Any way to measure power consumption of the drive alone?
Because this should be taken into account. The EVO series claims (according to the data listed in shops) to have a really low power consumption, idle and writing.
Maybe it is not the fastest but a good option for a ultra mobile laptop with > 15h battery runtime under HDD conditions already.
Was the Corsair Neutron GTX series tested? I built a PC with that one recently (for Mom) and they give 5 years warranty and claim to have reliable cells - which is a very important point in terms of storage for me (e.g. on hard disks I only go with Constellation ES from Seagate - 5 y warranty, load/unload mechanism, MTBF through the roof / low AFR, robust drives).
840 has slower write speed probably because it doesn't use compression as Sandforce-based SSDs
If benchmarks are writing binary zeros, almost no data are written to flash memory. Real applications don't usually write binary zeros to files. These results are probably realistic as glxgears in case of GPU.
Should be able to be done just as with the Windows version, burn the iso and boot to it from what I understand..
Yea that is how I update my Samsung disks. Point is they provide (albeit proprietary) update apps for OSX and Windows, where they should be using some common payload injection framework all the ssd manufacturers could agree on so we could develop foss guis in Linux-space to install it.
Honestly, you bought the wrong drive. The 128GB is slower than its siblings as not all NAND channels are populated. Step up to the 256GB or the 512GB (I own the latter) and it's a super speedy drive that's much cheaper than its direct competitors.
Yes, because everyone needs more than 120GB. Most people doing nothing but surfing the web, watching videos and using Office etc. don't need more space, and buying a bigger version would be a waste of money for them.
I am surprised by these benchmarks, I was going to swap out my current vertex 3 for an evo (mostly because I am running out of storage) but now I am doubting that decision..
How often do you copy huge files? Because in day-to-day tasks, it performs amazing. Who cares about sequential write.
Originally Posted by zanny
Good luck with that, considering Samsung dosen't provide any means to update their firmware through Linux.
I know Sandforce models do, though. Their update utilities are even in the AUR.
No problem at all. Use unetbootin or something on Linux and install FreeDOS on an USB drive with one click. Then put the firmware update files on it and boot from the USB drive. It works, I did it this way.
I switched from a 2010 120GB Intel Postville SSD to a 2013 250GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD and don't notice any differences in day-to-day scenarios like opening applications etc., it was fast before and it is still fast. Tbh., SSD benchmarks are really uninteresting at this point as 99% of the people don't copy huge files all the time and just use their applications/games. The Intel SSD is now sitting in my Thinkpad X121e with an old AMD E-350 APU and it runs great there.
The OCZ drives can be upgraded "live" on linux.
(I.e.: without taking down your server).
Just extract the right tools from their rescue CD (you must mount -o loop the squashfs packages of the firmware to cp them), cp them to your server and remove the SSD from the raid, upgrade, and put it back in the raid.
For hobby I use 2 samsung 840's (not EVO), and I won't upgrade them because I can't. I wouldn't know how... Bike to the datacenter, then remove them. Then go with the SSD's to a place where I can upgrade them (still don't know where and how), then bike back to the datacenter, screw them back in, and turn it on. Because It's raid, I have to do it for each SSD, and in the mean time the server is down.
From a professional point of view, the OCZ's are the least hassles to upgrade.
I got stuck with a Samsung 830. Apparently they're even crappier than rotating disc-a-mathings. After seeing people with these rotor things load games faster on shittier spec'd systems that I, I tend to agree.
200GB of SSD that still loads 70% of tasks faster than any rotunda-drive can offer is good enough for me. Just not for the price premium SSD demands =D Lucky I got it on spesh!
Umm, what? The 830 uses MLC vs the 840 EVO using TLC, making the 830 actually better than the 840 Evo (the 840 Evo Pro is an entirely different beast). The 830 has also consistently been rated in the top tier of all SSD drivers, and, when new, was generally one of the fastest out there, too. So, either your drive, bios/system config, or another piece of hardware in your system is fubar'd.
Huh, that's very interesting. I was looking at the 120GB version, so it's probably good that I went with Toshiba after all. Since I don't have it installed yet, I'll probably take the opportunity to run a benchmark on my end to see how it fares.
I'm also a bit unsure of I/O schedulers at the moment. I always thought you're supposed to use deadline or noop with SSDs, but it seems that CFQ got updates and now works fine on SSDs as well. Hmm... Of course, deadline is good for benchmarks, but probably it's best to stay with cfq on desktops, then?