*** Crucial M225 SSD's Available From £102.99 inc VAT ***

I have just been looking and using google and looks like other places have chnaged there price.

glad i got my order in already.

So no point asking them when they will get the drive, I asked last week think it was thursday and was told 5-7 days .. hope it this week i am off next week and would be good to have the drive to se-up

Rich
 
Just ran Crystal and here are the results:-

These are the best results I have got so far, no idea what I did to get them mind. Prior to this test I was getting way lower readings on the 4kb test.

--------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 2.2 (C) 2007-2008 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
--------------------------------------------------

Sequential Read : 231.328 MB/s
Sequential Write : 146.472 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 163.595 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 129.903 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 26.567 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 16.234 MB/s

Test Size : 100 MB
Date : 2009/08/17 14:24:35
 
As well as the dollar rate declining quite sharply again from when we managed to get the first batch in stock, Crucial have also increased the price to everyone - obviously they're still a reasonably good price but either they've decided they weren't making very much money or they may just be thinking they can make more.

The price that everyone pre-ordered at will remain so you guys are going to be getting a very good buy indeed.:)
 
well i am glad i did my order and have a very good price and speed drive .. just wish i did not have to wait for stock.

Will the stock be in this week .. or are we looking at next week ?

Rich
 
I finally have my hard drive. 8 days after placing my order with next day delivery (thanks a bunch, Royal Mail and your stupid strike action), I have the thing in my grubby hands.

I can't wait to get home and plug it into the PC. :D
 
Has anyone actually seen benchmarks of the Crucial's in raid, either 64/s or 128's, or preferably both.

So tempted to replace my curretn 2x64gb samsung raid, with a 128gb, but then going 2x64gb again will likely be faster and just about the same cost.
 
CrystalDiskMark results, 100MB test size:

Seq: 220.4 read, 142.1 write
512k: 154.0 read, 126.6 write
4k: 28.76 read, 16.65 write

Not too shabby. :)
 
lol.. i just realised Id been using the OS installed on my sata (dual boot) for 4 days.. and hadnt realised it wasnt the ssd!!!! I know bootup was a lot quicker.. but just using the pc, browsing, and simple apps.. doesnt really seem to make the much of a real difference.... I found generally things seem to run a lot quick on win7 anyway, and knocking milliseconds off them doesnt really make much difference...

I suppose loading and working with large apps, files, or games is where the real benefit is, or perhaps laptops which have slower hard drives, and not general pc useage, browsing etc... im wondering whether or not to sell mine (128gb Crucial) , as Im not really worried abot how quick my pc boots up..i generally dont sit there watching it!!
 
Last edited:
I find Windows 7 very quick with a standard 1.5TB HDD also but I'd love to see it with an SSD in there, mmmmmm. RAID 0 sounds nice but it would use up two SATA ports rather than one, which is annoying because I only have 3 left as it is and I will want some more beefy storage drives at some point. :(
 
DragonQ said:
I find Windows 7 very quick with a standard 1.5TB HDD also but I'd love to see it with an SSD in there, mmmmmm. RAID 0 sounds nice but it would use up two SATA ports rather than one, which is annoying because I only have 3 left as it is and I will want some more beefy storage drives at some point. :(
Click to expand...

Just nab yourself a cheapo SATA PCI-e controller card for £15 :)
 
Strife212 said:
Are these actually better than 10,000RPM hard drives? Because cheap SSD's used to suck.
Click to expand...

The short answer is: Yes.

You will get moderately improved sequential read and write speeds, but MASSIVE improvements on small-file random reads and writes.

The "suckyness" of the old SSDs was down the to jmicron controller. This is a thing of the past now.
 
SSD Offsets using Windows 7 mirroring

So being lazy, rather than doing a fresh install of Windows 7 and my applications I thought I'd have a go at converting my disks to Dynamic and using diskmanager to mirror all the volumes including the 100MB reserved volume.

It's all synching up as I type but running Diskpart to check for offserts got the following results:

Partition ### Type Size Offset
------------- ---------------- ------- -------
Partition 1 Dynamic Data 992 KB 31 KB
Partition 2 Dynamic Data 100 MB 1024 KB
Partition 3 Dynamic Data 97 GB 101 MB
Partition 4 Dynamic Data 140 GB 97 GB

It looks to me like Partition 1 - which is unused - is being used to pad the disk to provide an offest of 1024kb for Part 2 (the reserved system partition).

I suspect the original HDD that I'm miorroring from might have been used under Vista so that might be why the padding has been added.

Do the more informed amongst you concur or am I hopelessly wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom