• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 609
  • Last Modified:

SSD drive verses SATA600 in desktop PCs

I'm building a few systems with following spec:

i5 3330 gen 3
ASRock B75 r2.0
1 x 8GB 1600MHz DDR3
1TB SATA3
M-ATX case
Samsung DVDRW
Windows 7 Pro 64

Would adding a small SSD drive (120GB) give me any bursts in performance bearing in mind SATA bottlenecks?

Never used SSDs before!


Thanks
0
bill2013
Asked:
bill2013
  • 6
  • 4
  • 3
  • +1
2 Solutions
 
DavidCommented:
How do you normally use the machine?  A SSD excels in RANDOM I/O.  If you aren't doing database with lots of indexing and joins and such, then save your money.

Instead get a 2nd HDD and use the native Win7 SOFTWARE mirroring.  Not only will it almost double read performance, but it protects against data loss.
0
 
bill2013Author Commented:
Hmmm. probably fairly repetitive work in Office 2010. Word, Excel, Access, Outlook.

Didn't know about the mirror performance. Wouldn't hardware SATA RAID which I believe the boards are capable of, be faster than software?
0
 
Dan CraciunIT ConsultantCommented:
Your onboard RAID is still software, not hardware (also called fake raid).

Better use windows RAID, cause in the event your mobo goes bad, you don't have to hunt for a similar one.

HTH,
Dan
0
Efficient way to get backups off site to Azure

This user guide provides instructions on how to deploy and configure both a StoneFly Scale Out NAS Enterprise Cloud Drive virtual machine and Veeam Cloud Connect in the Microsoft Azure Cloud.

 
Dan CraciunIT ConsultantCommented:
BTW, I don't agree with dlethe that a SSD is only useful for database work.

I've been using SSDs since the original Vertex and the OS (Windows 7, 8 and 8.1) is way more "snappy".

In day to day usage, it matters (to me at least) if applications open almost instantly.

Dan
0
 
DavidCommented:
The deal with the SSD is that you also take a big performance hit if I/O isn't an exact multiple of 4K or 128KB and it isn't aligned.  For the type of work this machine is doing, unless you need protection against vibration then real-world you'll be better off having nearly 100% of read I/Os be twice the speed as they are now, and the data protection FIRST.

Then after you have your RAID1, add a SSD if you wish.
0
 
bill2013Author Commented:
OK, for future projects most systems will use a large Access or SQL database.

So, if say 1 x 1TB SATA3 on a cheapish m-ATX motherboard with SATA3 gave read and write times of 5 (on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is fast), what would:

1. Adding 1 x 120GB SSD drive give
2. Adding 2 x 120GB SSDs mirrored
3. 2 x 1TB SATA3 mirrored

Only a rough gues based on experience, thanks.
0
 
Dan CraciunIT ConsultantCommented:
You can compare desktop performance of HDDs and SSDs

Worst case scenario: a SSD will be *only* twice as fast as a HDD. Even with the performance hit on I/O not being multiple of 4/128K.

Do you really need 1TB of storage? Cause you can buy a 240GB SSD for ~$150.
0
 
DavidCommented:
I've seem consumer SSDs with such poor write amplification that HDDs can easily outperform them on even a PC, it is also the offset that gets you and the inherent differences between 4 and 128KB I/O.  

Also in mirroring config we're talking read load balancing, which you won't get with a single SSD.
0
 
nobusCommented:
what i do is use a 160 GB SSD for OS and software
i keep the data on a separate drive, 1-2 TB
and imo the SSD is the best investment i made the last 20 years regarding PC performancs - i i don't run databases ! !
0
 
bill2013Author Commented:
I was thinking along the same lines as Nobus.

In my case 120GB or 240GB SSD drive only on networked units (mentioned 1TB as only slightly more expensive than smaller ones) and they keep their data on the server.

For independent PCs 240GB SSD and larger SATA3.

All units are cloned when built so mirroring not an issue, just fed up with fast PCs that become donkeys when others start using them.
0
 
nobusCommented:
i have - after 5 years of using the SSD  - only used about half of it (80 GB)
so, unless you really need a larger drive, an 160 GB, or even 120 Gb should be enough.
this reduces the cost
but i advise to get a good brand; i'm a fan of intel drives : http://www.ssdcenter.be/category/208068/intel-ssd.html#!ref=71159&mkwid=sSR6ct9tj_dc&pcrid=31159992750&pkw=intel%20ssd&pmt=e&gclid=CJmPqv79w7wCFSTmwgodfwwA4g

select sandForce drives if you need the most speedy ones
0
 
bill2013Author Commented:
What about Kingston 120GB SSDNow V300 SSD? £60 inc tax and delivery from ebuyer.com

Interface: SATA Rev. 3.0 (6Gb/s); SATA Rev. 2.0 (3Gb/s);  SATA Rev. 1.0 (1.5Gb/s)
Sequential reads:  up to 450MB/s
Sequential writes:  up to 450MB/s
Max Random 4k Read/Write: 85,000 / 55,000 IOPS
PCMARK Vantage HDD Suite Score: 49,000

Any good for network PCs on it's own?
0
 
Dan CraciunIT ConsultantCommented:
Pretty much any SSD will do. You won't really feel the difference between a "regular" ssd and a top of the line one, apart from bragging rights.
I recently switched my 5 year old 120 GB Vertex for a 240GB Intel 530 and my system works as fast as ever.
0
 
bill2013Author Commented:
MAny thanks - great advice
0
 
nobusCommented:
i use intel ones - they also give you a toolbox, and other software, and are very reliable.
and i said : "select sandForce drives if you need the most speedy ones "
if you want to use Kningston, look up the reviews on it
0
 
bill2013Author Commented:
I did a search on sandForce and among several brands Kingston came up saying it used an LSI SandForce controller.
0

Featured Post

Free Tool: ZipGrep

ZipGrep is a utility that can list and search zip (.war, .ear, .jar, etc) archives for text patterns, without the need to extract the archive's contents.

One of a set of tools we're offering as a way to say thank you for being a part of the community.

  • 6
  • 4
  • 3
  • +1
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now