Will it be fairly reliable with the latest firmware? Sure. More so than a Crucial M4? More so than a Samsung 830? Not necessarily. It sure is a lot slower than those, however--and also a lot more expensive, even for a smaller capacity.
If that's all you know about your power supply, then you definitely need to be a lot more worried about your power supply than an SSD. How's the voltage regulation? How about ripple suppression? Transient overshoot?
Yes its all my bro used to have a computer strore and he told me it was a good Power Supply for years and that i didnt need more than 800 w
You do, I hope, realize that the "800 W" figure is a marketing number, not something that is objectively measurable. There are some 800 W power supplies that are very nice. There are also some that are junk that should make you worry even if you knew for an absolute fact that you'd never even pull 300 W from them. And there are a lot at various points in between. Which do you have? Do you even know?
If that's all you know about your power supply, then you definitely need to be a lot more worried about your power supply than an SSD. How's the voltage regulation? How about ripple suppression? Transient overshoot?
Yes its all my bro used to have a computer strore and he told me it was a good Power Supply for years and that i didnt need more than 800 w
You do, I hope, realize that the "800 W" figure is a marketing number, not something that is objectively measurable. There are some 800 W power supplies that are very nice. There are also some that are junk that should make you worry even if you knew for an absolute fact that you'd never even pull 300 W from them. And there are a lot at various points in between. Which do you have? Do you even know?
Yes i know but the 800 wats are real not ficticious
See, that's the sort of power supply that you should be worried about. It's not even 80 PLUS certified, and requirements for certification are pretty low. Rarely are their power supplies that can't get certification, but are even kind of all right.
How much of that 800 W is on the +12 V rails? Even the spec sheet doesn't answer that. Four +12 V rails isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when they're only 18-22 A each, that's really not that good.
And back to the above questions: how is the voltage regulation? How about the ripple suppression? Transient overshoot? Power supplies can cause an awful lot of problems other than just a dead power supply.
See, that's the sort of power supply that you should be worried about. It's not even 80 PLUS certified, and requirements for certification are pretty low. Rarely are their power supplies that can't get certification, but are even kind of all right.
How much of that 800 W is on the +12 V rails? Even the spec sheet doesn't answer that. Four +12 V rails isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when they're only 18-22 A each, that's really not that good.
And back to the above questions: how is the voltage regulation? How about the ripple suppression? Transient overshoot? Power supplies can cause an awful lot of problems other than just a dead power supply.
It's supposedly "700 W", but the total wattage on the +3.3 V, +5 V, and +12 V rails added together only totals 683 W. So it's impossible to actually pull 700 W from it in the real world without running it out of spec. That's about the best admission of a fake wattage that you can find short of something like this:
It's supposedly "700 W", but the total wattage on the +3.3 V, +5 V, and +12 V rails added together only totals 683 W. So it's impossible to actually pull 700 W from it in the real world without running it out of spec. That's about the best admission of a fake wattage that you can find short of something like this:
It's supposedly "700 W", but the total wattage on the +3.3 V, +5 V, and +12 V rails added together only totals 683 W. So it's impossible to actually pull 700 W from it in the real world without running it out of spec. That's about the best admission of a fake wattage that you can find short of something like this:
Just throwing my 2 cents in here. I bought my first SSD almost a year ago and absolutely love it! I will never put my OS on a non-SSD again. I bought an OCZ Vertex 3 240gb Sata III and I have had zero problems with it.
Make sure you get a Sata III SSD and also a Sata III motherboard. I benchmarked my SSD on my old motherboard and my new motherboard with Sata III and there was a noticeable difference. Use the Sata III cables that come with it as well. There also was something I had to turn on in my Windows 7 registry to get the full speed out of it and I can't remember what it was called now
I bought a Samsung 830 128gb SSD about a month or so ago. So far so good. After having an SSD it would be hard to go back. But I will say while they are nice they are not necessary by any means. Having faster response time and decreased load times is easy to get used to tho.
The prices have dropped so much lately that if you were on the fence about getting one now is the time. I am thinking about getting another just because prices are so low now.
I've got the Crucial C300 256GB. The first one crapped out within three months and I'm not terribly happy with the replacement. YMMV. I think I'm going to stick with Intel going forward. They seem to be the most reliable from what I've seen.
Hey quiz, if you are still watching this thread, can you give me your honest opinion... Is a SSD worth the money for gaming? I know it boost loading/writing speeds, but do they really affect the game much? I've been on the fence about one since my new build, i think i want one, but i don't really know much about them.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
Hey quiz, if you are still watching this thread, can you give me your honest opinion... Is a SSD worth the money for gaming? I know it boost loading/writing speeds, but do they really affect the game much? I've been on the fence about one since my new build, i think i want one, but i don't really know much about them.
I am not Quiz but I will tell you my experience with SSD and gaming.
In Skyrim my load times dropped by about 80-90%. I usually dont even have time to read the " hints", many times its almost an instant transition.
Other game load times are cut in half at the least, most by at least 70%+.
It also seems I have less stutter / hitching. Which may be due to the SSD or the new GPU i got at the same time.
Either way I am happy with the buy and performance. Hopefully it will last, I have had it for a little over a month now.
Hey quiz, if you are still watching this thread, can you give me your honest opinion... Is a SSD worth the money for gaming? I know it boost loading/writing speeds, but do they really affect the game much? I've been on the fence about one since my new build, i think i want one, but i don't really know much about them.
I am not Quiz but I will tell you my experience with SSD and gaming.
In Skyrim my load times dropped by about 80-90%. I usually dont even have time to read the " hints", many times its almost an instant transition.
Other game load times are cut in half at the least, most by at least 70%+.
It also seems I have less stutter / hitching. Which may be due to the SSD or the new GPU i got at the same time.
Either way I am happy with the buy and performance. Hopefully it will last, I have had it for a little over a month now.
Awesome, thats what i wanted to hear, now my next question When looking into buying a SSD, for a gaming purpose, should i look for a better sequential write speed? or should i look for a higher random read/write on the IOPS? Or does it even make that big of a difference? Should i buy one SSD that has a larger capacity, 200+ gb, or get two 120's and possibly RAID them? As for Power supplies, i'm more than certain mine will work, 750w 80plus bronze i think, i forget exactly which one it is but if you want me to post it i can in a few hours. (not sure who i'm asking all these questions too, but any answers are helpful!)
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
For most games, Random I/O is king when dealing with performance. There are some exceptions, but buy and large, most games are made up of hundreds, if not thousands, of individual files spread across the installation directory. At various points during the game, it loads a few of these files at a time.
Each time you go to find a file, or a fragmented part of a file, you incur the "seek time", which is really what gets compounded with Random I/O. Every time you change the file, or the file is split and changes location, you add in another seek time. For regular hard drives, that's on the order of 10ms or so - you have to wait for the drive arm to move over the right part of the platter, and for the platter to have rotated into position before you can start reading. For most SSD's, you just punch in the address, and that's typically well under 0.1ms.
That's a huge difference. Multiply that out by how many times that a program calls for different files at different times during the loading and playing, and you can see the real impact that an SSD makes.
It's a similar case for Windows - it's made up of hundreds (if not thousands) of files, and it loads them at various times during startup. That's why you see startup times on SSDs go from 40sec-1min down to 10-20 sec: it's all in the reduced seek time, represented by Random I/O scores.
Sequential times are typically only important if you are streaming files (usually something like FRAPS recording, which is particularly sensitive to Sequential Write speeds).
As far as reliability goes:
For laptops, hands down SSD's win, for the most basic reasons of no moving parts and lower heat generation (which is far and away the number one killer of hardware in laptops).
For desktops, I have literally dozens of SSDs installed at work. I have 4 or 5 here in my personal computers. Hard drives in and of themselves don't have very high failure rates to being with (unless you drop them). Some of my SSDs have seen over 3 (close to 4) years of use by now. I haven't had any SSD's fail, but I will admit I am a small sample size, and that out of all the hard drives i've used, I've not had a huge failure rate (aside from WD Raptor 72G and IBM Deskstar) to begin with.
If you don't want any blue screens - don't turn on your computer. The hard drive is just one of many components that can cause your computer to blue screen, and probably one of the less likely (specific issues aside) to cause it.
I've been a fan of Crucial drives myself, but I don't have any particular loyalty to them. They have just been very consistent brand with a good reputation, excellent performance, and fair pricing.
Hey quiz, if you are still watching this thread, can you give me your honest opinion... Is a SSD worth the money for gaming? I know it boost loading/writing speeds, but do they really affect the game much? I've been on the fence about one since my new build, i think i want one, but i don't really know much about them.
I could never go back to standard HDD for my OS. From power button to login screen is about 8 seconds. BF3 with the way you join games from the browser & have to reload the entire game when you switch servers would have been really painfull without SSD. SSD is also great for games that stream a lot from disk.
Hey quiz, if you are still watching this thread, can you give me your honest opinion... Is a SSD worth the money for gaming? I know it boost loading/writing speeds, but do they really affect the game much? I've been on the fence about one since my new build, i think i want one, but i don't really know much about them.
It's a question of budget. If you're trying to squeeze your build into a budget of $600 excluding peripherals, then no, an SSD just doesn't fit. If you've got a budget of $1200 excluding peripherals, then I think it's silly not to get an SSD. Personally, I have a 120 GB SSD (OCZ Agility) and no hard drive at all; if you don't need that much capacity and can go SSD-only, then it makes sense on a smaller budget than if you're also going to have to shell out $80 or $100 for a hard drive even if you get the SSD.
It also depends some on what games you play. For a game like Guild Wars with lots of loading times due to map travel, I thought that upgrading from a hard drive to my SSD was a much bigger deal than upgrading from a Radeon X1300 Pro to a Radeon HD 5850. For a seamless, open world game that manages to disguise hard drive accesses in the background pretty well, an SSD is still somewhat nice for the initial load time, but not as big of a deal.
-----
My point on the power supply bit above is that it's silly to worry about whether this SSD has a 3% chance of failing in a given amount of time while that one has only a 2% chance unless you've already taken care of the much bigger things like making sure you have a good power supply, adequate case airflow to handle your parts, and so forth. And if you're overclocking your processor to 4.5 GHz, then you don't really care that much about reliability.
From power button to login screen is about 8 seconds.
That actually has a lot to do with which motherboard you have. If the computer takes 20 seconds to POST before it even starts accessing the SSD or hard drive, you're not getting to the login screen within 8 seconds.
Comments
It's not like that's been free from past firmware problems, either.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4625/intel-testing-firmware-fix-for-ssd-320-8mb-power-bug
Will it be fairly reliable with the latest firmware? Sure. More so than a Crucial M4? More so than a Samsung 830? Not necessarily. It sure is a lot slower than those, however--and also a lot more expensive, even for a smaller capacity.
this is my power supply
http://nox-xtreme.com/en/power-supply/58-apex-800w
why you recommend slow 270 MB/s intel SSDs?
the good SSDs these days are 500+ MB/s
You do, I hope, realize that the "800 W" figure is a marketing number, not something that is objectively measurable. There are some 800 W power supplies that are very nice. There are also some that are junk that should make you worry even if you knew for an absolute fact that you'd never even pull 300 W from them. And there are a lot at various points in between. Which do you have? Do you even know?
Yes i know but the 800 wats are real not ficticious
See, that's the sort of power supply that you should be worried about. It's not even 80 PLUS certified, and requirements for certification are pretty low. Rarely are their power supplies that can't get certification, but are even kind of all right.
How much of that 800 W is on the +12 V rails? Even the spec sheet doesn't answer that. Four +12 V rails isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when they're only 18-22 A each, that's really not that good.
And back to the above questions: how is the voltage regulation? How about the ripple suppression? Transient overshoot? Power supplies can cause an awful lot of problems other than just a dead power supply.
if you have SATA 3
OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD (Solid State Disk) (550MB/s read, 520MB/s write)
Kingston Hyperx 3K 240GB (555MB/s read, 510MB/s write)
so for 800 W wich power supply do you recommend
And how do you know this? Has it been reviewed by a reputable site that actually pulled 800 W from it to see what happened?
Here's a picture I found of the 700 W version:
http://www.modreactor.com/images/stories/reviews/nox_apex_700w/009.JPG
It's supposedly "700 W", but the total wattage on the +3.3 V, +5 V, and +12 V rails added together only totals 683 W. So it's impossible to actually pull 700 W from it in the real world without running it out of spec. That's about the best admission of a fake wattage that you can find short of something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XglUdm25Bxo&feature=player_embedded
You probably don't actually need 800 W. What else do you have in your system?
mine isn´t that one
But if they'll put a fake wattage on the 700 W version, what makes you so certain that they won't do the same for the 800 W version in the same line?
Operating System
MS Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit SP1
CPU
Intel Core i5 750 @ 2.67GHz 28 °C
Lynnfield 45nm Technology
CPU COOLER
Noctua U-12 P
RAM
8,00 GB Dual-Channel DDR3 @ 666MHz (9-9-9-24)
Motherboard
ASUSTeK Computer INC. P7P55D PRO (LGA1156) 25 °C
Graphics
ASUS VH222 (1920x1080@60Hz)
1280MB GeForce GTX 470 (ASUStek Computer Inc) 29 °C
Hard Drives
625GB Sistema (RAID)
Optical Drives
ASUS DRW-2014S1T
Audio
High Definition Audio Device
Case
Thermaltake Element S
PSU
Nox 800w
Just throwing my 2 cents in here. I bought my first SSD almost a year ago and absolutely love it! I will never put my OS on a non-SSD again. I bought an OCZ Vertex 3 240gb Sata III and I have had zero problems with it.
Make sure you get a Sata III SSD and also a Sata III motherboard. I benchmarked my SSD on my old motherboard and my new motherboard with Sata III and there was a noticeable difference. Use the Sata III cables that come with it as well. There also was something I had to turn on in my Windows 7 registry to get the full speed out of it and I can't remember what it was called now
I bought a Samsung 830 128gb SSD about a month or so ago. So far so good. After having an SSD it would be hard to go back. But I will say while they are nice they are not necessary by any means. Having faster response time and decreased load times is easy to get used to tho.
The prices have dropped so much lately that if you were on the fence about getting one now is the time. I am thinking about getting another just because prices are so low now.
I've got the Crucial C300 256GB. The first one crapped out within three months and I'm not terribly happy with the replacement. YMMV. I think I'm going to stick with Intel going forward. They seem to be the most reliable from what I've seen.
Hey quiz, if you are still watching this thread, can you give me your honest opinion... Is a SSD worth the money for gaming? I know it boost loading/writing speeds, but do they really affect the game much? I've been on the fence about one since my new build, i think i want one, but i don't really know much about them.
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
I am not Quiz but I will tell you my experience with SSD and gaming.
In Skyrim my load times dropped by about 80-90%. I usually dont even have time to read the " hints", many times its almost an instant transition.
Other game load times are cut in half at the least, most by at least 70%+.
It also seems I have less stutter / hitching. Which may be due to the SSD or the new GPU i got at the same time.
Either way I am happy with the buy and performance. Hopefully it will last, I have had it for a little over a month now.
Awesome, thats what i wanted to hear, now my next question
When looking into buying a SSD, for a gaming purpose, should i look for a better sequential write speed? or should i look for a higher random read/write on the IOPS? Or does it even make that big of a difference? Should i buy one SSD that has a larger capacity, 200+ gb, or get two 120's and possibly RAID them? As for Power supplies, i'm more than certain mine will work, 750w 80plus bronze i think, i forget exactly which one it is but if you want me to post it i can in a few hours. (not sure who i'm asking all these questions too, but any answers are helpful!)
The "Youtube Pro": Someone who watches video's on said subject, and obviously has a full understanding of what is being said about such subject.
SSD INTEL Series 520.
well if u got alot of money i will go for that,
One think i learn from ssd is iam not going to install windows again on it. not until windows 8,
Now i used HDD for windows and all my game on my SSD and
for some reason after a while my ssd is slowing down and its only when i put windows on them
i been asking around and some said its because windows always rewrite and move stuff million time in the background
and since the ssd is not a disk but image its turnbad,
anyway iam not a expert i may be very wrong..
correct me if iam wrong,
~The only opinion that matters is your own.Everything else is just advice,~
For most games, Random I/O is king when dealing with performance. There are some exceptions, but buy and large, most games are made up of hundreds, if not thousands, of individual files spread across the installation directory. At various points during the game, it loads a few of these files at a time.
Each time you go to find a file, or a fragmented part of a file, you incur the "seek time", which is really what gets compounded with Random I/O. Every time you change the file, or the file is split and changes location, you add in another seek time. For regular hard drives, that's on the order of 10ms or so - you have to wait for the drive arm to move over the right part of the platter, and for the platter to have rotated into position before you can start reading. For most SSD's, you just punch in the address, and that's typically well under 0.1ms.
That's a huge difference. Multiply that out by how many times that a program calls for different files at different times during the loading and playing, and you can see the real impact that an SSD makes.
It's a similar case for Windows - it's made up of hundreds (if not thousands) of files, and it loads them at various times during startup. That's why you see startup times on SSDs go from 40sec-1min down to 10-20 sec: it's all in the reduced seek time, represented by Random I/O scores.
Sequential times are typically only important if you are streaming files (usually something like FRAPS recording, which is particularly sensitive to Sequential Write speeds).
As far as reliability goes:
For laptops, hands down SSD's win, for the most basic reasons of no moving parts and lower heat generation (which is far and away the number one killer of hardware in laptops).
For desktops, I have literally dozens of SSDs installed at work. I have 4 or 5 here in my personal computers. Hard drives in and of themselves don't have very high failure rates to being with (unless you drop them). Some of my SSDs have seen over 3 (close to 4) years of use by now. I haven't had any SSD's fail, but I will admit I am a small sample size, and that out of all the hard drives i've used, I've not had a huge failure rate (aside from WD Raptor 72G and IBM Deskstar) to begin with.
If you don't want any blue screens - don't turn on your computer. The hard drive is just one of many components that can cause your computer to blue screen, and probably one of the less likely (specific issues aside) to cause it.
I've been a fan of Crucial drives myself, but I don't have any particular loyalty to them. They have just been very consistent brand with a good reputation, excellent performance, and fair pricing.
Samsung all the way!!! I have this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147136
I had two crucials die on me that I had for less than 6 months..
"You are all going to poop yourselves." BillMurphy
"Laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone."
I could never go back to standard HDD for my OS. From power button to login screen is about 8 seconds. BF3 with the way you join games from the browser & have to reload the entire game when you switch servers would have been really painfull without SSD. SSD is also great for games that stream a lot from disk.Definitely worth tha cash IMHO.
It's a question of budget. If you're trying to squeeze your build into a budget of $600 excluding peripherals, then no, an SSD just doesn't fit. If you've got a budget of $1200 excluding peripherals, then I think it's silly not to get an SSD. Personally, I have a 120 GB SSD (OCZ Agility) and no hard drive at all; if you don't need that much capacity and can go SSD-only, then it makes sense on a smaller budget than if you're also going to have to shell out $80 or $100 for a hard drive even if you get the SSD.
It also depends some on what games you play. For a game like Guild Wars with lots of loading times due to map travel, I thought that upgrading from a hard drive to my SSD was a much bigger deal than upgrading from a Radeon X1300 Pro to a Radeon HD 5850. For a seamless, open world game that manages to disguise hard drive accesses in the background pretty well, an SSD is still somewhat nice for the initial load time, but not as big of a deal.
-----
My point on the power supply bit above is that it's silly to worry about whether this SSD has a 3% chance of failing in a given amount of time while that one has only a 2% chance unless you've already taken care of the much bigger things like making sure you have a good power supply, adequate case airflow to handle your parts, and so forth. And if you're overclocking your processor to 4.5 GHz, then you don't really care that much about reliability.
That actually has a lot to do with which motherboard you have. If the computer takes 20 seconds to POST before it even starts accessing the SSD or hard drive, you're not getting to the login screen within 8 seconds.