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

JaseUK said:
I manage to make the USB stick bootable no problems using the HP boot program. I change my boot order around as to boot from the USB stick. When it boots I get a windows 98 boot screen and then it goes to a command prompt at C:\
Click to expand...

Thats right then, assuming you've put the exe file on the USB root, type its name ct128m and you should see a y/n instruction.
 
Thanks guys, it worked.
Just ran Crystalmark and have to say I am getting slightly slower speeds.
However Vista has no TRIM capability so this is probably why.

Any news on an updated Wiper.exe?
 
fornowagain said:
Doesn't look like many programs actually use it, seems to be fine. I leave it on system managed and its currently using 532MB. There's plenty of system ram free, I could always use a bit more. I figure system ram is still faster than the SSD.
Click to expand...

Sounds good, I will give this a go with my new build. Is RamDisk Plus the best choice for doing this?
 
Last edited:
raptormonkey said:
Is it worth it? All this hassle to get the drive running the way it should be? Serious question as i am thinking of getting one by the end of the year (This year!!)
Click to expand...

Its mostly to get the drive working better than it should be.

Frankly its no different at all to defragging a normal drive to keep it in tip top shape, and while it gets it back to as new(basically) performance, the degraded performance is mostly a benchmark thing, but people like to feel like they are getting the best performance possible even if the difference is mostly only noticeable by testing and not in the real world.

Keep in mind also that Trim support is only going to really be available properly with win 7's real release, and companies are clearly bringing Trim to the majority of the better/current drives now before the release so thats better than what was promised basically, which was basically, no trim support till win 7 launch.

Think about it like this, lets say a Crucial 64gb gets 13-14mb random 4kb writes in a benchmark as a fresh drive, lets say it dips all the way down to 8mb due to needing to erase blocks before writing as they haven't been "trimmed" beforehand. Your average mechanical hdd, including raptors, aren't really breaking 1mb/s in the same benchmark, you're still getting an 800% performance increase and frankly you probably won't see that large a drop in performance anyway. So even heavily used with lots of erased blocks to "fix" before being writen to, they still spank hdd's in every single way with ease.
 
If you have an HDD, the page file should be a fixed size for maximum performance in order to prevent fragmentation. It could alternatively be on its own partition for the same reason.

On an SSD, fragmentation isn't a problem AFAIK so it should just be left up to Windows, right?
 
It's not so much that fragmentation isn't a problem but moreof that the seek times on SSDs is so fast (like <0.05 sec in most cases) that it's less relevant, and defragmenting a SSD shortens its lifespan.
 
But is reading a file in a single block quicker than reading a file split over several blocks actually quicker on an SSD? It obviously is, by far, on an HDD but I don't know how SSDs work internally.
 
Afternoon everyone,

This may have been answered already (I did go back quite far to check):

I ordered a 64GB on 12 August, does anyone know the eta for these to be back in stock? I've sent a webnote, but I'm too impatient to wait for the reply!
 
DragonQ said:
If you have an HDD, the page file should be a fixed size for maximum performance in order to prevent fragmentation. It could alternatively be on its own partition for the same reason.

On an SSD, fragmentation isn't a problem AFAIK so it should just be left up to Windows, right?
Click to expand...

Correct. The discussion here is that by putting your page file in RAM (if you have enough of it) then it will be faster still than an SSD.

Fornowagain, I tried RamDisk plus but found I was running out of swap and Windows was creating a new pagefile on the SSD at the next boot. I was rendering stuff at the time, so it quickly ate up my RAM (on an 8gb machine).

Sadly not going to be a solution for me - but thanks for the heads up on this :( And nice post Firewizard :)

Anyway, I should get my second M225 256gb tomorrow so gonna see what it does in RAID0 :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom