This leaves the drive’s capacity at 59.6GB, which a little too small for our liking. A fresh install of Windows 7, a few applications and a game or two and you’ll soon hit be reaching for the add/install programs control panel to clear out some room.
Couldn't this be solved by making the SSD you windows/cache drive, while installing your games on a "normal" harddrive along with your data?
(I anyway never install my games under C:\program files...)
Yers, but then you don't get lightning-quick game level loads - I guess it depends on how much gaming you do, and how much you hate the waiting for levels to load.
I've been trying to decide what's the better choice (for gaming) out of the X25-M or one of the Indilinx SSDs... Anyone got any thoughts they want to share?
Originally Posted by Mr T Looks pretty impressive for the money. Is there a Crucial M225 128GB review on the way?
we're waiting for the Windows 7 firmware update. It's an Indilinx based drive for cheap tbh, and if you can stand to wait a week or two for firmware updates over the Vertex, it's the best Indilinx drive - they're all the same after all.
Originally Posted by Tyrmot I've been trying to decide what's the better choice (for gaming) out of the X25-M or one of the Indilinx SSDs... Anyone got any thoughts they want to share?
Indilinx Indilinx Indilinx
The new firmware (available now to OCZ vertex users) enables TRIM support too, so excellent performance maintenance in Windows 7. We tested both the old and the new X25-Ms for Custom PC's labs test, and while they have the best random write speeds (30+MB/s) theier sequential write speeds are cack - 80MB/s is slower than a hard disk.
The Intel drives also loaded the Crysis level a couple of seconds slower than the Indilinx based drives. While I know the Intel drives have their fans, I'd take superior real world and massively faster sequential writes over un-noticeably faster random writes any day.
i want an ssd so bad. thing is i'm not about to pay more than about this price, but i'd be wanting at least 100gb. looks like i'll be skipping a generation.
Originally Posted by Tyrmot I've been trying to decide what's the better choice (for gaming) out of the X25-M or one of the Indilinx SSDs... Anyone got any thoughts they want to share?
Indilinx Indilinx Indilinx
The new firmware (available now to OCZ vertex users) enables TRIM support too, so excellent performance maintenance in Windows 7. We tested both the old and the new X25-Ms for Custom PC's labs test, and while they have the best random write speeds (30+MB/s) theier sequential write speeds are cack - 80MB/s is slower than a hard disk.
The Intel drives also loaded the Crysis level a couple of seconds slower than the Indilinx based drives. While I know the Intel drives have their fans, I'd take superior real world and massively faster sequential writes over un-noticeably faster random writes any day.
Ah ok cheers Baz. The Intel has the advantage of coming in at 80GB at the ~£170 point where the various Indilinx types seem to be 60-64GB for a similar price, and I'm don't have the £££ at the moment to move up to the 120-128GB versions... But I guess performance wins this particular race
OK maybe im missing something but a "Kingston Technology 2.5 inch 128GB SATA2 SSDNow V-Series Drive " on amazon costs "£167.19 & this item Delivered FREE in the UK with Super Saver Delivery. " sorry for the advertising but SSDs prices change by the minute and even though this one is on back order (upto a month apparantly) thats still a heck of a lot cheaper than any other one ive seen on this site.
And yes ok theyre indilink or whatever but so what, whatever you buy in new technology you'll get bugs, just depends on how much you want to spend to find out those bugs.
This leaves the drive’s capacity at 59.6GB, which a little too small for our liking. A fresh install of Windows 7, a few applications and a game or two and you’ll soon hit be reaching for the add/install programs control panel to clear out some room.
Couldn't this be solved by making the SSD you windows/cache drive, while installing your games on a "normal" harddrive along with your data?
(I anyway never install my games under C:\program files...)
Xir
Is 60 gigas ACTUALLY not enough for WIn 7? I have a 25 gig partition for my XP with some ranom, non-essential programs installed there as well, and i still have over 8 GB of space left.
Originally Posted by TS_Slick OK maybe im missing something but a "Kingston Technology 2.5 inch 128GB SATA2 SSDNow V-Series Drive " on amazon costs "£167.19 & this item Delivered FREE in the UK with Super Saver Delivery. " sorry for the advertising but SSDs prices change by the minute and even though this one is on back order (upto a month apparantly) thats still a heck of a lot cheaper than any other one ive seen on this site.
And yes ok theyre indilink or whatever but so what, whatever you buy in new technology you'll get bugs, just depends on how much you want to spend to find out those bugs.
That's the V Servies that uses the old JMicron controller, not the V+ that uses the superior Samsung. The standard V series is completely rubbish, as as such is priced to ship, although I'd feel sorry for anyone foolish enough to grab one - time to write 1.6GB of ISO files? 46 seconds (36MB/s). Maximum random write latency? 1615ms (yes, that's 1.6 seconds!).
I'll admit they're confusingly named though - it'd be easy to get mixed up, especially as the drives are worlds apart in terms of performance.
Originally Posted by TS_Slick OK maybe im missing something but a "Kingston Technology 2.5 inch 128GB SATA2 SSDNow V-Series Drive " on amazon costs "£167.19 & this item Delivered FREE in the UK with Super Saver Delivery. " sorry for the advertising but SSDs prices change by the minute and even though this one is on back order (upto a month apparantly) thats still a heck of a lot cheaper than any other one ive seen on this site.
And yes ok theyre indilink or whatever but so what, whatever you buy in new technology you'll get bugs, just depends on how much you want to spend to find out those bugs.
The thought of an OS randomly grabbing hard disks outside your control is... well, I was going to say "very worrying", but in actual fact, it's a complete deal breaker.
I presume this, along with whatever other new stuff they've dreamed up, will go on the list of Things To Switch Off Immediately After Install. Honestly, since windows 98 the only user experience thing that's actually changed, with a slight nod to stability, is the amount of crap I have to turn off on install.
Originally Posted by Phil Rhodes I edit video for a living.
The thought of an OS randomly grabbing hard disks outside your control is... well, I was going to say "very worrying", but in actual fact, it's a complete deal breaker.
I presume this, along with whatever other new stuff they've dreamed up, will go on the list of Things To Switch Off Immediately After Install. Honestly, since windows 98 the only user experience thing that's actually changed, with a slight nod to stability, is the amount of crap I have to turn off on install.
Originally Posted by Primoz Is 60 gigas ACTUALLY not enough for WIn 7? I have a 25 gig partition for my XP with some ranom, non-essential programs installed there as well, and i still have over 8 GB of space left.
Im posting this from windows 7 on a 60 gig partition, and it runs just fine. Mind you the only things I have installed are security stuff, flash et al for browsing, drivers, some stuff for VNCing to work, and DEFCON for when I cant be arsed to VNC to work.
Probably he means that 60g isnt enough for W7 and your Steam folder :)
The article mentions the fact that Windows Vista tends to do a lot of unbidden hard disk thrashing in order to implement defragmenting, analysis, blah, whatever irksome and unwanted non-feature microsoft have chosen to blight us with this release.
The reason I ask is that if you've carefully built a RAID that will do uncompressed HD video, and if you have spent further large sums of money renting a very expensive broadcast tape deck for a day so as to record lots of HD video to tape, it would suck to be halfway through recording a 2-hour feature film when suddenly Microsoft Irritation Express Edition 2009 pops up and hammers your disks.
My question is: is it possible to disable all of this.
Originally Posted by Phil Rhodes OK, let's take this from the beginning.
The article mentions the fact that Windows Vista tends to do a lot of unbidden hard disk thrashing in order to implement defragmenting, analysis, blah, whatever irksome and unwanted non-feature microsoft have chosen to blight us with this release.
The reason I ask is that if you've carefully built a RAID that will do uncompressed HD video, and if you have spent further large sums of money renting a very expensive broadcast tape deck for a day so as to record lots of HD video to tape, it would suck to be halfway through recording a 2-hour feature film when suddenly Microsoft Irritation Express Edition 2009 pops up and hammers your disks.
My question is: is it possible to disable all of this.
Comments 1 to 24 of 24
ReplyAh well, the OCZ Agility series is pretty decent value.
Couldn't this be solved by making the SSD you windows/cache drive, while installing your games on a "normal" harddrive along with your data?
(I anyway never install my games under C:\program files...)
Xir
we're waiting for the Windows 7 firmware update. It's an Indilinx based drive for cheap tbh, and if you can stand to wait a week or two for firmware updates over the Vertex, it's the best Indilinx drive - they're all the same after all.
Indilinx Indilinx Indilinx
The new firmware (available now to OCZ vertex users) enables TRIM support too, so excellent performance maintenance in Windows 7. We tested both the old and the new X25-Ms for Custom PC's labs test, and while they have the best random write speeds (30+MB/s) theier sequential write speeds are cack - 80MB/s is slower than a hard disk.
The Intel drives also loaded the Crysis level a couple of seconds slower than the Indilinx based drives. While I know the Intel drives have their fans, I'd take superior real world and massively faster sequential writes over un-noticeably faster random writes any day.
Ah ok cheers Baz. The Intel has the advantage of coming in at 80GB at the ~£170 point where the various Indilinx types seem to be 60-64GB for a similar price, and I'm don't have the £££ at the moment to move up to the 120-128GB versions... But I guess performance wins this particular race
And yes ok theyre indilink or whatever but so what, whatever you buy in new technology you'll get bugs, just depends on how much you want to spend to find out those bugs.
Is 60 gigas ACTUALLY not enough for WIn 7? I have a 25 gig partition for my XP with some ranom, non-essential programs installed there as well, and i still have over 8 GB of space left.
That's the V Servies that uses the old JMicron controller, not the V+ that uses the superior Samsung. The standard V series is completely rubbish, as as such is priced to ship, although I'd feel sorry for anyone foolish enough to grab one - time to write 1.6GB of ISO files? 46 seconds (36MB/s). Maximum random write latency? 1615ms (yes, that's 1.6 seconds!).
I'll admit they're confusingly named though - it'd be easy to get mixed up, especially as the drives are worlds apart in terms of performance.
The one on this site is V+ ;)
The thought of an OS randomly grabbing hard disks outside your control is... well, I was going to say "very worrying", but in actual fact, it's a complete deal breaker.
I presume this, along with whatever other new stuff they've dreamed up, will go on the list of Things To Switch Off Immediately After Install. Honestly, since windows 98 the only user experience thing that's actually changed, with a slight nod to stability, is the amount of crap I have to turn off on install.
wrong thread there phil?
Again can we turn off this "randomly grabbing hard disks" thing?
Im posting this from windows 7 on a 60 gig partition, and it runs just fine. Mind you the only things I have installed are security stuff, flash et al for browsing, drivers, some stuff for VNCing to work, and DEFCON for when I cant be arsed to VNC to work.
Probably he means that 60g isnt enough for W7 and your Steam folder :)
You what?
THIS IS SPARTA
The article mentions the fact that Windows Vista tends to do a lot of unbidden hard disk thrashing in order to implement defragmenting, analysis, blah, whatever irksome and unwanted non-feature microsoft have chosen to blight us with this release.
The reason I ask is that if you've carefully built a RAID that will do uncompressed HD video, and if you have spent further large sums of money renting a very expensive broadcast tape deck for a day so as to record lots of HD video to tape, it would suck to be halfway through recording a 2-hour feature film when suddenly Microsoft Irritation Express Edition 2009 pops up and hammers your disks.
My question is: is it possible to disable all of this.
Yes
-
« Previous
-
1
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums