Samsung SpinPoint F4 320GB 16MB comparable to SSD

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,801
1,265
136
If its something you see being posted by someone repeatedly on multiple threads and that person has a trollish like history I would report it.
 

SickBeast

Lifer
Jul 21, 2000
14,377
19
81
Perhaps the OP will update the title of the thread so that it doesn't have to come to that. :whiste:

:colbert:
 

mv2devnull

Golden Member
Apr 13, 2010
1,511
149
106
Your games will be installed on mechnical if you have a big collection like freakin 13 games that are avg 7gb each ,, did you put that on your 160G3 no you didnt,, pointless for me especially that I run a DAW... I need everything installed on primary drive and I got GB of DAW sh*T . and I point data to my 320GB WDC SE.
A DAW is a digital audio workstation, and it doesn't have to be on the primary. Mine is spanned over a few drives for read/write speed.
:confused:
You say that you need everything on primary, but apparently it does not need to be on primary after all?

Does "span" mean "span" or "stripe" here?

One could "span" SSD's too, gaining both speed and size.

{Edit: Nevermind, probably a rAID-0 or RAID-5.}


tweakboy, your primary argument to avoid SSD seems to be size rather than speed. While SSD isn't the answer to your specific needs, that does not mean that SSD is bad for everyone.


Personally, I do find SSD more pleasing than a 200GB Seagate from year 2005. A noise issue ...


I have to agree with others that the title of this thread does not represent the content of this thread appropriately, and it does create unjustified impressions.
 
Last edited:

tweakboy

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2010
9,517
2
81
www.hammiestudios.com
well my DAW DATA is saved on the WDC 320GB which is fast enough for me. plus not something that is used often so its all good. However i do have space now to put my projects on the current drive but no need to ,, so their all in the WDC SE 320GB ,, just a large wave file and mp3 file ,, saving and reading those I dont mind the 1 second delay.

My external is eSATA 500GB soo what I do for backup is put my DAW projects on their and I have plenty of space left for a image Windows 7 image thing. Which right now is 173GB , and I have 13 games installed on it avg 7GB. thousands of photos, fair ammount of video.. most importanntly I have my DAW on primary as far as apps and plugins etc.

Soo I immediatly noticed things got snappier in Sonar 8.5 Producer Edition... like some samples that would take 10 seconds to load now took like 5 or 6 seconds ,,, anyhow.. soo I use creat a image in W7 twice a week. Soo if the hard drive dies ,, I can still get ieverything back and be up and running,,, I iluv that W7 feature. I dont think Vista had that..
 
Last edited:

Any_Name_Does

Member
Jul 13, 2010
143
0
0
I am with tweakboy on this subject. I think I'll skip nand based ssd altogether. While they are rather good for laptops and such, they are not fit for desktops and will never be. they are made of some sort of chemicals with extremely short write/read cycles and they are verrrrry slow as well. the fact that you are fooled into believing they are fast is that they are heavily raided, the transistors themselves are slow switching.
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
I am with tweakboy on this subject. I think I'll skip nand based ssd altogether. While they are rather good for laptops and such, they are not fit for desktops and will never be. they are made of some sort of chemicals with extremely short write/read cycles and they are verrrrry slow as well. the fact that you are fooled into believing they are fast is that they are heavily raided, the transistors themselves are slow switching.

dear science so much wrongness.

First of all, the current NAND based solutions are several times faster then any spindle drive in sequential read/writes, and HUNDREDS of times faster in random reads/writes. They are literally saturating SATA bus.

Second of all, NAND is already more then enough in terms of reliability, with the average person needing hundreds of years to waste it all. Mine is going at less then 3% of lifespan per year. so it would take me 33 years to use it all up. And the more space you have, the longer the lifespan.

Third, everything is made out of chemicals... SSD operation actually has nothing to do with chemical reaction... it has to do with electricity and got a lot in common with capacitors.

There is no "fooling"... they are not raided, they are better then raided. The multi chanel writing system is better than raid0... but so what? and spindle drives have multiple platters with two heads per platter (although they do not move independently), and RAM works in dual chanel with DDR^3, and CPUs are multi core... btw, for extra speed the SSDs are getting DDR as well as their multi Chanel operation starting with the upcoming generation.
But all of this is totally irrelevant engineering decisions. what matters is that in benchmark they annihilate the competition.
 

Any_Name_Does

Member
Jul 13, 2010
143
0
0
dear science so much wrongness.

First of all, the current NAND based solutions are several times faster then any spindle drive in sequential read/writes, and HUNDREDS of times faster in random reads/writes. They are literally saturating SATA bus.

Second of all, NAND is already more then enough in terms of reliability, with the average person needing hundreds of years to waste it all. Mine is going at less then 3% of lifespan per year. so it would take me 33 years to use it all up. And the more space you have, the longer the lifespan.

Third, everything is made out of chemicals... SSD operation actually has nothing to do with chemical reaction... it has to do with electricity and got a lot in common with capacitors.

There is no "fooling"... they are not raided, they are better then raided. The multi chanel writing system is better than raid0... but so what? and spindle drives have multiple platters with two heads per platter (although they do not move independently), and RAM works in dual chanel with DDR^3, and CPUs are multi core... btw, for extra speed the SSDs are getting DDR as well as their multi Chanel operation starting with the upcoming generation.
But all of this is totally irrelevant engineering decisions. what matters is that in benchmark they annihilate the competition.

Everything you said is absolutely correct. But I still don't respect this tech.:eek: why? I'll giver you no reasons because you'll destroy all my reasons anyway. I think the industry is better seved concentrating on a better tech. IBM was doing some stuff with magnetic ssd which sounded good. I forgot the name. In short, bring on the breakthroughs.
 

Any_Name_Does

Member
Jul 13, 2010
143
0
0

not really gut feeling. some knowledge can not ( easily ) be expressed in words. ( intuition maybe? ). that is what I mean. Does anyone really seriously think these things are a great next gen tech? how many people come here and complain that they don't notice a significant and worthy boost for their money? everytime you are doing heavy read write work on your computer you are forced to think one more cycle less life for my ssd.
 

=Wendy=

Senior member
Nov 7, 2009
263
1
76
www.myce.com
Only those who are paranoid will worry about write cycles. Even with 5,000 cycles across the complete drive, they should last 10s of years, and by that time you'll have moved onto something else.

SSDs vs HDDs?
There is no comparison. SSDs are much much faster in the "real world".

Make up your own mind.
HDDs and SSDs in the Real world, with real applications and data, measured with some expensive hardware.
http://www.myce.com/review/seagate-...-hdd-review-36205/MyCE-Reality-Suite-tests-7/

The test also includes a Samsung F3, which is only very slightly slower than the F4.
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
just an FYI, the industry IS also developing other potential technologies. the capacitor like SSD is currently the best, but a promising tech is one which uses solid/glass properties. it melts it and either lets it cool quickly (glass) or runs a current in it while cooling to slow down cooling (solid), and the two have different resistance once cooled.
Those have infinite write cycles, infinite retention (current SSD have 10 year unplugged data retention), but are currently more expensive and slower. so they are limited to niche products and lab developments. there are also some that work like ram, special ram modified to not lose data.

basically, they ARE developing a bunch of competing tech, the one we actually use is the one that is most practical today.
 

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,801
1,265
136
not really gut feeling. some knowledge can not ( easily ) be expressed in words. ( intuition maybe? ). that is what I mean. Does anyone really seriously think these things are a great next gen tech? how many people come here and complain that they don't notice a significant and worthy boost for their money? everytime you are doing heavy read write work on your computer you are forced to think one more cycle less life for my ssd.

For every post you can find with someone not being impressed, I can find 20 post of people who love their purchase and would never go back to using an HD.

There are people in this forum who have never built their own computers, there are users that are long time overclockers etc etc.

My point is its subjective to the user and their use of the system.

Some of us do more than just game on our systems.

However i'm not a fan of what tweakboy is doing in every SSD thread about his love for his Samsung HD and how its supposed to be much better than some first Gen Vertex blah blah.

If you cannot afford to buy an SSD that is a valid reason but don't try to fool anyone into thinking a HD is superior!
 

Any_Name_Does

Member
Jul 13, 2010
143
0
0
My point is its subjective to the user and their use of the system.


And my point is, a new tech should not be subjective. It should be better in every respect. with nobody even doubting it's superiority. when dinosaurs died, they were replaced by humans. :oops: ok. that wasn't a good example but you know what I mean.
 

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,801
1,265
136
Better in every respect according to who?

specs alone don't mean a thing if the piece of hardware doesn't match up with your required use.

SSD's are better than HD's but would you install one in your grand mothers rig that is a P4 1.7 with 1GB of ram, her primary use is emails and websurfing?

There are some people on this forum based on how they use their machines that don't need a SSD or would even benefit from one.

Some wouldn't be able to tell if they are I/O bottleneck, CPU etc unless they are told in a graph.

So you cannot just disregard those facts.

There are people with personal agenda's that will post trying to defend their purchase even in the face of tons of evidence that might show their product to not be excellent.

Like when I read tweakboy post it just sounds like he works for samsung lol.
 
Last edited:

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
My point is its subjective to the user and their use of the system.
whether its a HUGE upgrade or Meh upgrade is subjective, whether it is worth the price is subjective...
but the FACT it is FASTER in every conceivable measurement scheme is not subjective. You might not think it to be a significant upgrade, you might not be able to notice the difference, but if you say an intel/sandforce/indilinx SSD is slower you are a liar; all you can say is that it being faster is not noticeable to the end user. Which puts you in a very small minority who doesn't notice the benefits.

when dinosaurs died, they were replaced by humans. :oops: ok. that wasn't a good example but you know what I mean.
first, dinosaurs were not replaced by humans, they were replaced by a plethora of creatures.
second, there is no such thing as evolutionary levels.
third, dinosaurs died because of a natural disaster (mega meteor impact).
 

Any_Name_Does

Member
Jul 13, 2010
143
0
0
whether its a HUGE upgrade or Meh upgrade is subjective, whether it is worth the price is subjective...
but the FACT it is FASTER in every conceivable measurement scheme is not subjective. You might not think it to be a significant upgrade, you might not be able to notice the difference, but if you say an intel/sandforce/indilinx SSD is slower you are a liar; all you can say is that it being faster is not noticeable to the end user. Which puts you in a very small minority who doesn't notice the benefits.


first, dinosaurs were not replaced by humans, they were replaced by a plethora of creatures.
second, there is no such thing as evolutionary levels.
third, dinosaurs died because of a natural disaster (mega meteor impact).

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not superman!

please forgive my ignorance.
 

SickBeast

Lifer
Jul 21, 2000
14,377
19
81
I can't believe that there are actually people coming in here and agreeing with weakboy and his lies.