SSD experiences
Page 6 of 37 Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 35, 36, 37  Next
sausje
Banned



Posts: 17716
Location: Limboland, Netherlands
PostPosted: Tue, 26th Feb 2013 15:48    Post subject:
Heh i had the same problem (and currently still without any DVD drive Laughing ), lucky for me i had an empty USB stick, so installed within 10min Razz


Proud member of Frustrated Association of International Losers Failing Against the Gifted and Superior (F.A.I.L.F.A.G.S)
Back to top
Sin317
Banned



Posts: 24322
Location: Geneva
PostPosted: Tue, 26th Feb 2013 15:53    Post subject:
yeah, i NEVER use my dvd drive .. so i never think about it and just hope for the best rofl. But yeah, should get me an usb stick with windows on it as well sometime, so i don't have to worry about that anymore Smile But like i know me, i'll lose it anyway haha.
Back to top
[mrt]
[Admin] Code Monkey



Posts: 1342

PostPosted: Tue, 26th Feb 2013 20:06    Post subject:
Frant wrote:
The pity about many games is that their data files are packed in half-gig to multigig files. That takes away some of the power of the SSD. That's why there are guides all over the net on how to unpack those .pak (or whatever) files for various games to get the best performance since SSD's are champs on reading random small files ( texture/mipmap etc. files) fast as hell, much faster than having to jump back and forth in a huge sequential file.

IOPS is the biggest strength of SSD's.


I should say here that there is no real difference between a "huge-file" and lots of small files layed out in a folder from the disk drives perspective. When you read up on basic file-systems and how they work you will see that the files are, no matter how physically big they may be, split into lots of smaller fragments that are chained together to form a file on the file system. There will be little gain ripping up those big game files into small files, on the contrary it can even hurt performance, since the game could have been using an optimized file structure that sped up loading times or some other aspect like less overhead in file handling. Mostly though I think the big files just facilitate game porting across platforms since the developer just writes unified resource IO handling for all platforms.

But the bottom line is that IOPS won't be any smaller for SSDs if it has to seek around big files or whether it has to look for a differently named file on the file system. The later might even be slower because of extra OS overhead. In the end the read still gets translated to "get block X from device". Which are scattered all around the drive like smaller files on the file system.


teey
Back to top
tw1st




Posts: 6112
Location: New Jersey
PostPosted: Tue, 26th Feb 2013 20:16    Post subject:
Going back to what I was asking about earlier. Setting up a SSD drive correctly. I did a firmware update for it, and it turns out that my mobo sets it to AHCI by default so I'm good in that regard, no need to change it or do any registry fixes, nice.

As far as Intels rapid share tech goes though, would I see really any difference in boot speed or write/read speeds while mucking around in the OS?

Doing a the Samsung Magician Software test gave me a good rating for SSD performance, so I don't know how much better/quicker I can get. Was getting something like 535/560 for read/write.


| BenQ XL2420T 24" 120Hz | Ducky Shine III 9008 White LED - Brown MX | Logitech G9x |
| Corsair Carbide 400R | Asus Sabertooth z77 | i7 3770K @ 4.3Ghz - 1.200v | CM Hyper 212 Evo - Push/Pull |
| SLI eVGA 4GB GTX980 ACX SC | Vengeance 16GB RAM 1600 DDR3 | AX850w PSU | Samsung 840Pro 128GB SSD | WD Black 1TB HD |
Back to top
Frant
King's Bounty



Posts: 24656
Location: Your Mom
PostPosted: Tue, 26th Feb 2013 20:51    Post subject:
[mrt] wrote:
Frant wrote:
The pity about many games is that their data files are packed in half-gig to multigig files. That takes away some of the power of the SSD. That's why there are guides all over the net on how to unpack those .pak (or whatever) files for various games to get the best performance since SSD's are champs on reading random small files ( texture/mipmap etc. files) fast as hell, much faster than having to jump back and forth in a huge sequential file.

IOPS is the biggest strength of SSD's.


I should say here that there is no real difference between a "huge-file" and lots of small files layed out in a folder from the disk drives perspective. When you read up on basic file-systems and how they work you will see that the files are, no matter how physically big they may be, split into lots of smaller fragments that are chained together to form a file on the file system. There will be little gain ripping up those big game files into small files, on the contrary it can even hurt performance, since the game could have been using an optimized file structure that sped up loading times or some other aspect like less overhead in file handling. Mostly though I think the big files just facilitate game porting across platforms since the developer just writes unified resource IO handling for all platforms.

But the bottom line is that IOPS won't be any smaller for SSDs if it has to seek around big files or whether it has to look for a differently named file on the file system. The later might even be slower because of extra OS overhead. In the end the read still gets translated to "get block X from device". Which are scattered all around the drive like smaller files on the file system.


In one giant .dat file it will constantly have to go back to sequential indexes and do extra jumps, severely affecting the IOPS by X%. Obviously the OS is the biggest bottleneck in this since the file system was designed in a particular way and affects the effectiveness of SSD performance negatively. But I still believe unpacking big .pak and .dat files and then deleting the big sequential files will allow an SSD to pick up individual files faster/nigh on simultaneously instead of one at a time, responding to the requests faster.

But I should really put some meat on those claims but I'm too tired and lazy to go google for facts. There are most likely benchmarks specifically aimed at that questions around. Wouldn't surprise me if they showed conflicting reports as well.

We need SSFS, Solid State File System.... Wink


Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

"The sky was the color of a TV tuned to a dead station" - Neuromancer
Back to top
tw1st




Posts: 6112
Location: New Jersey
PostPosted: Wed, 27th Feb 2013 16:14    Post subject:
Don't know if this was posted before but an amazing guide for SSD owners. Free'd up about 12GB of space for me in about 5 minutes and gave me a small boost in SSD performance.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1156654/seans-windows-7-install-optimization-guide-for-ssds-hdds

Also, my write speeds seem to be very low.... getting about 510 for read, only about 330 for write. On sata6, AHCI, latest firmware. Is this normal for write speeds, I see some people getting 500+


| BenQ XL2420T 24" 120Hz | Ducky Shine III 9008 White LED - Brown MX | Logitech G9x |
| Corsair Carbide 400R | Asus Sabertooth z77 | i7 3770K @ 4.3Ghz - 1.200v | CM Hyper 212 Evo - Push/Pull |
| SLI eVGA 4GB GTX980 ACX SC | Vengeance 16GB RAM 1600 DDR3 | AX850w PSU | Samsung 840Pro 128GB SSD | WD Black 1TB HD |
Back to top
rgb#000
Banned



Posts: 5118

PostPosted: Wed, 27th Feb 2013 18:12    Post subject:
it's a handy guide, but i wouldn't follow it blindly, there is too much general OS optimization and personal preference in it that has nothing at all to do with SSD (disable aero effects, run windows update, install antivirus). Laughing lol wut

"System Setup after Installation" is the most useful part in that guide.
Back to top
Werelds
Special Little Man



Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
PostPosted: Wed, 27th Feb 2013 19:34    Post subject:
Intel_NVIDIA wrote:
it's a handy guide, but i wouldn't follow it blindly, there is too much general OS optimization and personal preference in it that has nothing at all to do with SSD (disable aero effects, run windows update, install antivirus). Laughing lol wut

"System Setup after Installation" is the most useful part in that guide.

It's quite overdone indeed.

This bit:
Quote:
(disable aero effects, run windows update, install antivirus)


Goes like:
Quote:
(nope, doh, nope)


For me Smile
Back to top
rgb#000
Banned



Posts: 5118

PostPosted: Wed, 27th Feb 2013 19:36    Post subject:
Werelds wrote:
Goes like:
Quote:
(nope, doh, nope)


For me Smile

+1 Wink
Back to top
tw1st




Posts: 6112
Location: New Jersey
PostPosted: Wed, 27th Feb 2013 19:42    Post subject:
Very true, most of those steps are things I do normally when installing a new OS anyway. Already disabled services, turned off features updates...etc I think most of the guide is for nubs.

I wasn't aware of the hibernation file however, and also lowering the pagefile (shrunk mine to 1GB from 8GB) Saved my quiet a bit of space there, nearly 12GB.


| BenQ XL2420T 24" 120Hz | Ducky Shine III 9008 White LED - Brown MX | Logitech G9x |
| Corsair Carbide 400R | Asus Sabertooth z77 | i7 3770K @ 4.3Ghz - 1.200v | CM Hyper 212 Evo - Push/Pull |
| SLI eVGA 4GB GTX980 ACX SC | Vengeance 16GB RAM 1600 DDR3 | AX850w PSU | Samsung 840Pro 128GB SSD | WD Black 1TB HD |
Back to top
rgb#000
Banned



Posts: 5118

PostPosted: Wed, 27th Feb 2013 20:02    Post subject:
yes shrinking, but not completely removing, paging file is the best course of action because without it sometimes memory management starts acting crazy (try doing disc check without having page file Laughing ) and some applications refuse to start at all. i have 16 gigs of ram and set paging file to 1gb.
also don't listen to ppl saying you must move paging file from SSD to reduce writes. what a load of nonsense, you get SSD for performance, and moving paging file to slow ass HDD goes against such goal.


Last edited by rgb#000 on Wed, 27th Feb 2013 20:07; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Oddmaker
Moderator



Posts: 2592

PostPosted: Wed, 27th Feb 2013 20:04    Post subject:
tw1st you don't need a pagefile if your running 16gb of ram, disable it.


dust.
Back to top
tw1st




Posts: 6112
Location: New Jersey
PostPosted: Wed, 27th Feb 2013 20:11    Post subject:
Oddmaker wrote:
tw1st you don't need a pagefile if your running 16gb of ram, disable it.


well if that's the case, then you just saved me another 1GB of space, thanks for the tip Wink


| BenQ XL2420T 24" 120Hz | Ducky Shine III 9008 White LED - Brown MX | Logitech G9x |
| Corsair Carbide 400R | Asus Sabertooth z77 | i7 3770K @ 4.3Ghz - 1.200v | CM Hyper 212 Evo - Push/Pull |
| SLI eVGA 4GB GTX980 ACX SC | Vengeance 16GB RAM 1600 DDR3 | AX850w PSU | Samsung 840Pro 128GB SSD | WD Black 1TB HD |
Back to top
JanKowalski82




Posts: 2027
Location: Poland
PostPosted: Thu, 28th Mar 2013 14:46    Post subject:
Just bought Plextor M5 Pro. My first SSD Fuck Yeah

Can't wait. If I'm lucky I should get it on Saturday.


ASUS GTX 660 2GB, AMD Phenom II X4 955 BE, MSI 870-G45, 4GB DDR3 1333, Plextor M5 Pro 128GB, WD Red 1TB

Back to top
Oddmaker
Moderator



Posts: 2592

PostPosted: Thu, 28th Mar 2013 21:23    Post subject:
You have broke your SSD virginity and you will never go back, well done good sir Whirling cane


dust.
Back to top
Invasor
Moderator



Posts: 7638
Location: On the road
PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 04:35    Post subject:
I was wondering if the samsung SSDs are reliable?

I'm thinking about buying the 830 (or maybe the 840)... anybody heard about problems with it?
Back to top
rgb#000
Banned



Posts: 5118

PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 09:15    Post subject:
samsung ssd are probably the most reliable and durable of them all. multiple torture tests confirm this, when other ssds crap out, samsung keeps on going and going (just don't buy TLC version)

and before usual types say that i talk out of my ass... you can find all the in depth details here http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?271063-SSD-Write-Endurance-25nm-Vs-34nm
(graphs in first page are outdated and don't show many latest models, but just keep reading the thread)
Back to top
Sin317
Banned



Posts: 24322
Location: Geneva
PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 09:36    Post subject:
as a proud owner of a samsung 840 pro myself, i can only tell you to go for it Smile

make sure to get the pro tho, the 840 (non pro) is the laptop version.
Back to top
rgb#000
Banned



Posts: 5118

PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 09:43    Post subject:
Sin317 wrote:
840 (non pro) is the laptop version.

not really true, you can use it anywhere, in desktop pc if you want. difference between pro and non pro is nand type: MLC in pro vs TLC in non pro.
TLC is "bottom feeder" nand, it wears out and dies fastest etc. that's why such a price difference between samsung 840 pro and non pro.

even so, TLC version of 840 is good for like 1PB writes, that's still much more than anyone will ever write to SSD under normal usage. but knowing this fact i wouldn't get TLC anyway.
Back to top
Sin317
Banned



Posts: 24322
Location: Geneva
PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 10:13    Post subject:
http://www.toppreise.ch/index.php?search=samsung+840

there its called "notebook upgrade kit" Smile

edit: ah didn't see below there are "just" 840's as well hehe.

But yeah, don't go non-pro. Its more expansive, but worth it for sure.
Back to top
StrEagle




Posts: 14059
Location: Balkans
PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 11:38    Post subject:
Samsung 840 Pro Series 128GB SSD (2.5", Sata 6Gb/s)
#: 1872125
128 GB
max write 390 MB/Sec
150eur

Samsung 840 Pro Series 256GB SSD (2.5", Sata 6Gb/s)
#: 1872133
256 GB
max write 520 MB/Sec
250eur

Samsung 840 Pro Series 512GB SSD (2.5", Sata 6Gb/s)
#: 1920804
512 GB
max write 520 MB/Sec
500eur

why is the 128gb slower?!


Lutzifer wrote:
and yes, mine is only average


Last edited by StrEagle on Thu, 2nd May 2013 11:41; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Perry Rhodan




Posts: 468

PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 11:41    Post subject:
because the 256GB version has more chips, and those chips are being used parallel, so more speed Smile
Back to top
StrEagle




Posts: 14059
Location: Balkans
PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 11:42    Post subject:
I don't see the 512GB version going 800MB/s Laughing


Lutzifer wrote:
and yes, mine is only average
Back to top
Werelds
Special Little Man



Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 11:43    Post subject:
Because there's less NAND packages. An SSD controller gets its speed from writing to multiple NAND packages at the same time, rather than writing to just one.

That's also why they are so much faster with thousands of small files. Rather than only being able to read from 1 source (like a magnetic drive's head, although that's technically not 100% accurate either), they read from 8 or 16 places at the same time. Couple that with the fact that it's all electric and you can see that the only bottleneck is how many NAND packages you can fit together and how fast electricity "moves" Wink
Back to top
rgb#000
Banned



Posts: 5118

PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 11:50    Post subject:
256gb is optimal ssd purchase today. with 128gb you always feel just a tiny bit short on space. i love my 128gb 830, but after windows and a few MP games that i always have installed, there isn't much more space left for anything else (maybe 2-3 SP games if you are lucky)


Last edited by rgb#000 on Thu, 2nd May 2013 11:53; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Sin317
Banned



Posts: 24322
Location: Geneva
PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 11:53    Post subject:
yeah, 256 is already so-so sometimes, with games getting so fucking huge lol.
Back to top
KillerCrocker




Posts: 20503

PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 12:04    Post subject:
I have 128gb plextor for c and steam and it is small. 100gb free after win7 and apps are installed.
Thankfully not much games need ssd. My hdd also got much faster since it is now free from system management


3080 | ps5 pro

Sin317-"im 31 years old and still surprised at how much shit comes out of my ass actually ..."
SteamDRM-"Call of Duty is the symbol of the true perfection in every aspect. Call of Duty games are like Mozart's/Beethoven's symphonies"
deadpoetic-"are you new to the cyberspace?"
Back to top
Invasor
Moderator



Posts: 7638
Location: On the road
PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 19:35    Post subject:
Thanks for the info guys, I'll look for the 840 pro...
Back to top
rgb#000
Banned



Posts: 5118

PostPosted: Thu, 2nd May 2013 20:56    Post subject:
good choice, you won't regret it
Back to top
sabin1981
Mostly Cursed



Posts: 87805

PostPosted: Fri, 10th May 2013 13:15    Post subject:
Back to top
Page 6 of 37 All times are GMT + 1 Hour
NFOHump.com Forum Index - Hardware Zone Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 35, 36, 37  Next
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)  


Display posts from previous:   

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group