A-Data Just added Trim to the firmware for the SX95- and S592 series
Not until January unfortunately. To quote its website:
No files available......
A-DATA said the firmware we have is "retail specification" and that cleared us to run the preview, however TRIM comes next month :) Most other companies will be launching 612 SSDs next month as well I imagine.
We'll hopefully be taking a look at Windows 7, TRIM and SSDs in January, once I've built a new test rig and figured out how to nuke Windows 7 caching from orbit.
Does the S596 have automatic performance maintenance/garbage collection?
I guess we'll just take their word for it, then.
I seem to recall many many months ago suggesting that someone should do some long-term testing of SSDs in order to find exactly this sort of problem. I was laughed at, I think.
still they could do with fixing that 1-2 second Write issue, be nice to know how the SSD performs for bit-tech
just as an question was the drive also tested in an filled state as well, as the JM drives really did tank in speed once they needed to do an erase before Write (i am betting anandtech will test it if bit tech have not)
is it just me that is confused by all htis SSD stuff depending on the controller and the brand the results appear to be all over the place what would you reccomend for something ~40-60GB for Fast read speeds (with fast seek)
Does the S596 have automatic performance maintenance/garbage collection?
I guess we'll just take their word for it, then.
I seem to recall many many months ago suggesting that someone should do some long-term testing of SSDs in order to find exactly this sort of problem. I was laughed at, I think.
The article is a performance preview, and we weren't even aware there was G/C until this morning. As I said we'll be coming back the JMicron 612 drives when they inevitably land on shelves, where we'll look at G/C, TRIM and performance degradation.
In regards to long term performance, G/C is a lot different to a drive running out of write cycles, which is what you originally suggested back in the G.Skill Falcon review (ie, an SSD will run out of write cycles and be borked long before a conventional drive). While that's technically true, the typical number write cycles for a consumer SSD is in the region 10,000 so it's a non-issue. G/C, TRIM and performance degradation over time due to "dirty NAND" and the read/copy to cache/ rewrite process is entirely different and is about maintaining a drive's peak performance.
We've been running SSDs here at bit-tech for months now, in both, home work and testing systems. Our SSD equipped GFX testing rigs have been completely re-imaged literally hundreds of times and show no signs of significant performance slow down due to over-use.
Originally Posted by V3ctor Where's Intel's G2 160Gb? or an 80Gb Intel drive? Just for a wider comparison :)
Nevermind, I just saw that it competes with the Indilinx controllers...
PS: Good review :)
I've been tempted by an Intel X25-M G2, it seems it offers great performance in everything expect sequential write activity, which it balances with a higher random write performance, than the Indilinx drives.
So it seems that it would suck as a drive for a file & print server, and to be fair Intel does offer the mucho expensive SLC version for enterprise use. For gaming and general PC use, the high random write performance is more important. (Is this assertion correct?)
Originally Posted by V3ctor Where's Intel's G2 160Gb? or an 80Gb Intel drive? Just for a wider comparison :)
Nevermind, I just saw that it competes with the Indilinx controllers...
PS: Good review :)
I've been tempted by an Intel X25-M G2, it seems it offers great performance in everything expect sequential write activity, which it balances with a higher random write performance, than the Indilinx drives.
So it seems that it would suck as a drive for a file & print server, and to be fair Intel does offer the mucho expensive SLC version for enterprise use. For gaming and general PC use, the high random write performance is more important. (Is this assertion correct?)
So Bit-Tech can we have a review, please.
You're assertions are correct - the X25-M G2 delivers much slower sequential write speeds (capped at 80MB/s) while also offering superior random write speeds. However, I'd argue that the random write capability of the Indilinx controller is still excellent (to the point where you'll never notice the difference) whilst you'll definatley notice the difference between 140MB/s write and 80MB/s write, especially when installing patches, service packs, etc.
I'll be reviewing the X25-M G2, as well as looking at the Indilinx's TRIM, in the new year once our Windows 7 SSD test rig is up and running.
@Baz, I completely disagree, where have you got this data from? I have just moved from a 120gb vertex to a intel 160gb g2 and the difference is very obvious. Programs open at a faster rate and installs take around the same time. Look at anandtechs reviews for more proof of this. Seems odd a bit tech author making such wild statements. Reminds me of that news story saying i-7920 was being fased out in the summer.
Originally Posted by bodkin @Baz, I completely disagree, where have you got this data from? I have just moved from a 120gb vertex to a intel 160gb g2 and the difference is very obvious. Programs open at a faster rate and installs take around the same time. Look at anandtechs reviews for more proof of this. Seems odd a bit tech author making such wild statements. Reminds me of that news story saying i-7920 was being fased out in the summer.
I would not say wild statements at all, we've looked into it considerably and simply disagree with yourself and Anandtech. The G2 is an excellent drive, no doubt, both have their merits: it's like arguing the difference of the fat content in milk. The latency difference is negligible between the two, and when you say "opening programs" you mean the read performance: which also reaches a bit of "fast enough" mantra. You obviously don't install or write significantly much, where the Indilinx drive will be notably faster: that's your own user style that suits you. That's fine. Unless, you're thrashing the drive with dozens-hundreds of IOs at the same time, both should appear just as responsive.
Your relation to this news story has me lost though - where is the link between both statements?
It seems just a snipe for the sake of it without actually reading what was written or taking the facts into account. For the record, we saw actual roadmaps from multiple manufacturers and if you read the news story it says next year - as in 2010. I cannot predict the future unfortunately, I can only do my best as a journalist to obtain as much evidence to write what multiple people from completely different companies informed me of.
Not to mention the fact in 6 months is a long time and Intel could easily have changed its roadmaps: Just last month it was showing off Larrabee, now it's cancelled it. Also, we were the first to break the news more recently that the Core i7 930 will be arriving in January too: have you conveniently forgotten about that to make your point?
Sorry dint mean to snip, but at the same time I find it a little annoying you say I dont install and write much. As a system builder I do a fair amount of installing, and while I found the old jmicron ssds unusable the difference in installs between the g2 and the vertex is not notable. What I meant by "opining programs" was that the responsiveness of windows is much higher with the intel drive. Sorry about the snip, it is just something that has been bothering me since you posted it as it send the community into overdrive and I now several people bought up stock over it. But thats off topic. I hope this makes more sense
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi Not to mention the fact in 6 months is a long time and Intel could easily have changed its roadmaps: Just last month it was showing off Larrabee, now it's cancelled it.
Good grief, I do believe I blinked and missed that one!
They were banging on about that for ages, did they say why? (Did you cover it?)
ATI must have scared them off with their 5xxx series...
Originally Posted by bodkin Sorry dint mean to snip, but at the same time I find it a little annoying you say I dont install and write much. As a system builder I do a fair amount of installing, and while I found the old jmicron ssds unusable the difference in installs between the g2 and the vertex is not notable. What I meant by "opining programs" was that the responsiveness of windows is much higher with the intel drive. Sorry about the snip, it is just something that has been bothering me since you posted it as it send the community into overdrive and I now several people bought up stock over it. But thats off topic. I hope this makes more sense
You find it annoying? Please realise I have NO idea of what you do, I can only assume given I know the distinct differences between the drives and what I've seen for myself between both of them.
If you personally find it more responsive, then great ;) you've got the right drive for you, I can't say I have noticed any difference on any of the systems we've used Intel or Indilinx drives with. You click it and *bang*, it loads.
If people buy anything, let alone stock from one review they read on the internet then they are crackers. We do our best to test as fairly as possible but other sites test in other ways with other hardware setups: you must always, always go through them all to see what the differences are and why these conclusions were made. Just like an "8/10" (or whatever) here is completely different to anywhere else, which is why we issue our own score guide.
I don't want to sound like some sort of brown noser but I feel this doesn't get said enough. I think the guys at Bit-Tech deserve some sort of medal or honors for how great their hardware reviews are. I have yet to find more comprehensive reviews (that are relevant given how quickly us consumers demand them) anywhere on the web. So here's a big thank you from this lowly Iowa redneck.
Originally Posted by bodkin Cool, thanks for explaining your position, no hard feeling?
Nope of course not :) It's good to have discussion! I do understand why you feel that way about the G2, it is very good drive :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scootiep I don't want to sound like some sort of brown noser but I feel this doesn't get said enough. I think the guys at Bit-Tech deserve some sort of medal or honors for how great their hardware reviews are. I have yet to find more comprehensive reviews (that are relevant given how quickly us consumers demand them) anywhere on the web. So here's a big thank you from this lowly Iowa redneck.
Originally Posted by Scootiep I don't want to sound like some sort of brown noser but I feel this doesn't get said enough. I think the guys at Bit-Tech deserve some sort of medal or honors for how great their hardware reviews are. I have yet to find more comprehensive reviews (that are relevant given how quickly us consumers demand them) anywhere on the web. So here's a big thank you from this lowly Iowa redneck.
+1
We, the general public, are often an ungrateful and ungracious lot - but we'd soon miss you if you weren't here supplying our every techno-info whim... :)
I remember in the days when the internet was but a small sapling - and tomshardware actually managed to write a review that you could trust. Bit-Tech came on the scene and since then you have managed to bring us some superb hardware reviews and methodology (whilst Toms has gone to ****).
There will always be a case for an individual having a particular SSD over one recommended. The point of a well written review is to arm the reader with the facts to make that judgement, to accurately inform, clearly paint the picture (have I said enough?). The end conclusion thould try to roll everything up and give an overview of the picutre - not repeat everthing in the review. If you are 'Joe bloggs' - then read the conclusion, if you are Jim, need a drive that has fast random reads..... pick out the specifics...
Baz - just wondering if Bit-Tech could do an article on raid cards (at 3 price points? budget, mainstream, OMG I need to sell the wife and kids), various RAIDs (0,1,10,5) SSD performance. Whilst I have seen a few reviews of SSD RAIDs - I cant seem to find if I need to spend £300 on a 4 port RAID card - or whether a £50 cheap and cheerful will give me any improvement over the ICH? on the MB.
Also I havent quite worked out whether the raid card (if used with SSDs) needs to support TRIM - as well as the SSDs - to get full TRIM support in this type of set up. Any one know?
Baz - just wondering if Bit-Tech could do an article on raid cards (at 3 price points? budget, mainstream, OMG I need to sell the wife and kids), various RAIDs (0,1,10,5) SSD performance. Whilst I have seen a few reviews of SSD RAIDs - I cant seem to find if I need to spend £300 on a 4 port RAID card
We actually started something like this back mid year, but Baz got side tracked because we told him to do other reviews :o:o
Originally Posted by V3ctor Where's Intel's G2 160Gb? or an 80Gb Intel drive? Just for a wider comparison :)
Nevermind, I just saw that it competes with the Indilinx controllers...
PS: Good review :)
I've been tempted by an Intel X25-M G2, it seems it offers great performance in everything expect sequential write activity, which it balances with a higher random write performance, than the Indilinx drives.
So it seems that it would suck as a drive for a file & print server, and to be fair Intel does offer the mucho expensive SLC version for enterprise use. For gaming and general PC use, the high random write performance is more important. (Is this assertion correct?)
So Bit-Tech can we have a review, please.
You're assertions are correct - the X25-M G2 delivers much slower sequential write speeds (capped at 80MB/s) while also offering superior random write speeds. However, I'd argue that the random write capability of the Indilinx controller is still excellent (to the point where you'll never notice the difference) whilst you'll definatley notice the difference between 140MB/s write and 80MB/s write, especially when installing patches, service packs, etc.
I'll be reviewing the X25-M G2, as well as looking at the Indilinx's TRIM, in the new year once our Windows 7 SSD test rig is up and running.
Please make sure to include the 160GB G2 intel drive in the future review which has a sequential write speed of 100mb/sec.
As of late i've been turned off by the high prices of all the drives. My Christmas gift to myself looks like it will be the 160GB intel drive as the 120GB vertex is only $30 cheaper yet I lose 40GB of space.
Please make sure to include the 160GB G2 intel drive in the future review which has a sequential write speed of 100mb/sec.
As of late i've been turned off by the high prices of all the drives. My Christmas gift to myself looks like it will be the 160GB intel drive as the 120GB vertex is only $30 cheaper yet I lose 40GB of space.
Yep, sounds fair enough. We're requesting the 160GB G2 in for the new year. In terms of choosing between the two, going for whichever matches your budget sounds about right - they're both excellent drives(Indilinx faster sequential write, Intel faster random) and the Indilinx drives have been going up in value crazy crazy amounts in the last few months.
I don't dislike Intel drives, I just think offering sub hard disk sequential write speeds is a bit naff for a premium product. An SSD should surpass a hard disk drive at every turn, and the X25M 80GB (and the value Kingston versious of said drive) doesn't.
Comments 1 to 25 of 39
ReplyA-Data Just added Trim to the firmware for the SX95- and S592 series
Not until January unfortunately. To quote its website:
No files available......
A-DATA said the firmware we have is "retail specification" and that cleared us to run the preview, however TRIM comes next month :) Most other companies will be launching 612 SSDs next month as well I imagine.
I guess we'll just take their word for it, then.
I seem to recall many many months ago suggesting that someone should do some long-term testing of SSDs in order to find exactly this sort of problem. I was laughed at, I think.
just as an question was the drive also tested in an filled state as well, as the JM drives really did tank in speed once they needed to do an erase before Write (i am betting anandtech will test it if bit tech have not)
the Kingston SSD now?
Nevermind, I just saw that it competes with the Indilinx controllers...
PS: Good review :)
The article is a performance preview, and we weren't even aware there was G/C until this morning. As I said we'll be coming back the JMicron 612 drives when they inevitably land on shelves, where we'll look at G/C, TRIM and performance degradation.
In regards to long term performance, G/C is a lot different to a drive running out of write cycles, which is what you originally suggested back in the G.Skill Falcon review (ie, an SSD will run out of write cycles and be borked long before a conventional drive). While that's technically true, the typical number write cycles for a consumer SSD is in the region 10,000 so it's a non-issue. G/C, TRIM and performance degradation over time due to "dirty NAND" and the read/copy to cache/ rewrite process is entirely different and is about maintaining a drive's peak performance.
We've been running SSDs here at bit-tech for months now, in both, home work and testing systems. Our SSD equipped GFX testing rigs have been completely re-imaged literally hundreds of times and show no signs of significant performance slow down due to over-use.
I've been tempted by an Intel X25-M G2, it seems it offers great performance in everything expect sequential write activity, which it balances with a higher random write performance, than the Indilinx drives.
So it seems that it would suck as a drive for a file & print server, and to be fair Intel does offer the mucho expensive SLC version for enterprise use. For gaming and general PC use, the high random write performance is more important. (Is this assertion correct?)
So Bit-Tech can we have a review, please.
You're assertions are correct - the X25-M G2 delivers much slower sequential write speeds (capped at 80MB/s) while also offering superior random write speeds. However, I'd argue that the random write capability of the Indilinx controller is still excellent (to the point where you'll never notice the difference) whilst you'll definatley notice the difference between 140MB/s write and 80MB/s write, especially when installing patches, service packs, etc.
I'll be reviewing the X25-M G2, as well as looking at the Indilinx's TRIM, in the new year once our Windows 7 SSD test rig is up and running.
I would not say wild statements at all, we've looked into it considerably and simply disagree with yourself and Anandtech. The G2 is an excellent drive, no doubt, both have their merits: it's like arguing the difference of the fat content in milk. The latency difference is negligible between the two, and when you say "opening programs" you mean the read performance: which also reaches a bit of "fast enough" mantra. You obviously don't install or write significantly much, where the Indilinx drive will be notably faster: that's your own user style that suits you. That's fine. Unless, you're thrashing the drive with dozens-hundreds of IOs at the same time, both should appear just as responsive.
Your relation to this news story has me lost though - where is the link between both statements?
It seems just a snipe for the sake of it without actually reading what was written or taking the facts into account. For the record, we saw actual roadmaps from multiple manufacturers and if you read the news story it says next year - as in 2010. I cannot predict the future unfortunately, I can only do my best as a journalist to obtain as much evidence to write what multiple people from completely different companies informed me of.
Not to mention the fact in 6 months is a long time and Intel could easily have changed its roadmaps: Just last month it was showing off Larrabee, now it's cancelled it. Also, we were the first to break the news more recently that the Core i7 930 will be arriving in January too: have you conveniently forgotten about that to make your point?
Good grief, I do believe I blinked and missed that one!
They were banging on about that for ages, did they say why? (Did you cover it?)
ATI must have scared them off with their 5xxx series...
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2009/12/07/intel-larrabee-cancelled/1
You find it annoying? Please realise I have NO idea of what you do, I can only assume given I know the distinct differences between the drives and what I've seen for myself between both of them.
If you personally find it more responsive, then great ;) you've got the right drive for you, I can't say I have noticed any difference on any of the systems we've used Intel or Indilinx drives with. You click it and *bang*, it loads.
If people buy anything, let alone stock from one review they read on the internet then they are crackers. We do our best to test as fairly as possible but other sites test in other ways with other hardware setups: you must always, always go through them all to see what the differences are and why these conclusions were made. Just like an "8/10" (or whatever) here is completely different to anywhere else, which is why we issue our own score guide.
Nope of course not :) It's good to have discussion! I do understand why you feel that way about the G2, it is very good drive :)
*hugs* <3
+1
We, the general public, are often an ungrateful and ungracious lot - but we'd soon miss you if you weren't here supplying our every techno-info whim... :)
There will always be a case for an individual having a particular SSD over one recommended. The point of a well written review is to arm the reader with the facts to make that judgement, to accurately inform, clearly paint the picture (have I said enough?). The end conclusion thould try to roll everything up and give an overview of the picutre - not repeat everthing in the review. If you are 'Joe bloggs' - then read the conclusion, if you are Jim, need a drive that has fast random reads..... pick out the specifics...
Baz - just wondering if Bit-Tech could do an article on raid cards (at 3 price points? budget, mainstream, OMG I need to sell the wife and kids), various RAIDs (0,1,10,5) SSD performance. Whilst I have seen a few reviews of SSD RAIDs - I cant seem to find if I need to spend £300 on a 4 port RAID card - or whether a £50 cheap and cheerful will give me any improvement over the ICH? on the MB.
Also I havent quite worked out whether the raid card (if used with SSDs) needs to support TRIM - as well as the SSDs - to get full TRIM support in this type of set up. Any one know?
Keep up the good work.
We actually started something like this back mid year, but Baz got side tracked because we told him to do other reviews :o:o
Please make sure to include the 160GB G2 intel drive in the future review which has a sequential write speed of 100mb/sec.
As of late i've been turned off by the high prices of all the drives. My Christmas gift to myself looks like it will be the 160GB intel drive as the 120GB vertex is only $30 cheaper yet I lose 40GB of space.
Yep, sounds fair enough. We're requesting the 160GB G2 in for the new year. In terms of choosing between the two, going for whichever matches your budget sounds about right - they're both excellent drives(Indilinx faster sequential write, Intel faster random) and the Indilinx drives have been going up in value crazy crazy amounts in the last few months.
I don't dislike Intel drives, I just think offering sub hard disk sequential write speeds is a bit naff for a premium product. An SSD should surpass a hard disk drive at every turn, and the X25M 80GB (and the value Kingston versious of said drive) doesn't.
With you on the write speed cap though, it does seem a little silly.. Have they said a reason for it at all?
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums