just installed my Intel SSD

[Toadster]

just ran it on my DX48BT2 w/4GB RAM

230.3MB/s burst
188.4MB/s average

I'm running Vista x64 Ultimate so the HDTach was run in XP SP2 compatability mode

seriously, this drive is so fast it just makes me giggle!

 

[Toadster]

and for a 2nd benchmark

--------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 2.2 (C) 2007-2008 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
--------------------------------------------------

Sequential Read : 254.963 MB/s
Sequential Write : 77.306 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 167.521 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 78.148 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 14.952 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 30.286 MB/s

Test Size : 500 MB
Date : 2008/10/16 23:23:16

 

[BoboKatt]

Man I will have to compare that to my sad OCZ v2 64GB SSD drive. For some reason I cannot run HDtach on Vista 64. I will try the XP SP2 compatibility tonight.

Did you install it as your OS drive?

 

[LOUISSSSS]

is the boot time about double as fast as your old hdd? which was ur old hdd?

 

[mooseracing]

Originally posted by: BoboKatt
For some reason I cannot run HDtach on Vista 64. I will try the XP SP2 compatibility tonight.

I've run it on Server 08 x64 and Vista x64, you just need to use that compatability mode.

 

[Toadster]

Originally posted by: BoboKatt
Man I will have to compare that to my sad OCZ v2 64GB SSD drive. For some reason I cannot run HDtach on Vista 64. I will try the XP SP2 compatibility tonight.

Did you install it as your OS drive?

yes, it's my OS drive... boots in ~10 seconds to Vista x64 Ultimate, sure it's pricier than some other drives - but you gotta pay to play when it comes to this kind of performance!

 

[taltamir]

sweet, can't wait for benchies

 

[imported_cambit69]

random reads and writes are crap on that drive. i'll wait for better.

 

[taltamir]

random reads and writes are crap on that drive. i'll wait for better.

what? they are the best of any drive ever made (Well, in normal price ranges, you can buy a 200000$ drive that out performs it of course)

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Toadster
Random Write 4KB : 30.286 MB/s

That's actually pretty good for 4k random writes. What SATA controller you got it connected to? ICH9?

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: cambit69
random reads and writes are crap on that drive. i'll wait for better.

Some people just can't be bothered with the facts...

 

[Zap]

Alright, so where can one of these be purchased?

 

[WT]

Alright, so where can one of these be purchased?

<- in line behind Zap

Would make a nice Xmas gift to myself !

 

[Phew]

Nice results. Not to rain on your parade, but magnetic drives still have some life left in em:

My new 300 GB Velociraptor:

259 MB/s Burst
105 MB/s Average (128 MB/s at the outside of the platters, where all my apps are)

Not bad for about 1/10th the cost per GB (got mine for $150 after Ebay/Live cashback). That said, SSDs are the future! Silent, less power, and much much faster seek.

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: Phew
That said, SSDs are the future! Silent, less power, and much much faster seek.

And not sensative to shocks. I've lost at least one hdd to a 1" drop onto a desk while it was running (picked up for a second to reposition cables, slipped out of fingers...doh! busted drive!).

 

[snowdogg187]

It will be nice to see these drive offerings in the future when price can come down.

 

[imported_cambit69]

Originally posted by: Toadster

Random Read 4KB : 14.952 MB/s

pathetic scores, when intel can produce SSD's with random read 4KB speeds that match their sequentials, then that'll be something worth talking about.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: cambit69

Originally posted by: Toadster

Random Read 4KB : 14.952 MB/s

pathetic scores, when intel can produce SSD's with random read 4KB speeds that match their sequentials, then that'll be something worth talking about.

Do you know anything about the topic you are posting on?

Your posts suggest you do not. But I'd love you to prove this impression incorrect.

So...can you give us an obvious example of a disk storage medium that has 4k random reads and writes which are equivalent to its own sequential read and writes?

Even my ramdisk is incapable of doing this:
http://i272.photobucket.com/al...DiskMark5GBRamDisk.jpg

Regardless of your obvious ignorance betrayed by your attempt to establish performance parity between random and sequential read/write, can you further share with us an example of 4k random read scores that are not pathetic in your assessment?

14MB/s 4k random reads is better than any spindle-based harddrive system I have ever seen or tested which was not attached to a cached controller (in which case the 4k random read results are that of the cache and controller, not the storage hardware).

 

[taltamir]

+1 for Idontcare...

 

[imported_cambit69]

Since we're talking about SSD's, whether or not you've seen any spindle-based harddrive system perform better than 14MB/s for 4k random reads is irrelevant. Your little screenshot only supports the fact that the Intel SSD sucks. As for an example, I base my benchmarks on the Gigabyte i-RAM drive. So to sum everything up, the Intel SSD sucks monkey balls.

+1 for cambit69...

 

[taltamir]

that is the most retarded thing I have ever heard (recently). That is like saying that the fastest car in the world sucks balls because an air plane is faster.
The intel has the FASTEST 4K random writes of ANY SDD and ANY spindle (regular drives if you don't know what a spindle is) drive on the market.

you do realize the iRAM drive is a RAM drive, using RAM STICKS and a BATTERY, it holds 4GB max of space, and if the battery goes out all the data disappears!
it is NOT a hard drive. It is not a spindle based or SSD based hard drive, but ram with a battery.

 

[imported_cambit69]

Another thing I may add, you wanted an example of a disk storage medium that has random reads/writes equivalent to it's own sequential read/writes. You essentially showed yourself the example with your own screenshot. If your ramdrive was a normal drive with a SATA/300 interface, it would saturate the interface and thus have matching 300MB/s random and sequential read/writes.

 

[imported_cambit69]

Originally posted by: taltamir
that is the most retarded thing I have ever heard (recently). That is like saying that the fastest car in the world sucks balls because an air plane is faster.
The intel has the FASTEST 4K random writes of ANY SDD and ANY spindle (regular drives if you don't know what a spindle is) drive on the market.

you do realize the iRAM drive is a RAM drive, using RAM STICKS and a BATTERY, it holds 4GB max of space, and if the battery goes out all the data disappears!
it is NOT a hard drive. It is not a spindle based or SSD based hard drive, but ram with a battery.

I never said it was a hard drive. I consider it an SSD. An SSD, Solid State Drive. Last time i checked DDR memory was considered Solid State. Whether or not it has batteries included doesn't change the fact that it's still an SSD.

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: Toadster

Originally posted by: BoboKatt
Man I will have to compare that to my sad OCZ v2 64GB SSD drive. For some reason I cannot run HDtach on Vista 64. I will try the XP SP2 compatibility tonight.

Did you install it as your OS drive?

yes, it's my OS drive... boots in ~10 seconds to Vista x64 Ultimate, sure it's pricier than some other drives - but you gotta pay to play when it comes to this kind of performance!

What'd that run you? At this point, I'd still probably prefer a Velociraptor based on price, but heck, why not if you're got the scratch? I admit, my disk striping is faster than anything I've ever had before...

Originally posted by: cambit69
I never said it was a hard drive. I consider it an SSD. An SSD, Solid State Drive. Last time i checked DDR memory was considered Solid State. Whether or not it has batteries included doesn't change the fact that it's still an SSD.

Ummm... dude, an SSD doesn't lose its data when power is off. You can "consider" yer little thing an SSD, but that does not MAKE it an SSD. Also, SSDs are usually made with.... ahem... FLASH memory. RAM is... ahem... dynamic random access, which is a COMPLETELY different animal.

So let's try to keep the hostile threadjacking to a minimum, mmmmmmkay?

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Do you know anything about the topic you are posting on?

Your posts suggest you do not. But I'd love you to prove this impression incorrect.

Originally posted by: cambit69
Since we're talking about SSD's, whether or not you've seen any spindle-based harddrive system perform better than 14MB/s for 4k random reads is irrelevant. Your little screenshot only supports the fact that the Intel SSD sucks. As for an example, I base my benchmarks on the Gigabyte i-RAM drive. So to sum everything up, the Intel SSD sucks monkey balls.

+1 for cambit69...

Originally posted by: cambit69
Another thing I may add, you wanted an example of a disk storage medium that has random reads/writes equivalent to it's own sequential read/writes. You essentially showed yourself the example with your own screenshot. If your ramdrive was a normal drive with a SATA/300 interface, it would saturate the interface and thus have matching 300MB/s random and sequential read/writes.

Originally posted by: cambit69
I never said it was a hard drive. I consider it an SSD. An SSD, Solid State Drive. Last time i checked DDR memory was considered Solid State. Whether or not it has batteries included doesn't change the fact that it's still an SSD.

Thanks for opening your mouth and confirming my initial suspicions to be correct.

I hope your posts have added value to your own life in some manner because wasting your time posting your rubbish here on the forums (the term is trolling, isn't it?) has most certainly NOT added value to anyone who inadvertently read them.

(PS: when you +1 yourself it kinda undermines your efforts to have credibility, are you 12 or something?)