Very specific ssd expectations, opinions wanted.

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

auburn

Honorable
Jul 5, 2013
30
0
10,530
Before anyone writes this off as yet another OCZ Vector 256gb vs. Samsung 840 PRO 256gb topic, let me get more specific.

In the past month I've ended up broadly disappointed by a 128gb 840 PRO, finding it performs with marked inferiority when compared to the OCZ Vertex 3 I had been running. Just learned this is mostly due to its lower number of flash channels. Not gonna lie: this has discouraged me from picking up another 840 PRO a little. If an older OCZ can beat the 128gb model like that, well... Gives me plenty of room for second thoughts.

But here's a list of my must-have's when it comes to a ssd. First priority is speed. I need a ssd which:

1) Boots into Win7 faster.
2) Loads applications with tons of content faster.
3) Writes faster. (I'm told that writes are the most important thing to look at when searching for a ssd that performs the two above the fastest. Is that correct?)
4) Has the best sustained performance. (I always leave lots of free space to avoid a performance decrease. But I'd hate to have a ssd that works wonders and then winds down to mediocre performance after the first few weeks/months.)
5) Slows down the less when not empty.
6) Takes better to overclocking. (My i7 is OC'ed to 4.4GHz stable. My previous Samsung 840 120gb and 840 PRO 128gb have been a little leery of it.)
7) Goes better with rendering and programs like 3DMax, Poser Pro and the like.

I'm looking at the Vector precisely because it's advertised as the fastest deal in the market, specs-wise. However, I've seen plenty of benchmarks that show it scoring second best under the 840 PRO 256gb, and very few that show it at the top of the heap. The 840 PRO comes with lower advertised specs, but on the other hand shows on top of almost every test around. Color me unsure.

Yes, I'm aware OCZ has earned a horrible rep when it comes to failure rate, but I'm willing to take the risk with the supposedly "most solid OCZ ssd so far" Vector if it'll get me the best performance. I'm not too concerned about prices, and very willing to pay a little more for the better deal provided it's not ridiculous, and the improvement is noticeable.

I'd really appreciate your opinions.
 
Solution
RetiredChief
Some general comments.

For OS + program drive - Boot time (really load OS time) and loading programs:
.. Random 4 K Read performance is the most important
.. Sequencial read/writes are the LEAST important. Sequencial only becomes important when reading, or writing LARGE files (data structures) such as Large Bitmap/jpeg Photos, Video files, large CAD/CAM drawings and 300 page word docs (and large excel files). Typically these types of data sturctures are on the HDD so SSD has no bearing.

Boot time / Performance:
.. My 256 gig 840 Pro Laptop i5-2410m - SAME programs as my desktops. From the time I hit power on -> a web page loaded (Foxnew):
... Windows 7 - 15 Seconds (My desktop takes longer, but primarily the diff is in POST time)...
Sort by date Sort by votes
goodguy713

goodguy713

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2009
1,177
0
19,460
look at a pci express revo drive 3 or revo drive 3 x2 just saying I have a revo drive 3 and a patriot wild fire which I have had no issues with and are not being sold any more apparently .. but great drives all the same . the x2 is a bit faster but worth the money how ever overclocking with a revo drive is not a friendly thing .. as far as your apples to oranges comparison just buy 2 or 4 60 GB drives and raid them just make sure they are all the same or you could do it with a couple 120gb drives .. comparing one drive to another when they are about the same were talking maybe 10 to 50 MB difference here .. in most cases.. where as if you just raid a couple of them then you will have better overall performance
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

auburn

Honorable
Jul 5, 2013
30
0
10,530
Sounds great, but I don't know the first thing about RAID. I'd really just stick to one ssd for my OS and a hdd for storage at the moment. Thank you anyway.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RetiredChief

RetiredChief

Judicious
Feb 22, 2007
8,528
0
32,960
Some general comments.

For OS + program drive - Boot time (really load OS time) and loading programs:
.. Random 4 K Read performance is the most important
.. Sequencial read/writes are the LEAST important. Sequencial only becomes important when reading, or writing LARGE files (data structures) such as Large Bitmap/jpeg Photos, Video files, large CAD/CAM drawings and 300 page word docs (and large excel files). Typically these types of data sturctures are on the HDD so SSD has no bearing.

Boot time / Performance:
.. My 256 gig 840 Pro Laptop i5-2410m - SAME programs as my desktops. From the time I hit power on -> a web page loaded (Foxnew):
... Windows 7 - 15 Seconds (My desktop takes longer, but primarily the diff is in POST time)
... Windows 8 - 8 Seconds. (Only have Win 8 on Laptop).

.. ONLY benchmarks that are really valid at one that use REAL programs, NOT synthetic benchmarks. IE:
Using AS SSD the overall score for my Curcial M4 and Samsung 830 are in the Mid 700s while the Samsung 840 Pro scores a WHOOPING 1100 - a BIG diff, but in REAL Live day-2-day usge very little diff. (My 840 Pro score is low as I believe they should score around 1200 - reason is older Chipset in my laptop/destops.

.. On Fill - You should leave at least 20 % FREE. This is to allow Wear leveling, Garbage Collector and TRIM to work their magic. The percentage to leave free is only slightly effected by brand.

Reliability - I personaly do not see a big diff. I have some 15 SSDs * diff companies) dating all the way back to Intel G1 and G2. Have NOT had a single failure NOR slow downs. I fell most Problems (NOT ALL) are user inflicted.
.. OCZ - what is that sdaying " ONE AW shi* wipes out ALL attaboys" OCZ had a HUGH compatability problem with their Agility IIIs nd Vertex 3s. Not only did they take considerable time to Fix, the real problem was MANAGEMENT - They blamed user knowledge and user sytems rather than accept responsibility. Understand some management has been replaced. However some like me have taken an oath - OCZ products will NEVER see the inside of my computer(s).
PS Yes I bought 2 OCZ Agility IIIs when they first came out. Had Compatability problem with one system - NOTE BOTH still work, One I swapped for a 128 gig Samsung 840 Pro - EVEN UP.

NOTE: On OCZ vertex III. Benchmarks are NOT valid when using prgrams like ATTO
1.. The Sandforce controller was optimized for useing data (files) that were highly compressable.
2.. ATTO is a OLD benchmark desiigned for HDD and USED highly compressable data.
... For OS + Programs, The vast majority of data read in is much close to Compressed data. Only bench mark for SSDs that I even look at are AS SSD which used compressd data - BUT as I said REAL program performance is much more valuable. Interesting to note that most reviews emphase SYNTHETIC benchmarks and have stopped using "real Life" performance - Synthetic benchmarks emphases differnces, BUT real ife shows little differencies between the better SSDs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
RetiredChief

RetiredChief

Judicious
Feb 22, 2007
8,528
0
32,960
ADDED: On Raid0
First Raid0 was GREAT for old HDD, all of my systems from late 90s (Old IDE drives) used Raid0. Last system to use raid0 was a Vista system with a pair of SATA HDDs raid0 for Vista, and a 2nd pair Raid0 for XP. Subsequently swapped Win 7 Beta for the XP pair. Have NOT used Raid0 since adapting to SSDs.

General Comments:
1) If one drive fails you lose ALL data from both drives.
2) Raid0 does not improve access time, therefore has little effect on small file random (4K) performance.
3) Improves Sequencial peformance: However, This improvement is only for files that are larger than the stripe size (Believe default size is 128K).
4) Depending on the Q depth performance is increased, that is if file "one" is reauired and on drive 1 an file "two" is on the 2nd drive they can be read at the same tme - BUT if both files happen to be on the same drive, not performance gain.
5) A 256 gig drive is Faster than the smaller brother.

SSDs when used as a "storage drive for large data stuctures, RAID 0 makes sense, But for a OS + Program drive - Raid0 is NOT benificial.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JohnnyLucky

JohnnyLucky

Illustrious
May 30, 2007
10,902
10
42,965
^5 +1 what Retired Chief said!

Most modern 3rd generation solid state drivers form a very tight performance cluster. There is very little performance difference. Typically users cannot tell the difference. There are a few exceptions. Synthetic benchmarks are a problem in that they are not real. That's why they are called synthetic benchmarks. They were expressly designed to grossly exaggerate very minor differences among ssd's. In addition, configurations and settings can be manipulated so that companies can present their ssd's in the most favorable light. As a result over 90% of the synthetic benchmarks do not accurately represent real world situations. Consider the synthetic benchmarks an advertising gimmick.

You mentioned "Goes better with rendering and programs like 3DMax, Poser Pro and the like." You might want to consider PCI-e based solid state drives and the new SATA Express standard that has been adopted.

Do you use a scratch disk?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

auburn

Honorable
Jul 5, 2013
30
0
10,530

Thanks a lot. That was a wonderfully informative post right there. It clarified a lot of stuff that, being a ssd rookie, was until now blurry for me. Seems I was under the wrong impression. I thought writes were the thing to look at when it came to everyday performance like booting and application loading.

I had the feeling the advertised specs would mean nothing at the end of the day, too. Looking at real world benchmarks it would seem the 840 PRO 256gb comes out as the strongest drive. Though to be honest I still need that final push to help me decide between it and the Vector.


All the workload goes to my hdd, if that's what you mean. Truth be told, in terms of performance, I couldn't have been any happier than I was with my old Vertex 3. Had it not been fried I wouldn't have even looked for possible alternatives. It more than sufficed for my everyday needs. So I thought that I'd be rather easy to please when it came to updating to a newer model drive. Imagine my disappointment at finding out the 840 PRO 128gb model couldn't live up to its predecessor's speed.

So yes. In truth, I have more experience with SATA-based ssds (puny as it is; I'm practically a newbie), and know a fairly fast one is enough to satisfy my user needs. This is why I have this pretty much brought down to which top notch 256gb model would better fit my demands, the 840 PRO or the Vector. If only because they are supposedly the fastest deals available in SATA format right now. Indecision is me. But I would hate another disappointment.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RetiredChief

RetiredChief

Judicious
Feb 22, 2007
8,528
0
32,960
I have to wonder why your 840Pro appears slower than your vertex 3.
Although the 840 Pro should be faster, most likely only VERY slightly faster in real life - should not have appeared slower.
Are you on a AMD or Intel Platform. SSDs come closer to manuf specs on the Intel platform (intel has a better chipset driver). If on the Intel chipset, Make sure your on the Intel sata port, not a 3rd party chipset (ie marvel), and make sure you use the latest Intel drive - believe it is 11.x

Johnnie brings up a good point and that is a 2nd SSD as a "work" drive for files currently working with or accessed the most. This is what I do both my desktops and main Laptop all have dual SSDs - One for OS and one for a "scratch" drive.
My want to consider a "cheaper", Not the Highest advertised performance drive which would then allow a 2nd small SSD.
AS I said I see very little diff between my M4 and my 840 Pro, BUT the M4 is often on sale for approx. $180. The Plextor M5P is also a great drive (probably slightly better than the M4. The Samsung 840 Non-pro would make an excellent scratch drive.
I do Recommend the 840 Pro for laptops as it has about the lowest power consumption and, If Money is not a question.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

auburn

Honorable
Jul 5, 2013
30
0
10,530

Yes, this puzzled me too. Still does, though dgingeri was kind enough to explain the most probable reason here. I'm on an ASRock extreme4 z77 and my chip is a i7 3770k overclocked at 4.4GHz. 100% sure the drive is connected to the right port, as I have AsMedia disabled. Both ssd and hdd are plugged to the Intel ports. Unistalling and reinstalling Intel Rapid Storage has improved speed considerably. So there has been progress since that last topic. Still, I would have expected the 128gb PRO to be much faster, or at least as fast as my Vertex 3.

The difference is even noticeable when browsing the internet. It takes visibly longer for .png image files to load, and it takes forever and a day to do so when having several tabs with lots of images loading simultaneously. With the Vertex they did so in a blink. Fairly large downloads such as DAZ 3D or Rederosity products also take a longer time.

As for latest Intel SATA drivers, all I have installed is Intel Rapid Storage Technology version 11.0.0.1032. The latest version seems to be RAID-oriented, so I suppose it's not for me? Not sure what else do I need. Any of these? https://downloadcenter.intel.com/SearchResult.aspx?lang=eng&keyword=%22AHCI+SATA+Driver%22
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

auburn

Honorable
Jul 5, 2013
30
0
10,530
Well, I actually ran one of those recently. Here:

SqIskTY.png

Seems like it's iaStor alright. I hope everything else looks normal?

Should I update to the newest IRST drivers anyway, see if that improves performance? I didn't touch those because they seemed to be specifically for RAID.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RetiredChief

RetiredChief

Judicious
Feb 22, 2007
8,528
0
32,960
You're overall score (1007) is between 10->20 Percent low.
1100 for Z6x chipset and around 1200 for Z87 chipsets Not sure on the Z77.
Yes I would try updating the Driver to version 11.x. While it appears that the driver is for raid, if The drive(s) are NOT a member drive of a raid configuration it will use a AHCI Intel equivalent driver.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

auburn

Honorable
Jul 5, 2013
30
0
10,530
Having updated to the latest version I still don't see any improvement. Image loading in firefox is still slow as agony. Could it be a matter of outdated LAN drivers? I have Broadcom Netlink Controller version 14.8.5.1 and so far I believe it's the latest, though. I frankly don't know what else to blame.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

auburn

Honorable
Jul 5, 2013
30
0
10,530

I'm afraid that's not my case. Already tried that and it didn't fix anything. It's the whole web surfing experience that has slowed down for me, though it feels worse when it comes to image loading. It even takes Firefox a second's pause to open, as if the ssd needed to think about it for a bit before acting on the command. With the Vertex it opened to a blank page instantaneously. I believe this must just be the way this disk performs (mediocre). Nothing I have tried has shown any improvement.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
RetiredChief

RetiredChief

Judicious
Feb 22, 2007
8,528
0
32,960
Have to agree with Johnny.
I use IE 9, 10 and on this system, Which is my slowest system and a SATA II SSD, 11 beta.
Desktop Samsung 840 Pro 128 gig (OS + program) plus a Samsung 830 "Scratch" drive.
Laptop: 256 gig Samsung 840 Pro (os+ Program) + a 256 Gig Crucial M4 for storage. Using window 8. Also have a 256 gig Samsung 830 with win 7 that I can use to swap out With Win 8 OS drive.

I none of these systems (3 different ones) Have I had IE load in less than a Blink of the I - EXCEPTIONs Have had some slow down in Provider speed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

auburn

Honorable
Jul 5, 2013
30
0
10,530
Not my case, sadly. I suppose I have more problems than I first thought. Any suggestions on what I could do to fix this?

Some odd thing I noticed is that my disk boots faster when I remove the Broadcom Netlink Controller. This along with the general slowness is what lead me to believe it could be a LAN driver matter. Not sure if switching to Realtek (the only other LAN drivers for my MOBO, far as I know) might make a difference for the better. I've heard only bad things about Realtek LAN controllers.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom