Trouble Ahead for the Intel X25-M?

I have read about this issue, however from what I read, all SSD's would suffer from this issue too. So it's conflicting what I've read so far. I have not read of any actual users suffering from this though- Are there any on this forum here??

One issue though seems to be PC Perspective... They are very close with OCZ, seeing as how they got the first Vertex review released, and in that you could see bias all throughout the review. So, until a few other review sites publish something about the issue, then it is not going to be a huge concern for me right now.

The timing of the release of this article is interesting as well. It looks like it's business as usual... :D

What bothers me is this line: "It's possible, although unlikely, that Intel will release a firmware fix that solves or reduces this issue."

How can they make a claim like that? If there's a major issue with the drives, why would Intel not release a fix- Not saying they would, but at the same time, you can't say they wouldn't. Especially since Intel was quoted as working on a fix... That makes no sense...
 
very interesting

here is mine, been using it for a few months now
gonna check into this more over the weekend

I'd content that even with reduced read/write performance, as long as it's still in the same neighborhood as a HDD, the SSD will still feel fast due to the dramatically decreased latency
write speed seems that it would be even less of a factor since you aren't doing a whole lot of writing on a OS disk

25qaaud.jpg
 
This is kind of good in a way.
Prices on these should come down drastically because of this.

If you don't care for high transfer rates but are more into lower access time and high transactional rates, then this will turn into a good buy when it falls to the $50 range, which should be by next year.
 
Wow.

So the industry has really put tech out there without any tools to remedy this issue below the file system.

Definitely won't be making the jump to SSD until next year at the earliest. Good read.
 
EnderW said:
very interesting

here is mine, been using it for a few months now
gonna check into this more over the weekend

I'd content that even with reduced read/write performance, as long as it's still in the same neighborhood as a HDD, the SSD will still feel fast due to the dramatically decreased latency
write speed seems that it would be even less of a factor since you aren't doing a whole lot of writing on a OS disk

25qaaud.jpg
Click to expand...

Some pretty significant drop-offs in there. Have you tried any of the tips from that PC Perspective article, I'd be interested in whether they work.
 
Forceman said:
Some pretty significant drop-offs in there. Have you tried any of the tips from that PC Perspective article, I'd be interested in whether they work.
Click to expand...
no, I'm gonna be doing a clean install soon, maybe this weekend and when I do that, I plan to format it with that tool
I also plan on setting up a RAM drive for the temporary internet files as well anything else I can get on there
 
Umm, with no moving parts, and every bit just as quick to access as any other bit.. Fragmentation shouldn't matter.. It's not like you Defrag your RAM is it? Only with moving parts should Fragmentation matter.
 
Don't forget, you must defrag the FREE SPACE on an SSD. This dramatically affects performance. Especially random writes. There is software to help with this, like Diskeeper's Hyperfast. It's automatically always running and keeping the empty part of the drive, well, empty. It's an odd thing to think about, but there's many threads all over the place about it.

I have run many, many before and after benches with Hyperfast. Pretty dramatic write differences.
 
Brahmzy said:
Don't forget, you must defrag the FREE SPACE on an SSD. This dramatically affects performance. Especially random writes. There is software to help with this, like Diskeeper's Hyperfast. It's automatically always running and keeping the empty part of the drive, well, empty. It's an odd thing to think about, but there's many threads all over the place about it.

I have run many, many before and after benches with Hyperfast. Pretty dramatic write differences.
Click to expand...
first I've heard of this
SSDs really are completely different than HDDs
 
Uh... Every SSD manufacture says not to defrag, pretty damn specifically in fact. You know the whole limited # of writes thing... yeah...

Oh and that fancy wear level algorithm which makes defrag completely pointless... yeah....
 
drgnfang said:
Uh... Every SSD manufacture says not to defrag, pretty damn specifically in fact. You know the whole limited # of writes thing... yeah...

Oh and that fancy wear level algorithm which makes defrag completely pointless... yeah....
Click to expand...

Wear levelling and file system defragmentation have nothing to do with each other.

Levelling = for physical block (or page or whatever they call it).

File (or free space) defrag = for logical clusters in the file system.

BTW, has it ever crossed your mind that SSD manufacturers don't recommend defragging because their confidence in the longevity of their drives is not very high? :D

After all, would you really want to put your precious data on a drive that is supposedly so sensitive that a lil ol defrag does it serious harm?

(Whether file system defrag has any effect on performance is not the issue).
 
You are absolutely right. Wear leveling is on a physical level and defragmentation is logical clusters. The logical clusters are rearanged by the wear leveling mechanism so they are not always in the same physical blocks, therefor rendering defragmentation a waste of write cycles.
 
What spaz said. Every time you defrag the algorithm just moves stuff back where it wants it anyway. The point of defragging is to decrease access time due to the mechanical nature of hard drive spindles and heads. It keeps the parts of a file within the same physical area of the disk meaning the heads don't have to move around to read/write it. This is a non-issue for SSDs.
 
EnderW said:
lol keep telling yourself that
Click to expand...

Just watch. ;)
The premium is simply not justified given the many limitations.
Once we have better and new models, the current ones will sell for nothing.

Magnetoman said:
...
BTW, has it ever crossed your mind that SSD manufacturers don't recommend defragging because their confidence in the longevity of their drives is not very high? :D

After all, would you really want to put your precious data on a drive that is supposedly so sensitive that a lil ol defrag does it serious harm?

(Whether file system defrag has any effect on performance is not the issue).
Click to expand...

Yep... and just when I was all excited about not having a moving part failing, it is turns out SSD fails just as easily. :mad:

They should at least design all SSD drives in a way that the controller is user serviceable since that's what will most likely fail first (before the cells are dead).

Defragging and wear leveling are such opposites that the discussion should be about turning wear leveling on and off for special purposes.
 
spectrumbx said:
Just watch. ;)
The premium is simply not justified given the many limitations.
Once we have better and new models, the current ones will sell for nothing.
Click to expand...

Isn't that true for all high end computer hardware? I sense a little jealousy/bitterness... :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top