new corsiar force series 3 SSD
- Thread starter arnoldma
- Start date
Yes as these are newer and IMO not bad value either.
Confused by this in post 41 you said you don't like the sandforce controllers
in response to a question asking if the Corsair drives were better than the C300 or M4. The M4 uses a Marvell controller and is the new Crucial drive...Confused by this in post 41 you said you don't like the sandforce controllers
Its OK for some people but I wouldnt buy it since its a Sandforce and doesnt handle compression all that well for my needs.
Doesnt mean its a terrible drive and can be had for around £140 (ex vat) for 120gb best of a bad bunch IMO.
So what you are saying is, as it does not cater to your needs they are bad drives?
Have you even read any reviews or done any research on how Sandforce drives work? If they are so bad then why are all the reviews positive? Why do the benchmarks I run show my vertex 2e to be better than my previous intel drive g2 drive? Why does my pc feel faster?
I don't mind people talking, but if you are going to make statements like that, then please back them up. I think you don't quite have the grasp into how the compression works. But if you do, please provide us with some links/explanation and enlighten us naive people buying these Sandforce drives.
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Jun 2007
- Posts
- 1,108
- Location
- Manchester
Sandforce drives don't hit their max speeds on compressed files, but they're hardly slow at them. Still great performance.
So what you are saying is, as it does not cater to your needs they are bad drives?
Have you even read any reviews or done any research on how Sandforce drives work? If they are so bad then why are all the reviews positive? Why do the benchmarks I run show my vertex 2e to be better than my previous intel drive g2 drive? Why does my pc feel faster?
I don't mind people talking, but if you are going to make statements like that, then please back them up. I think you don't quite have the grasp into how the compression works. But if you do, please provide us with some links/explanation and enlighten us naive people buying these Sandforce drives.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4159/ocz-vertex-3-pro-preview-the-first-sf2500-ssd/10
Tell me how the Vertex 3 200GB which is supposedly has a write speed of over 500 MB/sec is only doing 229 MB/sec ?
"The sequential write test is a tough pill to swallow for SandForce. This is truly worst case scenario performance as its high queue depth transfers of incompressible data. Admittedly the Vertex 3 Pro does much better than drives based on its former controller (SF-1200) but it's no faster than Samsung's SSD 470 and barely faster than the SSDNow V100. Over a 3Gbps interface the controller doesn't look all that great either."
Im afraid it is you who does not understand how compression works... it is done on the fly by the controller and since it cant compress data you see the raw performance.
"Using realtime compression and data deduplication techniques, SandForce's controllers attempt to reduce the size of what the host is writing to the drive. The host still thinks all of its data is being written to the drive, but once the writes hit the controller, the controller attempts to reduce the data as much as possible."
and if your using lots of Incompressible data there is also the "Performance Degradation Problem".
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4159/ocz-vertex-3-pro-preview-the-first-sf2500-ssd/6
lol. Are you looking at the speeds? 229 MB/sec is bad is it? What drive are you using or would buy in the same price price range? Bet it would not be doing a lot more than that.
Also consider, this is in only some situations that it will happen. In majority of the cases it will work at full speed. So yeah, would rather o for sandforce anyday.
Also consider, this is in only some situations that it will happen. In majority of the cases it will work at full speed. So yeah, would rather o for sandforce anyday.
I'm probably going to hold out until Intels next round of drives personally, I used to have an X25-M and was very impressed with it! But wasn't so impressed with this recent release of the 320s and I can't really justify the cost for the 510s.
I'm probably going to hold out until Intels next round of drives personally, I used to have an X25-M and was very impressed with it! But wasn't so impressed with this recent release of the 320s and I can't really justify the cost for the 510s.
and I also said "Doesnt mean its a terrible drive and can be had for around £140 (ex vat) for 120gb best of a bad bunch IMO."
But yeah Intels are good all rounders. Im also going to see what their next update to the Intel 510 are like.
Here:
IMO, your point would stand if it was like below 100 MB/sec. All your showing is, even in it's worse case scenario the drive is better than most drives out there for the price of a 120gb drives.
The point you are missing is, in majority of cases you will be getting the max speed of the drive, only in small instances will it drop to 229 MB/sec. Also you are not taking into consideration that the link is not even a review but a prieview from months ago, and the fact the force series 3 SSD's have much higher IOPS and higher read write speeds.
A lot of people are still very happy with their intel x25-m ssd's which are great drives. Yet this sdd in its worst case scenario has double the speed. Yet you are calling them bad ssd's, which to me makes no sense
Here:
IMO, your point would stand if it was like below 100 MB/sec. All your showing is, even in it's worse case scenario the drive is better than most drives out there for the price of a 120gb drives.
The point you are missing is, in majority of cases you will be getting the max speed of the drive, only in small instances will it drop to 229 MB/sec. Also you are not taking into consideration that the link is not even a review but a prieview from months ago, and the fact the force series 3 SSD's have much higher IOPS and higher read write speeds.
A lot of people are still very happy with their intel x25-m ssd's which are great drives. Yet this sdd in its worst case scenario has double the speed. Yet you are calling them bad ssd's, which to me makes no sense
Its not a worse case scenario IMO .. I consider it a daily scenario if im using AVI / rars / Zips files. For people who arent handling those files they will get the super duper 500MB/secs+ speeds.
Yeah I had noticed it was a preview and preview products are often cherry picked by the manuafacturers to give good results for reviews.. so its a moot point.
.
The thing is though for many people the SSD won't be used for handling those types of files, they will normally be downloaded and extracted on bigger storage drives. Whereas the SSD will be used for for the OS and general applications.
Exactly.
Love the way you pick up on the preview and comment on it ass a moot point, but miss my main point which is the corsair has much higher iops and also slightly faster read/write
Don't remember ever having zip/rar'd anything on my ssd, and I have had one for over a year. All my avi and other video files are on hdd. By the sounds of it you would need to spends loads and loads of money to be having those files on ssd's. As IMO most people will not be doing that, your whole argument in a moot point. lol
In a week or two buddy.