• 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.

SSD for desktop and notebook

F

faugusztin

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 9, 2008
Messages
2,668
Hi,

i'm thinking about moving to SSD for 2 use cases :
1) my Toshiba notebook (M800), for which 60GB drive would be enough (Windows 7, Eclipse, OpenOffice and other basic stuff)
2) my main desktop, which would probably require 120GB drive (Windows 7, Eclipse, OpenOffice, Steam with many games, other basic stuff), which would also have WD1001FALS as data drive.

Use case for both SSD drives include usage for Java projects with hundreds or thousands small files.

Now, i'm looking at my options, which are (prices are without VAT):
  • Kintson X25-M 80GB - 243.40€
  • OCZ Vertex 60GB - 218.83€
  • OCZ Summit 60GB - i don't know the price yet
  • OCZ Vertex 120GB - 361.09€
  • OCZ Summit 120GB - 377€
  • there are also lots of JMicron based SSD's (A-DATA XPG is the one with best price - 236.26€ for 128GB, but also have big write problems). No Samsung or Corsair SSD drives available here.

Which one would you recommend and why ?
 
X25-M for the laptop. OCZ Vertex 120gb for the desktop. Stay away from JMicron..
 
Ok, why Vertex and why not Summit ? Vertex got many firmware updates, which is good, but also bad as each firmware update means you need another OS to flash from, and also means contents of your drive are gone. Vertex is also a bit quicker, on other side Summit got something like "auto TRIM"...
 
Vertex has TRIM as well. The Vertex also has better random write speeds as well..
 
Ok, let's concentrate on laptop. Why Kingston X25-M 80GB and why not OCZ Vertex 60GB ? It's true that my favorite seller have it for a bit higher price (221.52€) and that means just 22€ advantage of Vertex against X25-M, which on other side does have a 20GB advantage (the fact that the extra space is maybe not needed is another side of coin). And another point are the speed degrading issue of X25-M.

So, would you recommend a X25-M 80GB for a laptop (specs) used mostly for Java development, with file size average around 5kB ?

I ask this because my primary issue is the laptop, PC is secondary and can wait for now.
 
The X25-M even degraded the 4k Random Writes/Reads are still faster than a clean Vertex and for 30 more, it shouldn't be too big of a hit. Worth the money. Plus I think the 60gb Vertex is slower vs the 120gb Vertex. The X25-M is indeed the quickest in the small random writes/reads.
 
Also there is a firmware fix out to mitigate the speed degradation issues on the Intels. (FYI all SSDs have speed degradation issues and only Intel has directly addressed it)
 
All SSDs drop in performance to what is called steady state performance. All the memory cells on the drive have been written to. In order to write more data, the drive will have to delete used cells before writing to new ones.

The uproar over Intel's performance degradation was not about steady state performance, but rather its use of an aggressive wear leveling algorithm that was severely fragmenting the drive's LBA table. It's since been addressed with a firmware update.

Currently, the v 1.3 firmware of the Indilinix controllers support Windows 7 TRIM. The newest firmware on Samsung's generation 2 controllers have an internal TRIM mechanism that runs on the scheduled basis, but does not support Windows 7 TRIM. In addition, you can't update the firmware on older Samsung drives, since they have not provided the end user with such a tool. The OCZ Summit is currently the only Samsung drive with this built-in auto-TRIM algorithm.
 
Ok. I was also thinking about X25-M for the laptop, so that choice is ok it seems. Right now i'm not decided about desktop yet, but for now i will postpone the decision about it, i will rethink it with when i will start upgrading to Core i5 (or any name it will have).

Thanks for responses.
 
I would recommend to get the X25-M for desktop. Then later on, when prices drops or when newer drives hits the market, get another bigger one for desktop use. Then you could move the first ssd for the laptop.
But if you're upgrading your desktop when Lynnfield arrives, maybe its better to get that X-25M directly for the laptop. And postpone your decision, like you thought.
 
The laptop is the main priority, as this is where the ultraslow drive is. My main desktop currently not so bad, WD1001FALS does have a acceptable speed (ok, maybe after feeling SSD in laptop i will think otherwise, but that's the risk :) ).
 
faugusztin said:
My main desktop currently not so bad, WD1001FALS does have a acceptable speed (ok, maybe after feeling SSD in laptop i will think otherwise, but that's the risk :) ).
Click to expand...

Good luck :)
I couldnt resist....
 
SSD in notebook now, boot is quick, but the primary test will be how will it feel doing J2EE work on it :).
 
I would partition any such drive to begin with...mixing and matching drivers with two different computers with a single partition and OS install can yield...interesting results.
 
Hm... Just did a hdtach read test, and it is unlike any graphs i seen. After Win7 instalation, installing Intel chipset drivers and other necessary stuff, the speed oscilates between 80 and 140MB/s, with random spikes to 200MB/s (two). Is this normal ?
 
This is how it looks :

x25m.jpg


Edit: Killing pagefile bringed it up to 162MB/s, but it is still not over 200MB/s :(. Did i miss something ?

Edit2: Maybe it is SATA/150 underneath the ICH9M ? http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/...dvantage-ssds-faster-than-sata150-spec-61982/
 
Last edited:
Not to mention sometimes SSDs are pretty schizophrenic to begin with in benchmarking software...
 
Lazn_Work said:
Also there is a firmware fix out to mitigate the speed degradation issues on the Intels. (FYI all SSDs have speed degradation issues and only Intel has directly addressed it)
Click to expand...

This is one of the reasons I went with the X25-M myself.

aznx said:
Vertex has TRIM as well. The Vertex also has better random write speeds as well..
Click to expand...

Rumor is that the Intel drive may be getting TRIM support in the future. Though no one can say for sure at this point.
 
astrallite said:
All SSDs drop in performance to what is called steady state performance. All the memory cells on the drive have been written to. In order to write more data, the drive will have to delete used cells before writing to new ones.
Click to expand...

I haven't read anything about the Summit, but as for the Vertex it appears they have the performance degradation under control. Bit-tech did full write benchmarks over 20 times and showing no suffering in performance even the slightest. Where others like the Intel started suffering in performance after even just one benchmark.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2009/05/15/ocz-vertex-ssd-review/11
 
rive22 said:
I haven't read anything about the Summit, but as for the Vertex it appears they have the performance degradation under control. Bit-tech did full write benchmarks over 20 times and showing no suffering in performance even the slightest. Where others like the Intel started suffering in performance after even just one benchmark.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2009/05/15/ocz-vertex-ssd-review/11
Click to expand...

I concur.
My Vertex 120 is still as fast as the day I bought it. running firmware v1.3
 
Really seems like controller cap. Same SSD, this time connected to desktop (Asus P5Q-E - P45, ICH10R chipset) :

x25desktop.png


Is that drop in first part, where W7 got installed a normal thing ?
 
rive22 said:
I haven't read anything about the Summit, but as for the Vertex it appears they have the performance degradation under control. Bit-tech did full write benchmarks over 20 times and showing no suffering in performance even the slightest. Where others like the Intel started suffering in performance after even just one benchmark.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2009/05/15/ocz-vertex-ssd-review/11
Click to expand...

nitrobass24 said:
I concur.
My Vertex 120 is still as fast as the day I bought it. running firmware v1.3
Click to expand...

The latest firmware for the Intel X25-M seems to have resolved those issues.
 
Firmware is for M only. My E has shown some slow-down as it has filled, but it is still faster then the Solids (in RAID0), and still has no stutter.
 
drgnfang said:
Firmware is for M only. My E has shown some slow-down as it has filled, but it is still faster then the Solids (in RAID0), and still has no stutter.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have minded a couple of X25-E drives in RAID-0 but the cost was just ridiculous and since this system is used mainly for playing games I didn't think it was worth the cost increase over the X25-M's.
 
I haven't tested this myself but here's a quote I picked up in another forum in case anyone has any of the older SSD's that need some good fixen supposedly these utilities do the trick where regular formats don't quite cut the cake. You'll still to have erase and reinstall or just recopy your saved image from a fresh install, but then it's like you get the drive as if it was new again.

Just formatting or zero-writing the drive doesn't help - you need to tell the SSD controller (as in the one inside the SSD, not the RAID card) that all the blocks should be empty. This can be done by issuing the ide command called SECURE_ERASE. If you need a program to do that for you, you can download HDDErase 4.0, or if that gives you an error message, HDDErase 3.3. I know version 3.3 is needed for Intel SSDs, but you should try your luck with 4.0 first.

Just make sure you remove the RAID and just connect the drives in legacy mode, and stick HDDErase onto a dos boot floppy (or flash drive or CD) and run it on each SSD separately.

I can pretty much guarantee your performance will be back to normal. Just don't do a write benchmark afterwards :)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
faugusztin said:
Well, HD Tune makes very similar graph where most of the line is around 170MB/s. So yes, probably the chipset.
Click to expand...
faugusztin said:
Really seems like controller cap. Same SSD, this time connected to desktop (Asus P5Q-E - P45, ICH10R chipset) :

Is that drop in first part, where W7 got installed a normal thing ?
Click to expand...

The method that HD Tune and Tach use doesn't seem to work very well with SSDs. I get more accurate benchmark results from the Everest disk benchmark.
 
rive22 said:
I haven't tested this myself but here's a quote I picked up in another forum in case anyone has any of the older SSD's that need some good fixen supposedly these utilities do the trick where regular formats don't quite cut the cake. You'll still to have erase and reinstall or just recopy your saved image from a fresh install, but then it's like you get the drive as if it was new again.
Click to expand...

To add to that, the latest Intel firmware allows you to run HDDErase 4.0.
 
DeathFromBelow said:
The method that HD Tune and Tach use doesn't seem to work very well with SSDs. I get more accurate benchmark results from the Everest disk benchmark.
Click to expand...

Still as you can see, same HD Tune shows different results for same SSD connected to diferent southbridge on different computers. So notebooks unfortunately have speed cap, even if it is less disturbing cap than the one on new Macbooks :D .
 
This might sound odd to American readers who keep citing price as one advantage the Vertex has over the Intel, but one of the other reasons I went with the Intel X25-M is price.

Have you seen the prices of the Vertex verses the Intel in Europe? The 120GB Vertex is "significantly" more expensive than the X-25 80GB. Even the 60GB Vertex, which has lower performance specs than it's big brother, is actually "more" expensive per GB than the Intel. And in many real world tests, the Intel is faster.

Remove the Vertex price advantage, which appears to apply mainly to North America anyway, and I'd go with the X-25 (which I'm very happy with).
 
Hope you guys aren't trying to play word games here and misleading the OP.

The main point is that the Vertex has no significant price advantage over the Intel in Europe. In absolute terms, the 120 Vertex is around 50% more expensive than the Intel. In relative terms, price per GB is almost identical. And the 60Gb Vertex is clearly more expensive per GB than the X-25M.

Therefore if the Intel X25-M is superior in terms of overall real-world performance to the Vertex, the choice clear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top