SSD upgrade - SATA2?

[Kharnak]

Heya guys, I'm going to take the jump to SSD if it actually proves possible.. lol.. My 790FX GD70 doesn't have SATA2, but the performance hit is apparently so minimal I won't notice?

Either way, I found this picture

And I was wondering if that's still up to date?

It's from http://.com/our-reviews/corsair-for...antage-comparison-testing-and-final-thoughts/

If the performance hit with SATA2 isn't too big, what's the best bang for buck between these (or even something entirely different?), nothing too far above 190 dollars

Thanks for the help

 

[Dangman]

Whatever site you were planning on linking to is apparently blocked by HardForum filters.

Also, your motherboard has 8 SATA II or SATA 3.0Gb/s ports. You mean SATA 6.0Gb/s or SATA III improperly.

 

[Deleted member 88227]

Image doesn't work. Link doesn't work either.

With that being said, SSDs today have the ablity to surpass SATA2 speeds. Will you notice any real world differences? Probably not depending on what you are doing, but it's recommended to put SSD drives on SATA3 ports. However your motherboard does have 8 SATA 3Gb/s ports so you should be fine.

As for which drive to buy, I recommend this drive.
$162.99 - Crucial M4 CT128M4SSD2 2.5" 128GB

 

[Dangman]

With that being said, SSDs today have the ablity to surpass SATA2 speeds. Will you notice any real world differences? Probably not depending on what you are doing, but it's recommended to put SSD drives on SATA3 ports. However your motherboard does have 8 SATA 3Gb/s ports so you should be fine

Ummm. SATA 3 is not the same as SATA 3.0Gb/s. SATA 3 is the improper term for SATA 6.0gb/s. SATA 2 is the name for SATA 3.0Gb/s

 

[Kharnak]

Ummm. SATA 3 is not the same as SATA 3.0Gb/s. SATA 3 is the improper term for SATA 6.0gb/s. SATA 2 is the name for SATA 3.0Gb/s

That's what I thought too?

SATA-600 (SATA 3) is the 6GB/s stuff.. no?

SATA-150 or whatever is SATA1, the 3GB/s...?

Maybe i'm just retarded... But will read/write speeds and search time performance drop if I use a SATA3 SSD on this motherboard?

 

[Dangman]

That's what I thought too?

SATA-600 (SATA 3) is the 6GB/s stuff.. no?

SATA-150 or whatever is SATA1, the 3GB/s...?

Thats correct. Skillz probably got a little confused. It happens.

Maybe i'm just retarded... But will read/write speeds and search time performance drop if I use a SATA3 SSD on this motherboard?

Random read/write speeds or the "search time performance) shouldn't be affected that badly if you use a SATA 6.0Gb/s SSD on a SATA 3.0Gb/s port IIRC. However, your read and write speeds will take a hit of roughly 25%.

 

[Kharnak]

However, your read and write speeds will take a hit of roughly 25%.

Loading times will be affected by 25% too then? or hm..

 

[ivan_cro]

don't worry, you won't notice anything much. Main advantage of ssd is how they operate with small files. Sequential speeds don't matter that much, and small file r/w speeds on qd1 aren't limited by any sata controller, even sata1.

Going to sata3 controller would boost speeds allright, but so would going to intel by some small margine, and all that is really not worth troubling yourself with. Stick with what you have, add ssd and enjoy instant or at least lightning fast app loading.

 

[jwcalla]

Thats correct. Skillz probably got a little confused. It happens.

I think he just worded it in a way that maybe confused some readers. Use of the word "However" there seems to indicate that he had his stuff straight.

For the OP... I wouldn't get the Force 3 when a 120 GB Force GT routinely goes on sale for $150. It was just on sale last week I think. The sales come and go so often. You might as well get a SATA3 drive since they seem to go for the same price as SATA2 drives. And you probably won't notice a difference anyway unless you have a stopwatch out.

 

[dustNbone]

You will not be able to tell the difference at all in normal OS drive usage. You'd have a hard time telling the difference with a stopwatch. Matter of fact a good SATA 3gbps controller will probably outperform a crappy SATA 6gbps one.

 

[Aesma]

That's what I thought too?

SATA-600 (SATA 3) is the 6GB/s stuff.. no?

SATA-150 or whatever is SATA1, the 3GB/s...?

Maybe i'm just retarded... But will read/write speeds and search time performance drop if I use a SATA3 SSD on this motherboard?

SATA 1 == SATA150 == SATA 1,5GB/s that's where your confusion is. That's old school.

SATA 2 == SATA300 == SATA 3GB/s the standard for years and until recently

SATA 3 == SATA600 == SATA 6GB/s the new standard, only SSDs can benefit from it ATM

 

[engiNURD]

That's what I thought too?

SATA-600 (SATA 3) is the 6GB/s stuff.. no?

SATA-150 or whatever is SATA1, the 3GB/s...?

Maybe i'm just retarded... But will read/write speeds and search time performance drop if I use a SATA3 SSD on this motherboard?

Almost... sorry for nitpicking, but that's not exactly correct...

SATA 3.0 is the revision of the SATA spec which specifies speeds up to 6Gb/s (gigabits, not Bytes). Products are marketed as SATA 6Gb/s.
SATA 2.0 is the revision that specifies speeds up to 3Gb/s. Products are marketed as SATA 3Gb/s.
SATA 1.0 is the revision that specifies speeds up to 1.5Gb/s. Products using this revision are marketed as SATA1.5Gb/s.

8bits/byte, and since most people like to think in Bytes and not bits, some people refer to them as SATA600, SATA300, and SATA150, despite the math not really lining up so nicely -- actual speeds come out to around those numbers in MB/s.

Ugh, Aesma beat me to it... oh wait...

SATA 1 == SATA150 == SATA 1,5GB/s that's where your confusion is. That's old school.

SATA 2 == SATA300 == SATA 3GB/s the standard for years and until recently

SATA 3 == SATA600 == SATA 6GB/s the new standard, only SSDs can benefit from it ATM

 

[Kharnak]

oh wait...

GAHHH, LOL.

Thank you, I finally get it.

Now back to my final and last question, how much will it actually affect my loading times?

Will it be a difference from 15sec with SATA-600 vs 13sec with SATA-300?

 

[Aesma]

Sorry, byte/bit is a little confusing for a French speaker. For us it's either Gb or Go (byte=octet), no confusion possible.

However the maths do round up since the SATA protocol uses 10 bits per byte.

 

[Deleted member 88227]

I think he just worded it in a way that maybe confused some readers. Use of the word "However" there seems to indicate that he had his stuff straight.

Right, that's what I meant just worded it a little confusing. His motherboard does have SATA2 (SATAII) aka SATA 3Gb/s ports since he claimed it did not. According to this article he has 8 SATAII ports or SATA 3Gb/s.

I highly doubt he will notice much of a difference.

 

[tonyb]

You will notice a huge difference between the performance of a HDD on SATA II and a SSD on SATA II. You won't likely notice a difference between an SSD on SATA II and an SATA on SATA III.

Throughput is higher on SATA III, but load times (especially an OS boot) aren't throughput-constrained, they're IOPS constrained. And IOPS aren't affect as much by the SATA levels.

If you can of course, go for SATA III. But an SSD on SATA II will still rock your world for operating systems.

You won't notice any difference between an SSD and a HDD for the most part if you use an SSD to store media, like MP3s, movies, etc. You might notice a difference if you're working with uncompressed HD files though (since throughput will be higher).