|
Instant Grat posted:My 530 has been showing NAND writes 5-6x higher than host writes since I got it, so honestly I am not super impressed with this supposed "legendary reliability" of Intel SSDs. Instant Grat posted:
Jesus christ stop freaking about a problem that might not even be real. In your screenshot, the "host writes" and "LBAs written" fields are 96E5, while "total NAND writes" is 1B7E. While the ratio between these two numbers is indeed about 5.5, 1B7E hex (NAND writes) is the smaller number, not the larger. Not that this means anything since who knows what the gently caress units these numbers are in. SMART doesn't force any standardization of "raw value" units. They can be whatever took the firmware engineer's fancy. The posters in that Intel community forum thread seem to have pulled some unit interpretations for these fields out of their collective asses, but I'm not exactly seeing any justification for those interpretations in that thread. If I were you I'd do a little more research on what these numbers actually mean before deciding that you have a horrible problem. At the very least, if Intel offers a tool that reports write statistics, use that instead of CrystalDiskInfo because Intel's tool should have accurate interpretations of SMART data for Intel's own drives.
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 11:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:31 |
|
|
Er, those numbers are well documented by Intel. F1 LBAs Written is a ratio of 1 raw to 32 MB of LBA writes. F9 NAND writes is 1 raw per 1 GB of NAND writes. If you check the upper part of the screenshot, these are already calculated out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:Jesus christ stop freaking about a problem that might not even be real. http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/product-specifications/ssd-530-sata-specification.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Okay then I'm dumb pls forgive my jerkpost
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
You'd think, with Samsung putting out their new PCIe 3.0 wunderdrive, that they'd decide to make a PCIe slot version of it that can work on any motherboard. All props to G.Skill and Plextor for doing it first (at least in the consumer area), but I'd be more likely to buy a PCIe drive that can be installed in legacy motherboards that wouldn't otherwise be able to boot from PCIe if it said "Samsung" on it and carried their warranty.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 04:25
|
|
|
m.2 drives can be converted to full-size PCIe with a simple slot adapter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
Yeah, I have one of those...which I can't use as a boot drive. Your motherboard needs the ability to boot from PCIe to use one of those. My Z68 doesn't have it. Until they put out a version that fools your computers BIOS into seeing that card as an AHCI-compatible device, you're SOL. The G.Skill and Plextor drives have that, but I'd rather buy one made by Samsung.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 05:48
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Yeah, I have one of those...which I can't use as a boot drive. Your motherboard needs the ability to boot from PCIe to use one of those. My Z68 doesn't have it. Can you provide model numbers/links to the aforementioned Plextor and G.Skill PCIe drives?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
Mr. Ali posted:Can you provide model numbers/links to the aforementioned Plextor and G.Skill PCIe drives? G.Skill (tested on a Z68): http://anandtech.com/show/8752/gskill-phoenix-blade-480gb-pcie-ssd-review Plextor (slightly slower): http://www.plextoramericas.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=246:m6e&catid=76:pcie-ssd&Itemid=200 It should be noted that the G. Skill gets its speed from using two 240GB M.2 in RAID 0. I also might be wrong about the Plextor drive being bootable from older motherboards - seems it's got a 'compatibility list' instead of explicitly mentioning that it can work in boards other than specific Z97 and X99s. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Jan 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
Personally I'd avoid a frankenstine solution that is the G.Skill product with multiple SATA based sandforce controllers behind some kind of RAID card/PCIe bridge. gently caress that. The Plextor also is no more compatible than the Samsung PCIe drives, all Plextor is doing is including a M.2 to PCIe adapter like the one Factory Factory linked. I'd still go with the XP941 or PM951/SM951 any day over either of these solutions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
Again, my *point* is that Samsung could certainly do a slot-PCIe interface drive with legacy boot capability far better, but evidently there isn't a large enough market for that, hence second-tier companies like G.Skill doing it by cobbling together parts and crossing their fingers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
OCZ today made a pretty massive and quiet announcement in regards to their quality efforts. Accepting a lot of the problems they had of old and also where they are right now under the vertically-integrated Toshiba umbrella. Personally I feel this level of disclosure is a game changer and going to shake up the industry at large which up until now the only figures coming out have been from oddball third parties. http://ocz.com/consumer/quality The interested bit of this is no other SSD vendor lists failure/return rates, and OCZ's goal is full product portfolio disclosure as they work to repair the damage of the Ryan Peterson and early SandForce controller days. Will be fun to watch the response from Intel, Sandisk and Samsung on this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
Keep in mind all the Samsung PCIe drives released so far are NOT meant for end users. They are sold to OEM's and SI's who put them in purpose built and fully validated systems. They have yet to release one to the channel/user market. Also by adding some kind of "legacy" boot support to a PCIe ssd means you can not use Native UEFI mode because native UEFI by definition disables all legacy hardware support. Asus has a PCIe card similar to the G.Skill one with a switch to enable legacy boot support, you can disable this if your motherboard is compatible with PCIe storage boot so you still have a choice to enable native UEFI. This is also a good solution but I don't see this coming to M.2 drives due to limited space and frankly, lack of a market since any system that has a M.2 port is a 9 series or newer which has excellent PCIe boot support. EDIT: As for the OCZ announcement... that's great but how can I trust the numbers OCZ is providing for its own drives? That announcement is barely a blip in the radar of the manufactures you mentioned. Mr. Ali fucked around with this message at 06:39 on Jan 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
dietcokefiend posted:OCZ today made gently caress OCZ forever. If I have the option of buying a "new and improved" Yugo for $12,500 or a Toyota Corolla for $12,995, I'm just going to buy the Toyota. I know it will not randomly explode while going down the highway at 70mph and I won't have to pay someone to tow it away when I'm done with it. Toshiba bought a toxic brand they can suck it up. I don't understand the concept of buying a brand that will do harm to your sales instead of leaning on the Toshiba brand. Even going with the Desk Star (google "death star hard drive") brand is a better option at this point than reviving the zombie corpse that is OCZ.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
Toshiba doesn't really have any major consumer footprint to lean on right now which is why they picked up OCZ that already had channel recognition. The branding aspect is one that will take a long time to repair, but OCZ old and OCZ new are really two completely separate entities at this point. The numbers will be fun to dig into as more gets published, but they are going into an open disclosure model which in this industry is something noone has done to this point. How well it plays out is yet to be seen, but its more than just a blip for the guys mentioned. It was one of the few cards they had left to repair the damage done. In regards to the Deskstar or DeathStar, HGST after picking that stuff from IBM has also come a long way and ranks as probably one of the most reliable brand offerings in the HDD space... so things can be repaired with time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
dietcokefiend posted:In regards to the Deskstar or DeathStar, HGST after picking that stuff from IBM has also come a long way and ranks as probably one of the most reliable brand offerings in the HDD space... so things can be repaired with time. HGST was sold to WD and Toshiba. Those two and Seagate are all that's left in HDD space. Buying OCZ was Toshiba's attempt to stay relevant in the SSD space. Though they probably should have dropped the name, there are still a ton of people who would recommend OCZ over Samsung simply because they don't know any better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 10:34
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:gently caress OCZ forever. http://anandtech.com/show/8851/ocz-suite-tour-vector-180-jetexpress-pcie-nvme-controller-zdrive-6000 quote:In regards to reliability there were indeed some products from the previous organization which used third party controllers and exhibited issues, and the fixes often took a long time due to inability to control the firmware source. There were also some problem products like those in the Octane and Petrol Series that over time exhibited a 6.4% return rate nearly 3 years ago. Much too high, and certainly not acceptable. A lot of this was the driving motivation for the organization, even prior to becoming part of Toshiba, to make great investments in new processes from design through manufacturing, as well solidifying the need to vertically integrate to control everything from the asic through the firmware.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
That's not going to bring back the $300 I wasted on a Vertex 2.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
Guess im in the never had problems with my vertex 2 club?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:Guess im in the never had problems with my vertex 2 club? I put mine in a laptop and it died on the way home from work. The RMA died at work. The second RMA died in my desktop when I had a power outage. The Intel 330 I replaced it with is still working wonderfully. Edit : the RMAs were all those lovely second versions of the Vertex 2 that lied about their capacity. Spermanent Record fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Jan 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Xenomorph posted:Everything has been defaulting to partition alignment at sector 2048 (1 MiB) for a while (Windows, Linux, etc). However, the SD Association wants partitions to start at sector 8192 (4 MiB). Has no one anything to say about this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
I understand that they bought a toxic asset with the intention of pushing the reset button on the bad PR counter, I'm saying I disagree with the whole plan. OCZ was due for a Shinola style brand revival in about 2060, maybe as some sort of brand brain implant brand, not an Ebola-stricken zombie brand with one foot in the grave, revived for one last lap around the CES showroom floor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
I'm hoping maybe I can get some help here, I've tried googling around looking for people with similar issues but come up empty handed; maybe my google-fu isn't what it once was. Anyone have any advice for getting an SSD with a fresh install of Win 8.1 to boot along side a second HDD with a copy of win 7 on it? If I disconnect my HDD Win 8.1 will boot just fine, with the HDD connected win 8.1 crashes while trying to boot. Win 7 will boot just fine with the SSD with Win 8.1 just fine, what am I missing? I'm trying to boot from my newly installed Samsung 840evo 128g which I did a fresh install on following the guidelines on the first page of the thread, while still having my old 1TB WD HDD with Win 7 connected so I can browse my old files from within Win 8 before finally Wiping the old HDD. I've played with all of the bios settings I can think of and no luck. Like I said, Win 7 will boot just fine with the SSD connected so long as I set the boot priority correctly in the BIOS, Win 8 however will not unless I completely disconnect the power / sata cable from my old HDD.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
I saw people had nightmares updating their Samsung Magician software to 4.5, so I've held off. Should I just update now, or wait until a newer version pops up you think?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
Alan_Shore posted:I saw people had nightmares updating their Samsung Magician software to 4.5, so I've held off. Should I just update now, or wait until a newer version pops up you think? I haven't had any issues with 4.5 personally so I'd say go for it. You can probably downgrade if you need to?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Alternative viewpoint: within an hour of upgrading to 4.5 I experienced loss of performance, BSOD, and finally a bricked drive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Alan_Shore posted:I saw people had nightmares updating their Samsung Magician software to 4.5, so I've held off. Should I just update now, or wait until a newer version pops up you think? I still haven't updated until I stop being lazy about backing things up just in case something decides to mess up, as it has apparently for some.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
4.4 caused BSODs for me. Gone when I updated to 4.5 Who knows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Diametunim posted:I'm hoping maybe I can get some help here, I've tried googling around looking for people with similar issues but come up empty handed; maybe my google-fu isn't what it once was. Anyone have any advice for getting an SSD with a fresh install of Win 8.1 to boot along side a second HDD with a copy of win 7 on it? If I disconnect my HDD Win 8.1 will boot just fine, with the HDD connected win 8.1 crashes while trying to boot. Win 7 will boot just fine with the SSD with Win 8.1 just fine, what am I missing? Problem solved, sometimes its easier to just format both drives and start with a clean slate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
I just won a Thinkpad x230 on ebay. Its coming with a 320GB HDD which I might remove: It has mSATA slot. I'm looking at a 500GB Samsung 840 Evo, would it make any difference to performance if I get an mSATA vs normal SATA version? Price is pretty similar. Hope I'm reading the OP right that the 840 evo firmware bug is fixed now. I'm thinking the 2.5" is more likely to be useable in a future machine, whereas the mSATA will let me keep a 2nd disk for data. Edit: I run Linux exclusively, so if there's any downside to this drive when not using windows let me know. Happy to consider alternatives. wooger fucked around with this message at 17:46 on Jan 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
In the X230 the mSATA slot is only 3gbs (SATA 2) as opposed to 6gbs (SATA 3) Will you notice? probably not. I'd go with the mSATA drive and like you said, keep the other bay for a 500gb or 1tb platter drive You can always get an mSATA to SATA adapter to use the drive in another laptop or desktop, they are only a couple bucks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Is there any benefit to running defrag programs on SSDs?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:Is there any benefit to running defrag programs on SSDs? If you consider using up write cycles, shortening the life of your drive for no performance gain to be a benefit then yes. Lots of benefits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Any reasonably good SSD will not get any benefit from a defrag. Certain extremely slow SSDs can benefit, but these are also the SSDs most likely to have limited write endurance and thus have their lifetime severely shortened by regular defrags.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:In the X230 the mSATA slot is only 3gbs (SATA 2) as opposed to 6gbs (SATA 3) Yup I read that 3Gbps thing too. Didn't know adapters were so easy to get, mSATA seems more sensible in light of that. There's actually a pretty decent price differential between the msata and data versions of the 840 evo (£20-£30), the sata being cheaper at £170 approx . Anandtech's latest guide suggests the Crucial M500 as the best mSATA choice, which I can get for £170. Any reason why that's foolish? UK prices are horrific compared to the U.S., and I missed some deals.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:Is there any benefit to running defrag programs on SSDs? Windows 7 and Windows 8 both do trim instead of defrag on ssd's.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
Don Lapre posted:Windows 7 and Windows 8 both do trim instead of defrag on ssd's. According to this, Windows 8/8.1 does perform defrag on SSD's when System Restore is enabled. http://www.hanselman.com/blog/TheRealAndCompleteStoryDoesWindowsDefragmentYourSSD.aspx TLDR; For this reason, supposedly... "Additionally, there is a maximum level of fragmentation that the file system can handle. Fragmentation has long been considered as primarily a performance issue with traditional hard drives. When a disk gets fragmented, a singular file can exist in pieces in different locations on a physical drive. That physical drive then needs to seek around collecting pieces of the file and that takes extra time. This kind of fragmentation still happens on SSDs, even though their performance characteristics are very different. The file systems metadata keeps track of fragments and can only keep track of so many. Defragmentation in cases like this is not only useful, but absolutely needed."
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
Diviance posted:According to this, Windows 8/8.1 does perform defrag on SSD's when System Restore is enabled. Well there ya go
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
How much of a pain in the rear end is migrating to an SSD when your boot platter drive is separated into a boot partition and a storage partition?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 12:31 |
|
|
It's easy. You migrate the partition on to your SSD using your chosen software and select the SSD as your boot device. You can then keep the HD partition as a backup or delete the partition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 07:24
|
|
