Finally joining Club SSD

[NextGen_Gamer]

Interesting to say the least. Notice how my ACHI driver is different than yours. Could that be the reason for such different results?

[shiven]

Interesting to say the least. Notice how my ACHI driver is different than yours. Could that be the reason for such different results?

You think so? Maybe.. on AS SSD, I actually have a higher "final" score than you :p due to my surprisingly high 4k-64thrd read speed... And I have no idea about CDM: yours is better in every category there...

Edit 1: So the guy I'm talking to from OCZ has scared me into thinking running benchmarks ruins the drive. This is false, yes?

Since my last benchmark, I've changed quite a few settings and freed up a significant amount of space (~15GB).

Edit 2: Also, I see that on CDM you're using "100MB" on the drop down, whereas I used 1000MB on my benchmark. Would this make a difference?

[RiverCampher]

Something that constantly writes to measure the speed would obviously affect it somewhat there are write limits imposed by the SSD memory type before it begins to degrade. However, I don't think even running it every hour would have a significant impact.

I've observed differences in motherboards can cause a variance in benchmark results between the best and worst performing boards of up to 10%. E.g. - http://www.anandtech.com/show/5850/gigabyte-gaz77mxd3h-review-z77-and-microatx/5

And yes, you'll always be fighting a free space vs what games to have currently installed on the SSD if you're like me :)

[shiven]

Something that constantly writes to measure the speed would obviously affect it somewhat there are write limits imposed by the SSD memory type before it begins to degrade. However, I don't think even running it every hour would have a significant impact.

I've observed differences in motherboards can cause a variance in benchmark results between the best and worst performing boards of up to 10%. E.g. - http://www.anandtech...-and-microatx/5

And yes, you'll always be fighting a free space vs what games to have currently installed on the SSD if you're like me :)

The "shouldn't be a problem" is good to hear (On a side note, how many cycles are SSD's these days rated at? I couldn't pinpoint number with OCZ, and I've heard everything from 10,000 to 1 Million). About the space problem, I just hooked up my old 160GB WD drive, so that's going to help me out a bunch :)

[shiven]

Re-ran CDM with no results: I actually got worse results overall than last time... suspicious...

[Astra.Xtreme]

The "shouldn't be a problem" is good to hear (On a side note, how many cycles are SSD's these days rated at? I couldn't pinpoint number with OCZ, and I've heard everything from 10,000 to 1 Million). About the space problem, I just hooked up my old 160GB WD drive, so that's going to help me out a bunch :)

I think modern SSD should in theory be good for over a decade of normal usage.

There is a SSD life tester app out there somewhere that will give you a life span prediction. Emphasis on prediction, haha. :)

[Konstanov]

I would never recommend OCZ SSDs to anyone. I have opened 3 DOA drives from them within a 3 month window. Completely unacceptable their failure rate is that high for any reason.

[Noir Angel]

I thought I'd go ahead and post this on both threads of mine, since there are some people following this one. Installed SSD, enabled AHCI, and fixed my random keyboard problem. Here are some benchmark screenshots! :D

Real world performance is almost never as high as the advertised speed, which is only really ever achieved on large contiguous reads. It's also worth noting that a great deal depends on the chipset you're using, it tends to average out that the best performing SSD's are paired with Intel chipsets or SATAIII Raid cards in most top benchmarks

[shiven]

Real world performance is almost never as high as the advertised speed, which is only really ever achieved on large contiguous reads. It's also worth noting that a great deal depends on the chipset you're using, it tends to average out that the best performing SSD's are paired with Intel chipsets or SATAIII Raid cards in most top benchmarks

So I hear :( I wish I'd known that before buying an SSD; then again, it probably wouldn't have changed my mind. Anywho, I updated my drivers to AMD AHCI from MSAHCI, and here are my (hopefully final) benchmarks:

CDM:

http://i.imgur.com/6uAzT.jpg

ATTO:

http://i.imgur.com/v8EBc.jpg

AS SSD:

http://i.imgur.com/3EQSH.png

[PGHammer]

Wait, I'm confused. I didn't think PCI-E had anything to do with it?

One limitation could be the speed at which Windows leaves the source.

One thing we are forgetting is that there are exactly zero SATA-3 *optical* drives (not even BD) - that means that a Windows install onto an SSD could well be held back from maximum throughput by the source (the slow optical drive) - not the SSD.

The best of all possible sources for a Windows install (external source) are USB3 thumb drives - however, that requires a USB3 controller for best possible output speeds. Therefore, best possible Windows installation (any OS installation, in fact) tag-team is USB3 source and SATA-6.0g destination (such as an SSD). While an SSD will outperform a HDD (let alone an optical drive) of the same SATA interface type, the general rule of thumb is that USB3 thumb drives are the nearest non-SATA3.0g equivalent to either SATA 3.0 drive type (HDD or SSD), with SSDs being slightly faster, while an HDD (understandably) winning in terms of sheer capacity. While PCIe x1 USB3 controller cards can be backfitted into both desktops and most recent portable computers (the ones for portables use the ExpressCard, not Type III PC Card, interface), you simply won't get maximimized performance backfitting beyond-spec hardware in a computer designed around older-interface hardware (no SATA-6 SSDs should be used with SATA 3.0-g controllers, let alone SATA-150 controllers).

The Sandforce SF-22xx series of controllers for SSDs are still largely, at best, SATA 3.0-g-type controllers - the newer breed of competitive controller (the multi-core MCX from Samsung and Indilinx Everest 2 in particular) are true SATA 6.0-g controllers - their additional cores and increased cache working to minimize lag, just as additional cache and buffer do the same for HDDs and optical drives. Basically, MCX and Everest 2 are better horses designed for the SATA 6.0-g *course*.

What I'd like to see - One thing I still have not seen as of yet are SATA-6.0-g controller cards designed to be backfitted to older desktops and portables (basically similar to the extant USB3 controller cards from SYBA). Is there a reason that has not yet been done?