Page 1 of 5 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 71

Thread: SSD's significant performance boost?

  1. #1
    PC Gamer
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    250
    Thanks
    70
    Thanked
    6 times in 5 posts
    • djglenn's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P5Q PRO P45
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 G0 @ 3GHz
      • Memory:
      • 4GB Corsair XMS2 800Mhz DDR2
      • Storage:
      • Western Digital 320GB AAKS (single platter)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire 5850
      • PSU:
      • Corsair TX850W
      • Case:
      • Antec P182
      • Operating System:
      • Win 7 PRO x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell SP2309W
      • Internet:
      • UK Online - 6Mbs actual connection

    SSD's significant performance boost?

    With SSD's dropping in price, £115 for the 64GB Samsung as featured here:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...e,2000-19.html

    Do they give a significant performance boost for a boot drive in your PC?

    I used to have a raptor that I loved for performance but hated for noise. I eventually had to ditch it due to the fact that 32GB wasnt enough for my primary drive.

    Anyone got a SSD for their PC?

  2. #2
    Welcome to stampytown! Salazaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    4,441
    Thanks
    505
    Thanked
    352 times in 253 posts

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    You've got to ask yourself whether you'd prefer to spend £115 on a 64Gb SSD which may perform marginally better but nothing you'd really notice outside of artificial benchmarks, or £70-80 on a 1Tb Spinpoint F1 or similar...
    ____
    (='.'=)
    (")_(")

  3. #3
    Seething Cauldron of Hatred TheAnimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    17,147
    Thanks
    798
    Thanked
    2,151 times in 1,407 posts

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    Remeber that raptor's wernt that good either.

    They had random access, but the density was awful, so throughput was often less than you would get on a very large drive.

    I've been using SSD's such as the X25-E and the performance difference is amazing, whilst i don't give a flying fornication about boot time, the responsiveness of the system is much better. Very complex apps open pratically instantly and have no latency when they touch the drive.

    In my media PC, as part of my advertion to noise i've got a cheapo 30GB OCZ SSD. It runs faster than a traditional drive, but isn't even in the same league as the real performance boosting SSDs.
    throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)

  4. #4
    Senior Member this_is_gav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,841
    Thanks
    175
    Thanked
    247 times in 214 posts

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    Wait until they take off. No point spending £100 now when you could spend £100 in a year and get double the performance and 3 times the capacity (total guess - I've no idea what will happen by then, but I suspect things are going to move fast in 2009).

    We say it all the time in the PC industry where there's no point in holding off updating, but I think SSDs are one of the few exceptions. Unless your wallet is struggling to hold all the notes of course, or you've got a very specific need.

  5. #5
    Technojunkie
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Up North
    Posts
    2,580
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked
    213 times in 138 posts

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    People spend an extra £200 on a cpu or gfx card for a small (percentage) benefit.

    SSDs run at similar speeds to HDDs at worst, at best they demolish them.
    In some real world usage they can be 5x faster!

    Instantly noticeable better responsiveness when sat at the PC, something that can't be said about a cpu upgrade.

  6. #6
    HEXUS.timelord. Zak33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    I'm a Jessie
    Posts
    34,491
    Thanks
    2,755
    Thanked
    2,841 times in 1,746 posts
    • Zak33's system
      • Storage:
      • Kingston HyperX SSD, Hitachi 1Tb
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Nvidia 1060
      • PSU:
      • Coolermaster 800w
      • Case:
      • Silverstone Fortress FT01
      • Operating System:
      • Win10
      • Internet:
      • Zen FTC uber speedy

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnimus View Post
    Remeber that raptor's wernt that good either.

    They had random access, but the density was awful, so throughput was often less than you would get on a very large drive.

    good post (again) by the Animus

    I have a 64 gig Raptor and it's quieter,(and latest 150 raptors are quieter again) and when it was close to empty, it was lightning fast. Bear in mind I only use it as a boot drive, for the OS and relevent installs. As soon as they get to 25% full or more, they start to slow in real life use.

    But it's not ACTUALLY faster in real life, than the first partition on a larger drive. My next full install will be on the first partition of a WD Blue/AAKS or similar, with a good platter density. Or maybe a Samsung F1.

    I AM, however, very interested in a SSD for a game drive. I already keep all my game installs on a seperate, first partition to speedup level loads, reloads after deaths etc... SSD could be awesome for that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Advice Trinity by Knoxville
    "The second you aren't paying attention to the tool you're using, it will take your fingers from you. It does not know sympathy." |
    "If you don't gaffer it, it will gaffer you" | "Belt and braces"

  7. #7
    Technojunkie
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Up North
    Posts
    2,580
    Thanks
    239
    Thanked
    213 times in 138 posts

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    The SLC samsungs seem to be on offer at novatech:

    64gb @ £114
    32gb @ £69

    http://forums.hexus.net/current-barg...gb-69-inc.html

    Though I did splash out on an intel X25-E , which is in a totally different universe to any other drive.
    http://www.behardware.com/articles/7...pertalent.html
    http://www.behardware.com/articles/7...pertalent.html

  8. #8
    Environ'mentalist Zadock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pembroke
    Posts
    1,386
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked
    101 times in 83 posts
    • Zadock's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z77
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • Corsair Corsair Vengeance 8Gb (1600Mhz)
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 500GB HD501LJ Spinpoint T, SATA300, 7200 rpm
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX HD6950 2GB
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 520W HX Series Modular Powersupply
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 64 HP
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 27" LED
      • Internet:
      • BT

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheAnimus View Post
    In my media PC, as part of my advertion to noise i've got a cheapo 30GB OCZ SSD. It runs faster than a traditional drive, but isn't even in the same league as the real performance boosting SSDs.
    Do you have that machine functioning as a PVR? I would imagine that buffering live tv would probably kill an SSD pretty fast if it was being used on a daily basis?
    ___________________________________________________________

    System 1: Case: Antec 900 Motherboard: Asus Z77 CPU: Core i5 3570K @3.4GHz RAM:8Gb DDR3 1600Mhz GFX: XFX AMD Radeon 6950 2Gb (Cayman) HDD: Samsung Spinpoint 500GB O/S: Windows 7 64bit Home Premium

    System 2: Lenovo Ideapad S205: AMD E350 APU (1.6Ghz), 2Gb 1066Mhz DDR3, Radeon HD6310 (integrated), 250Gb HDD, Windows 7 64Bit Home Premium

    System 3:Asus Eee 901: 12Gb Ubuntu 10.10 Gnome Desktop edition


  9. #9
    Does he need a reason? Funkstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    19,874
    Thanks
    630
    Thanked
    965 times in 816 posts
    • Funkstar's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte EG45M-DS2H
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83GHz)
      • Memory:
      • 8GB OCZ PC2-6400C5 800MHz Quad Channel
      • Storage:
      • 650GB Western Digital Caviar Blue
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 512MB ATI Radeon HD4550
      • PSU:
      • Antec 350W 80+ Efficient PSU
      • Case:
      • Antec NSK1480 Slim Mini Desktop Case
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407 + 2408 monitors
      • Internet:
      • Zen 8mb

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    With each memory cell being good for 100,000 writes, and wear leveling built into the memory controller, even using it as a time shift buffer isn't really an issue.

    Say you have a buffer of 1 hour, and that 1 hour of space is kept in the same place on the drive (which it wouldn't be), that means you can write 100,000 hours of buffer in that same space. That's more than 11 years of continuous buffering!

    As 1 hour of footage is about 2GB, on a 30GB SSD you have, for aguments sake, 15 unique locations for that buffer, giving you at least 150 years of continuous buffering.

    A mechanical drive is going to die will before the SSD in this case.

  10. #10
    Environ'mentalist Zadock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pembroke
    Posts
    1,386
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked
    101 times in 83 posts
    • Zadock's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z77
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • Corsair Corsair Vengeance 8Gb (1600Mhz)
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 500GB HD501LJ Spinpoint T, SATA300, 7200 rpm
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX HD6950 2GB
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 520W HX Series Modular Powersupply
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 64 HP
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 27" LED
      • Internet:
      • BT

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    Nice, contrary to what some people have been saying then? I have an Eee and people are always prattling on about the SSD wearing out from this, that or the other.
    ___________________________________________________________

    System 1: Case: Antec 900 Motherboard: Asus Z77 CPU: Core i5 3570K @3.4GHz RAM:8Gb DDR3 1600Mhz GFX: XFX AMD Radeon 6950 2Gb (Cayman) HDD: Samsung Spinpoint 500GB O/S: Windows 7 64bit Home Premium

    System 2: Lenovo Ideapad S205: AMD E350 APU (1.6Ghz), 2Gb 1066Mhz DDR3, Radeon HD6310 (integrated), 250Gb HDD, Windows 7 64Bit Home Premium

    System 3:Asus Eee 901: 12Gb Ubuntu 10.10 Gnome Desktop edition


  11. #11
    Does he need a reason? Funkstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    19,874
    Thanks
    630
    Thanked
    965 times in 816 posts
    • Funkstar's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte EG45M-DS2H
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83GHz)
      • Memory:
      • 8GB OCZ PC2-6400C5 800MHz Quad Channel
      • Storage:
      • 650GB Western Digital Caviar Blue
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 512MB ATI Radeon HD4550
      • PSU:
      • Antec 350W 80+ Efficient PSU
      • Case:
      • Antec NSK1480 Slim Mini Desktop Case
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407 + 2408 monitors
      • Internet:
      • Zen 8mb

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    SSDs wear out
    Vista was made by the devil himself
    Plasma TVs need "re-charged" after a couple of years
    Hybrid cars save the planet


    All of which are spouted about by people on thar interwebs. None of which are strictly true.

    Old flash memory cards didn't have such good write cycle numbers and lacked wear leveling so were a lot more prone to bits or cells failing. Flash memory has been around for a long time though. NOR and NAND flash technologies were both invented by Toshiba around 1980 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_memory#History). The industry has had 29 years to get it working well.

    I still wouldn't use a memory card (like an SD or CF) for applications that require a lot of re-writes though as they probably don't come with wear leveling as their intended usage doesn't require it. Pro or industrial cards may be different, but certainly not mainstream or budget cards.

  12. #12
    Seething Cauldron of Hatred TheAnimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    17,147
    Thanks
    798
    Thanked
    2,151 times in 1,407 posts

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    I don't use it for buffering TV thou, too damn small!

    Its more of a rich renderer, anything that stores data, is networked away in seperate room.
    throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)

  13. #13
    Does he need a reason? Funkstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Aberdeen
    Posts
    19,874
    Thanks
    630
    Thanked
    965 times in 816 posts
    • Funkstar's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte EG45M-DS2H
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core2Quad Q9550 (2.83GHz)
      • Memory:
      • 8GB OCZ PC2-6400C5 800MHz Quad Channel
      • Storage:
      • 650GB Western Digital Caviar Blue
      • Graphics card(s):
      • 512MB ATI Radeon HD4550
      • PSU:
      • Antec 350W 80+ Efficient PSU
      • Case:
      • Antec NSK1480 Slim Mini Desktop Case
      • Operating System:
      • Vista Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407 + 2408 monitors
      • Internet:
      • Zen 8mb

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    Buffering TV doesn't need to be big, a couple of GB is all you should need. Recording TV is another matter

  14. #14
    NOT Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    5,905
    Thanks
    412
    Thanked
    278 times in 253 posts

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    Quote Originally Posted by this_is_gav View Post
    We say it all the time in the PC industry where there's no point in holding off updating, but I think SSDs are one of the few exceptions.
    It's an exception because HDD's have been the main bottleneck of the system for ages now
    Once everyone's kitted up with an SSD and it's all the standard then you can have moan at those upgrading SSD's for faster speeds like GPU's and CPU's

  15. #15
    Seething Cauldron of Hatred TheAnimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    17,147
    Thanks
    798
    Thanked
    2,151 times in 1,407 posts

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    After we'd run one desktop on an X25-E

    Had virtually no issue getting sign off for more for my team!
    throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)

  16. #16
    Environ'mentalist Zadock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pembroke
    Posts
    1,386
    Thanks
    104
    Thanked
    101 times in 83 posts
    • Zadock's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Z77
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • Corsair Corsair Vengeance 8Gb (1600Mhz)
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 500GB HD501LJ Spinpoint T, SATA300, 7200 rpm
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX HD6950 2GB
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 520W HX Series Modular Powersupply
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 64 HP
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 27" LED
      • Internet:
      • BT

    Re: SSD's significant performance boost?

    Quote Originally Posted by Funkstar View Post
    I still wouldn't use a memory card (like an SD or CF) for applications that require a lot of re-writes though as they probably don't come with wear leveling as their intended usage doesn't require it. Pro or industrial cards may be different, but certainly not mainstream or budget cards.
    Agreed, this is why I have a 16Gb SDHC card for anything that isn't day to day. Pretty impressed with the perfomance actually, it seems to be faster than the seconday (8Gb) SSD in my Eee. That is particularly noticable when I install something via an external DVD drive.

    What you mean that vista wasn't made by the devil? ...Simon Cowl perhaps then? (next best thing).
    ___________________________________________________________

    System 1: Case: Antec 900 Motherboard: Asus Z77 CPU: Core i5 3570K @3.4GHz RAM:8Gb DDR3 1600Mhz GFX: XFX AMD Radeon 6950 2Gb (Cayman) HDD: Samsung Spinpoint 500GB O/S: Windows 7 64bit Home Premium

    System 2: Lenovo Ideapad S205: AMD E350 APU (1.6Ghz), 2Gb 1066Mhz DDR3, Radeon HD6310 (integrated), 250Gb HDD, Windows 7 64Bit Home Premium

    System 3:Asus Eee 901: 12Gb Ubuntu 10.10 Gnome Desktop edition


Page 1 of 5 1234 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 22-11-2008, 12:36 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-07-2008, 06:06 PM
  3. NVIDIA's SLI - 6800 GT Performance
    By Steve in forum HEXUS Reviews
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 24-11-2004, 08:35 PM
  4. Dissapointed with Performance
    By yamangman in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 13-05-2004, 01:10 AM
  5. Do you get an 'XP rating' applied when you o/c?
    By Austin in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 11-12-2003, 03:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •