I need some suggestions on an SSD. EDIT: I need help imaging to SSD

[Saffron]

I just recently built the computer in my sig below. Really the only thing left I have to do to it hardware wise is get a solid state hard drive. I have no idea what is good and what isn't and whether I should get a small one like a 128GB or spend the cash and get a larger 512GB.

I've searched around and checked out some benchmarks. I am thinking about going with an OCZ Vertex 4, any thoughts or concerns on this particular drive? Are there any other brands I should look into more deeply? Are there any reliability issues with SSD, because I don't want to spend the money and 2 years later have it puke on me?

I have used OCZ RAM in the past and have been overly satisfied with their products. I actually have an A64 computer with 2GB of OCZ DDR-800 still working fine to this day. I memtested it with 9 passes a couple months ago and no errors.

EDIT:
My boss gave me his 120GB OCZ Vertex 3 SSD today. I am still going to purchase a brand new one regardless, but I have new questions.

What is the best way to go about imaging from my 3TB storage (only 40GB used) to my solid state? Should I use the software that comes with windows or should I use something like Symantec Backup Exec or Acronis?

My main questions is whether the OS and all my games will still work if I restore everything from the image (no hardware changes other than the SSD)? I really don't want to download almost 40GB of games again... considering I just did so a few day ago.

 

[dagamer34]

256GB Samsung 840 for just $180. I don't think buying a 512GB SSD makes that much sense in a desktop unless there is a really good reason to have that much flash storage (perhaps you want to store your Lightroom library on an SSD instead of a spinning disk). It's not cost prohibitive to get a 512GB drive, just probably not cost-efficient.

As for reliability, the way I put it is this, if it's good enough for Apple after they've validated the drive, it's probably good enough for you.

 

[Charlie98]

OCZ gets a lot of hate, they had some reliability issues in the past, but I think it's reasonable to still consider one of the newer releases, like the Vertex4 you suggested. I have a Agility3 in my desktop (that will be going to my HTPC, soon) that I have never had a problem with, so YMMV.

I just ordered a Samsung 256GB 840Pro... my original Agility3 was only 64GB and I've outgrown it in only a year... I think the 256GB is probably the best choice... cost/performance-wise... unless, as dagamer suggests, you just need a lot of space.

Most of the big names (Crucial, Samsung, OCZ, Intel, Plextor) are all good choices (just understand the differences in the individual models) and there are a lot of other brand choices as well that would serve you. The SSD market has really expanded this past year or so, there are a lot of choices.... There is a sticky at the top of this section that links SSD reviews... I've found it very helpful researching a new drive.

 

[Remobz]

I just bought the samsung 840 pro 128gb. I highly recommend it or the 256gb one.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I love my 840 pro 256gb.

 

[sze5003]

I picked up a 256gb Samsung 830 before the 840 model came out. I have a 128gb crucial m4 laying around too.

 

[Saffron]

Thanks for all your useful feedback, I greatly appreciate it!

I have the ability to purchase a larger 512GB SSD but I was just curious if it was warranted. On the same token I do have a 3TB Barracuda for storage so I already figured it wouldn't be critical. With the size of storage needed for games now days I wonder if it would be worth the larger capacity. I can easily fill 256GB with all the games I play, but that doesn't mean I need them all on the SSD.

I have some friends that mentioned using a smaller SSD for caching, how is the done and what would be the weight of this feature towards purchasing a lower or high capacity solid state?

 

[sm625]

If you have a large media HDD then you dont need a large SSD. Any SSD will do jsut fine, as long as it works and will likely remain working. (So no OCZ) What I've been doing is buying intel X25-M's. They have great performance at a great price. Also, the intel X25-E 32GB has been popping up on ebay for $60. This is an SLC drive that I would trust to go fast and remain fast and reliable for many many years. Everything new seems to be overpriced and you really dont notice the performance because they're all crazy fast.

All you really need an SSD for is your Windows folder, your Users folder, and all your antivirus files. Those things need not ever exceed 30GB (if they do then you need to write a script to clean out temp files, leftover browser garbage, etc). Everything else can go on another drive and your computer will still fly.

 

[kbp]

I personally would get a 256 for your primary drive and a 64 to cache your 3TB Seagate drive.

 

[Charlie98]

I personally would get a 256 for your primary drive and a 64 to cache your 3TB Seagate drive.

If you have the loot to get a 512GB SSD, you could do this instead. Performance-wise, the 256GB SSD's are the sweet spot.

 

[groberts101]

unless Samsung does something to improve steady state performance on the midsized TLC drives(unlikely as they are prioritizing lifespan with lazy recovery tendencies for TLC at this time).. I would be looking at the 512GB model since it will allow much more slack space and reduce that slowdown tendency if you rarely idle the machine enough for GC to work its magic.

Just keep in mind that TRIM alone won't always save you and the controllers firmware algorithms.. along with usage models decide when the drive will actually make use of it.

If you're going to get a regular TLC based 840?.. I would get the 512GB model.. or stick with the Pro version for an OS volume as of now. Then you can get by with the 256GB Pro version without issue as the TRIM/GC recovery is much more aggressive.

Another way to look at it is that the Pro is faster overall as a filled OS drive in a settled in state.. than the TLC drive is when it's factory fresh.

So, having increased lifespan and fast reads for an OS drive is great.. but not at the expense of steady state speeds(reads are somewhat affected too) and recovery ability, IMO.

 

[Saffron]

I personally would get a 256 for your primary drive and a 64 to cache your 3TB Seagate drive.

This is another thing I would like to know about. Is there a certain way I would go about using a smaller SSD to cache my 3TB -- do I set it do so in my bios, do I need software to do it, or is it something in the drives properties? Could I get a 128/256GB, use it for both my OS and caching my 3TB?

My 3TB Barracuda will be plenty of storage space, but it's the speed from the SSD I am after(naturally). I'm trying to find the best way to go about doing this. Thanks for bearing with me and providing me with very useful information.

 

[Arkaign]

I recently bought a Vertex 4 (well, I guess about 6 months ago). I loved it, was a great drive. Moved to an 840 Non-Pro (faster reads, slower writes). Am planning on moving to a pair of 500 840 Pros for my write-heavy drives soon.

Either way, get a 250/256GB model, they are often much faster than the 120/128GB models and not that much more expensive. I think the Vertex4 is a good candidate, I put mine through a lot and it never failed me. If you want even more speed, the 840 Pro is a great choice as well. I like my non-pro 840 a lot, but I am really only using it for the read performance, I do little writing to my C drive, and the writes are slower than many SSDs.

 

[Arkaign]

Results with my 840, mostly filled drive.

 

[Bill Brasky]

I would go with a 256gb OCZ Vector at the moment. They're a slightly higher performing drive than the Samsung 840 pro and are on sale for $239 which is cheaper than the 840 pro. Better speed for less money is an easy choice.

 

[sze5003]

At one point I'll move up to the 512gb SSD. That's pretty much when I'll stop using the secondary 1tb drive. When the 512's are cheap enough that you can also keep a 256 model around and not sell it, you will pretty much have a nice backup plan.

I store all my downloads and such in the mechanical drive. There is really no need for a larger SSD than 256gb if you are going to follow an optimization guide and keep only certain apps and windows on it. I have it optimized and only apps I run constantly on it and still have 221gb free.

 

[BrightCandle]

Actually it doesn't really matter. Me personally I would avoid a Sandforce based drive as their reliability record (failure rate stats say they are worse than hard drives!) is atrocious.

Instead any modern Marvel or Intel based drive will do the Job. Crucial M4's might be very cheap right now as they are from the prior generation, Samsung 830, 840's are also very well regarded. Intel's drives tend to be expensive but they also tend to be the most reliable drives out there. Up to you really, plenty of good choices and you should just choose the cheapest of the reasonable ones.

OCZ on the other hand I would avoid, they have a history of dishonesty about their SSD products.

 

[zCypher]

I started with a 60GB SSD and it was barely big enough to have Windows, Office and a few basic programs before it was almost full. Even with my current 240GB drive, I have a bit less than 100GB free. I do have a lot more installed though, including quite a few games. So 240 to 256GB drives are not terrible but if you have the means to go 512GB, why not? Bigger is better is it not?

If you are looking strictly in terms of the best value per GB of SSDs, I think 240-256GB drives are still the sweet spot until 512GB drives get a bit cheaper.

 

[wiammaren]

The SSD market has really expanded this past year or so, there are a lot of choices

 

[lehtv]

Yet there are few SSD's that hit a sweet spot for price, reliability and speed. Not long ago the Samsung 830 was just that, and before it the Crucial M4. But now we have Samsung 840 which has somewhat unproven reliability, Intel 330 which is somewhat slow but reliable and cheap, and Samsung 840 Pro and others which are faster but also a lot more expensive... I'm hoping Crucial's next gen SSD will be affordable, fast and reliable

 

[kbp]

This is another thing I would like to know about. Is there a certain way I would go about using a smaller SSD to cache my 3TB -- do I set it do so in my bios, do I need software to do it, or is it something in the drives properties? Could I get a 128/256GB, use it for both my OS and caching my 3TB?

My 3TB Barracuda will be plenty of storage space, but it's the speed from the SSD I am after(naturally). I'm trying to find the best way to go about doing this. Thanks for bearing with me and providing me with very useful information.

Use the 256 SSD as your primary boot drive.
Use the second 64 SSD as a cache drive for your Seagate by using the Accelerate TAB in the Intel Rapid Storage Technology Program.

 

[Saffron]

Is it possible to use an SSD as both the boot drive and for caching? As in setting it up with an OS partition and cache partition. Can you even partition a solid state hard drive?

 

[sze5003]

Is it possible to use an SSD as both the boot drive and for caching? As in setting it up with an OS partition and cache partition. Can you even partition a solid state hard drive?

Yes it can be partitioned but not recommended. Also usually you don't need caching on an SSD unless your doing something else.

 

[tweakboy]

Wow my Crucial pownz this 840 pro in read seq. Note I am on 512k cluster size.
I love firmware........

 

[Saffron]

See my first/topic post in this thread. ^

Bump for the edit. I didn't want to create a new thread.