Hmm.. Solid State Drives?
December 26th, 2013
My final build is gonna be:
Case: Cooler Master Elite 430
Case Fans: Sharkoon Silent Eagle 1000 Fan
Motherboard: Gigabyte Z68XP-UD3P
CPU Cooler: COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 Plus
CPU: Intel Core Sandybridge i7 2600k
RAM: G-Skill Ripjaws X 1600MHz 8GB
Graphics Card: Sapphire AMD Radeon 6950 HD 2GB
Power Supply: Corsair 650W TX Series
I told some friends and family, and some have suggested on getting a Solid State Drive to increase performance and especially where the Gigabyte motherboard says 4x/60% increase performance using SSD’s.
I’m thinking about getting one, but they’re expensive? 60GB is too little and 120GB is good, but expensive? From what I’ve been seeing 120GB on brands like OCZ has more failure rate than the 60GB? I keep seeing people say their SSD died 3-6 months later or didn’t work when they first bought it.
I’m thinking about getting OCZ Vertex 2 60GB for primary drive which will store games and OS. I have Two other Western Digital drives and 2 other external hard drives, so yeah plenty of storage available.
Can anyone suggest any better Solid State Drives? I don’t really want to spend over £100. But, if it is really good and doesn’t have any problems I’ll purchase anything under £130.
The reviews for the:
OCZ Vertex 2 60GB
Customer Reviews - 22 Reviews
5 star: (17)
4 star: (3)
3 star: (1)
2 star: (0)
1 star: (1)
Average Customer Review
4.6 out of 5 stars (22 customer reviews)
Please read reviews: http://www.amazon.co.uk/OCZ-Vertex-2-5-inch-Internal-Solid/dp/B003NE5JCE/ref=sr_1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1317588537&sr=1-1
OCZ Vertex 2 120GB
Customer Reviews - 27 Reviews
5 star: (15)
4 star: (0)
3 star: (1)
2 star: (2)
1 star: (9)
Please read reviews: http://www.amazon.co.uk/OCZ-Vertex-120GB-2-5-inch-Internal/dp/B003NE5JCO/ref=sr_1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1317588545&sr=1-1
My first gaming machine, so yeah. Any input and recommendation will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for reading!
i would get a bigger power supply and i would loook for a sata 3 drive
HD-Uploader replied: i would get a bigger power supply and i would loook for a sata 3 drive
That’s the first I heard that I need a bigger power supply. I also used this site that a few people recommended:
http://extreme.outervision.com/PSUEngine
Says I’m going to use around 391W, I’ll say 500W under heavy load.
Is there any pros or cons to get SATA III over SSD? I just want to compare.
OperationWarez replied: I'm thinking about getting one, but they're expensive?
Of course they are,They use different technology which is more expensive to make.
SSDs are based on flash memory while HDDs are based on magnetic platters. Also keep in mind that SSDs use the
2.5″ form factor and desktop cases use 3.5″,Some SSDs come with a 2.5>3.5″ drive bay adapter but not all,Looking
at pics on Newegg is best to determine this.
OperationWarez replied: Gigabyte motherboard says 4x/60% increase performance using SSD's.
Do keep in mind that unlike standard HDDs,The differences in read/write speeds on SSDs are very significant,You
really should notice the stated read/write speeds.
OperationWarez replied: 60GB is too little
Your not looking at it correctly,SSDs are not yet economical enough for general storage,What most people do is buy a small
SSD for their OS/Apps and an HDD for the rest,60GB is good enough for those uses.
OperationWarez replied: Can anyone suggest any better Solid State Drives?
Look into the Corsair Force GT/Mushkin Chronos ones.
OperationWarez replied: I keep seeing people say their SSD died 3-6 months later or didn't work when they first bought it.
It’s all a matter of luck,You won’t find 100% positive reviews on any SSD/HDD,And for the record,Backup is very important as
you can never predict these kinda things!
OperationWarez replied: Is there any pros or cons to get SATA III over SSD? I just want to compare.
You are quite confused,Both SSDs/HDDs use SATA,It’s a connection interface,The average mechanical HDD
doesn’t top 100-110 MB/s,SSDs can go up to 550 MB/s (depends on the model of course),For mechanical
HDDs the SATA revision makes no difference as the technology can’t fully utilize even the first
one,For SSDs it can make quite a difference (provided your motherboard support the specific revision)
HD-Uploader replied: i would get a bigger power supply
I don’t see anything wrong with the current one,It’s more than enough.
Wow, Corsair Force GT/Mushkin Chronos cost nearly £200.
Crucial M4 SSD’s. Super fast and highly competitive prices.
also more formated capacity than the vertex counterparts.
http://www.scan.co.uk/products/64gb-crucial-realssd-m4-25-ssd-sata-iii-6gb-s-mlc-flash-read-507mb-s-write-290mb-s-new-version
seem to be overdue the stock since a couple days ago.
No doubt they will come in this week.
You could save a fair bit cash on the motherboard. by grabbing a MSI P67A-G45 (B3) wich is a excellent board.
Unless you need the gigabyte board for some reason?
I would favour a GTX 560Ti over the HD6950 for physx effects etc on GPU.
jock_juffalo replied: Crucial M4 SSD's. Super fast
These are overrated,Fast on the reading but sub-standard on the write.
For comparison:
Crucial M4
———-
Max Sequential Read: Up to 415 MB/s
Max Sequential Write: Up to 95 MB/s
Corsair Force Series GT
————————-
Max Sequential Read: Up to 555MB/s
Max Sequential Write: Up to 495MB/s
Mushkin Enhanced Chronos
————————
Sustained Sequential Read: Up to 525MB/s
Sustained Sequential Write: Up to 495MB/s
Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe
——————————-
Sustained Sequential Read: Up to 560MB/s
Sustained Sequential Write: Up to 495MB/s
OCZ Solid 3
———–
Sustained Sequential Read: up to 500 MB/s
Sustained Sequential Write: up to 450 MB/s
*Speeds taken from Newegg and holds true for the drive’s intended interface (SATA 3.0/6 GB/s)*
Edit: Just had another look and seems the speed I posted on the M4 is true only in regards to the 64GB model,The 128GB has 415/175 (read/write) and the bigger capacity ones are 415/260,But still,There are faster ones as noted above.
Yes, but you can’t measure a ssd’s performance from quoted sequentual max speeds. they are useless and don’;t reflect real world performance.
The Crucial keeps up and betters in some cases the vertex 3 in real world.
Sequential write (that you will never use) has been sacrificed to gain much higher random write speeds (the write you actually use)
Same goes for read speeds. the sequential max is of no interest as you wont be reading single large files on your pc. many small files will be read/written.
If you want to compare then look here.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2011/09/08/crucial-m4-vs-vertex-3-new-firmware-face-of/1
Well,The quoted max speeds are not 100% accurate and are a little slower in actual performance,But still,The M4 is not a good
choice (value wise),There’s no reason to pay the same amount of money for an inferior product,Btw turns out the speed
I posted above was only true for the 64GB M4,Noted it on the edit,But nonetheless,It just doesn’t keep up with the competition.
Roberto400 replied: Well,The quoted max speeds are not 100% accurate and are a little slower in actual performance,But still,The M4 is not a good
choice (value wise),There's no reason to pay the same amount of money for an inferior product,Btw turns out the speed
I posted above was only true for the 64GB M4,Noted it on the edit,But still,It just doesn't keep up with the competition.
No offence Roberto but you don’t really know what you are talking about here.
Have a read through the link i posted and you will learn a bit about SSD’s
EDIT: actually that’s not the best test in this scenario as they don’t pit the smaller 64gb models against each other. wich do perform slower.
EDIT2: Can’t find a fair comparison of lower capacity models anywhere. but the same holds true. it’s all about the random read/write. not sequential. and there is not a big gap between the vertex and crucial drives in these areas.
I don’t get why your so “passionate” about the M4 when it pales in compare to the other ones I mentioned.
Maybe your trying to justify your purchase as you have it? I’m well aware that the read/write speeds vary according to file
sizes and of course that the rated max read/write speeds are always a little off,But nonetheless,The M4 doesn’t keep up with the competition.
Roberto400 replied: I don't get why your so "passionate" about the M4 when it pales in compare to the other ones I mentioned.
Maybe your trying to justify your purchase as you have it? I'm well aware that the read/write speeds vary according to file
sizes and of course that the rated max read/write speeds are always a little off,But nonetheless,The M4 doesn't keep up with the competition.
Sorry if it came over a in a bad way.
i’m trying to get the real info out there as you are looking into ssd speeds the wrong way.
Sequential speeds are put up by ssd manufacturers as the headline attention grabber as you would think it means it’s faster.
The speeds don’t vary a little. they vary alot.
the speeds quoted are irrelevant as they are sequential read/write.
What you need to look at is random read/write speeds as they are the ones that matter. you have not looked at those.
They put the vertex/crucial drives pretty close together in terms of speed.
If you just don’t know what you are looking at then yes you would think that vertex drives arte alot faster..but you would be mistaken.
jock_juffalo replied: What you need to look at is random read/write speeds as they are the ones that matter. you have not looked at those.
I know,I wasn’t arguing with that,Thought it was obvious when I wrote the following:
Roberto400 replied: I'm well aware that the read/write speeds vary according to file sizes
My point is that the M4 is still not the best of it’s class,Yes it may perform just as good with small files,But not with large ones.
The bottom line is that there is never a justification to buy a lower quality product when you can get a better one for the
same price.
Ahh i see. but most all the large files are actually containers containing many small files.
You simply wont be writing large files.
The reason i favor them is because while the speeds are really similar the sandforce drives cost alot more. so in effect for 99% of home users you pay a huge premium for a small speed difference that you wont even notice.
and you lose some capacity to boot.
I’ll shut up on it now though because it’s de-railing the thread.
Read 507MB/s, Write 290MB/s should be the headline sequential speeds for M4.
jock_juffalo replied:
You simply wont be writing large files.
Technically you would when you download em,But your DL speed will never be half as fast
jock_juffalo replied: The reason i favor them is because while the speeds are really similar the sandforce drives cost alot more
Actually,The difference is not that significant,Just had a quick comparison on Newegg:
Crucial M4 64GB $104.99
Corsair Force Series GT 60GB $124.99
Mushkin Enhanced Chronos 60GB $129.99
Crucial M4 128GB $196.99
Corsair Force Series GT 120GB $219.99
Mushkin Enhanced Chronos 120GB $209.99
jock_juffalo replied: so in effect for 99% of home users you pay a huge premium for a small speed difference that you wont even notice.
Small premium^,Your probably right on the rest but it all depends on the usage,For example,Games have a lot of large files and this
could be noticeable when installing em,And if your doing a lot of video editing it can be a plus as you quite often need to write
very large files.
jock_juffalo replied: and you lose some capacity
True,But it’s not that significant.
jock_juffalo replied: Read 507MB/s, Write 290MB/s should be the headline sequential speeds for M4.
Not according to this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&N=100006742&isNodeId=1&Description=CRUCIAL+M4&x=0&y=0
jock_juffalo replied: I'll shut up on it now though because it's de-railing the thread.
I might just do that myself,Just wanted to get my points across,But to be honest I think our friendly argument benefited
this thread,It was about SSDs after all and now the OP got all the answers he was after and more!
Roberto400 replied: jock_juffalo replied:
You simply wont be writing large files.
Technically you would when you download em,But your DL speed will never be half as fast
jock_juffalo replied: The reason i favor them is because while the speeds are really similar the sandforce drives cost alot more
Actually,The difference is not that significant,Just had a quick comparison on Newegg:
Crucial M4 64GB $104.99
Corsair Force Series GT 60GB $124.99
Mushkin Enhanced Chronos 60GB $129.99
Crucial M4 128GB $196.99
Corsair Force Series GT 120GB $219.99
Mushkin Enhanced Chronos 120GB $209.99
jock_juffalo replied: so in effect for 99% of home users you pay a huge premium for a small speed difference that you wont even notice.
Small premium^,Your probably right on the rest but it all depends on the usage,For example,Games have a lot of large files and this
could be noticeable when installing em,And if your doing a lot of video editing it can be a plus as you quite often need to write
very large files.
jock_juffalo replied: and you lose some capacity
True,But it's not that significant.
jock_juffalo replied: Read 507MB/s, Write 290MB/s should be the headline sequential speeds for M4.
Not according to this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&N=100006742&isNodeId=1&Description=CRUCIAL+M4&x=0&y=0
jock_juffalo replied: I'll shut up on it now though because it's de-railing the thread.
I might just do that myself,Just wanted to get my points across,But to be honest I think our friendly argument benefited
this thread,It was about SSDs after all and now the OP got all the answers he was after and more!
Ok i’ll brake my shut upping to answer this, if it is going to be beneficial information on SSD buying.
Main points.
1: You wouldn’t be downloading to SSD or writing large files to it because it’s not a storage drive. you install stuff on it. (loads n loads of little files)
2: in the UK it’s a huge premium. £40 on the smaller drives. (OP is linking to UK sites for his purchases)
3:You quoted the very first release drive speeds. Unlike sandforced based drives like OCZ etc who get what there given from sandforce makers. Crucial develop the marvel controller themselves and have improved it leaps and bounds. (that is why it’s now as fast as sandforce drives)
4: like you said the drive is for OS and apps. never writing large files. so having a better sequential write speed is off no use whatsoever to a buyer of these SSD’s. what is off use is having 4gb more space and a extra £40 in your pocket.
Solid points there,I admit I got a bit confused earlier,My bad.
Btw,You didn’t quote the right post.
Oh dear. it’s 3am here and i’m not exactly 100% with it.
But yes, i should have taken my time and made those point much earlier, and i probably would have if it was not 3am.
Sorry again for coming over all nerd rage.
Yes, looking at the nerd rage and small argument. Can someone translate it to English please lol!?
Is SSD worth it? Or just splashing cash for small performance? I can always get a SSD when the specs get far better and worth the value.
I’m keeping that Gigabyte Z68 board as it’s future proof for me.
OperationWarez replied: Yes, looking at the nerd rage and small argument. Can someone translate it to English please lol!?
Is SSD worth it? Or just splashing cash for small performance? I can always get a SSD when the specs get far better and worth the value.
I'm keeping that Gigabyte Z68 board as it's future proof for me.
Boot times, softwares startup times, game loading times will vastly improve.
Rest will remain the same.
Roberto400 replied: Well,The quoted max speeds are not 100% accurate and are a little slower in actual performance,But still,The M4 is not a goodSequential read/write is not what makes an SSD and SSD. It’s the IOPS and random read/write speeds. The faster sequential write/read is just something you get extra.
choice (value wise),There's no reason to pay the same amount of money for an inferior product,Btw turns out the speed
I posted above was only true for the 64GB M4,Noted it on the edit,But nonetheless,It just doesn't keep up with the competition.
Yeah i see what you guys are saying but in most sites they are not giving out random write speeds. Is there any place we can get that?
1xaris replied: Yeah i see what you guys are saying but in most sites they are not giving out random write speeds. Is there any place we can get that?Any half decent review should have that.
Love the SSD conversations, very technical and worthy of reading each time.
It’s nice to have, also in a gaming setup. Enough space to keep the main game you play on the SSD too. I have one on my TV gaming PC, where I currently play GTAIV. Putting the game on the SSD just made it load really fast and smooth. Very nice.
Squirrelman replied: It's nice to have, also in a gaming setup. Enough space to keep the main game you play on the SSD too. I have one on my TV gaming PC, where I currently play GTAIV. Putting the game on the SSD just made it load really fast and smooth. Very nice.
What SSD do you have?
That’s my old one, SATA II, a Samsung PB22-J 60GB. Read/write about 200mb/s
I took it from my main PC when I got a new SATA III Kingston Hyper-X 120GB drive, around 500mb/s
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes a SSD is one of the best upgrades you can get for you computer. Bought one, never looked back!