The Intel drive has better random reads/writes, but the Vertex has better sequential reads/writes. Also, the Vertex now supports trim so it's performance probably degrades even less than the Intel drive.
Last edited:
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Any signifcant SSD changes imminent? Good time to buy?
- Thread starter echn111
- Start date
The Intel drive has better random reads/writes, but the Vertex has better sequential reads/writes. Also, the Vertex now supports trim so it's performance probably degrades even less than the Intel drive.
STOP! Hammer time. 300GB VelociRaptor vs. Vertex
Price/GB
VRaptor - $0.67
Vertex - $2.95
Access Time
VRaptor - 6.8 ms
Vertex - 0.1 ms
Random Read
VRaptor - 0.55 MB/s
Vertex - 34.9 MB/s
Random Write
VRaptor - 1.63 MB/s
Vertex - 6.47 MB/s
Sequential Read
VRaptor - 118.0 MB/s
Vertex - 255.9 MB/s
Sequential Write
VRaptor - 118.9 MB/s
Vertex - 135.3 MB/s
Vertex 5 (4 by incredibly large margins), VRaptor 1 (price)
1. Source?
2. Go vs 2x VR's in Raid 0 not one vs 1, its the vertex is way more expensive.
3. Price/Size/Performance kills it already.
I never said SSDs aren't better, they just aren't a better option right now, especially when they will for sure go down tremendously in cost, up their size in the near future, 6 months - 1 year. Of course its better tech, but your still not convincing me that right now its a better time to buy.
Also rarely do any applications need those speeds atm, the VR speeds are plenty fast, unless its a server etc. But w/e I gave my 2 cents. Some of you didn't read what I wrote, no point in repeating.
With firmware 1.30 for the Vertex, seq write for me is up to 190mb/s.
DarkStryke
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2001
- Messages
- 1,391
Come this fall SSD's will be getting another shakeup, with JMicron hopefully shipping the arm 612, and new players in the nand market.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3535
Hahaha, even 2 VR's in Raid 0 don't stand a chance against a single Vertex!
Let's see... Raid doesn't help access time, so the Raptors will remain roughly 70 times slower. God, do I even have to continue? The damn Vertex is over 60 times faster at random reads, 4 times faster at random writes, over twice as fast at sequential reads, and according to aznx the sequential writes are now approaching twice the speed of a VR. How much extra performance do you think another VR in Raid will give you? I can tell you... not enough to catch up to even a single Vertex. And yes, as I stated, we know the Vertex is more expensive. That's the ONLY thing the VR's have going for them at this point.
Well, price might kill it in your opinion. Size? Most new SSDs are available in 256GB capacities, which is nearly the same as the largest VR's. Performance? We've been over this...
You've obviously never used a computer with a fast SSD like the Vertex or X25-M. It's the most noticeable performance boost I've ever seen from a single piece of hardware.
nitrobass24
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - December 2009
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,466
I will willingly trade anyone 2 VR's for 120gb Vertex
mutantmagnet
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2009
- Messages
- 267
Make that an X-25M.
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3535
Hahaha, even 2 VR's in Raid 0 don't stand a chance against a single Vertex!
Let's see... Raid doesn't help access time, so the Raptors will remain roughly 70 times slower. God, do I even have to continue? The damn Vertex is over 60 times faster at random reads, 4 times faster at random writes, over twice as fast at sequential reads, and according to aznx the sequential writes are now approaching twice the speed of a VR. How much extra performance do you think another VR in Raid will give you? I can tell you... not enough to catch up to even a single Vertex. And yes, as I stated, we know the Vertex is more expensive. That's the ONLY thing the VR's have going for them at this point.
Well, price might kill it in your opinion. Size? Most new SSDs are available in 256GB capacities, which is nearly the same as the largest VR's. Performance? We've been over this...
You've obviously never used a computer with a fast SSD like the Vertex or X25-M. It's the most noticeable performance boost I've ever seen from a single piece of hardware.
Nope havent used a SSD so I don't doubt what your saying in that regard, again your missing the point, I know SDD is better overall, I think OP should merely wait until the prices fall and capacities increase. I explained already why I needed the space, and Don understood it the best. Where do you get the idea, I am saying SSD's aren't better. What I am saying is wait a while until prices drop, so you get performance and price to match, in their current capacities/price IMO, HDD > SSDs, and VR's should be fast enough in REAL world use to match those SSDs in most apps. All your configurations depend on the SSD as OS drive and then with some other drive to be DATA. In my case, when I do switch to 2-4 SSDs in Raid 0, then Ill make my VR's Data drives. Ill have the best of both worlds.
That's a negative on 1 VR = 1 Intel/Vertex SSD in REAL world use. You'd probably need 50 to even make a dent. 50 VRs is a lot more expensive than 1 Intel/Vertex for your price/performance ratio.
Also VRs are pretty slow on the price/capacity/performance ratio as newer 1TB/2TB drives are just as fast in seq read/write speeds.
300gb/$200 per VR
120gb/$350 per Vertex or 80gb/$320 per Intel isn't bad at all.
You mention having all that space 2 two VRs, but how much of the 600gb is REAL world use as you say? Stuff that you would use and access everyday..
Guess I misunderstood what you were saying.
Old Hippie
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2005
- Messages
- 6,013
There'll never be an end to the GB/$/personal-acceptance-factor discussion.
Makes the whole thing much more interesting.
Makes the whole thing much more interesting.
pc1x1 tries to imply that his 1 or 2 VRs = 1 Vertex/Intel in the real world...which is basically saying SSDs aren't better even for home desktop use, which is false..
DarkStryke
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2001
- Messages
- 1,391
Raptors are nowhere near performance of a SSD in real world access use. Having an app pop up in 6-7 seconds versus a 1 second SSD is not "better", having that much heat and power pumping in a case is not "better".
SSD's are in the infancy period that generally doesn't reward early adopters, but they are the largest performance upgrade in day to day use you can do to a computer right now.
Good now we are in the same page
.Your last sentence is exactly my point. THEY WIll GET BETTER, thats what OP is asking, damn. He wants to know, do I buy an SSD now or not.
I said, Get VR's for now if you need performance, or get a normal HDD, wait 6 months then get a SSD, not that hard to understand now is it?
And what aps take 6-7 seconds to open, I presume you have a slow computer. Because on mine, even heavy 2D or 3D, is very very fast. Seldom especially for a normal user is read and write a bottleneck, unless your doing video editing or something constantly. If you aren't using gigs of stuff, then in REAL world, it wont matter as much.
nitrobass24
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - December 2009
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,466
That makes absolutely NO sense.
Yes they will get better, and so will HDD, and processors, and TV's.
Things are in a constant state of change.
BUT there is NO reason to wait for better SSD's for a desktop computer.
Yes they are going to get faster, but as you pointed out that most people never hit their peak read/write speeds unless they are working with large files.
So for "Real-World" use there is no reason to wait from a technological standpoint.
The only reason to wait is for the $/GB to come down.
But by the time you buy two VR's and in 6mo buy some SSD's you could have paid the same and just gotten SSD's in first place.
Then theres the argument that well its not enough space for all my music, and files, etc.
Well just get a 640gb for $60 to store all your crap and put your OS/apps on the SSD.
The OS and apps is where your gonna see the performance boost, not on your music its not like it will play any faster.
Also on what apps take longer than 6 secs to open......i dunno.....any Office program. Outlook will take 30secs to load on a HDD, but it opens instantly on my SSD.
Last edited:
nitrobass24
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - December 2009
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,466
double post
I am done with trying to explain it to you. Of course everything will get better, but all reports point to costs decreasing on SSD's etc.
Also even waiting 30 seconds for outlook, thats not really a big deal. You aren't going to die because you waited a few seconds. Thats what I am talking about in real world. Most benefits will be seconds, and if that.
Are SSDs better, yes, they are, but OP would be better served IMO if he waited, for price, and capacity to increase.
Meanwhile to answer his own question, he should get a normal HDD, wait those 30 seconds, and then in 6 months to a year get much better SSD's.
Tech will always get better, but sometimes theres outstanding products that are so good they last longer. ala 9800 pro, 8800 GTX, etc. I am not going to argue on what could be or what will be, I maybe right or you may be. But theres plently of precedents, Tech comes in way to expensive, then drastically goes down.
SSDs are bound to drastically go down. Again I never said the performance isn't there, it is, and it actually isn't needed, seconds aren't going to kill anyone! But once price is right, then getting back those seconds makes sense for nornal computing. If you work with Gigantic files, then by all means get it. Thats my whole argument, I never once said SSDs are faster, better etc. Hell I hope they are, the benefits they bring will finally help what has been the slowest part in the computer for ages, but for these current capacities, and price, theres no point. I highly doubt any of us, myself included actually NEED this speed. We certainly want it, but we don't need it per say. And before you go on a tanget I am not saying we don't need to progress, all I am saying is for the current market and price, OP is better served getting proven, mature and most importantly cheaper tech, ala HDD's, and then when prices hit mainstream, upgrade.
You could even use the HDDs op buys today, as his data drive in the future, should he need the space, when he upgrades to SSD.
I am done repeating myself, thanks!
And just as a precaution, if OP doesn't use alot of space, then he can get SSDs if he chooses, like I mentioned I have 300 gigs just on programs, and OS, no data, so I need the space, and I like OS and programs on the same drive, so VR's make sense for me. However since just 2 weeks ago, I was in the same position as OP, SSDs or VR's. It seems more sensible to go for VR's but I am honestly tired of trying to defend an opinion, its ridicolous, that you keep fragmenting my quotes, and worse yet trying state MY opinion is wrong, its hilarious.
Copy and paste Ockie's sig after 2 cents, .... yeah exactly.
I mean comon gtg465x after putting together my quotes understood what I meant on my posts. See if you can do the same. Sighs....
Ok I am done now
Also even waiting 30 seconds for outlook, thats not really a big deal. You aren't going to die because you waited a few seconds. Thats what I am talking about in real world. Most benefits will be seconds, and if that.
Are SSDs better, yes, they are, but OP would be better served IMO if he waited, for price, and capacity to increase.
Meanwhile to answer his own question, he should get a normal HDD, wait those 30 seconds, and then in 6 months to a year get much better SSD's.
Tech will always get better, but sometimes theres outstanding products that are so good they last longer. ala 9800 pro, 8800 GTX, etc. I am not going to argue on what could be or what will be, I maybe right or you may be. But theres plently of precedents, Tech comes in way to expensive, then drastically goes down.
SSDs are bound to drastically go down. Again I never said the performance isn't there, it is, and it actually isn't needed, seconds aren't going to kill anyone! But once price is right, then getting back those seconds makes sense for nornal computing. If you work with Gigantic files, then by all means get it. Thats my whole argument, I never once said SSDs are faster, better etc. Hell I hope they are, the benefits they bring will finally help what has been the slowest part in the computer for ages, but for these current capacities, and price, theres no point. I highly doubt any of us, myself included actually NEED this speed. We certainly want it, but we don't need it per say. And before you go on a tanget I am not saying we don't need to progress, all I am saying is for the current market and price, OP is better served getting proven, mature and most importantly cheaper tech, ala HDD's, and then when prices hit mainstream, upgrade.
You could even use the HDDs op buys today, as his data drive in the future, should he need the space, when he upgrades to SSD.
I am done repeating myself, thanks!
And just as a precaution, if OP doesn't use alot of space, then he can get SSDs if he chooses, like I mentioned I have 300 gigs just on programs, and OS, no data, so I need the space, and I like OS and programs on the same drive, so VR's make sense for me. However since just 2 weeks ago, I was in the same position as OP, SSDs or VR's. It seems more sensible to go for VR's but I am honestly tired of trying to defend an opinion, its ridicolous, that you keep fragmenting my quotes, and worse yet trying state MY opinion is wrong, its hilarious.
Copy and paste Ockie's sig after 2 cents, .... yeah exactly.
I mean comon gtg465x after putting together my quotes understood what I meant on my posts. See if you can do the same. Sighs....
Ok I am done now
I am done with trying to explain it to you. Of course everything will get better, but all reports point to costs decreasing on SSD's etc.
Also even waiting 30 seconds for outlook, thats not really a big deal. You aren't going to die because you waited a few seconds. Thats what I am talking about in real world. Most benefits will be seconds, and if that.
Are SSDs better, yes, they are, but OP would be better served IMO if he waited, for price, and capacity to increase.
Meanwhile to answer his own question, he should get a normal HDD, wait those 30 seconds, and then in 6 months to a year get much better SSD's.
Tech will always get better, but sometimes theres outstanding products that are so good they last longer. ala 9800 pro, 8800 GTX, etc. I am not going to argue on what could be or what will be, I maybe right or you may be. But theres plently of precedents, Tech comes in way to expensive, then drastically goes down.
SSDs are bound to drastically go down. Again I never said the performance isn't there, it is, and it actually isn't needed, seconds aren't going to kill anyone! But once price is right, then getting back those seconds makes sense for nornal computing. If you work with Gigantic files, then by all means get it. Thats my whole argument, I never once said SSDs are faster, better etc. Hell I hope they are, the benefits they bring will finally help what has been the slowest part in the computer for ages, but for these current capacities, and price, theres no point. I highly doubt any of us, myself included actually NEED this speed. We certainly want it, but we don't need it per say. And before you go on a tanget I am not saying we don't need to progress, all I am saying is for the current market and price, OP is better served getting proven, mature and most importantly cheaper tech, ala HDD's, and then when prices hit mainstream, upgrade.
You could even use the HDDs op buys today, as his data drive in the future, should he need the space, when he upgrades to SSD.
I am done repeating myself, thanks!
And just as a precaution, if OP doesn't use alot of space, then he can get SSDs if he chooses, like I mentioned I have 300 gigs just on programs, and OS, no data, so I need the space, and I like OS and programs on the same drive, so VR's make sense for me. However since just 2 weeks ago, I was in the same position as OP, SSDs or VR's. It seems more sensible to go for VR's but I am honestly tired of trying to defend an opinion, its ridicolous, that you keep fragmenting my quotes, and worse yet trying state MY opinion is wrong, its hilarious.
Copy and paste Ockie's sig after 2 cents, .... yeah exactly.
I mean comon gtg465x after putting together my quotes understood what I meant on my posts. See if you can do the same. Sighs....
Ok I am done now
Also the current SSDs are one of those "outstanding" products that'll last you a long time. How can you have an opinion on something you've never experienced? I'd gander it's called BSing..
300gbs of what programs? Do you use every single one of them everyday? How much space do you think your everyday programs would take up? Surely not 300gbs..I'm betting there is a lot of bloat there, or you're exaggerating a whole lot..
Also the current SSDs are one of those "outstanding" products that'll last you a long time. How can you have an opinion on something you've never experienced? I'd gander it's called BSing..
300gbs of what programs? Do you use every single one of them everyday? How much space do you think your everyday programs would take up? Surely not 300gbs..I'm betting there is a lot of bloat there, or you're exaggerating a whole lot..
I specifically mentioned my experience with VR's, and said multiple times, I don't own SSD's, but go read upcoming news, etc. Its all there. Also HDD's last a long time too, guess what? We been using them for the last 20 years without any problems that would cause them unviable, theres quirks sure. SSD's have their own problems too. Again your another one that misses the point, I haven't once said HDD's are better than SSDs etc. I said the timing to buy one is off, learn to read. And learn to answer questions, because thats what OP ASKED!
Also who are you to judge or tell me how many gigs my programs should use? And yea I do use that, why would I make up an arbitrary number, and yea obviously its a rounded figure.
Really why do you people feel the need to defend a technology, whats with the fanboyism, why can't you be objective? Instead of attacking me, and looking like an idiot, why not provide facts? Honestly the one that discussed with me that I actually listened, was gtg465x, and actually he came off as rude in the beginning, but I noticed he originally thought I was saying VR's were faster etc, which isn't the case. Anyhow its always fun to argue on the interwebs, though its not fun, since theres no argument here at all, just baseless attacks now.
I did like this thread for the fact, it made me give a second look to SDDs. But facts are still there, prices are coming down, and capacity going up, and any hybrid approuch will need a HDD. So the senseable thing is to get HDD's now, since they most likely won't drop to much more in price, then later on get SDDs, for all their benefits.
Not once did I say SSD's aren't better, so I find your fanboyism funny. All the people that were actually contributing, aren't speaking here anymore, so this thread is becoming useless and redundant.
I am all ears in someone can prove buying an SSD right now, with cold hard facts is better than buying a HDD. I can easily buy SDD's right now even. I am not convinced. And keep your mindless personal attacks to yourself or Ill start reporting you, Ill keep your post up for now, just to show your ignorance.
TTYL! and night, I am quite tired now, and probably more incoherent haha.
Read up on what random read benchmarks represent as well as IOPS combined with access times then read the following reviews...
Maybe then you'll understand why everyone recommends SSDs over VRs for the money..
You can't really describe real world use through numbers..
http://www.guru3d.com/article/ocz-vertex-120-gb-ssd-review/1
http://barefeats.com/hard118.html
http://barefeats.com/mbpp13.html
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=670&type=expert
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=318&Itemid=60
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/954/1/
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2009/05/15/ocz-vertex-ssd-review/1
http://hothardware.com/Articles/Fou...dux-OCZ-Corsair-Kingston-Super-Talent/?page=1
http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=776&pageid=1
If you cannot swing for a 128-GB model or thereabouts, I would hold off for another six months or so. The performance is fantastic, but the capacity is still a bit limited and I have a feeling that the 30GB and 60GB models of today, though very performant, are going to be tomorrow's disposable USB keys. I've had little issue filling up by 80GB Intel - just windows with all its winsxs crap has grown close to 20GB, add office apps, games (many of which are 10+GB these days with all that texturing) and the like and that space can feel a bit limited in very short order.
Obviously, if you have disposable income, this doesn't apply. I have the 80GB Intel in my laptop and a pair of 120GB Vertex drives on an i7 desktop, but I'm an enthusiast so I'm willing to pay more for what I acknowledge up front may feel like disposable crap in 12-18 months.
Obviously, if you have disposable income, this doesn't apply. I have the 80GB Intel in my laptop and a pair of 120GB Vertex drives on an i7 desktop, but I'm an enthusiast so I'm willing to pay more for what I acknowledge up front may feel like disposable crap in 12-18 months.
To nitrobass and others expounding the "things always get better so might as well buy now" argument - you seem to be leaving out the very real world situation of disposable income and personal taste when it comes to dealing with disruptive tech. (This isn't a surprise, most people do; often the ones with enough of it.)
These are luxury items. Few of us "need" more than a 5400rpm disk - we merely "want" it
When you "need" something, you get it then and there.
When you "want" something, it's perfectly okay to study the trends, the peaks and valleys, to see exactly how much shelf life the item has, not because of its intrinsic properties, but because of how much you'll be tempted by the next great thing based upon certain trends.
I spend big on computer displays. I have found, over what is now 30 years of technology experience, that computer displays have a long, long shelf life. Barring failure, it's perfectly reasonable to expect 5 or more years out of a display--and generally not feel so tempted about getting the next best thing every six months. It makes the investment worth the while.
Up until recently, I spent big on hard disks as well. That 36GB raptor sure held up well... a solid 5 years. Some of those old fast 7200rpm 400GB sata disks also did well. But today? I'm not so sure. Hard disk performance has been relatively stable for a long time... slow incremental gain, similar to display tech, so you bought to match your capacity needs and would be fine. SSD has thrown all that out the window; it's one of the most disruptive new technologies of the last five years and that needs to be taken into consideration. There's really no target for what SSD performance and capacity will be like 12 months from now. We can at most guess, but whatever our guess is, it's likely to be dramatically different from today. So I know me well enough to know that as tempting as whatever I get may be today, I'm going to be tempted by its replacement 6 months from now. That's fine if you are made of money. It's a swan dive off a cliff if you're not, and if you're not good at managing your temptations. SSD offers a lot of that right now: so much temptation that we'll make any excuse we can to overlook any deficits so that we can justify getting one Right Now. Unfortunately that's not going to go away and "I need 80GB and 200MB/sec" will very quickly become "I need 512GB and 600MB/sec" and the drive you exhort others to purchase today you yourself are likely going to be regarding with some disdain nine months from now while reading pcper.com reviews of the latest and greatest.
I guess all I'm saying is to keep these other aspects of the equation in mind. The OP is asking a personal question and ultimately he or she has to determine what makes the most sense. We can at best list out the variables at play, and offer up some general guidelines, but when there's disruptive change, some people have to choose which side of the disruption makes most sense to them.
Just think about cars. Model is redesigned and new, superior vehicles hit the floor. Some people will be after the previous model year units fully expecting closeout discounts. Others will go to the same dealership expecting to pay MSRP for their latest and greatest model. Both will walk away feeling they got what they wanted. OP and indeed most of us are in a similar position, except the disruption will play out over a few years. At some point we have to make a personal decision about the "deal" of the old tech versus the "sexyness" of the new tech.
These are luxury items. Few of us "need" more than a 5400rpm disk - we merely "want" it
When you "need" something, you get it then and there.
When you "want" something, it's perfectly okay to study the trends, the peaks and valleys, to see exactly how much shelf life the item has, not because of its intrinsic properties, but because of how much you'll be tempted by the next great thing based upon certain trends.
I spend big on computer displays. I have found, over what is now 30 years of technology experience, that computer displays have a long, long shelf life. Barring failure, it's perfectly reasonable to expect 5 or more years out of a display--and generally not feel so tempted about getting the next best thing every six months. It makes the investment worth the while.
Up until recently, I spent big on hard disks as well. That 36GB raptor sure held up well... a solid 5 years. Some of those old fast 7200rpm 400GB sata disks also did well. But today? I'm not so sure. Hard disk performance has been relatively stable for a long time... slow incremental gain, similar to display tech, so you bought to match your capacity needs and would be fine. SSD has thrown all that out the window; it's one of the most disruptive new technologies of the last five years and that needs to be taken into consideration. There's really no target for what SSD performance and capacity will be like 12 months from now. We can at most guess, but whatever our guess is, it's likely to be dramatically different from today. So I know me well enough to know that as tempting as whatever I get may be today, I'm going to be tempted by its replacement 6 months from now. That's fine if you are made of money. It's a swan dive off a cliff if you're not, and if you're not good at managing your temptations. SSD offers a lot of that right now: so much temptation that we'll make any excuse we can to overlook any deficits so that we can justify getting one Right Now. Unfortunately that's not going to go away and "I need 80GB and 200MB/sec" will very quickly become "I need 512GB and 600MB/sec" and the drive you exhort others to purchase today you yourself are likely going to be regarding with some disdain nine months from now while reading pcper.com reviews of the latest and greatest.
I guess all I'm saying is to keep these other aspects of the equation in mind. The OP is asking a personal question and ultimately he or she has to determine what makes the most sense. We can at best list out the variables at play, and offer up some general guidelines, but when there's disruptive change, some people have to choose which side of the disruption makes most sense to them.
Just think about cars. Model is redesigned and new, superior vehicles hit the floor. Some people will be after the previous model year units fully expecting closeout discounts. Others will go to the same dealership expecting to pay MSRP for their latest and greatest model. Both will walk away feeling they got what they wanted. OP and indeed most of us are in a similar position, except the disruption will play out over a few years. At some point we have to make a personal decision about the "deal" of the old tech versus the "sexyness" of the new tech.
Having a good SSD is like having a car that can produce all its power and torque at ALL RPMs.
aka kinda like the electric cars and their engines..Having a good SSD is like having a car that can produce all its power and torque at ALL RPMs.
Your still missing the point
.Spinx summarized one of my points perfectly. Very nice + props
Nah, I'm pretty sure he's just trying to justify why he went with VRaptors instead of an SSD or even regular HDDs 'till he was able to afford an SSD (or 'till he felt comfortable investing in one)... Even though he probably knows he would be better off with the SSDs.
I could almost see his argument (he likes to keep some data and apps on the same drive, or far too many games/apps on the OS drive), but he invested in TWO VRaptors, which pretty much blows most of the price/performance/size arguments out of the water. For the price of the two VRaptors he could have easily gone with a smaller Vertex, he has multiple other drives for data and backups anyway, so what difference does it make if he keeps even more of his data and secondary apps off the OS drive and on the other larger/slower HDD drives?
I don't think there's anything wrong with recommending or at 'least suggesting that someone wait on imminent price drops on SSDs... I'll give him that. I think it's irrisponsible to even suggest a VRaptor as an option in the same breath though, because the performance gained from them (for the money) is far far less than what you'd get from an SSD. If you wanna save cash then get a WD640GB drive for $70, not a 300GB Raptor for $170.
The difference between those two drives will be far less noticeable than the difference between either of those two and an SSD, that migh be the one thing pc1x1 doesn't quite grasp in his effort to rationalize his purchase.
Last edited:
Actually I am not rationalizing my purchase I already bought them, last week or so actually, I don't get kick backs if you buy VR's lol. Anyhow I said to me the VR's made more sense, and if you want that extra performance, I'd get them, its a mid step, from SSDs and to HDDs. Its not the BEST option either. The best is getting 2-3x Samsung Spinpoints, or something simular, and raid 0 them, in price/performance wise, then waiting. I just personally choose the VR's, because I always wanted one (psycological), and wanted to see the "difference". Haven't regretted my purchase yet, although they were a bit pricey. I have 6 HDDs. All of them performace drives, but I wanted something a little faster, even coming off two WD' dual platter 640's Caviars, so I opted for them, because of aforementioned reasons. But it certainly isn't for everyone. And I disagree with your opinion that the Vertex is better option than VR's. But I do respect the fact your entitled to it.
And seen the reviews, on SSD, and they seem to follow the same logic that its not the best time per say to get them, but Ill hold my judgment for SSD's until I own them later this year. But my opinion stands, HDD > SSD for now, and if you are in a simular situation as myself, I think VR's are worth a shot. Thats all
I just personally choose the VR's, because I always wanted one (psycological), and wanted to see the "difference". Haven't regretted my purchase yet, although they were a bit pricey...
And I disagree with your opinion that the Vertex is better option than VR's. But I do respect the fact your entitled to it.
And seen the reviews, on SSD, and they seem to follow the same logic that its not the best time per say to get them, but Ill hold my judgment for SSD's until I own them later this year. But my opinion stands, HDD > SSD for now, and if you are in a simular situation as myself, I think VR's are worth a shot. Thats all
Again, I think you're just rationalizing your purchase (which implies you've already bought 'em...), and you admitted you haven't used a good SSD yourself so you can't comment on how much of a 'mid-step' it may or may not be... I'm not saying you blew away your money, the VRaptors aren't a bad product, but it wasn't a smart purchase as far as I'm concerned. SSDs are a substantial upgrade over either a VRaptor or a regular HDD, the VRaptor is much closer to a regular HDD than it is to the SSD in performance, while costing substantially more.
You have psychologically always wanted a raptor? What's that even mean?
Last edited:
You know, I bought my 300Gb Velociraptors pretty close to when they came out. Before all of this SSD hooplah. If I had to buy them right now..............it WOULD be a tough decision. However, I will say that having them sitting in my machine leaves me in the enviable position of sitting around for a bit while all of you early adopters shake out this SSD wave for me. GO EARLY ADOPTERS...............GO!!!!
Then when price, performance and capacity reach that magic number, I'll reach into the old wallet and get me an SSD. By that time, it also won't be a technology that I have to go to the forums to figure out that theres 10 things I need to do to make them work right.
I don't say that 300Gb VR's are better than SSD's, that would be stupid, but if you happen to already have them, you can afford to wait. Your not suffering that much. Plus like somebody else said earlier, if your using Vista or the Win7 RC, most everything on the desktop opens instantaniously anyway..............how much more instantaniously do you need. You are missing out on boot up time and game load times I guess. Some of the movie and sound enthusiasts doing a lot of whatever it is that they do could see benefit I guess. But if your rig is mainly a game rig with some por..ahem--web surfing thrown in....................better times in the SSD world are coming fast.
This is all of course imho and only applies to me. Take from my thoughts what you will.
Then when price, performance and capacity reach that magic number, I'll reach into the old wallet and get me an SSD. By that time, it also won't be a technology that I have to go to the forums to figure out that theres 10 things I need to do to make them work right.
I don't say that 300Gb VR's are better than SSD's, that would be stupid, but if you happen to already have them, you can afford to wait. Your not suffering that much. Plus like somebody else said earlier, if your using Vista or the Win7 RC, most everything on the desktop opens instantaniously anyway..............how much more instantaniously do you need. You are missing out on boot up time and game load times I guess. Some of the movie and sound enthusiasts doing a lot of whatever it is that they do could see benefit I guess. But if your rig is mainly a game rig with some por..ahem--web surfing thrown in....................better times in the SSD world are coming fast.
This is all of course imho and only applies to me. Take from my thoughts what you will.
Again, I think you're just rationalizing your purchase (which implies you've already bought 'em...), and you admitted you haven't used a good SSD yourself so you can't comment on how much of a 'mid-step' it may or may not be... I'm not saying you blew away your money, the VRaptors aren't a bad product, but it wasn't a smart purchase as far as I'm concerned. SSDs are a substantial upgrade over either a VRaptor or a regular HDD, the VRaptor is much closer to a regular HDD than it is to the SSD in performance, while costing substantially more.
You have psychologically always wanted a raptor? What's that even mean?
1) Its a mid step number wise, higher performance than normal hdds, below SSD?
2) I respect your opinion, and will use it when I buy more HDDs/SSD in the next 6 months
3) I just started using the VRs, seem faster while doing work, but Ill know only in a month or so, I am currently building it, slowly but surely
.Also I am not rationalizing anything, I just stated I am happy with my purchase, because size wise its what I needed. And still your not really posting facts why SSD is better, or facts that it won't drop its price, etc,etc soon.
You never had a dream or goal? Thats what psychologically wanting something. I dunno how old you are, but I am 21, and its very satisfying to be able to buy stuff with my own money, and I can tell ya, alot of long hours heh! So I always wanted one, saved a bit of money and got em
. Same way I am going to do when I get SSDs. But I know its alot of work, sweat so I value price alot.And please don't quote me on a way, I have to keep responding to you, I said all I need to say. This thread isn't about me, so dunno why you guys have to keep targeting my personal reasons for getting VR's or judging my decision to get them, etc. Its not my thread, its OP wanting to know if buying HDD or SSD. And I love how one can't freely express his opinion without people being ignorant. I mean its apparently a crime to like HDDs more than SSD
. Apparently having differences of opinion is now a crime.Instead of how you keep responding look at it this way. You disagree with me? Thats fine, how about posting. I disagree with PC1X1, and believe SSDs are better, because of this, this and this. No arguments needed. But honestly instead of just stating opinions, everyone just keeps saying the same crap. We know the numbers people, they are faster, thats not the argument, the argument is, should OP get SSDs now or later. I think Not Now, some think not now as well. Some think yes, and me personally, I think VR's are the way to go if you need a performance solution now and are not doing server or movie work and need space, which VRs should be more than enough or actual work, not benches but should wait for SSDs to get more mature and cheaper. If performance isn't as important than get a Spinpoint or something.
Now please please please, make me stop replying to the same thing heh!
Last edited:
1) Its a mid step number wise, higher performance than normal hdds, below SSD?
2) I respect your opinion, and will use it when I buy more HDDs/SSD in the next 6 months
3) I just started using the VRs, seem faster while doing work, but Ill know only in a month or so, I am currently building it, slowly but surely
Also I am not rationalizing anything, I just stated I am happy with my purchase, because size wise its what I needed. And still your not really posting facts why SSD is better, or facts that it won't drop its price, etc,etc soon.
You never had a dream or goal? Thats what psychologically wanting something. I dunno how old you are, but I am 21, and its very satisfying to be able to buy stuff with my own money, and I can tell ya, alot of long hours heh! So I always wanted one, saved a bit of money and got em
And please don't quote me on a way, I have to keep responding to you, I said all I need to say. This thread isn't about me, so dunno why you guys have to keep targeting my personal reasons for getting VR's or judging my decision to get them, etc. Its not my thread, its OP wanting to know if buying HDD or SSD. And I love how one can't freely express his opinion without people being ignorant. I mean its apparently a crime to like HDDs more than SSD
Instead of how you keep responding look at it this way. You disagree with me? Thats fine, how about posting. I disagree with PC1X1, and believe SSDs are better, because of this, this and this. No arguments needed. But honestly instead of just stating opinions, everyone just keeps saying the same crap. We know the numbers people, they are faster, thats not the argument, the argument is, should OP get SSDs now or later. I think Not, some think not as well. Some think yes, and me personally, I think VR's are the way to go if you need a performance solution now. If not get a Spinpoint or something.
Now please please please, make me stop replying to the same thing heh!
On a scale from 1 to 20..a VR isn't even a mid-step
1 would be a 7200 RPM 1TB WD Black
2 would be a VR
3 would be a 15K SAS drive
18 would be a Vertex
19 would be a X25-M
20 would be a X25-E
That's how different SSDs are..
You've got issues pc1x1, we're expressing our opinion just as you are, our opinion is that VRaptors ('specially two in Raid 0) are no longer worth the price premium in light of falling SSD prices. $300-350 for a 120GB SSD is good enough for me even if it's substantially less storage than two VRaptors, I'm only putting the upgrade off out of laziness while waiting for W7. I wouldn't know why you need much more space for daily apps in general but that's just me.
Why do I think this? You've seen the numbers, we all have as you said, I think they're a much much bigger performance upgrade than VRaptors are. In fact, for day to day tasks ("real world" as you like to say) SSDs are the biggest upgrade anyone could make right now, more substantial than upgrading to an i7 even or adding more RAM (past 4GB). Having an SSD as the OS/app drive is that nice, and I say that after having played around with one for only a couple hours. Using a 10K RPM drive never gave me that feeling, not even close to it (though I did consider a VRaptor when they came out originally).
With the SSD everything feels snappier, opens faster, loads in less time (if you even see it loading), etc. The amount of time it saves throughout the day probably adds up very nicely. /shrug I'm not sure why you feel we're attacking you, no one's insulted you personally. If you think quoting you and stating a difference of opinion somehow amounts to an attack or persecution then you've spent your time online so far in a very sheltered state.
In any case, I've avoided quoting you now and tried answering some of your questions as to why I think VRaptors are not a sound investment, happy? aznx's analogy is probably a more blunt way of putting it. No one's compelling you to keep replying nor criminalizing your opinion though. I'm 27 btw... And I stopped dreaming about hardware a while ago, personally I think you've put the VRaptors on a pedestal for whatever strange reason.
Why do I think this? You've seen the numbers, we all have as you said, I think they're a much much bigger performance upgrade than VRaptors are. In fact, for day to day tasks ("real world" as you like to say) SSDs are the biggest upgrade anyone could make right now, more substantial than upgrading to an i7 even or adding more RAM (past 4GB). Having an SSD as the OS/app drive is that nice, and I say that after having played around with one for only a couple hours. Using a 10K RPM drive never gave me that feeling, not even close to it (though I did consider a VRaptor when they came out originally).
With the SSD everything feels snappier, opens faster, loads in less time (if you even see it loading), etc. The amount of time it saves throughout the day probably adds up very nicely. /shrug I'm not sure why you feel we're attacking you, no one's insulted you personally. If you think quoting you and stating a difference of opinion somehow amounts to an attack or persecution then you've spent your time online so far in a very sheltered state.
In any case, I've avoided quoting you now and tried answering some of your questions as to why I think VRaptors are not a sound investment, happy? aznx's analogy is probably a more blunt way of putting it. No one's compelling you to keep replying nor criminalizing your opinion though. I'm 27 btw... And I stopped dreaming about hardware a while ago, personally I think you've put the VRaptors on a pedestal for whatever strange reason.
Last edited:
Wow, no comment.
Read your post, You attack me 3 different times, and you wonder why I mentioned hypocracy, I mean you start the damn post with you got issues, no sir, you do. Its hilarious, and this conversation is no longer fruitful. AND AGAIN you use PERFORMANCE, NOT ONCE DO I MENTION PERFORMANCE, DAMN. When will you understand, I am not talking about straight up performance, I am talking about the total package, and the most important FACT, SSDs are going to lower in price, and get bigger soon, they have to! Average consumer looks at Size, not performance. And we have been living with HDDs forever, you do NOT NEED 200 Read/Write, unless your doing something server related thing, or working with large files period.
I am not putting the VR's on a pedestal, I only said for the space that I need, and performance, VR's are the best choice, and if you look at various posts, I am not alone. Maybe 120 gigs main drive is acceptabel for you, but its not for me. And anyone else that wants to run a simular set up, should get an HDD for now instead, and wait until both price and size on SSDs get bigger. How hard is that to get understand? I am going to unsubscribe to this thread soon, because I am wasting my time.
I am literally having an aim conversation on a forum with a SSD fanboy (aznx) and an Impulsive poster who can only back up his arguments by attacking someone. (no pun intended.) This isn't that big of a deal people, shessh.
Otherwise Thanks for the fun ride, but honestly now its getting annoying. Thanks OP for definitely posting on a hot topic. And I am glad I can be devil's advocate, as honestly no one has proved, 1) SDD's prices aren't going to drop in the short term, 2) that their capacities won't increase 3) A hard fact based need for 100 Read and Writes, ie why OP should need that performance premium right now. When the price is right, then it makes sense. Not one of you that keep posting vs me, have answered any of those questions. Also I will only READ objective responses, if you have a personal attack in there, then your an idiot, and I won't bother replying to you, even if you are correct and I am wrong.
Heres some good quotes from the topic.
As a charter member of the "cheap bastards club" (our motto: we are too cheap to use capital letters), I think that SSDs don't provide the right amount of performance for the price. They will have to get much cheaper before I buy any. Do I want some SSDs? Of course. But not at these prices.
There'll never be an end to the GB/$/personal-acceptance-factor discussion.
Makes the whole thing much more interesting.
Personally I think we've all got issues, it's what makes us human... However I think you're definitely wasting your time with all those quotes, that's a lot of copy/paste indeed brother (from within the same thread mind you).
All tech gets faster and all tech gets cheaper, if you're gonna suggest that an upgrade isn't worthwhile purely on that basis then no upgrade is ever worth it. I mean, nobody really needs the kind of power that i7 provides on a home system, at all... Yet a lot of people still upgrade to i7 knowing full well that i5 is around the corner and mobos will be half as cheap and processors will be cheaper.
It's the same deal for SSDs, only SSDs will improve system performance and responsiveness across the board... Whereas something like a processor upgrade isn't likely to do that for you unless you're upgrading from something relatively ancient. Between that and aznx's steps analogy I dunno how I could make it any clearer.
If you look at the performance benefit of a VRaptor objectively (versus the cost), it's like the complete opposite case. Nobody needs a HDD that's mildly faster for double or triple the cost! At 'least when you pay a premium for an SSD you're paying for something that's an order of magnitude faster and more tangible.
However I think you're definitely wasting your time with all those quotes, that's a lot of copy/paste indeed brother (from within the same thread mind you).All tech gets faster and all tech gets cheaper, if you're gonna suggest that an upgrade isn't worthwhile purely on that basis then no upgrade is ever worth it. I mean, nobody really needs the kind of power that i7 provides on a home system, at all... Yet a lot of people still upgrade to i7 knowing full well that i5 is around the corner and mobos will be half as cheap and processors will be cheaper.
It's the same deal for SSDs, only SSDs will improve system performance and responsiveness across the board... Whereas something like a processor upgrade isn't likely to do that for you unless you're upgrading from something relatively ancient. Between that and aznx's steps analogy I dunno how I could make it any clearer.
If you look at the performance benefit of a VRaptor objectively (versus the cost), it's like the complete opposite case. Nobody needs a HDD that's mildly faster for double or triple the cost! At 'least when you pay a premium for an SSD you're paying for something that's an order of magnitude faster and more tangible.
If performance doesn't matter, why upgrade ever at all? It's not like you'll notice or care about the difference...
I'm sure you'd be a fanboy too of SSDs if you ever used a system that had a good one..
Fair point but I and anyone else that needs or wants more than 120 gigs on a single drive, isn't going to get that on an SSD right now. So I am holding out for a 256 or 512 drive thats costs $200. Which is my suggestion, the VR fit my budget and size requirement, when SSDs fit that then I will buy them. I never said OP should get a VR, the smart thing is to get a good 7k drive for now. I got the VR because I felt like it, and wanted a little extra oomph. Digging it so far.Personally I think we've all got issues, it's what makes us human...
All tech gets faster and all tech gets cheaper, if you're gonna suggest that an upgrade isn't worthwhile purely on that basis then no upgrade is ever worth it. I mean, nobody really needs the kind of power that i7 provides on a home system, at all... Yet a lot of people still upgrade to i7 knowing full well that i5 is around the corner and mobos will be half as cheap and processors will be cheaper.
It's the same deal for SSDs, only SSDs will improve system performance and responsiveness across the board... Whereas something like a processor upgrade isn't likely to do that for you unless you're upgrading from something relatively ancient. Between that and aznx's steps analogy I dunno how I could make it any clearer.
If you look at the performance benefit of a VRaptor objectively (versus the cost), it's like the complete opposite case. Nobody needs a HDD that's mildly faster for double or triple the cost! At 'least when you pay a premium for an SSD you're paying for something that's an order of magnitude faster and more tangible.
As far as upgrades, read Sphinx quote, its really well worded, and exactly how I personally feel, but your welcome to disagree. I am not saying hold off forever, but theres definitely the argument that right now, is not the time to buy them. Which is all I have said this entire time. I never said VR's are better than SSDs. I said because the inevitable changes coming to SSDs soon, and price drops. Right now is not the time. If you need performance VR is the next step up from an HDD, if not a good regular 7k drive should suit you fine. Thats it, no more and no less. Again Read what Sphinx wrote, I couldn't have typed it better myself.
Sphinx, if your out there, chime in again, good stuff
Hello, I'm not sure where this thread went, but I did end up buying an Intel X25-M. Everyone's feedback was useful, and I did end up reading a bit more about SSD's.
I fully agree that an SSD purchase does depend on situation. And the decision is not as clearcut from either the pro-SSD or pro-HDD perspective. SSD's are a relatively new consumer technology, many early adopters have been burnt (e.g. early jmicron related stuttering) and most pc users should stick to mature HDD technology.
Buying an SSD is still a risk - as a consumer technology, it is still not mature, and expensive. "But" I think the major limitations and risks are now understood and major companies are actively addressing them with firmware upgrades, O/S adjustments or new features, and price discounts. Some of the results are seen in the feedback on this board. No one is aware of any seriously exciting new breakthrough SSD products, so I see prices decreasing "gradually" rather than dramatically decreasing.
So the risks are a lot lower now, but still there - but it's my hard earned money to risk and my hobby. So thanks to the efforts of the "early adoptors" and feedback, I'm now far more confident I'm not buying either a significantly flawed technology, or a lemon of a product, when I go with the Intel X25-M today.
I fully agree that an SSD purchase does depend on situation. And the decision is not as clearcut from either the pro-SSD or pro-HDD perspective. SSD's are a relatively new consumer technology, many early adopters have been burnt (e.g. early jmicron related stuttering) and most pc users should stick to mature HDD technology.
Buying an SSD is still a risk - as a consumer technology, it is still not mature, and expensive. "But" I think the major limitations and risks are now understood and major companies are actively addressing them with firmware upgrades, O/S adjustments or new features, and price discounts. Some of the results are seen in the feedback on this board. No one is aware of any seriously exciting new breakthrough SSD products, so I see prices decreasing "gradually" rather than dramatically decreasing.
So the risks are a lot lower now, but still there - but it's my hard earned money to risk and my hobby. So thanks to the efforts of the "early adoptors" and feedback, I'm now far more confident I'm not buying either a significantly flawed technology, or a lemon of a product, when I go with the Intel X25-M today.