Intel 80GB G2 vs...

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

Slash621

Member
Mar 5, 2003
189
0
0
So I'm thinking of going SSD and I need at least 80GB Total Capacity. (Both of my computers use about ~45GB on the OS Drive).

I'm looking at doing 2 X-25M G2's based on all the advice here in the articles. However I am curious about something he said towards the end, that the larger sized drives are faster than the smaller ones. I assume this is because there are more individual blocks that can be employed in reading in parallel. So my question is this....

Is there another brand of a larger size (example: OCZ Agility 120GB) which is faster than the G2-80GB for the same PRICE. I'm really curious...
 
C

chrisf6969

Member
Mar 16, 2009
82
0
0
The larger INTEL drives are faster than the smaller Intel drives.

ie: the X25-M 160Gb is a little faster than the X25-M 80Gb.

But the Intel X25-M 80Gb is still faster than all the OCZ, Corsiars, etc... even at 128Gb, 256Gb, etc.

large intel MLC drives > small intel MLC drives

small MLC intel drives > all other brand MLC drives.
 
S

Slash621

Member
Mar 5, 2003
189
0
0
ok, SO INTEL it is. 1 more question. Where the heck do I find a G2 in stock for a price close to the 225 list! It seems all of the available ones are 300+ and its a ripoff. Bummer
 
D

davem1979

Junior Member
Sep 20, 2009
5
0
0
Hi,

I also am considering 2 Intel X-25M 80gb drives. I am wondering if I should get 2 80gb X-25M vs. 1 160gb X-25M...I want to have one X-25M with Windows 7 OS/Apps and on the second X-25M, I was thinking of running up to 2 Virtual Machines, as well as current photos I'd be editing before moving to archival standard hard drive storage. Do you think 2 80gb drives will serve me better than 1 160gb X-25M?

I don't plan on putting the 80GB X-25M's in RAID 0, although if the new TRIM command can be passed through the ICH10r then I'd at least have that option in the future.

The other thing is that I am wondering if now with SSD's being so fast, is it necessary to separate OS/Apps from data? For Instance, if I am working on some pictures or maybe editing a couple video files, is there any reason not to use the SSD that the OS/Apps are located on. For standard hard drives, I always short stroke the disk for the OS/Apps, and then put my documents and pictures and video on a separate short stroked hard drive. Does the logic of keeping things separate now still apply to SSD's?

Here's my configuration that I'm considering:

2 80gb Intel X-25M G2 (independent disks so TRIM can be used) one X25M with OS/Apps/Pagefile, the other X-25M with virtual machines (not in use all the time) and temp photos/media for editing
2 640gb WD Caviar Black partition 320GB RAID 0 + partition 480GB RAID 1 (RAID 0 for fast storage of documents, video, photos and RAID 1 for internal back up of SSD's and RAID 0 partition)
1 500GB external USB/eSata backup

I have my music/movies on a separate HTPC. This hard drive setup is mainly for fast document access and photo/editing-video storage...

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
David
 
G

Griswold

Senior member
Dec 24, 2004
630
0
0
Originally posted by: davem1979
For standard hard drives, I always short stroke the disk for the OS/Apps, and then put my documents and pictures and video on a separate short stroked hard drive. Does the logic of keeping things separate now still apply to SSD's?
Click to expand...

No. Just throw everything that benefits from the speed of an SSD on it. Personally, I partitioned my 160GB G2 for the sole reason that I dont need VMs and a game or two to be included in the daily and weekly image of my OS partition. Otherwise I wouldnt even have bothered with that.

However, video editing may not necessarily benefit from an Intel SSD with its not so stellar sequential write performance. I'd use the HDDs for that.
 
J

jdjbuffalo

Senior member
Oct 26, 2000
433
0
0
Originally posted by: davem1979
Hi,

I also am considering 2 Intel X-25M 80gb drives. I am wondering if I should get 2 80gb X-25M vs. 1 160gb X-25M...I want to have one X-25M with Windows 7 OS/Apps and on the second X-25M, I was thinking of running up to 2 Virtual Machines, as well as current photos I'd be editing before moving to archival standard hard drive storage. Do you think 2 80gb drives will serve me better than 1 160gb X-25M?

I don't plan on putting the 80GB X-25M's in RAID 0, although if the new TRIM command can be passed through the ICH10r then I'd at least have that option in the future.

The other thing is that I am wondering if now with SSD's being so fast, is it necessary to separate OS/Apps from data? For Instance, if I am working on some pictures or maybe editing a couple video files, is there any reason not to use the SSD that the OS/Apps are located on. For standard hard drives, I always short stroke the disk for the OS/Apps, and then put my documents and pictures and video on a separate short stroked hard drive. Does the logic of keeping things separate now still apply to SSD's?
Click to expand...

The main reason to keep it separate has always been that if anything happens (e.g. virus, malware, bad patch that hoses Windows etc.) then you don't have to worry about losing much if any data.

 
C

chrisf6969

Member
Mar 16, 2009
82
0
0
Originally posted by: davem1979
Hi,

I also am considering 2 Intel X-25M 80gb drives. I am wondering if I should get 2 80gb X-25M vs. 1 160gb X-25M...I want to have one X-25M with Windows 7 OS/Apps and on the second X-25M, I was thinking of running up to 2 Virtual Machines, as well as current photos I'd be editing before moving to archival standard hard drive storage. Do you think 2 80gb drives will serve me better than 1 160gb X-25M?

I don't plan on putting the 80GB X-25M's in RAID 0, although if the new TRIM command can be passed through the ICH10r then I'd at least have that option in the future.

The other thing is that I am wondering if now with SSD's being so fast, is it necessary to separate OS/Apps from data? For Instance, if I am working on some pictures or maybe editing a couple video files, is there any reason not to use the SSD that the OS/Apps are located on. For standard hard drives, I always short stroke the disk for the OS/Apps, and then put my documents and pictures and video on a separate short stroked hard drive. Does the logic of keeping things separate now still apply to SSD's?

Here's my configuration that I'm considering:

2 80gb Intel X-25M G2 (independent disks so TRIM can be used) one X25M with OS/Apps/Pagefile, the other X-25M with virtual machines (not in use all the time) and temp photos/media for editing
2 640gb WD Caviar Black partition 320GB RAID 0 + partition 480GB RAID 1 (RAID 0 for fast storage of documents, video, photos and RAID 1 for internal back up of SSD's and RAID 0 partition)
1 500GB external USB/eSata backup

I have my music/movies on a separate HTPC. This hard drive setup is mainly for fast document access and photo/editing-video storage...

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
David
Click to expand...

If you're not going to Raid 0 the 2x 80Gb's then you might as well get 1 160Gb drive. Its a little faster, and you won't run out of room on it if you want to keep all of your OS/apps/games on one drive. (sounds like you already have your docs / data plan on regular HD's)

 
I

imported_Lothar

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2006
4,559
1
0
Originally posted by: chrisf6969
The larger INTEL drives are faster than the smaller Intel drives.

ie: the X25-M 160Gb is a little faster than the X25-M 80Gb.

But the Intel X25-M 80Gb is still faster than all the OCZ, Corsiars, etc... even at 128Gb, 256Gb, etc.

large intel MLC drives > small intel MLC drives

small MLC intel drives > all other brand MLC drives.
Click to expand...

Link?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom