Vertex 2E or C300&Controller

dyarrow

dyarrow

dyarrow

Associate
Joined
27 Jan 2005
Posts
13
Hi all,

I'm looking at buying an SSD but torn between two options at the moment. The SSD will have O/S, some apps and a couple of games - the PC is mostly used for gaming and movies.

My motherboard is an ASUS P5Q Pro so only has SATA 2.
Choices are:
OCZ Vertex 2E 120GB or
Crucial C300 128GB with Asus U3S6 SATA 3 controller.

First off will I notice much difference between the two for general O/S use, Gaming and viewing movies etc?

Second, are there any issues with the SATA 3 controller cards? Are they as quick as a mb with built in SATA 3?

Thanks in Advance.
 
dyarrow said:
Hi all,

I'm looking at buying an SSD but torn between two options at the moment. The SSD will have O/S, some apps and a couple of games - the PC is mostly used for gaming and movies.

My motherboard is an ASUS P5Q Pro so only has SATA 2.
Choices are:
OCZ Vertex 2E 120GB or
Crucial C300 128GB with Asus U3S6 SATA 3 controller.

First off will I notice much difference between the two for general O/S use, Gaming and viewing movies etc?

Second, are there any issues with the SATA 3 controller cards? Are they as quick as a mb with built in SATA 3?

Thanks in Advance.
Click to expand...

i can tell u i have had both and the crucial c300 is much better out the 2.
the vertex dont give anything that they claim on write speed and read.
the crucial is spot on on both speeds and i had 2 in stripped raid 0 and ran amazing.
it is even 4gb larger than the vertex. crusial c300 all the way m8 1 of the best cheap ssd on the market by far. ;)
 
Dazboots

"the vertex dont give anything that they claim on write speed and read."

Got to admit that's not my experience. Though VERY much depends on which benchmark tool you use. OCZ'z quoted figures (and they make no bones about this) are quoted from using ATTO which tests using compressible data.

My figures (and this is just using the standard Microsoft AHCI drivers that W7 installs) are pretty much in line with their claims:

SSDATTObenchmark.jpg


And even using AS SSD (probably the only other benchmark tool worth looking at) look decent enough:

SSDASbenchmark.jpg


I suspect in every day use, you would be unlikely to notice much difference between either SSD, Both are decent drives.
 
Last edited:
if u run as ssd benchmark and chrystal disk mark the ocz vertex underperforms
compared to the crucial c300 i have run both drives and the crucial wins hands down. what they say is what it shows in all tests. not just atto.
 
Sorry but CDM is not the best of benchmarks to run for ant SSD. Really designed for mechanical drives.

Even so.

Don't think the Vertex 2 looks too bad in CDM.

SSDCDMbenchmark.jpg


and AS SSD results (posted previously) also don't look too bad to me.

Got to be honest, I don't think it's as cut and dried as you say.

Think I'll stick to my previous comment that:

"suspect in every day use, you would be unlikely to notice much difference between either SSD, Both are decent drives. "

Though should you have a SATA3 interface, then the C300 is maybe the better choice. But even then, I suspect my previous statement stands.

I'm sure the OP wont be disappointed with either.
 
mikeo said:
Sorry but CDM is not the best of benchmarks to run for ant SSD. Really designed for mechanical drives.

Even so.

Don't think the Vertex 2 looks too bad in CDM.

SSDCDMbenchmark.jpg


and AS SSD results (posted previously) also don't look too bad to me.

Got to be honest, I don't think it's as cut and dried as you say.

Think I'll stick to my previous comment that:

"suspect in every day use, you would be unlikely to notice much difference between either SSD, Both are decent drives. "

Though should you have a SATA3 interface, then the C300 is maybe the better choice. But even then, I suspect my previous statement stands.

I'm sure the OP wont be disappointed with either.
Click to expand...



where it states 355mb read 70mb write that what it shows in crystal disk mark on the c300. problem with vertex 2 the read and constant write of 250mb falls short with the vertex 2 and to top it all off u have 4gb less than

the crucial.



this is the vertex 2 60 gb drive not the 128gb drive ur showing.
- Capacity: 60GB
- Controller: SandForce SF-1200
- Maximum Read: 285MB/sec
- Maximum Write: 275MB/sec
- Sustained Write: 250MB/sec

ur 128gb drive falls much on this statment. nevermind the 60gb version. im going from what i have used and owned. both drives and the crucial does what it says on the tin. show me constant write speeds of 250mb from crysal disk mark or as ssd benchmarks u cant because google the internet is full of ppl not getting what they paid 4.
 
Last edited:
dyarrow said:
Hi all,

I'm looking at buying an SSD but torn between two options at the moment. The SSD will have O/S, some apps and a couple of games - the PC is mostly used for gaming and movies.

My motherboard is an ASUS P5Q Pro so only has SATA 2.
Choices are:
OCZ Vertex 2E 120GB - Recommended plus Duraclass Technology.
Crucial C300 128GB with Asus U3S6 SATA 3 controller.

First off will I notice much difference between the two for general O/S use, Gaming and viewing movies etc? Nope
Second, are there any issues with the SATA 3 controller cards? Yes. Grey area on TRIM support.
Are they as quick as a mb with built in SATA 3? Nope
Thanks in Advance.
Click to expand...
 

like i said i have used on 6gb controller and normal controller.
and even on normal controller can reach over 250 mb on read and thats even faster than the vertex 2.
when he upgrades to 6gb motherboard will go even faster.
 
Sorry but you are mising my point.

You say "your 128gb drive falls much on this statement. ". But as I've already stated, OCZ make no attempt to hide the fact that their quoted figures are for compressible data. And in this case, their figures are pretty much spot on.

And to be totally honest, the issue/s surrounding performance (especially real world performance) of SSD is a hell of a lot more complex than what can be demonstated by a few artificial (because that's what they are "artificial/synthetic" benchmarks).

Not quite sure what point you are really trying to make here. As I'm not even disagreeing with you!

But I think the statement that I've made already a couple of times is a more than reasonable one.

""suspect in every day use, you would be unlikely to notice much difference between either SSD, Both are decent drives"

"Though should you have a SATA3 interface, then the C300 is maybe the better choice. But even then, I suspect my previous statement stands

I'm sure the OP wont be disappointed with either".

Good luck to the OP whatever he decides on.

PS. I think post number #9 has pretty much answered the OPs questions.
 
Last edited:
My experience especially if running in raid 0 is that onboard sata 3 chipsets crucifies the performance of ssd in raid.

In fact my raid was miles quicker on the Intel sata 2 chipset on the mobo.

So unless you are buying a "decent" controller card (as in not the same chipset as the on onboard sata 3), if you are planning on raid then the vertex2 drives are the better bet for their faster write speeds.

Here's my 2 x 60gb vertex2

newraidarray64kstripe.jpg
 
Last edited:
Greebo said:
My experience especially if running in raid 0 is that onboard sata 3 chipsets crucifies the performance of ssd in raid.

In fact my raid was miles quicker on the Intel sata 2 chipset on the mobo.

So unless you are buying a "decent" controller card (as in not the same chipset as the on onboard sata 3), if you are planning on raid then the vertex2 drives are the better bet for their faster write speeds.

Here's my 2 x 60gb vertex2

newraidarray64kstripe.jpg
Click to expand...


i had a score over 800 in crystal disk mark using none 6gb raid controller using 2x crucial c300 64 gb drives in raid 0.
i will dig arround and see if i can find the screen shot.
 
mikeo said:
Sorry but you are mising my point.

You say "your 128gb drive falls much on this statement. ". But as I've already stated, OCZ make no attempt to hide the fact that their quoted figures are for compressible data. And in this case, their figures are pretty much spot on.

And to be totally honest, the issue/s surrounding performance (especially real world performance) of SSD is a hell of a lot more complex than what can be demonstated by a few artificial (because that's what they are "artificial/synthetic" benchmarks).

Not quite sure what point you are really trying to make here. As I'm not even disagreeing with you!But I think the statement that I've made already a couple of times is a more than reasonable one.

""suspect in every day use, you would be unlikely to notice much difference between either SSD, Both are decent drives"

"Though should you have a SATA3 interface, then the C300 is maybe the better choice. But even then, I suspect my previous statement stands

I'm sure the OP wont be disappointed with either".

Good luck to the OP whatever he decides on.

PS. I think post number #9 has pretty much answered the OPs questions.
Click to expand...

Looks to me like he's simply justifying his signature. :D
 
ive just bought a vertex 2e 60gb to replace my vertex LE that died a couple of days ago (got an RMA # to send it back) i was torn between the 2E and the c300 but only had the funds for 60/64gb size so went with the 2e as the c300's write speeds so low, if the RMA of my 100gb LE is sucsessful they tell me il likely get a 120gb 2e as a replacement, if so i may well sell it and get the 128gb c300 as ive got sata3 on my mobo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom