Samsung 64GB 2.5" SATA-II MLC Solid State Hard Drive

Associate
Joined
8 Jan 2003
Posts
421
Location
Sheffield, UK
if SLC are supposed to be better than mlc, how come the crucial slc ssd's are given an almost terrible write up in every review site? They're supposed to be so bad that i actually am thinking of buying a crucial slc as my last upgrade just out of sympathy for the company

SLC is better than MLC, but that is more down to longevity than performance.

The thing that makes the real difference is the controller and how much cache memory.

In the case of the Samsung drives. The SLC slightly outperforms the MLC because it doesn't have to focus any attention on wear levelling. Otherwise they're very similar performance wise.

I'm not sure why Crucials drive suck so much, especially since Micron (crucials parent company) have the technology to delivery 200,000 IOPs + 800Mb/sec bandwith using flash memory. It's strange as you'd expect them to be much much better since memory tech is their thing.
 
Associate
Joined
19 Sep 2008
Posts
344
well thanks for clearing that up for me LeJimster, i was considering buying a transcend 128GB sata 2 SLC SSD for my pirmary boot drive but the read/write rates were abysmal (150mb sec read 110mb sec write if memory serves correct), i was questioning why the prices ranged to rougly £200 more than an equivical mlc drive, now that i know why i don't think that, tbh, the slight performance increase warrants the vast increase in cost. And to be honest, if a standard mlc has a 2 million hour mtbf thats not really going to affect longevity too much since most of us will have moved on long before then (specifically when 128GB drives become more cost/performance effective) unless this is a one in a time upgrade for enthusiasts which i can't really see being the case.

I would have expected crucial to have performed much, much better though in comparison to other memory vendors like OCZ and G.skill (which does dissapoint me a bit as they have great products available in the Memory arena) and it is suprising really when i think about it that intel are currently producing the best MLC/SLC drives on the face of the planet (although they are also extremely expensive, i would have expected intel to be under dogs though in this area tbh), the best guess that i have is that Crucial are/were trying to capitalise on the budget scene but left it a little too late in the game for their drives to be considered a proper alternative to drives like the OCZ Apex/Vertex or samsgun which proves even more, imo, that samsung still produce the best performance/gigabyte/cost effective SSD drive even up to 128GB capacities (where their only other real competitor is the OCZ Solid Series and G.Skill Titan at which point prices start going mad again), which leaves me to ask one last question, why are'nt samsung yet in a dominating position in the SSD range.

All in all though, Samsung must be beaming over how fortunate they have been as of late, they look like they have had a really good run with hard drive releases lately, their F1 range has shot straight into the spotlight probably becoming WD's largest competitor (don't think that the F1 Raid range have been too successful though) and now they're having a very good run with SSD's. You've really got to admire the company's enthusiasm considering where they were 2 or 3 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
10 Jan 2009
Posts
1,242
Here is my first effort ...

1.jpg


and my latest...still trying to figure out what i'm doing :o

2-1.jpg
 
Associate
Joined
19 Sep 2008
Posts
344
where did you upload those screenprints to oggiet? i've been trying imageshack but it won't let me upload screenprints.

those are pretty much the same HD Tune (which i preferre over ATTO tbh) stats as i get on my bench marks also (give or take 10-20mb sec read and write for raid 0), it seems to put things into perspective when you look at the access times rather than the read/write speeds when comparing ssd's to mechanical.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
10 Jan 2009
Posts
1,242
Its Photobucket mate ;)
Yeah main difference over my sammy1TB is access times...its huge. Just installing some games to test it out. Quite happy for £99, if it lasts me 6-9 months till better generation comes out for cheaper and bigger i'll be very happy
 
Associate
Joined
19 Sep 2008
Posts
344
anybody know how good samsung are when it comes to returns and repairs/warrantys? one of my SSD's has kicked the bucket due to a bad power connector and either needs raplacing or repairing big time.
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Aug 2004
Posts
3,840
where did you upload those screenprints to oggiet? i've been trying imageshack but it won't let me upload screenprints

I use Imageshack with no problems, on this forum or any other forum on the net.


Just visit imageshack, click on browse, find your image file on your PC, click start upload, wait a few seconds where it looks like nothing is happening and then you will get to a page that looks like this...

imageshacko.gif


If you've cropped your image to just the application you're running (eg in the shot I cropped it to just the ATTO window) then you can just copy'n'paste the direct link at the top and use the IMG tags like below here on the forums...

Code:
[img] Paste the Imageshack direct link here [/img]

If haven't cropped your image and you've taken a picture of your entire desktop then you should use Thumbnails for forums (1) or (2) link, again see the above image for where it will be. When using the thumbnail links, you do not need to use the IMG tags as they include it for you :)
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Aug 2004
Posts
3,840
In case you don't know, you can take a capture of just the active window by pressing ALT and print screen.

I always used the Alt-Gr button (the one to the right of the space bar), never really considered the standard ALT button since I would do the Alt-Gr + PrtSc with one hand, but both ways work :)
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Aug 2005
Posts
3,955
Location
Beds
Right I've tried to install an SSD into my laptop but the recovery disks will not work! My only Vista disk has the 64bit version of the OS.

I need to install the 32 bit version as work's silly VPN software doesn't work with Vista 64bit. Does anyone know how I can legally install Vista Business 32 bit without having to go out and buy another copy of Vista?
 
Soldato
Joined
31 Jul 2004
Posts
13,546
Location
Surrey
don't think there is a way, if you have ultimate it should have the ability to install any version iirc but other than that its back down the shops I'm afraid.
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Aug 2005
Posts
3,955
Location
Beds
don't think there is a way, if you have ultimate it should have the ability to install any version iirc but other than that its back down the shops I'm afraid.

Just as I thought. :mad:

In that case I've putting Ubuntu on it - I have a valid Vista license but no way to use it and I want to play with my SSD today! :D
 
Associate
Joined
8 Jan 2003
Posts
421
Location
Sheffield, UK
Right I've tried to install an SSD into my laptop but the recovery disks will not work! My only Vista disk has the 64bit version of the OS.

I need to install the 32 bit version as work's silly VPN software doesn't work with Vista 64bit. Does anyone know how I can legally install Vista Business 32 bit without having to go out and buy another copy of Vista?

Seriously, the VPN software doesn't work in Vista 64? I honestly rarely come across software that doesn't run on 64bit vista. Unless it uses some drivers that are 32bit only, then 32bit software works fine on Vista x64
 
Associate
Joined
25 Nov 2002
Posts
2,218
Location
Somerset
Right I've tried to install an SSD into my laptop but the recovery disks will not work! My only Vista disk has the 64bit version of the OS.

I need to install the 32 bit version as work's silly VPN software doesn't work with Vista 64bit. Does anyone know how I can legally install Vista Business 32 bit without having to go out and buy another copy of Vista?

Firstly. A Vista licence is not 32 or x64 dependant, The licence key will work for either as long as it's the same version i.e. Business, Home Premium ect. You just need to get hold of, or download the 32bit dvd, which is perfectly legally available... it's the licence key thats protected.

For VPN on Vista x64 I found a great third party application which works perfectly for my work's Cisco vpn. try this... has a 30 day full function trial http://www.ncp-e.com/en/downloads/software.html
 
Soldato
Joined
23 Aug 2005
Posts
3,955
Location
Beds
Firstly. A Vista licence is not 32 or x64 dependant, The licence key will work for either as long as it's the same version i.e. Business, Home Premium ect. You just need to get hold of, or download the 32bit dvd, which is perfectly legally available... it's the licence key thats protected.

For VPN on Vista x64 I found a great third party application which works perfectly for my work's Cisco vpn. try this... has a 30 day full function trial http://www.ncp-e.com/en/downloads/software.html

Thanks - that's a good point - I only need to get hold of the software. As for VPN - Novell Access Manager 3.0 is what we use, it downloads an Active X to function - this will not install no matter what I've tried on x64 Vista.
 
Soldato
Joined
10 Apr 2004
Posts
13,489
I've been following this thread but not that closely but im debating if it is infact worth it over a £230 300Gb Raptor.

Will two of these things out run it and last more than like, a year?

Although I'll be using software RAID so I can't boot into windows...

Tough choices!

So guys two of these in RAID 0 > One Velociraptor totally worth it?
 
Associate
Joined
25 Nov 2002
Posts
2,218
Location
Somerset
Thanks - that's a good point - I only need to get hold of the software. As for VPN - Novell Access Manager 3.0 is what we use, it downloads an Active X to function - this will not install no matter what I've tried on x64 Vista.

That VPN client software is generic and seems to work for most, if not all types. In my case, Cisco have the same issue as you're suffering no vista 64 software... I was able to use this NCP client and even import (from my old 32bit software) the cisco profile and it worked first time
 
Permabanned
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
47,396
Location
Essex
I've been following this thread but not that closely but im debating if it is infact worth it over a £230 300Gb Raptor.

Will two of these things out run it and last more than like, a year?

Although I'll be using software RAID so I can't boot into windows...

Tough choices!

So guys two of these in RAID 0 > One Velociraptor totally worth it?

I used to own a 300GB Velocripator and I was personally underwhelmed by it. (It was about £185 a few months ago btw!)
 
Back
Top Bottom