SSD purchase

[slightlyhuman]

Hey guys. I recently picked up a gateway laptop. 4gb ram, 260m GPU, upgrading to a 2.8ghz 6mb cpu(stock was 2.53 3mb). Also looking at throwing an SSD in there. Currently it has a 500gb 5400rpm(ewww). I'm looking at the 60GB SSDs. A few questions. The read/write times. The read/write times are confusing me.

Would the cheapest 60GB SSD still be faster than my 5400rpm drive? I don't want to skimp on read/write times if it makes that big of a difference. I'm mainly looking to improve OS speeds and if I can get any better performance in BF3(long shot I know but anything helps).

Just curious if I should get the fastest(and most expensive) SSD out there or would one of the cheaper ones be sufficient enough.

 

[philipma1957]

Hey guys. I recently picked up a gateway laptop. 4gb ram, 260m GPU, upgrading to a 2.8ghz 6mb cpu(stock was 2.53 3mb). Also looking at throwing an SSD in there. Currently it has a 500gb 5400rpm(ewww). I'm looking at the 60GB SSDs. A few questions. The read/write times. The read/write times are confusing me.

Would the cheapest 60GB SSD still be faster than my 5400rpm drive? I don't want to skimp on read/write times if it makes that big of a difference. I'm mainly looking to improve OS speeds and if I can get any better performance in BF3(long shot I know but anything helps).

Just curious if I should get the fastest(and most expensive) SSD out there or would one of the cheaper ones be sufficient enough.

SSD'S ARE way faster then hdds for ops program loading etc.
I am not sure if your laptop is sata II or sata III.
If you have a sata II laptop you don't need a sata III ssd.
I have used many ssd's in many pieces of gear.
I would look for a 128gb ssd over a 64gb ssd.

An intel a crucial a samsung all come to mind. I do not know where Tejas is located so I won't give ebay links or store links for 128gb ssd's.

If you search ebay there are good legit sellers that have 128gb samsung series 470 ssds for 150 bucks buy it now.

Also newegg has some crucial and intel ssds along with superbiiz. I have found buying 64gb ssd to be frustrating because they are a bit slower then the larger models. Of course they are too small. I really try to find 120 or 128gb models of samsung and intel.

 

[slightlyhuman]

Trying to find out of I have Sata 2 or 3.

 

[slightlyhuman]

it's a gateway 7908u-fx, fwiw

 

[groberts101]

An OS lives in the latency and randoms which just about any SSD will reward you with. So, in that respect.. the biggest perceptible gain when moving from HDD to SSD is the latency and HUGE random performance they have to offer over the spinner. That will make even the cheapest and smallest SSD seem like "da bomb" vs HDD. And the more you multitask?.. the better the perceivable gain in usage.

Aside from that?.. the e-peening that many fall victim to in regards to sequential speed comparisons rarely make much difference in perception.. UNLESS.. you have another storage vulume on the machine(or external storage) that can make use of those taller sequentials. Having statically stored data ON the SSD itself read at 500MB/s vs 250MB/s will harldy make much difference when you consider that many apps/files will open in only 1 second to begin with so there's not much to be gained ther at all for time saved. Faster write speeds can help though, especially in multitasking environments due to the write load requirements of various tasks being split up amongst the SSD's capability. It's like a pie being divy'd up and a larger one is always better if you do much multitasking and writing to the drive.

IOW, getting too caught up on sequential performance means squat when you consider that we cannot write to the SSD any faster than we can read the data from storage. Conversely, we cannot write data to the storage volume any faster than its inherent capability regardless if the SSD can read data at 500MB/s. So don't get too caught up on sequentials as they don't rule in an OS environment unless you have raided HDD storage to even take full advantage of them. Straight sequentials are best left to the concernt of heavy transfer tasks, such as a storage volume would allow.

However, that being said, another way to look at it this. If you currently have a sata2 device and can't make immediate use of those faster sppeds?.. it may still be worth buying a sata3 SSD jjst because they're not that much more money and you have greater forward capability down the road when you do upgrade to a sata3 capable device.

So, unless the sata2 SSD is so much cheaper or you really don't want to worry about forward compatability/hardware upgrades?.. I would always advise in purchasing sata3 SSD's these days. 2 years down the road, you'll be glad you spent the extra 40 bucks.

And PS.. larger SSD's generally have more stamina and better latency/random perormance than smaller ones, so there's that to consider as well. Although, there's nothing wrong with starting out small to get your feet wet at first. Then you'll be hooked for life and want another.. and another.. and another. That's how it starts for many of us. lol

Good luck on the hunt.

 

[bryanW1995]

Crucial m4 is ~ $180 for 128gb on newegg right now. Many 80gb drives can be found for less than $100 these days. I'd try to stick to intel/samsung/crucial if possible.

 

[slightlyhuman]

Hmm. So Sataiii will work in my lappy even if it's only Sataii it will just run it at sataii speeds right? So what can you recommend for the best performance under $100? Awesome post. Thx.

 

[groberts101]

I'd have to agree with bryan on those choices as well.

Staying away from the increasing likelyhood of laptop bios compatabilty issues known to plague Sandforce controlled drives would probably be best in your situation.

Mine works fast and flawlessly on my I7 laptop.. but the potential is definately there when adding a Sandforce to the mix for some.

PS.. yes.. sata3 will be backwards compatable and only the max sequentials would be affected due to the fact that they never saturate the sata2 interface anyhow. Especially on a laptop which already trades a bit of performance for battery considerations written into the bios implementation.

 

[bryanW1995]

This is as low as I'd go, and it's $5 over your budget. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148441

However, I wouldn't buy anything at all right now. SSD prices currently suck, especially on the smaller drives. the 256gb m4 is only $345 right now, while 64-96gb drives are trending $1.50-$1.80 per GB right now. MADNESS!

 

[razel]

Hmm. So Sataiii will work in my lappy even if it's only Sataii it will just run it at sataii speeds right? So what can you recommend for the best performance under $100? Awesome post. Thx.

At current price per GB, you're left with the smaller sized SSD 64GB unless you get lucky with a sale on a 120GBs. The only one at 64GB that's worth it tends to be the most expensive one... the Samsung 830 which currently is on sale today for $100. Tom's Hardware compared that 64GB size and it came out on top. The issue with the 64GB SSD is that their write perfomance can be half of the larger sized models. Luckily the most important aspects and improvements that SSDs bring, read speed and latency tends to be the same.

However, if I were you, I'd pick up an older Intel G2 off ebay. I see the 80GB under $100 pretty often.

 

[slightlyhuman]

what about this?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-X25-M...ultDomain_0&hash=item27c2ae69be#ht_500wt_1089

 

[groberts101]

depends on how much you like to gamble with your cash on e-bay. Most get lucky.. but some don't.

PS.. the "both formatted with a pass of 0's so they are at factory speeds".. is certainly funny too. Run the toolbox on the drive and make sure you get the latest firmware flashed right away and TRIM the drive before using them and you might be all good.

 

[slightlyhuman]

An intel a crucial a samsung all come to mind. I do not know where Tejas is located so I won't give ebay links or store links for 128gb ssd's.

Texas=p

 

[bryanW1995]

That seller has almost 1000 sales and 99.2% positive, I think you're just as safe buying from him as you are from tigerdirect. The bigger issue is new vs used, 80gb vs 64gb, and speed. Normally I don't talk much about ssd performance, b/c to almost all of us any ssd is a jet plane compared to walking on foot, but the x25m g2 is going to be quite a bit slower than a samsung 830 or crucial m4. And even though x25m g2 has legendary quality, this one is likely 2-3 years old and probably won't be any more reliable than a new ssd from a quality manufacturer. So that leaves the 80gb vs 64. As I said before, there are really no good options right now. A few weeks ago you could get a brand new 320 series for $1/gb in either 80, 120, or 160gb flavors. I'd suffer through it for a week or two, keep your eyes here, in hot deals forum, at slickdeals.net, etc etc until a good deal comes along. They always do, and ssd prices will continue to trend downward over time.

edit: obligatory "I love my x25m g2 80gb drive" disclaimer.

 

[groberts101]

Personally, I'd just spend the extra cash and go with this one. Decent bang for the buck and you'll be able to throw it in any sata3 upgrade down the road for a slight bump in speed.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147133

even cheaper when used with this coupon.
http://dealzon.com/deals/cheap-samsung-ssd

 

[slightlyhuman]

looking at grabbing that one groberts, thanks!

 

[philipma1957]

looking at grabbing that one groberts, thanks!

that drive will keep you happy and the price is good. when you get go to samsungs website and register the ssd they will tack on 3 months to the warranty for no cost. I was an intel nut for a few years but the samsungs have been rock solid for me so I have purchased them more often over the last year or so.

this is an ebay link to a usa based seller

http://www.ebay.com/itm/128GB-Samsu...aultDomain_0&hash=item43ac51c038#ht_980wt_889


I purchased a few from him. they had less then 10 hours on them and work fine for me. I would think since you are new to ssds you may want to buy from newegg and get the 99 dollar one.

 

[groberts101]

looking at grabbing that one groberts, thanks!

you're welcome and you can hold me partially resonsible later on when you're "hooked on SSD". Enjoy. :thumbsup:

 

[slightlyhuman]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167048

found this one for $93 shipped on some forums. thoughts vs the samsung mentioned above>?

 

[slightlyhuman]

eh, the samsung shows to be a lot faster, nvm.

 

[razel]

You won't be able to tell the difference between the Intel or Samsung. The Intel may even bench better since you're on SATA II. Regardless, they're both stellar and have some of the lowest latencies for SSDs. I'd go for the Intel 320 since it's 80GB for $93. You'll appreciate the additional space. That package also comes with a great USB 3.0/SATA adapter.

 

[bryanW1995]

If the intel is new then definitely go with it. Check out the ssd/hdd section from the main AT page, anand did a nice writeup of the 830 series with lots of ssd's to compare against it about 4-5 months ago. IIRC, he also tried out the sata 6gb/s ssd's in sata 2 slots, and the intel 320 series was excellent in those tests. Plus, having 80 gb vs 64 gb is a huge upgrade to your available space after intsalling your OS and mission critical stuff.

I assume that you have an external hdd for storage?

 

[Obsoleet]

Personally, I'd just spend the extra cash and go with this one. Decent bang for the buck and you'll be able to throw it in any sata3 upgrade down the road for a slight bump in speed.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147133

even cheaper when used with this coupon.
http://dealzon.com/deals/cheap-samsung-ssd

I'd go with this, best deal in the thread overall IMO.

 

[bryanW1995]

I'd go with this, best deal in the thread overall IMO.

Did you catch that the samsung is more expensive and extremely limited at only 64gb vs 80gb for the intel drive? And also that the OP is only using sata II, so the intel will be nearly as fast as any of the sata 6gb/s ssd's available, anyway?

 

[groberts101]

SSD "speed" has far more to do with latency and random performance than sequentials. So the "a sata 2 SSD will run better on a sata2 board" argument is moot since even the slower interface would not bottleneck the SSD's either way.

Regardless of that though.. I'd still lean towards the sammy even with less capacity due to greater long term potential with only slight W7 tweaks needed(such as hiberfile, page file, and sys restore space reductions/or disabling) to make it work well for most applications.