- Intel X-25M G2
- Raid array: /
- Capacity: 80GB
- TRIM enabled: yes
- OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x86
- Crystal Mark benchmark:
Last edited by .Sup (2009-11-06 01:32:51)
I thought TRIM was automatic.
Guess I should read up on SSDs.
Guess I should read up on SSDs.
* Intel X-25M G2
* Raid array: no
* Capacity: 80GB
* TRIM enabled: no
* OS: Windows Vista x64 Ultimate SP2
* Crystal Mark benchmark:
* Raid array: no
* Capacity: 80GB
* TRIM enabled: no
* OS: Windows Vista x64 Ultimate SP2
* Crystal Mark benchmark:
3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8
amazing speed
G.Skill Falcon 64gb
230mb read
135mb write
waiting for a firmware update ...or I am going to flash it to an OCZ firmware..
230mb read
135mb write
waiting for a firmware update ...or I am going to flash it to an OCZ firmware..
let us know how that works out.joker3327 wrote:
G
waiting for a firmware update ...or I am going to flash it to an OCZ firmware..
Intel X25-M G2 80GB
Latest firmware
Run 2
Latest firmware
Run 2
Last edited by james@alienware (2009-11-06 07:08:45)
* Intel X-25M G2
* Raid array: no
* Capacity: 80GB
* TRIM enabled: Yes
* OS: Windows Windows 7 Home Prem 64bit
* Crystal Mark benchmark:
* Raid array: no
* Capacity: 80GB
* TRIM enabled: Yes
* OS: Windows Windows 7 Home Prem 64bit
* Crystal Mark benchmark:
Intel Core i7 CPU 920 @ 4GHz || 3x2 GB OCZ 1600Mhz DDR3 || 80GB Intel X25-M Gen 2 || KFA2 GTX 480 1536Mb ||| Samsung T220 || Xonar DX 7.1 || AV 40 || P6T Deluxe V2 || Win 7 HP 64 Bit || Lian Li P80
Why can they write faster than they can read? Seems illogical to me. Or is that the same for all HDD's?
On the 4k writes, you're probs just seeing the advantage of a large cache.
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
Write speed is secondary in terms of benefits for normal user. 90MB/s is pretty much more than enough for everything, you are not doing crazy large writes on SSDs. The write speeds of -M (Mainstream MLC) series capped to about 90MB/s so they don't steal the market from the -E series drives (Extreme: high price, high write speed, SLC).liquidat0r wrote:
Why can they write faster than they can read? Seems illogical to me. Or is that the same for all HDD's?
As a result you won't see the drives lose any of the write performance over time as there is HUGE 100MB/s overhead that the drive could physically do. That + the wear leveling techs like TRIM.
So in short: random read and write are most important. The drive will do a lot tiny read and writes during tasks. At this the Intel drives absolutely rape the competition.
E: whoops ment random, not sequential....
Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2009-11-06 10:05:00)
3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8
I don't have flashy Intel drives. They're a bit on the pricey side (I got ny drives for £100 each (price has jumped since then), whereas the Intels are about double that).
* Crucial M225
* Raid array: yes
* Capacity: 64GBx2
* TRIM enabled: No
* OS: Windows Windows 7 Ulimate x64
* Crystal Mark benchmark:
As you can see, RAID isn't helping much. Burst speed is insane (I haven't included burst speed benchmarks - but read speeds can exceed 400MB/s!) and write speeds are damned high - but it has a serious negative impact on small non-sequential write speeds. I'm thinking about not running them in RAID.
HDD Tune Random Access:
* Crucial M225
* Raid array: yes
* Capacity: 64GBx2
* TRIM enabled: No
* OS: Windows Windows 7 Ulimate x64
* Crystal Mark benchmark:
As you can see, RAID isn't helping much. Burst speed is insane (I haven't included burst speed benchmarks - but read speeds can exceed 400MB/s!) and write speeds are damned high - but it has a serious negative impact on small non-sequential write speeds. I'm thinking about not running them in RAID.
HDD Tune Random Access:
Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-11-07 05:09:22)
For others reading to compare, some tests from my XP box:
2 x 250GB WD (somethings), RAID 1
4 x 36GB 10k WD Raptors, RAID 0
2 x 250GB WD (somethings), RAID 1
4 x 36GB 10k WD Raptors, RAID 0
They made 15K Raptors?chuyskywalker wrote:
4 x 36GB 15k WD Raptors, RAID 0
No, no they didn't. Got my numbers wrong.
I thought maybe they released a SCSI version or something...chuyskywalker wrote:
No, no they didn't. Got my numbers wrong.
Was just curious.
- Hitatchi 250GB 7,200 RPM
- Raid array: None
- Capacity: 250GB
- TRIM enabled: wat
- OS: Tiny 7 32 bit
Lmfao.
Last edited by Finray (2009-11-07 06:24:18)
Western Digital 1TB 7200RPM
I think we should leave.. we dun has SSDs..
*cries*Finray wrote:
I think we should leave.. we dun has SSDs..
True, I was just posting so the SSD marks could be put into perspective. Sux2bUs.Finray wrote:
I think we should leave.. we dun has SSDs..
Np guys you can keep on posting. Jsnipy gave me a great idea to make this thread a benchmarking thread so go ahead and post benches of your HDDs if you like.
Here's the data of my buddie's SSDs:
His raid is doing pretty good, Bert could you possibly post what mobo/raid controller you are using?
If a mod could rename this thread to "SSD/HDD benchmark", that would be great, thanks.
Here's the data of my buddie's SSDs:
- 2 x OCZ Vertex
- Raid array: 0
- Capacity: 2 x 30GB
- TRIM enabled: no
- OS: Windows XP SS3
- Crystal Mark benchmark:
His raid is doing pretty good, Bert could you possibly post what mobo/raid controller you are using?
If a mod could rename this thread to "SSD/HDD benchmark", that would be great, thanks.
Last edited by .Sup (2009-11-07 15:13:37)
4 seagate 640GB sata2 drives, raid 1+0
* WD Velociraptor
* Raid array: No
* Capacity: 150GB
* TRIM enabled: -
* OS: Windows XP Home edition
My question is, do the huge SSD numbers make any difference in real world apps? I'm tossing up between getting an 80GB Intel drive or another Vraptor for RAID0. Would the speed advantage of the SSD make it worth the huge price tag and small size, seeing as I could get another raptor for $AU200 (as opposed to the $AU500 for the Intel?).
* Raid array: No
* Capacity: 150GB
* TRIM enabled: -
* OS: Windows XP Home edition
My question is, do the huge SSD numbers make any difference in real world apps? I'm tossing up between getting an 80GB Intel drive or another Vraptor for RAID0. Would the speed advantage of the SSD make it worth the huge price tag and small size, seeing as I could get another raptor for $AU200 (as opposed to the $AU500 for the Intel?).
pretty decent writes dont know why such bad reads
wd 640gb 16 mb cache
Edit: this is the one
http://ncix.com/products/index.php?sku= … gital%20WD
Last edited by dill13 (2009-11-08 00:36:22)