Interesting SSD Reliability Study - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 199 Old 07-24-2012, 06:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ilovejedd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,723
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Modern pc just feel faster.

I have a high end E8500 core2 duo system that when built was top of line.

It has 120GB sata2 SSD and over clocked 4GB ddr2 with a 3870X2 raedon card.

It was expensive back when I built it and cutting edge.

Today my $300 HTPC with a $60 g630 CPU seems light years faster.

While CPU specs are just slightly lower (the core2 is over clocked at 4.0ghz) it's obvious the modern pc is superior.

It's because of faster SSD drives and SATA3 ports today with much faster DDR3 1600mhz memory.

You don't need a cutting edge i7 today to see major performance improvements because most times the CPU is not the bottle neck.

I agree with the comment regarding SSD. Not so much SATA3 and DDR3 1600. I do a lot of CPU-intensive work so for me, there's a noticeable difference between a hyperthreaded Core i7 and a Wolfdale dual-core. However, I can't say I've noticed much of a difference for normal desktop tasks (web browsing, office, email, etc) between a Celeron E3300 3.33GHz (200 >> 266 FSB mod) / 8GB DDR2 / GT 430 / G.SKILL Phoenix Pro 120GB (SF-1200) and a Core i5-3450 / 16GB DDR3 / Samsung 830 256GB with both running Windows 7. I think by the time Wolfdale arrived, we reached a point when the CPU is fast enough that it's no longer a bottleneck for typical client desktops.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobby2478 View Post

In my case it was my FSB that was slow. I got my Dell about 5-6 yrs ago, but I got a refurbished one as it was a great deal. So even when I got it, it was already a couple yrs old at that point, but upgrade from my old machine was dramatic (old machine was about 7 yrs old). The CPU isn't that bad, 2GHZ AMD Athlon dual core, but my FSB is only 533MHZ. So stepping up to a machine with a much faster FSB (1600MHZ) in and of itself will make a huge difference.

Not to mention I'm still rocking the "Vista Virus"...

So around 2006 or 2007 then. I'll say it again, it wouldn't matter if you had gotten a top of the line PC back then. It would still feel slow by today's standards. Even a faster FSB wouldn't help.
ilovejedd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 199 Old 07-24-2012, 10:17 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,408
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 776
Right. I was explaining in typical HTPC or office standard use stuff. Web browser, word docs and such.

Any CPU intensive task will show a difference for sure.


I too have an Overclocked (at times) i7 2600k that I can certainly feel difference on stuff. Encoding a video, zipping or unzipping with winRar from SSD, and gaming show a difference for sure.

But for normal stuff- it's a non issue. The G630 I have in my HTPC is perfectly quick for that.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #183 of 199 Old 07-24-2012, 10:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,408
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 776
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobby2478 View Post

In my case it was my FSB that was slow. I got my Dell about 5-6 yrs ago, but I got a refurbished one as it was a great deal. So even when I got it, it was already a couple yrs old at that point, but upgrade from my old machine was dramatic (old machine was about 7 yrs old). The CPU isn't that bad, 2GHZ AMD Athlon dual core, but my FSB is only 533MHZ. So stepping up to a machine with a much faster FSB (1600MHZ) in and of itself will make a huge difference.
Not to mention I'm still rocking the "Vista Virus"...

Agree about the FSB.

It's all related.

A sub 3.0ghz Sandy Bridge running 1600mhz DDR3 will "feel" faster than a previous generation single or dual core even if the CPU spec is above 3.0ghz.

A close look at the CPU speed chart might even show relative same performance- but the modern machine feels faster.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #184 of 199 Old 07-27-2012, 09:54 AM
Senior Member
 
bobby2478's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Damn, so much for the "deal" on the 240GB Intel 330 SSD. I just got an email from B&H saying the price was in error and they cancelled my order frown.gif

Time to find another option now...
bobby2478 is offline  
post #185 of 199 Old 07-28-2012, 08:33 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,408
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 776
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobby2478 View Post

Damn, so much for the "deal" on the 240GB Intel 330 SSD. I just got an email from B&H saying the price was in error and they cancelled my order frown.gif
Time to find another option now...

It must be 240GB sized or larger?

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #186 of 199 Old 07-28-2012, 11:06 AM
Senior Member
 
bobby2478's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Ideally, if I can get a good deal (less then $0.75 per GB). I saw the Samsung 256 on sale for $200, but that's been on sale for about $190 before so was waiting for a better deal.

128GB should be plenty, but if I can get a good 240GB or 256GB in the $150-$175 range, I'd rather do that. A decent 180GB might be ok too.

Basically looking for the best deal on a highly rated drive. I'm keeping my eye on Slickdeals, but no crazy deals as of late.
bobby2478 is offline  
post #187 of 199 Old 09-24-2012, 06:45 AM
Senior Member
 
indio22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Chicagoland area
Posts: 396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 36
I realize this is an older thread, but I was researching the Intel 330 family of SSDs, and noticed this from an AnandTech review:

"The biggest problem with Intel's SSD 330 really stems from the limitations of its SandForce controller. Performance with incompressible (or software encrypted) data is hardly competitive. As an unencrypted OS/application drive the 330 is great, but if you're planning on using software encryption or will be primarily storing photos, videos and music you'll want to opt for a drive based on a different controller technology."

Whether or not the typical HTPC user would notice a difference - I don't know. But at least in terms of specs, if the HTPC will use the SSD to download videos, record TV, and play videos - all at the same time in some cases - seems like AnandTech thinks a non-Sandforce drive could be a better choice. Wondering if anyone here who owns the Intel SSD 240GB drive has a comment?
indio22 is offline  
post #188 of 199 Old 09-24-2012, 07:27 AM
Member
 
cshaw88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 158
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by indio22 View Post

I realize this is an older thread, but I was researching the Intel 330 family of SSDs, and noticed this from an AnandTech review:
"The biggest problem with Intel's SSD 330 really stems from the limitations of its SandForce controller. Performance with incompressible (or software encrypted) data is hardly competitive. As an unencrypted OS/application drive the 330 is great, but if you're planning on using software encryption or will be primarily storing photos, videos and music you'll want to opt for a drive based on a different controller technology."
Whether or not the typical HTPC user would notice a difference - I don't know. But at least in terms of specs, if the HTPC will use the SSD to download videos, record TV, and play videos - all at the same time in some cases - seems like AnandTech thinks a non-Sandforce drive could be a better choice. Wondering if anyone here who owns the Intel SSD 240GB drive has a comment?

99% of the users here (I assume) use an SSD as a boot drive and for frequently used programs, then use a mechanical, large capacity drive for media (or a server). Mose of us have media collections that are just too large to store on an SSD.

Plus there is very little up side to using an SSD for media. A mechanical hard drive has plenty of throughput for multiple streams of HD video.

I have 2 Intel 330 128GB drives at home, one in our laptop and one as a boot drive in our primary HTPC. I have all of our photos and home videos on the laptop. I've never noticed any issues with either drive. I thought the sandforce controller had been updated and was no longer an issue.
cshaw88 is offline  
post #189 of 199 Old 09-24-2012, 08:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
nathanddrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 900
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by indio22 View Post

But at least in terms of specs, if the HTPC will use the SSD to download videos, record TV, and play videos - all at the same time in some cases - seems like AnandTech thinks a non-Sandforce drive could be a better choice. Wondering if anyone here who owns the Intel SSD 240GB drive has a comment?

Even worst case scenario, the 330 with incompressible data is multitudes faster than the fastest mechanical hard drive available, which is more than up to the task.
ilovejedd likes this.
nathanddrews is offline  
post #190 of 199 Old 09-24-2012, 01:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ilovejedd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,723
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanddrews View Post

Even worst case scenario, the 330 with incompressible data is multitudes faster than the fastest mechanical hard drive available, which is more than up to the task.

+1. Besides, I remember the Intel 520 240GB (SandForce w/Synchronous NAND) already being faster than the Crucial m4 256GB (Marvell) in AS-SSD which uses incompressible data.
ilovejedd is offline  
post #191 of 199 Old 09-25-2012, 08:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
augerpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by indio22 View Post

if the HTPC will use the SSD to download videos, record TV, and play videos - all at the same time in some cases - seems like AnandTech thinks a non-Sandforce drive could be a better choice.

The limitations of Sandforce mentioned by Anandtech have nothing to do with those situations.
augerpro is offline  
post #192 of 199 Old 09-26-2012, 01:16 PM
Senior Member
 
indio22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Chicagoland area
Posts: 396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by augerpro View Post

The limitations of Sandforce mentioned by Anandtech have nothing to do with those situations.

Under what situations then do the limitations apply?
indio22 is offline  
post #193 of 199 Old 09-26-2012, 02:37 PM
Senior Member
 
indio22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Chicagoland area
Posts: 396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovejedd View Post

+1. Besides, I remember the Intel 520 240GB (SandForce w/Synchronous NAND) already being faster than the Crucial m4 256GB (Marvell) in AS-SSD which uses incompressible data.

But I think the Intel 520 line is still significantly more in cost than Crucial M4. For example, I think currently there is at least a $50 premium for the 240gb 520 model over the slightly larger M4 256gb model.

On the other hand, if there are two SSDs near the same price point, and one is documented to better handle incompressible files (the kind the PC will see a lot) - then why not choose that SSD? That seems to be what AnandTech was indicating - namely if you are going to be working with incompressible files on your SSD, it makes sense to consider a drive that does not lose performance with those sort of files.
indio22 is offline  
post #194 of 199 Old 09-26-2012, 02:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ilovejedd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,723
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by indio22 View Post

On the other hand, if there are two SSDs near the same price point, and one is documented to better handle incompressible files (the kind the PC will see a lot) - then why not choose that SSD? That seems to be what AnandTech was indicating - namely if you are going to be working with incompressible files on your SSD, it makes sense to consider a drive that does not lose performance with those sort of files.

That's the thing. From benchmarks I've seen, SandForce (SF-2200) with Synchronous or Toggle NAND are comparable or even slightly faster than the Crucial m4 when it comes to incompressible data and significantly faster when dealing with compressible data. Basically, whatever type of data you use, the SF SSD would be faster. The situation would be different if you were comparing, say, the Samsung 830 or Plextor M3 as those drives are faster with incompressible data than SF w/sync or toggle. Between a similarly priced Crucial m4 and a decent SF-2200 SSD, I'd go with SandForce.
ilovejedd is offline  
post #195 of 199 Old 09-27-2012, 07:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
augerpro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 1,700
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by indio22 View Post

Under what situations then do the limitations apply?

Moving large files around on the SSD (or between it and another SSD). Watching a movie requires relatively no bandwidth, neither does recording TV, or downloading videos. Or even all three at the same time. There is almost no situation most users would ever hit the limit.
augerpro is offline  
post #196 of 199 Old 09-27-2012, 07:55 AM
Senior Member
 
indio22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Chicagoland area
Posts: 396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovejedd View Post

That's the thing. From benchmarks I've seen, SandForce (SF-2200) with Synchronous or Toggle NAND are comparable or even slightly faster than the Crucial m4 when it comes to incompressible data and significantly faster when dealing with compressible data. Basically, whatever type of data you use, the SF SSD would be faster. The situation would be different if you were comparing, say, the Samsung 830 or Plextor M3 as those drives are faster with incompressible data than SF w/sync or toggle. Between a similarly priced Crucial m4 and a decent SF-2200 SSD, I'd go with SandForce.

Thanks, I appreciate yours and the other comments. The Samsung 830 SSD was actually a drive that I had my eye on, not simply due to the minor incompressible data situation, but due to many persons finding it to be a fast and reliable drive. A good deal popped up for the 830 yesterday so I placed an order.

Although, I might end up putting the 830 into my high power video editing rig where it could provide the greatest benefit, and then swap the 500GB traditional hard drive from the editing rig into my current HTPC. That will allow moving the green Samsung 2T drive from the HTPC, into the low budget server/PC for which I am also collecting parts. And I will keep an eye open for another good SSD deal down the road for my other new HTPC build. I am knee deep in parts at the moment and got my work cut out for me, lol.
indio22 is offline  
post #197 of 199 Old 09-30-2012, 03:27 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,408
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 776
Samsung 840 looks like a solid drive so far too... That is the new Samsung

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
post #198 of 199 Old 09-30-2012, 07:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lespurgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Yep,
840 is the first of the next generation of drives - about 4th generation overall I would say. The incremental improvements are getting small, but still occurring.
lespurgeon is offline  
post #199 of 199 Old 10-01-2012, 12:57 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,408
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 776
It looks improved. As does the new Plextor with toshiba 19nm NAND

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is offline  
Reply Home Theater Computers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off