance to go down signficantly from the first version, or that the difference is primarily due to different firmware? If writing SSD firmware were easy, why would Corsair and Intel release SSDs with lower performance than an SSD that has been out for more than a year?

No need to post a nonsense answer to those questions. They are rhetorical, to help you to become less confused, if you take the time to think and learn.
 
john4200 said:
You are confused, and as is becoming increasingly apparent, quite ignorant about the functioning of SSDs. I am not going to waste my time trying to educate you on how SSDs work. But here is a point that, if you consider it carefully, may help to get you on the path to understanding, if you are willing to put in some time to research and think about the subject.

The Crucial C300 SSD has significantly higher random 4KB performance than either the Corsair P3 or the Intel 510, but lower sequential performance. All these SSDs use the Marvell 88SS9174 controller (the C300 has the -BJP2 version, the others have the newer -BKK2). Which is more likely, that Marvell introduced a revised version of their controller that forces the random 4KB performance to go down signficantly from the first version, or that the difference is primarily due to different firmware? If writing SSD firmware were easy, why would Corsair and Intel release SSDs with lower performance than an SSD that has been out for more than a year?

No need to post a nonsense answer to those questions. They are rhetorical, to help you to become less confused, if you take the time to think and learn.
Click to expand...

So what your trying to say is that you think Corsair & Intel both suck & are not capable of updating a product & making it faster.. because its impossible to do.. Oh wait didn't Intel do that with the g2 drives. That was like a 1 time fluke that they couldn't possibly do again right?

You seriously sound like you work for crucial or some shit. Of the 3 I will be most likely getting the crucial for other reasons all together (I like to support local business's & Crucial/Micron is local to me). But I am not so closed minded to think that they will immediately dominate & the largest microchip manufacturer in the world cant match them in firmware.
 
What I am saying is that you are confused about how SSDs work, and how to compare performance. If you want to change that, you need to think about how SSDs work. I already tried to help you a bit, but I'm not interested in helping someone who refuses to do a little thinking and learning. One more rhetorical question I will add to try to help you, what sort of SSD usage would benefit more from higher random 4KB performance, and what usage would benefit more from higher sequential performance?
 
john4200 said:
What I am saying is that you are confused about how SSDs work, and how to compare performance. If you want to change that, you need to think about how SSDs work. I already tried to help you a bit, but I'm not interested in helping someone who refuses to do a little thinking and learning. One more rhetorical question I will add to try to help you, what sort of SSD usage would benefit more from higher random 4KB performance, and what usage would benefit more from higher sequential performance?
Click to expand...

Man your hard headed.. You are seriously defensive all because I said to get whatever one of the 3 you think has the best post sales support.. But noooo you must get the crucial because john4200 says so.. You seem to believe that the 4KB numbers are all that matters. Well news flash for you, from a Intel x25v to a c300 the time difference in booting windows, loading apps or 90% of anything else that 90% of the buyers of SSD's will ever do in minuscule.
 
Why do you think I am recommending that anyone should buy a Crucial SSD rather than an Intel SSD? Are you delusional?
 
bastage said:
wow.. I have no ideal what you were even attempting to say there.
Click to expand...

That is abundantly clear.

I'll rephrase the question. Where in this thread have I written that I think anyone should buy a Crucial SSD rather than the Intel 510 or the Corsair P3?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top