- Mar 2, 2012
- 172
- 0
- 76
Is this a decent SSD? Newegg has a special today for a 500 gig BX100 for 169.99. That would work out to around $340 for a TB of nand storage. If its half decent that would be pretty sweet.
The BX100 is a great SSD.
If finances allow for it my next build will be completely ssd's.
Is this a decent SSD? Newegg has a special today for a 500 gig BX100 for 169.99. That would work out to around $340 for a TB of nand storage. If its half decent that would be pretty sweet.
I certainly thought about it. But I realized that for only $400 I could have 9TB of parity backed storage with traditional disks. I put the money I saved into a larger PCIe SSD. 1400MB/s sequential is quite nice.
Aren't those the shingled ones that write at, like, 30MB/sec? *shudder*For $500 you can have 8TB of 100% replicated storage with traditional disks. Yay 8TB HDDs.
Aren't those the shingled ones that write at, like, 30MB/sec? *shudder*
I'm just trying to run a simple gaming rig, nothing more. It's a luxury I know, but I just one day would like to have 3TB of nand and no spinning disks. Right now, I'm not doing to bad at all and can't complain. I have a 500 gig 850 pro, 128 830, 4tb black.
The speedtest on the 8TB Seagate drives is around 150 MB/s (read and write).
Yes the performance of the drive degrades a bit if used in a RAID environment. It also degrades if sectors are being overwritten due to SMR.
However you are obviously mischaracterizing the drive in your post.
http://www.storagereview.com/seagate_archive_hdd_review_8tb
Speeds are good for write bursts, and the drive performs very well in read-heavy workloads, but start throwing lots of writes, and god-forbid, random writes, and performance gets torpedoed.
RAID rebuilds specifically are far worse than "degrades a bit". RAID rebuilds take a factor of 3 performance hit compared with HGST's He8 (19 hrs HGST He8 vs. 57 hrs Seagate SMR).
In the Anandtech review, it wasn't a big difference - and there were benchmarks where the BX100 actually was faster.Wouldn't the Crucial MX200 be better than the BX100 for only ~$10 more? If I remember there wasn't a huge difference between them, but seems the prices now are very close.
Hah, if you put it like that I have to agree!In the Anandtech review, it wasn't a big difference - and there were benchmarks where the BX100 actually was faster.
Although it did have a couple features the BX100 didn't.
But for a home desktop client, I don't think I'd even consider it worth $10 more. That, like, totally a six pack of the good beer.