SSD or VelociRaptors?

[linoliveira]

SSD's don't have good reliability at all... you don't have to worry about a HDD's condition. Other hand, you have to do the SSD tweaks (if not already done) and make sure you don't constantly write on the SSD (take down it's cycles).

Right... i see your point but, lets be honest here...
If you are going to buy an OS drive, i assume you got a "store" drive like 1TB+ HDD.
Is that hard to just do some tweaks to the OS (it doesn't take more than 5min of your precious time) rly?
But then... you still say, "your SSD will die in a couple of time because you have limited write cycles". I agree with you, but just think about the usage of an OS drive:
1- Install the OS
2- Install all the drivers/programs/games and updates.
3- Open the apps/games and enjoy it.

Ok, in the start you might do some 200GB writes in a day, but you will not be re-installing the programs every day, will you?
Speaking for myself, i have done 250GB writes on the first day, and 2 months later i have 376GB writes out of 360TB (and i have not deactivated some settings in windows).
The only reason you can get in trouble with an SSD is some random firmware issue.

With my opinion stated above, i complement with the fact that you dont have to defragment an SSD nor wait for the seek of an HDD, experiencing the real deal of a fast computer with a proper Disk Drive!

 

[John Doe]

But then... you still say, "your SSD will die in a couple of time because you have limited write cycles". I agree with you, but just think about the usage of an OS drive:
1- Install the OS
2- Install all the drivers/programs/games and updates.
3- Open the apps/games and enjoy it.

Ok, in the start you might do some 200GB writes in a day, but you will not be re-installing the programs every day, will you?
Speaking for myself, i have done 250GB writes on the first day, and 2 months later i have 376GB writes out of 360TB (and i have not deactivated some settings in windows).
The reason you can get in trouble with an SSD is some random firmware issue if you do proper tweaks in windows.

Write cycles aren't the whole issue. It's the flash cells, cheap ones like to die out of nowhere. You don't know when and why an SSD may give up. Thing is, when the SSD shoots itself, you can't recover data from logical media.

As for firmware issues, they aren't related to Windows tweaks. Some SSD's (i.e, SandForce controller) have firmware bugs like the ones Bta mentioned.

 

[robal]

Raid 0 arrays do wonders for throughput, but do nothing for latency.
SSD will wipe the floor with HDD array in terms of OS responsiveness.

Cheers

 

[linoliveira]

As for firmware issues, they aren't related to Windows tweaks. Some SSD's (i.e, SandForce controller) have firmware bugs like the ones Bta mentioned.

Sorry, that was my bad english sense expression :b
I meant, if you do the right tweaks, you have nothing to worry about. The bad luck could be only if your firmware is bad.

Cheers!

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

but I personally would have the OCZ as i know they have a good warranty

They would have to given how high a failure rate they have.

 

[JATownes]

SSD's don't have good reliability at all... you don't have to worry about a HDD's condition. Other hand, you have to do the SSD tweaks (if not already done) and make sure you don't constantly write on the SSD (take down it's cycles).

Posted 3 days ago:

Uhm, yeah. Time to do some research on what I just mentioned. Look it up then tell me what the IBM guys say about it. SSD reliability (especially real SLC like ZeusIOP's, single cell only) is much more improved. It's more reliable than a convertional HDD.

You really need to make up your mind whether an SSD is reliable or not.

 

[John Doe]

Posted 3 days ago:

You really need to make up your mind whether an SSD is reliable or not.

You do realize I was on about a €10.000 single level cell only, enterprise only, limited ZeusIOPS SSD, right? It's not your $200 SSD. It's more reliable than even the most reliable HDD. That was an entirely specific case. We're talking about regular MLC flash here, which in no way compares to enterprise SLC.

 

[Bo$$]

You do realize I was on about a €10.000 single level cell only, enterprise only, limited ZeusIOPS SSD, right? It's not your $200 SSD. It's more reliable than even the most reliable HDD. That was an entirely specific case. We're talking about regular MLC flash here, which in no way compares to enterprise SLC.

OP doesn't want SLC anyway. Raid is LESS reliable anyway, no backup if one of the SECOND HAND drives fail.


Get an INTEL SSD and call it a day, fast, reliable, less power used

 

[John Doe]

OP doesn't want SLC anyway. Raid is LESS reliable anyway, no backup if one of the SECOND HAND drives fail.


Get an INTEL SSD and call it a day, fast, reliable, less power used

RAID isn't any less reliable than JBOD. RAID isn't back-up, all it does is to stagger multiple drives. Even if one fails, he still can take it up to data center and save the data. What if the SSD fails? It's impossible to recover data from flash media.

 

[JATownes]

I understand we were all talking about SLC the other day, but I still believe you are leading the OP in the wrong direction. If given the choice between VRs in RAID and a quality SSD, I think the answer is clearly the SSD. SSD (OS) + HDD (Data) + HDD (Backup) is the best combination.

And I believe the failure rate of HDD & SSDs are right on par with each other:

Source

 

[John Doe]

I understand we were all talking about SLC the other day, but I still believe you are leading the OP in the wrong direction. If given the choice between VRs in RAID and a quality SSD, I think the answer is clearly the SSD. SSD (OS) + HDD (Data) + HDD (Backup) is the best combination.

And I believe the failure rate of HDD & SSDs are right on par with each other

Failure rate isn't the point. You don't have anything to worry about with an HDD. With an SSD, you do regardless of the size of concern. That's all I'm saying.

And he isn't exactly about to get a "quality" SSD with that kind of budget.

Further, no, I'm not misleading him to any way. I owned both and there isn't Worlds difference between an SSD to a VRap. I don't care what anyone else says, the SSD isn't a million times faster than a VRap. Yes, it's faster. But not as much as people make it out to be.

 

[linoliveira]

Further, no, I'm not misleading him to any way. I owned both and there isn't Worlds difference between an SSD to a VRap. I don't care what anyone else says, the SSD isn't a million times faster than a VRap. Yes, it's faster. But not as much as people make it out to be.

Sure! see it for yourself -> LINK

43secs on the raptors VS 14 for the lonely SSD

Know why? Small files are a pain in the ass for HDD's thats where you rly notice the BIG difference from SSD's vs HDD's in RAID 0.
By a large margin, any SSD will kick the raptor's butt. Period

 

[JATownes]

Failure rate isn't the point. You don't have anything to worry about with an HDD. With an SSD, you do regardless of the size of concern. That's all I'm saying.

That is what a HDD backup is for. All the performance, and no risk, because you have an automated image of the SSD made every night.

And he isn't exactly about to get a "quality" SSD with that kind of budget.

Further, no, I'm not misleading him to any way. I owned both and there isn't Worlds difference between an SSD to a VRap. I don't care what anyone else says, the SSD isn't a million times faster than a VRap. Yes, it's faster. But not as much as people make it out to be.

I would argue that. My SSDs have an amazing track record, and are relatively inexpensive. I also have owned both, and yes there is a huge difference between the two. The "hype" about SSDs is very well deserved, as evidenced by everyone in this thread (besides you) recommending the SSDs.

 

[Chappy]

I'd honestly personally prefer Caviar Black 2TB than a VelociRaptor. You can even RAID it for performance increase. I already came from a 300GB VelociRaptor but then realized in the end that capacity is much more important than performance. I even read a review that caviar black performs on par or even higher than velociraptor. For me SSD's are just for Notebooks/Laptops as they're more susceptible to accidental drops and concussions. I suggest you go economical and save lots of bucks as our technology are still fresh. You might be able to get one of this or this in the near future... at a amazingly affordable price.

 

[jgrahl]

[/URL] Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/IMG]

this is the performance i get with a 150gb raptor and 150gb velociraptor in raid 0

 

[Jstn7477]

I have a Corsair Force 3 120GB and it has been fast and reliable for the last month. OCZ drives seem to die all the time, although any SSD can fail quickly just like some HDDs. The Kingston drives seem to use slow controllers in general, and Intels also have restrained throughput but seem quite reliable. SandForce chipsets are pretty much the fastest, but the SF-2200 series had some nasty firmware issues from release until recently. My Corsair with that chipset has been flawless, though.

For OS, I would take an SSD anyday. For games I still use my Barracuda Green 2GB and to be honest the games seem to load faster without the OS on the HDD, presumably because you can perfectly defrag the files (no unmovable data) and there's no OS competing for drive access while the game is loading.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[rangerone766]

this is the performance i get with a 150gb raptor and 150gb velociraptor in raid 0

i run 3x74gig of the old 8meg raptors. and for years they were blazing fast. but it is time to retire them. my xmas gift is going to be a pair of ssd's. so i say go ssd

i will say one thing, my raptors throughput is pretty close to alot of the sata 2 ssd's, but the latencies are way higher with any mechanical drive. almost every thing will be faster with the new tech.

 

[Canzara]

SSD, no competition.
After reading through this thread I thought I would share my experiences.
My first SSD was a first generation Solid series from OCZ. (no trim) I had 2x64gb in raid 0. One of these drives eventually died. OCZ was great about replacement and upgraded me to the Solid 2 for replacement with no hassle.
Me being impatient replaced my Solids while I waited for the replacement drive with a 120gb Kingston V100. it worked fine. Had no issues whatsoever with it.
Never actually used the solid they sent me.

Now I'm using a 120gb vertex 3.

Initially when I got this vertex 3 I was using an older chipset with only sata 2. I couldn't see any real world difference between the Kingston and the vertex 3 under sata 2. There were differences in benchmarks, but not all that dramatic, the vertex was faster but again, it was really only noticeable in benches, not real world use.
There were issues with the vertex initially due to the sandforce controller issue that is fairly common with all of the sata 3 sandforce drives. I had no issue until I upgraded to the 990fx chipset, then my system would crash about once a day and completely lose the drive. A cold boot would fix it and it would be fine for another day.. After much reading about the issues and a couple of firmware updates/experimenting with drivers etc the problem disappeared. For me I found I had no issues using the AMD AHCI driver, but I did have issues using the default windows AHCI driver. At the time the AMD driver was slower so I resented using it, but its not bad now.
I think most of the issues with the sandforce controller have been fixed with new firmware although I'm not 100% sure as mine works fine and I didn't keep up with it.

People saying the OCZ drives are unreliable, I can't agree. Anytime I had an issue OCZ was great about helping me fix it. The OCZ forums for SSD are second to none IMO. So much information that applies to any and all SSD's its just insane. As well there is software a member made to autotweak windows for your SSD. You can spend days reading up on them there.
When I did have a drive die they replaced it. Any drive could die, but if the company is going to send you a new one, its not as big of a deal. If you have to fight with that company to get your replacement, it quickly becomes a big issue.

Out of your choices, I would get the solid 3. I believe its the best choice there.
Good luck hope this helps some.

 

[nt300]

Can I use a SSD just for a game drive so I can install my games on this drive? Will make better performance in games?

 

[CrAsHnBuRnXp]

The only thing an SSD will do is help loading times.

 

[linoliveira]

The purpose of a SSD is to speed loading times.
Mainly what you do with a SSD is to put the OS and your favorite games and applications (the ones you use most) in it, so you don't have to wait so much time when you are working with something heavy or loading a game level.
As example of it is that windows boots in less than 20secs and heavy applications open almost instantaneously. As for FPS in 3D games you wont even see 1fps difference versus an HDD.

 

[LiveOrDie]

Get a SSD and use a RAID0 HDD for games.

 

[Batou1986]

Coming from someone who has had raptors since there inception, get the ssd even the best raptor cant hold a candle to the original vertex SSD's more less anything new.

 

[vigorsol]

I have a 128GB realSSD from crucial, sadly not m4, but it has trim enabled. 355 read, 140 write. If you make sure it has TRIM, the data loss should'nt be a problem for atleast the next 5 years, so to all the haters who are jealous of SSD - It's not that bad! the price is high yes, but so is everything else that is good?

 

[Nauzhror]

As for FPS in 3D games you wont even see 1fps difference versus an HDD.

I would imagine that varies game to game, seen a few where textures are loaded dynamically from the hard drive to avoid having loading screens when changing areas. A SSD should cause a noticeable increase in performance in such games.