Kingston v+ ssd vs intel x25m g2 ssd

[howareu]

Im having a big dilema over weather to get the kington v+ 128gb ssd or intel x25m 80gb ssd

the intel ssd is the best performing ssd on the market while kingston offers 128gb for £210 at average speeds

would there be noticible difference between this 2 drives performance wise?

and which one is the better choice

at the moment my OS partition is 97gb so 80gg(74.4gb) is kinda lowish for me atm

[kalniel]

What's your usage scenario?

[howareu]

What's your usage scenario?

win 7
MS office 07
autocad 2006
firefox
and GAMES

[kalniel]

Boot times will be similar, big application and level load times will be similar. The kingston will be slower when it comes to system responsiveness and small/random operations, so launching small applications while windows is still loading or firefox for example. Both will seem a lot faster than a hard drive, so while you might be able to notice the difference if you compared them back to back, you probably wouldn't tell the difference if you were only comparing each of them to a mechanical hard drive.

[howareu]

Boot times will be similar, big application and level load times will be similar. The kingston will be slower when it comes to system responsiveness and small/random operations, so launching small applications while windows is still loading or firefox for example. Both will seem a lot faster than a hard drive, so while you might be able to notice the difference if you compared them back to back, you probably wouldn't tell the difference if you were only comparing each of them to a mechanical hard drive.

would there be a massive difference in responsiveness between this 2 ssd

[kalniel]

But would games load much faster?

Define 'much'

Games would usually load about 33% faster for either SSD compared to a mechanical drive. Some games will load even faster with the Intel, but not by much and not all games.

[howareu]

Define 'much'

Games would usually load about 33% faster for either SSD compared to a mechanical drive. Some games will load even faster with the Intel, but not by much and not all games.

and would intel be much more responsive than kingston?

[kalniel]

and would intel be much more responsive than kingston?

You'd notice it if you were comparing them back to back, especially if they were relatively full, but if you were comparing them each to a hard drive then no, you probably wouldn't notice it.

[smargh]

Use TreeSize Free to determine what's taking up the 97GB. I don't game much, and my Win7 OS-only SSD drive is using 18.2 gigs.

I know that some games can use a huge amount of space for cached install files - I think Crysis was a serious offender last time I installed that. VMWare also uses %temp% for copied & pasted files, which can use up a lot of space - my %temp% is now hosted on a Velociraptor, as is the 8GB OS pagefile.

[howareu]

Use TreeSize Free to determine what's taking up the 97GB. I don't game much, and my Win7 OS-only SSD drive is using 18.2 gigs.

I know that some games can use a huge amount of space for cached install files - I think Crysis was a serious offender last time I installed that. VMWare also uses %temp% for copied & pasted files, which can use up a lot of space - my %temp% is now hosted on a Velociraptor, as is the 8GB OS pagefile.

i actually havnt used all of my 97gb on my main partition

[GoNz0]

intel

[nibbler]

Can someone explain to me again why it's useful to creat a partition for OS?

[kalniel]

Can someone explain to me again why it's useful to creat a partition for OS?

There's no performance benefit if you have a decent defragmentation strategy, but it makes it easier to reinstall OS by nuking the partition and leaving the remainder of your data intact.

[smargh]

Can someone explain to me again why it's useful to creat a partition for OS?

If you fill up the space on your larger working partition, your OS will still be functioning. That's the main reason it's done on server systems - runaway logfiles etc. However, typically a small server would have the OS on two drives in RAID 1.

It also simplifies backup & restore processes if your OS has issues.

If you're thrashing your (also RAIDed) data disks, your OS would still be tootling along fine and remain responsive.

On home systems, my personal preference is for an SSD OS drive for reliability and responsiveness, with non-essential data on large traditional hard drives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_partitioning

[howareu]

Can someone explain to me again why it's useful to creat a partition for OS?

in my case my biggest partition holds all my important files while my OS partition holds my OS and if i want to reinstal my OS i can reformat my OS partition without touchin my valuable files

[Antagram]

Regarding partitions, can someone answer this relating to SSD's if this is true.

Does SSD perform deteriorate as they get nearer full capacity?

If above is true, does having one partition nearly full affect the whole SSD performance or just the partition that's nearly full?

I was considering the V-series 128GB for £198. But the V+ at £210 might be a better option.