SSD=Amazing

Well Splattered · 10 Sep 2010 at 21:19

JonJ678 said:
They've got nothing on running the os from a ramdisk though.

You are not able to run an OS from a ramdisk as its run from volatile system memory where data is lost when you turn off the pc.

Can you clarify what you mean?

bhavv · 10 Sep 2010 at 21:29

My reads on this drive are 355 - 365 in crystalmark

Superfast drive, it needs sata III to make it awesome.

ripperOFflesh · 10 Sep 2010 at 21:33

Hi i got a c300 64gb other day everything seems a lot quicker

bhavv · 10 Sep 2010 at 21:43

I didnt bother adding my 2Tb drives score, that thing is just dire.

adam_castell · 10 Sep 2010 at 22:28

got mine installed

blue - Crucial C300 128GB 6GB/S
green - Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB 64mb 6GB/S
red - my external usb hdd

ryan4227 · 10 Sep 2010 at 22:29

Hey

Here is the SSD c300 64gb only on Sata 2 no idea why write is this fast consistently

And this is for my storage drive Maxtor Diamondmax 21 not bad for 4-5 year old drive

Let me know what you think

Regards Ryan

reygjabla · 10 Sep 2010 at 22:42

Your write speed is even faster than the one using Sata III 6Gbp/s.

ryan4227 · 10 Sep 2010 at 22:45

Hey

Yeah must have got a lucky drive lol or it could be the Nvidia Nforce 750a Sata controller

.
Also didn't install sata drivers because Nforce driver doesn't support TRIM so all is good.
but hey i'm not complaining.

Regards Ryan

steve258 · 11 Sep 2010 at 01:15

Well Splattered said:
You are not able to run an OS from a ramdisk as its run from volatile system memory where data is lost when you turn off the pc.

Can you clarify what you mean?

I believe he meant something like this. These have been made redundant now that the SSDs have gained popularity. I was sure there's a DDR2 version but apparantly not.

Well Splattered · 11 Sep 2010 at 01:37

steve258 said:
I believe he meant something like this. These have been made redundant now that the SSDs have gained popularity. I was sure there's a DDR2 version but apparantly not.

I played with I-Ram back in the day. I had two fully occupied with 4gb each.

My original post is here http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9654078&postcount=76 Its a good thread, even if most of the pics have died.

The I-Ram was unstable and read and write speeds were slower than todays SSD's.

I also tried a proper ramdisk with system memory. I had 16gb total which I used as 4gb system and 12gb as a ramdisk.

They were quick, but sacraficed system overclock and fsb speeds. The disk was still on 12gb in size and had to be loaded each boot.

SSD's are the way forward.

Zarf · 11 Sep 2010 at 02:12

ryan4227 said:
Hey
And this is for my storage drive Maxtor Diamondmax 21 not bad for 4-5 year old drive

Let me know what you think

Regards Ryan

Some caching or driver screwiness going on there, Unless it's part of a RAID array. 4-5 year old 160GB platter drives just didn't perform anywhere near that. Real performance won't even be half what the numbers are showing.

See what an HDTach bench has to say.

vintage-x · 11 Sep 2010 at 03:04

PapaLazaru said:
What annoyed me most when I bought mine was that I paid all that money and the damn things are tiny.

same here paid £250 for my 120gb vertex 2 and the package was so small

.

Dont regret it for a second though that thing flyyyyyyyyyyyyyssssssssssssss

skotish| · 11 Sep 2010 at 08:15

ryan4227 said:
Hey

Will be very inresting to see what you get results you might get more than rated

Let me know

Regards Ryan

Will do m8 its on its wae to me right now \o/

ryan4227 · 11 Sep 2010 at 13:13

Hey

Just to let you know i tested the maxtor with HDD Tune and i came to 70mb/s max read so issue somewhere but never mind

Regards Ryan

Stonedofmoo · 11 Sep 2010 at 14:03

Looks awesome. However I'm waiting for the Intel G3's. Intel always set the benchmark and they are worth waiting another month or two for.

ryan4227 · 11 Sep 2010 at 19:47

Hey

Yeah i see your point about the Intel G3 but i thought i would get on these now because of the use for the newer sata interface so my drive is around 260 now could go up 350 with newer board so it really gives me some upgradeable options for my system.

Also it was on offer and i had been thinking about it for ages the temptation grabbed me and i really don't regret it atall

Regards Ryan

-fedexer- · 11 Sep 2010 at 22:24

Well after reading this thread, i sense i need to go back to the drawing board and seriously considering splashing out that little extra and get a SSD drive for the OS/ Crucial App/Games ^^

Seems there is a hell of an improvement to be expected from SSD, as i assumed it would be, however i never really considered it in my build. :eek:

Craig321 · 11 Sep 2010 at 22:34

whitecrook said:
Still too small just now. When 512GB are cheap enough let me know.

Mmm, that's my problem with them at the moment. I need a minimum of a 256GB one (might be able to squeeze by with 128GB). Not much point in spending so much if you can't stick everything you want/need on it, so I'll wait until 256 are cheaper.

Duke · 11 Sep 2010 at 22:40

256GB? That is a lot of games or applications. I think 120GB would be fine for most people. Keep media and other stuff on a NAS out the way.

bhavv · 11 Sep 2010 at 22:51

SSDs arent meant to be storage drives. OS and Games are what they are most useful for. For media and other files, you should use a normal hard drive.

A 64 Gb SSD for the OS, a pair of fast 1 Tb drives in Raid 0 for games, and a 2 Tb eco drive for backups is a brilliant setup. TBH two 1 Tb Samsung F3s are still absolutely brilliant for loading times in games, and much more affordable than an SSD, then you only really need a 64 Gb SSD for windows, or a 120 if you want to put some extra programs like games on it.