|
Thinking of getting an SSD soon, is the Corsair Force 3 still the recommended price/performance? I want to put win7 on it, as well as the 1-3 games I'll be currently playing at any given time. I don't know anything about SSDs though. For instance, how does it connect to your PC, SATA cables like any hard drive or something else? Also, how do you update the firmware as I've often read, is it tough to do? Thanks in advance!
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 01:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
It's just a SATA connection, and the force 3s have the most recent firmware on them already
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
I like the speed boost on my new SSD  New drive is on the left.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 02:02
|
|
|
Greedish posted:Thinking of getting an SSD soon, is the Corsair Force 3 still the recommended price/performance? I want to put win7 on it, as well as the 1-3 games I'll be currently playing at any given time. I don't know anything about SSDs though. For instance, how does it connect to your PC, SATA cables like any hard drive or something else? Also, how do you update the firmware as I've often read, is it tough to do? I posted a screenshot of benchmarks between my brand new force3 and an old drive on the precious page. Quite pleased with it so far. Mine actually was 1 firmware release behind, but the changelog didn't seem to indicate anything being fixed that I should be concerned with so I left it alone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 03:39
|
|
|
I just bought a 60gb Force 3 to use for caching. Now that I've gotten it set up I'm getting audio stuttering the first boot after I enable caching. Anyone have any ideas? Turning it off and restarting fixes things. EDIT: It was HWinfo polling. Exited that and the stuttering stopped. Rap Game Goku fucked around with this message at 12:52 on Jan 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 03:53
|
|
|
I got two Intel 320 80GB SSDs from the deal a few pages back. I put them in a RAID0 array and benchmarked the array. Total cost for the array was $160 after rebates. I chose Intel for reliability and the good deal on the drives. This is on my PC with a Core i5-750 @3.6GHz, P55 chipset, 8GB RAM, Radeon 6870 and two 1.5TB storage drives. The jump in perceived performance with the SSDs is not quite what I expected. Maybe it is more impressive on machines without as much RAM?  I read some stuff that said Intel was adding TRIM for RAID0 in their RST drivers soon. has this happened yet?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 15:49
|
|
|
You see those 4K random I/O numbers? Your hard drives did 1/40th that, about half a MB per second. Put some programs on them and start the programs. Then you'll see the difference.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
The problem is also that you got the 80GB. Below 120GB, the Intel 320 series has bad sequential write speeds (40GB - 45MB/s, 80GB - 90MB/s), and there's not much you can do about that. (I should mention, I'm using "good" HDDs as my cut off for "bad" sequential writes. Assuming "good" HDDs can manage 100MB/s sequential). However, because you've RAID0'd those suckers, they're a bit faster than a single 120GB in writes (which writes at 130MB/s), and a very healthy read speed. Yes, you didn't make the choices for the highest SSD performance, but at the same time, those numbers are going to give you decent real-world performance. This thread needs to have less benchmarks. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Jan 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 15:54
|
|
|
HalloKitty posted:This thread needs to have less benchmarks. The funny thing is how quickly you become accustomed to the speed of SSD being the acceptable default. I bought my SSD about a month ago (Corsair Force 3, 240 GB) and after a couple weeks was about to come to the conclusion that the hype was severely overrated because the speed wasn't as different as I hoped it would be. It was only when I booted up and used someone's else's rather new machine and later checked a video walkthrough of a game I was currently playing where I was astonished at how agonizingly slow everything seemed. It reminded me of how owning an HDTV for a few weeks didn't seem like that big of a deal until I saw other people's televisions which suddenly looked incredibly grainy to me to the point of distraction.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 17:24
|
|
|
 This is from one of my storage drives. Pretty bad compared to the SSD RAID array.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 17:37
|
|
|
I don't know anything about hard drives, what does each of those measurements mean? When is each of those read/write types used?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 18:56
|
|
|
Greedish posted:I don't know anything about hard drives, what does each of those measurements mean? When is each of those read/write types used? Sequential transfers are data that's all in a row. Copying a big file like a movie or zip file. The 4k transfers are copying just a 4 kilobyte chunk of data. Reading and writing small files. And then access time is the delay from when you request a sector of the disk to the time the drive can physically move the read/write head from one portion of the disk to the other. SSD's basically don't suffer from access or seek times, and are much faster on small data transfers. Your computer spends most of its time doing those kinds of tasks. But sequential transfers can happen quite often depending on your use - loading a level at the start of a game, for instance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 19:01
|
|
|
So is the Samsung 830 more reliable / a better choice than the Crucial M4? Or is it a push? Because right now I can get the M4 for slightly less than the 830. Warranty is the same, 3 years.. Crucial advertises 3 GB/sec backwards compatibility and Samsung doesn't? Binary Badger fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Jan 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 21:24
|
|
|
Binary Badger posted:So is the Samsung 830 more reliable / a better choice than the Crucial M4? Or is it a push? Because right now I can get the M4 for slightly less than the 830. Tom's Hardware says: quote:Samsung's 830-series SSDs are arguably the fastest MLC-based consumer drives available right now, generally outpacing Crucial's m4. If you look at retail prices, the 830 only commands a $5-$10 premium over the m4, which is why we consider Samsung's SSD to be a better deal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
If any of you own a Crucial SSD be sure to update the firmware to v 0007. My god, my C300 is so much faster.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 21:43
|
|
|
The only advantage now to the M4 is that it has some history in the field. 830 is looking very nice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 21:43
|
|
|
Are the OEM Samsung drives in Dell and Apple laptops the same as the 470? Does anyone re-brand the Toshiba OEM drives?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 21:45
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Are the OEM Samsung drives in Dell and Apple laptops the same as the 470? Does anyone re-brand the Toshiba OEM drives?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 22:07
|
|
|
Researching this is pretty insane, with the crashes and firmware and performance I don't understand, so I'll ask here: I'm looking for an SSD to install windows 7 on and the 2 to 4 games I'll be playing at any given time, and I want it to be pretty fast. My budget is ~$200, what can I get?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 22:23
|
|
|
You can get a nice 120 GB SSD from the very first paragraph in the very first post in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 22:24
|
|
|
Greedish posted:Researching this is pretty insane, with the crashes and firmware and performance I don't understand, so I'll ask here: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147137
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 22:53
|
|
|
Where are the main advantages the 830 has over the m4?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 00:48
|
|
|
Kane posted:Where are the main advantages the 830 has over the m4? Look like 3 posts up, it's a little faster in -most- benchmarks. It's also thinner. M4 review: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4253/the-crucial-m4-micron-c400-ssd-review 830 review: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4863/the-samsung-ssd-830-review
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 01:05
|
|
|
M4 128GB drives are $180 right now. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148525 I grabbed 2 since I think one of my Agility 1 drives (3xRaid0) is about to die. The symptoms I saw, were that last Saturday it was giving a BSOD after a few minutes in Windows. It would then not be detected every time when booting. I moved the page file and deleted a game to free up space, which seems to have fixed it. But I fear that that particular drive might be close to hitting the write limits on the drive. This is really the only issue I've had with these, PBCrunch posted:I read some stuff that said Intel was adding TRIM for RAID0 in their RST drivers soon. has this happened yet? I think that it has. I have 10.6.2.1001 for the version and I think 10.8 might be out. It says it is enabled. 
Phuzun fucked around with this message at 06:55 on Jan 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 06:26
|
|
|
its not writes dude, faulty firmware/cheap nand
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 07:02
|
|
|
When are we going to see non-OCZ drives come down to $1/GB? I know there were a few for Black Friday, but I was dumb and didn't know if I'd be employed so I didn't buy one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 19:15
|
|
|
Schiavona posted:I was dumb and didn't know if I'd be employed so I didn't buy one. After oogling at the m4 for so long, it seems the 830 has entered the mix. Whoever breaks the $150CAD for 128gb mark first, you have my money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 22:41
|
|
|
PUNCHITCHEWIE posted:If any of you own a Crucial SSD be sure to update the firmware to v 0007. My god, my C300 is so much faster. Did this last week and while the long pause in upgrading from 0002 to 0006 is a mild heart attack, getting to 0007 is like lightspeed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
What's the best free/cheap way to clone my current OS drive onto a new Crucial M4? Doesn't look like they come with any software or a kit. The source drive is a 500GB but I only want to transfer the short stroked partition of 80GB Thanks
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 22:54
|
|
|
Was there ever any evidence one way or the other as to whether or not OCZ's garbage collection on the old Agility/Vertex drives actually worked as intended as a TRIM replacement behind a RAID array? At the time the only consensus was that this certainly seemed to be something that garbage collection would do if it worked as advertised but little information was released by OCZ/Indilinx and friends as to how and when it would do this and nobody could ever produce any numbers or evidence to indicate whether it worked or not. I ask because I've got a pair of old Agility 60s in RAID0 that I've been using for a couple of years now, and I'm thinking of doing a fresh windows install soon. I was wondering if it'd be worth the hassle to break the RAID array and zero the drives while I'm out of commission.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2012 01:55
|
|
|
It is supposed to work well enough. But either way, zeroing the drives won't help; you'd have to do a secure erase.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2012 02:25
|
|
|
Hmm so I got a replacement Corsair F3 and the same thing happened. I restored the factory image for my Lenovo X120e and then after installing Windows Update I shutdown and now I don't see the drive anymore  Is there anything I can look for to see if any of my settings are busted? I'm on the newest BIOS for the notebook and the SSD and I have AHCI enabled...
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2012 05:31
|
|
|
Syrinxx posted:What's the best free/cheap way to clone my current OS drive onto a new Crucial M4? Doesn't look like they come with any software or a kit. I used Acornis True Image 30 day trial to image my OS drive and restore to the new SSD, it worked flawlessly, just had to tidy up enough that the actual data present fit inside the drive's capacity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2012 17:15
|
|
|
Was about to order the M4 when I found an email from Newegg for $10 off the Samsung 830. Grabbed that one instead based on what I read on this page and at Tom's. If anyone is buying the 128GB Samsung 830 you can get it for $189 shipped with code EMCNJHF45. It includes a copy of Ghost and a mounting bracket and cables.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 00:49
|
|
|
Syrinxx posted:Was about to order the M4 when I found an email from Newegg for $10 off the Samsung 830. Grabbed that one instead based on what I read on this page and at Tom's. Awesome. About 2.5 years ago when SSDs were becoming popular, these prices got you a mid-ranged 60GB drive. Now you get the top end with 2x the capacity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 00:52
|
|
|
I'm trying to decide between the ADATA S501 V2 and the Corsair Force 3. The extra 16GB on the ADATA for $10/less is appealing to me, but I don't know if it comes with cut corners attached. The Corsair is also prettier, but I
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 02:20
|
|
|
It looks like that A-Data is a rebadged Crucial C300. It will perform significantly worse than the Force 3 in synthetic benchmarks, but in actual use you probably couldn't ever tell the difference between the two side by side (In Anandtech's benchmarks, it adds up to a 70 second difference in the total disk time to simulate 2 weeks worth of heavy usages).
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 02:56
|
|
|
Greedish posted:I don't know anything about hard drives, what does each of those measurements mean? When is each of those read/write types used? Access time, also called Seek time: Time it takes to physically get to the file and prepare to transfer it. Hard drives have a very significant access time (milliseconds, which might not sound long but when much of the computer operates in times measured in nanoseconds, it adds up), dependent on physical location of the data, physical location of last data accessed, RPM speed of the drive, number of platters/density, etc. SSDs on the other hand have no moving parts involved, so access times are usually less than 1 milisecond for any random location. When doing large amounts of small I/Os like this, the performance of the SSDs IO controller comes into play. Random Transfer rate: How many bytes it can read or write per second, in chunks of X-size located in random areas of the drive. Running a large search on thousands of small text files, for example. Sequential rate: The data chunks are physically laid out one after the either. Imagine a large 100MB zip file for example. In fact, this is why defragmenting to speed things up has been popular for years. It takes random access (file split into chunks spread out across the drive) and turns it into sequential access. It is entirely possible for an HDD to beat an SSD in Transfer rates, yet the SSD be the better performer in realistic situations due to the faster access times. And 4KB is used because it is the smallest NTFS file size, so it is basically a worst-case scenario that can be benchmarked.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 19:48
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147137 Can someone explain to me the difference between that and this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147134 ? It looks like ones a notebook and ones a desktop upgrade kit, but does a mounting bracket (what I can only assume the difference is) warrant $100 difference in price?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2012 20:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
Traffic Reporter posted:Can someone explain to me the difference between that and this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147134 ?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2012 20:39
|
|