SSD Thread (Benchmarks, Brands, News, and Advice)

[chevychic55]

Thanks guys

[ComicSands]

Hey guys, I'm planning to get an SSD with my new laptop towards the start of June and I have several questions/comments.

First off, the anandtech article a few pages back has the Kingston SSDNow V+ barely edging out the Intel X-25s on PCMark Vantage. Does this mean that it's better or at least comparable on daily use computing tasks?

The general opinion based on what I've read so far is that the Intel X-25 G2 is still the most recommended SSD, is this because it has higher random read/writes over the Kingston and since PCMark Vantage is still a 'synthetic' test, still performs better in the real world?

The techreport article seems to favor the Corsair Nova, but I would tend to disagree, based on the reviewer not having used proper drivers for the Intel X-25 and the poor reliability reviews on the Corsair.

Also, I'm wondering if there is a significant difference between the 160GB and 80GB Intel SSDs. The PCMarkVantage test shows the 80GB actually doing better than the 160GB on all test except music. However, I assume the 80GB will usually have more of its capacity filled, since it is a smaller drive, but with TRIM this shouldn't be too much of an issue.

Finally, the most basic issue: price. The Intel 80GB is $200, the Kingston 128GB is $300 and the Intel 160GB is $400. If my pockets were overflowing with cash, I would get the Intel 160GB and call the discussion over. But since they aren't, I am inclined to go with the Kingston, since that extra 48GB is a huge difference.

Of course, things may be cheaper with the G3 refresh later this year, which means maybe I should go with a HDD for now and upgrade later?

[Pitabred]

They will all be much, much faster than a spinning drive. Yes, if you value performance over all else, the Intel is what you should choose. But the extra capacity of the Kingston drives I would think is worth it. I find 120GB to be "ok" space-wise, especially after disabling hibernation, system restore, and other disk-eating things. I'm currently using 75GB of space on it, and that would completely fill the 80GB Intel. I am considering upgrading in the next generation or two, but not yet. The only thing I don't have on the drive is my music and movies, but that's a great thing to leave on an external drive.

[Phil]

First off, the anandtech article a few pages back has the Kingston SSDNow V+ barely edging out the Intel X-25s on PCMark Vantage. Does this mean that it's better or at least comparable on daily use computing tasks?

These real life benchmarks confirm the Kingston V+ edging out the Intel.
A look at new SSDs from Corsair, Kingston, Plextor, and WD - The Tech Report - Page 6

The random reads and especially the writes of the Kingston are significantly slower though:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3667/o...-mp-firmware/5

How much you would notice of this in real life is the question. Installing programs will probably be quite slow on the Kingston.

Of course, things may be cheaper with the G3 refresh later this year, which means maybe I should go with a HDD for now and upgrade later?

May not be a bad idea. You can get a Hitachi 7K500 250GB single platter for $49.

Or get the Intel 80GB, it's dropping below $200 now.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-016-_-Product

[DetlevCM]

Hey guys, I'm planning to get an SSD with my new laptop towards the start of June and I have several questions/comments.

First off, the anandtech article a few pages back has the Kingston SSDNow V+ barely edging out the Intel X-25s on PCMark Vantage. Does this mean that it's better or at least comparable on daily use computing tasks?

The general opinion based on what I've read so far is that the Intel X-25 G2 is still the most recommended SSD, is this because it has higher random read/writes over the Kingston and since PCMark Vantage is still a 'synthetic' test, still performs better in the real world?

The techreport article seems to favor the Corsair Nova, but I would tend to disagree, based on the reviewer not having used proper drivers for the Intel X-25 and the poor reliability reviews on the Corsair.

Also, I'm wondering if there is a significant difference between the 160GB and 80GB Intel SSDs. The PCMarkVantage test shows the 80GB actually doing better than the 160GB on all test except music. However, I assume the 80GB will usually have more of its capacity filled, since it is a smaller drive, but with TRIM this shouldn't be too much of an issue.

Finally, the most basic issue: price. The Intel 80GB is $200, the Kingston 128GB is $300 and the Intel 160GB is $400. If my pockets were overflowing with cash, I would get the Intel 160GB and call the discussion over. But since they aren't, I am inclined to go with the Kingston, since that extra 48GB is a huge difference.

Of course, things may be cheaper with the G3 refresh later this year, which means maybe I should go with a HDD for now and upgrade later?

The Intel get's recommended for its 4K speeds - sequential speeds are 100% worthless. (Excluding a storage setup)
Additionally - they've so far been the most reliable - yes they had a firmware problem where an upgrade of the firmware bricked some drives - BUT any Firmware upgrade is a risk on any device.
Additionally we know that Intel's keep their speeds and not become dead slow after a little while.

[Phil]

The Intel get's recommended for its 4K speeds - sequential speeds are 100% worthless.

Sequential speeds are important, they're just not the whole picture. Neither are 4K random speeds.

Real life performance is basically a mixture of access times, sequential speeds and I/O performance. All are important.

As you can see in the Techreport benchmarks, Intel does a lot better in the random reads, yet the Kingston V+ manages to outperform the Intel in a lot of the real life benchmarks.

[ComicSands]

Sequential speeds are important, they're just not the whole picture. Neither are 4K random speeds.

Real life performance is basically a mixture of access times, sequential speeds and I/O performance. All are important.

As you can see in the Techreport benchmarks, Intel does a lot better in the random reads, yet the Kingston V+ manages to outperform the Intel in a lot of the real life benchmarks.

Thanks for the advice. However, I do have some concerns about the reliability of the Techreport benchmarks. For most of the tests on the first page, especially the Photoshop CS2 and the gaming tests, the reviewer uses Microsoft's AHCI drivers instead of Intel's. He mentions several times that the Intel's performance would be significantly better if he had used those drivers.

My question is, overall, isn't the Intel faster (based on his review) if you take into account the expected performance boost from using Intel drivers?

Also, in his conclusion he mentions that one of the weaknesses of the Kingston is random writes. I was wondering what real-world tasks this would affect.

[DetlevCM]

Thanks for the advice. However, I do have some concerns about the reliability of the Techreport benchmarks. For most of the tests on the first page, especially the Photoshop CS2 and the gaming tests, the reviewer uses Microsoft's AHCI drivers instead of Intel's. He mentions several times that the Intel's performance would be significantly better if he had used those drivers.

My question is, overall, isn't the Intel faster (based on his review) if you take into account the expected performance boost from using Intel drivers?

Also, in his conclusion he mentions that one of the weaknesses of the Kingston is random writes. I was wondering what real-world tasks this would affect.

Pretty much loading software - opening large files, or using software that uses temp files like Photoshop.

These will need random read and writes.

[Phil]

Launching applications is mostly dependent on random read performance.

Random write performance influences installing applications.

Also applications like Firefox will often write small files to disk, which is also influenced by random write performance. However, the random write performance of the Kingston is not that bad that it will cause hick ups.

[Marecki_clf]

Funny thing: I've bought an Intel 160GB G2 on ebay last week, I've still been waiting for the delivery. I've mentally prepared myself for reinstalling my Win7Pro x64, but I've just found out that my DVD drive has died How ridiculous is that?