or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › New Vector SSD looks very interesting. Is this the BEST NEW SSD for 2013 ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Vector SSD looks very interesting. Is this the BEST NEW SSD for 2013 ? - Page 2

post #31 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Are you talking about unzipping a winrar file or whatever ???? You would have to download or have located your files on this drive first to see the benefit. The size is the problem here.
I use a dual 1TB in RAID 0 array - it does about 160/MB reads according to my terracopy when pasting to SSD. It's fast enough for me- while providing me a 2TB scratch disk.
I wonder if Intel SSD cache could help or not ?????

Yes, unrar a 15GB .iso on a HDD and it takes nearly 3min. Using an SSD instead I'm certain that would be halved at least. I normally use a single download drive where everything is processed and extracted, then shifted over somewhere else. An SSD would be a big boost. I'm leaning to Samsung's 840 Pro 128GB.
post #32 of 212
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiddles88 View Post

Yes, unrar a 15GB .iso on a HDD and it takes nearly 3min. Using an SSD instead I'm certain that would be halved at least. I normally use a single download drive where everything is processed and extracted, then shifted over somewhere else. An SSD would be a big boost. I'm leaning to Samsung's 840 Pro 128GB.

Personally I'd run out of room with only 128GB as a scratch disc. I'd need much bigger which makes SSD a bad choice for.

I am curious if I could use Intel SSD cache and use a spare 60GB Vertex2 I have laying around to boost my HDD speeds... and run it on a RAID0 array.

Anyone know if you can boost a RAID0 drive array with Intel SSD cache ???
post #33 of 212
I think its funny how there is one specific benchmark, which even is very very far from real-world usage (64 threads accessing the disc actively at the same time, really?), and it gets used to represent the whole drive.
Heck, Mfusick picked the two or three benchmarks where it scored #1 and left out all the others. Way to be objective dude. wink.gif

In total summary, its about the same speed as the Samsung 840 Pro (and the same price segment, too), so it really is nothing new and groundbreaking as Mfusick makes it out to be. Samsung already set the speed, others are just catching up, with a few advantages in some areas, and disadvantages in others, as is always the case. Its faster then last generations drives, would be sad if we didn't move forward in tech, but its not a magic bullet. tongue.gif
post #34 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by cybrsage View Post

Would you notice 51% faster?...............

Does this mean I can watch a 2 hour movie in an hour?
post #35 of 212
No that would just be 50% faster - this is much better smile.gif
post #36 of 212
Thread Starter 
Another review up on Tomshardware:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/vector-ssd-review,3358-10.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomsHardware 
While OCZ faces down the rest of its competition with admirable gust, the Vector is more importantly a notable improvement over the Marvell-based drives that emerged after OCZ stopped introducing new SSDs with SandForce controllers. Although the Vertex 4 was already approaching the limits of a SATA 6Gb/s interface, the Vector goes even further to improve sequential read and write performance.
post #37 of 212
I really don't understand why SSD speeds matter at all for general use including HTPC use. The chance of noticing any difference from one SSD to another is very low. Hard drives used to be the major bottleneck in your system, so speed was actually important. With SSDs you're likely to encounter bottlenecks elsewhere.

I remember when I upgraded from an Intel X25-M to a Crucial M4 there was absolutely no noticeable difference, even though the M4 was considered a speed demon at the time. IMO, just buy the least expensive SSD that doesn't have any known reliability problems.
post #38 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by lockdown571 View Post

I really don't understand why SSD speeds matter at all for general use including HTPC use. The chance of noticing any difference from one SSD to another is very low. Hard drives used to be the major bottleneck in your system, so speed was actually important. With SSDs you're likely to encounter bottlenecks elsewhere.

I would tend to agree, but unfortunately I don't have the budget to experiment. For my main computer I'm using a rather old computer with an SSD and it will load Chrome, Windows Mail and Outlook with a rather large PST file extremely fast, even while the other startup programs are still loading. If I were doing that on a moderately high end computer built in the past year it would be even faster doing those tasks, probably under 1 second.
post #39 of 212
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karyk View Post

I would tend to agree, but unfortunately I don't have the budget to experiment. For my main computer I'm using a rather old computer with an SSD and it will load Chrome, Windows Mail and Outlook with a rather large PST file extremely fast, even while the other startup programs are still loading. If I were doing that on a moderately high end computer built in the past year it would be even faster doing those tasks, probably under 1 second.

Right. As the speed of the overall system increases- and the demands of the end user increase it's much more of an issue.

The Vector being at the performance level it's at is appropriate for a high end build. It's more expensive than a cheapo SSD drive so it's not appropriate for a budget build.

In the context of this forum and average $500 HTPC's -it's probable overkill and under appreciated.

In the context of say an i7 based performance desktop, gaming rig, or workstation- I think it's highly appropriate and it's advantages are more appreciated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lockdown571 View Post

I really don't understand why SSD speeds matter at all for general use including HTPC use. The chance of noticing any difference from one SSD to another is very low. Hard drives used to be the major bottleneck in your system, so speed was actually important. With SSDs you're likely to encounter bottlenecks elsewhere.
I remember when I upgraded from an Intel X25-M to a Crucial M4 there was absolutely no noticeable difference, even though the M4 was considered a speed demon at the time. IMO, just buy the least expensive SSD that doesn't have any known reliability problems.

It seems like the Vector is approaching on the limitations of the SATA interface. That's impressive. I am wondering if there with be a SATA4 coming out soon ????

I agree that on a budget build- or a basic use PC it's not a big deal. However- There is plenty of people with very high end PC's and even high end HTPC's that might want it's performance benefits.

It's sometimes hard to judge these things from and outside perspective because I think everyone puts their own personal situation into the mix and individuals are all different.

If I was very wealthy- I wouldn't think twice about spending a little extra on one of these bad boys just to make sure I have a very high level of performance. Flip side- If I was budget constrained I'd quickly and easily look for a lower performance and cheaper alternative.

It's interesting to me to see the negative reaction of many folks here towards this new drive- seemingly because it's "too good" or viewed as "overkill" and "not needed"- as well as the idea of it not being significantly noticeable real world in a basic HTPC environment. To me- I think if anything drives like this are great because it's going to push the bar higher on general SSD performance and it's going to make cheaper the less SSD's and limit the price premium commanded at retail. I think the greatest side effect of this drive, and the SamsungPro- are that they are going to be pushing down the prices of lesser SSD's- which are more applicable in a basic HTPC budget build.

I'll sign up all day to be able to purchase 128GB SSD's that now cost $100 for $59 in a couple months. Your going to see drives like Vertex4, CrucialM4, Samsung840, dropping further in price I think. Why would you buy one if you can get a 128GB Vector for near the price and a longer 5 year warranty ??? Only logical answer would be a personal distrust of OCZ or a preference for another brand. That might make sense on individual levels. Other than that- There isn't one. So it's almost obvious to me the positive benefits of SSDs like the new Samsung840Pro and the Vector are two fold. First- They will increase the general performance level of SSD's and force other MFG to improve their products to keep up AND/OR secondly cause the other MFG's to decrease prices of their lesser drives to provide a reasonable value proposition for the consumer and maintain sales.

Love it or hate it-- I think it's good news for SSD's in general. The negative reaction surprises me as there is clear benefits in it's existence beyond simply owning one personally.

For my desktop I am looking at this one possibly next year and also possibly the Samsung840Pro. There has been a few threads about the Samsung840's dieing or failing at overclockers and Anandtech- so I'll keep an eye out on that. Also keep an eye out on how the reliability of this new Vector turns out. Assuming no other new entries into the market- it's going to be the decision between these two I will make next year when I upgrade I think.
Edited by Mfusick - 11/28/12 at 9:31am
post #40 of 212
Mfusick, I can assure that I am not annoyed at the prospect of faster SSDs. Faster for the same price is always better. I just don't think it's particularly exciting at this point in time. The subsequent fall in price of slower SSDs is though.
post #41 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by lockdown571 View Post

I remember when I upgraded from an Intel X25-M to a Crucial M4 there was absolutely no noticeable difference, even though the M4 was considered a speed demon at the time. IMO, just buy the least expensive SSD that doesn't have any known reliability problems.

+1

I recently upgraded my Crucial M4 64gb drive to a Samsung 840 Pro 128gb drive & really don't notice any difference in normal day to day usage even though the benchmarks are much faster with the Samsung drive. Windows updates & programs seem to install slightly faster which may be partly attributable to the faster write speeds in general of larger SSDs. This is on a fairly fast system too (i3-3225, 4gb ram, Asus P8H77-M, Win 7.)

Benchmark numbers for SSDs simply don't translate to real world performance. The random 4k reads & writes for my Crucial M4 64gb drive are 40k IOPS & 20k IOPS respectively. The Samsung 840 Pro 128gb drive's numbers are 97k IOPS & 90k IOPS respectively. With benchmark numbers 2-4x faster you'd think there would be a noticeable difference, but there isn't. I bought the Samsung drive because I wanted a larger drive & that was my excuse to get a new toy so I'm not really disappointed.
post #42 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by tawd1992 View Post

+1
I recently upgraded my Crucial M4 64gb drive to a Samsung 840 Pro 128gb drive & really don't notice any difference in normal day to day usage even though the benchmarks are much faster with the Samsung drive. Windows updates & programs seem to install slightly faster which may be partly attributable to the faster write speeds in general of larger SSDs. This is on a fairly fast system too (i3-3225, 4gb ram, Asus P8H77-M, Win 7.)
Benchmark numbers for SSDs simply don't translate to real world performance. The random 4k reads & writes for my Crucial M4 64gb drive are 40k IOPS & 20k IOPS respectively. The Samsung 840 Pro 128gb drive's numbers are 97k IOPS & 90k IOPS respectively. With benchmark numbers 2-4x faster you'd think there would be a noticeable difference, but there isn't. I bought the Samsung drive because I wanted a larger drive & that was my excuse to get a new toy so I'm not really disappointed.

Excellent post.

That was precisely my point early on in this thread.
post #43 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

It seems like the Vector is approaching on the limitations of the SATA interface. That's impressive. I am wondering if there with be a SATA4 coming out soon ?

SATA III was really only introduced because SSDs were pushing the limits of the SATA II interface. It is funny that all the magnetic drive makers started rolling out SATA III versions of their drives as well.


Also, the more I hear of your workstation builds, the more I wonder what the heck you do with all that horsepower?

I think you could probably handle a couple households full of LTSP terminals from your workstation link
post #44 of 212
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SawThisOnAnotherForum 
I will just leave this here.

From Intel ITC 2012 Athens Greece

intelitc2012ssd1a.jpg
post #45 of 212
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Slayer View Post

SATA III was really only introduced because SSDs were pushing the limits of the SATA II interface. It is funny that all the magnetic drive makers started rolling out SATA III versions of their drives as well.
Also, the more I hear of your workstation builds, the more I wonder what the heck you do with all that horsepower?[/URL]

Whats the point in buying a corvette when the speed limit is 65?

How come people build hot rod cars with 600 horsepower when you don't need that?

I spend a good deal of my free time on my PC as an enthusiast. I surf the net while doing other stuff. Right now AVS is on my left 23" monitor, but behind that there is two sessions of MakeMKV running ripping blu rays to my Hitachi HDD. On my right monitor i am unzipping a few winrars- and running handbrake to convert a disney movie for my wifes Iphone. I will probably open a game of Command and Conquer in a second while these processes complete in the background before I return to AVS.

The way I use a PC- I can tell a difference. I can certainly tell a difference between my work PC (Asus LGA775 Core2 Duo E8500 3.16ghz, 4 GB DDR2 800mhz, Sata3 120GB SSD) and my i7 desktop at home. It's very obvious.

I am a super impatient personality type- and the faster PC allows me to do more and get off it faster. Waiting is an unbearable thing for me. Clicking a program - I want it instantly to do what I want it to do. Any lag is simply unacceptable. I am jealous of people that don't know better and sit and watch and wait patiently for the PC to do the task. Personally I can't operate a HDD based OS PC. I just go nuts.

I've built 25 PC's this year of various prices and levels of performance. While perhaps in a basic HTPC an ordinary user might not not notice much difference, I can assure you I certainly can tell a difference.

I was blown away by the speed improvement in RAID0 SSD array. If I could have figured out TRIM on my Z68 I would have kept it. It was black and white faster to me.

There is a difference between an ordinary user and an enthusiast.

If all I did was surf the web and play back movies-- I probably would not notice either.
post #46 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Whats the point in buying a corvette when the speed limit is 65?
How come people build hot rod cars with 600 horsepower when you don't need that?

I didn't intend any offense, I was just curious if I was missing out on something that really needed the extra oomph
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I can certainly tell a difference between my work PC (Asus LGA775 Core2 Duo E8500 3.16ghz, 4 GB DDR2 800mhz, Sata3 120GB SSD) and my i7 desktop at home.

Based on the usage you described, you're probably noticing a bottleneck in the memory bandwidth of Core2 with 800 MHz DDR2 RAM.
Even Core2 with DDR3 1333 would provide a noticeable difference in high multitasking

Makemkv and web browsing shouldn't be ram intensive. Dump Firefox, Safari, or Opera for Chrome and web browser resources are miraculously managed! Don't know if Firefox memory leakage is fixed, but I don't care to go back and check. I'm too used to chrome now
post #47 of 212
Thread Starter 
I use chrome with Firefox simultaneously... on dual screens. Both are good.

Your right about the memory thing.

I notice the speed most in high multitasking, launching games, and encoding... I guess is the short answer.
post #48 of 212
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Slayer View Post

I didn't intend any offense, I was just curious if I was missing out on something that really needed the extra oomph
Based on the usage you described, you're probably noticing a bottleneck in the memory bandwidth of Core2 with 800 MHz DDR2 RAM.
Even Core2 with DDR3 1333 would provide a noticeable difference in high multitasking
Makemkv and web browsing shouldn't be ram intensive. Dump Firefox, Safari, or Opera for Chrome and web browser resources are miraculously managed! Don't know if Firefox memory leakage is fixed, but I don't care to go back and check. I'm too used to chrome now

And ... Certainly no offense taken biggrin.gif

I am not the sensitive type.
post #49 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

It seems like the Vector is approaching on the limitations of the SATA interface. That's impressive. I am wondering if there with be a SATA4 coming out soon ????

High-end SSDs have been at the limit for a while now, at least in sequential performance, it didn't particularly increase with the Vector (maybe for OCZ, but not in the grand scheme of things). There is still a lot of room for random read/writes before it'll reach the limit, though.

The next thing is rumored to be called "SATA Express", sporting up to 16Gbps (1.6 GB/s) (up from the 6Gbps (600 MB/s) in SATA III). SATA Express is essentially a direct PCI Express connection for the SATA device, so the controller middle-man is cut out - a cheaper version to build PCI Express SATA drives, and ones that don't need a full PCI Express slot.
Earliest for this to be commercially available is most likely 2014 however (and of course it needs a new motherboard, or add-in card at least - and breaks backward compat)

PS:
Before anyone complains that 16Gbps are not 1.6 GB/s, there is also 8b/10b coding used that limits the actual usable bandwidth.
Edited by Nevcairiel - 11/28/12 at 11:24pm
post #50 of 212
What, SATA-Express isn't L337 enough for 128b/130b encoding?
I demand a refund!!!
post #51 of 212
To be honest, i couldn't find any information if SATA Express also moved to the 128b/130b encoding used for PCI Express 3.0, sources are rather unspecific on this, but its well over a year until availability, so we'll find out.
post #52 of 212
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevcairiel View Post

High-end SSDs have been at the limit for a while now, at least in sequential performance, it didn't particularly increase with the Vector (maybe for OCZ, but not in the grand scheme of things). There is still a lot of room for random read/writes before it'll reach the limit, though.
The next thing is rumored to be called "SATA Express", sporting up to 16Gbps (1.6 GB/s) (up from the 6Gbps (600 MB/s) in SATA III). SATA Express is essentially a direct PCI Express connection for the SATA device, so the controller middle-man is cut out - a cheaper version to build PCI Express SATA drives, and ones that don't need a full PCI Express slot.
Earliest for this to be commercially available is most likely 2014 however (and of course it needs a new motherboard, or add-in card at least - and breaks backward compat)
PS:
Before anyone complains that 16Gbps are not 1.6 GB/s, there is also 8b/10b coding used that limits the actual usable bandwidth.

Very interesting.

Thanks for this excellent post. biggrin.gif
post #53 of 212
Thread Starter 
Interesting Article on OCZ today:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/29/us-ocztechnology-interview-idUSBRE8AS0KQ20121129?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews&rpc=76

Stock also popped 30% up..

I remember saying something earlier about it being possibly a good opportunity...
post #54 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Interesting Article on OCZ today:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/29/us-ocztechnology-interview-idUSBRE8AS0KQ20121129?feedType=RSS&feedName=technologyNews&rpc=76
Stock also popped 30% up..
I remember saying something earlier about it being possibly a good opportunity...

Try at least to be fair and balanced. They have a long long way to go. And a 20-30% gain when your stock is $1 is nice but still doesn't mean that the company is anywhere near healthy. And certainly not a reason to shout "I told you so!!!" in caps and increased font sizes.

I would at least wait until the investigation into OCZ is finished.

post #55 of 212
Thread Starter 
Still 30% pop the day after I said it is mildly worth an "I told you so"

lol.

I could not help myself.
post #56 of 212
Look at the trend I posted over the past year. Plenty of 20-"30% pops" but an overall downward spiral.

1 data point does mean much at all.
post #57 of 212
Thread Starter 
Actually there isn't many 30% pops because the increase was smaller percentage since the stocks total price was greater.

It might have increased more... but percent gain was smaller. regardless I said yesterday it could possibly be a good move... so a 30% pop the next day was funny to me.

I think we all agreed OCZ was at the bottom. That article I linked explained why. Mostly warning on earnings and accounting discrepancy. That scared the crap out of investors.
post #58 of 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Mostly warning on earnings and accounting discrepancy. That scared the crap out of investors.

Yeah, that's definitely not the reason buddy. You need to open your eyes. OCZ is in trouble. And there are a few other 20% "pops" just like I mentioned (just depends on what you want to consider as the timeframe allowed for that "pop").
post #59 of 212
Here is a much much better and more balanced article on OCZ instead of just "CEO Speak"

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1036191-ocz-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly

Also since you are fair balanced when it comes to OCZ (right?) I fully expect that you will let poeple know that OCZ fully intends to pull out of the low end (i.e. HTPC) market as they conceded that the other big guys have them beat.
Quote:
Part of that plan involves conceding the budget SSD market to the competition.

"I cannot think we can compete on price," Schmitt told Reuters in an interview. "The flash guys -- the Microns, the Intels, the Samsungs really are the guys that will take that market. They can have it as far as I am concerned, as there is no profit to be made there for us."
post #60 of 212
Thread Starter 
Yup. I think Samsung will be the go to choice on low end as time goes.. Unless Crucial actually steps up with a better product.

I said from the first post it's interesting to see the SSD MFG's that make their own controllers dominating the performance segment. OCZ and Samsung.

That leaves Sandforce and Marvel drives like Crucial M4 or the Mushkin to battle out the price war at the bottom. OCZ has long been a strong player in the price wars... so I'll be sad to see them go.

But the higher performance drives should price down the older and lower performance drives. That's a good thing for HTPC builders.

I'm getting to the point where most of my builds are coming from hand me downs... I'd rather replace my desktop SSD with a better and use that for a cheaper build vs just buying a cheap one new.

My drive has 99% life left on it according to my bench- so I guess it lasts a long time. It's only a year old in February.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Home Theater Computers
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Home Theater Computers › New Vector SSD looks very interesting. Is this the BEST NEW SSD for 2013 ?