Guest boeingqa Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 Guys looking at getting 2 SSD drives. 1 for OS and the other for FSX. just wondering, has anyone see a big difference in performance also whats the best one out there. l was looking at the OCz also whats the best prices you have seem l`m after say a 120gig for os and 256 for fsx. Thx Guys Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abulaafia Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 don't buy them now. wait until april-may and some really cool technology coming out that will make the current 1st and 2nd gen SSDs obsolete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest boeingqa Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 l was building a new system around apr may.. but l was wondering on performance. Thx Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heiko Glatthorn Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 don't buy them now. wait until april-may and some really cool technology coming out that will make the current 1st and 2nd gen SSDs obsolete Within this time your whole PC is obsolete. We can wait forever, can we... I just finished my i7 920 system (specs in the sig - it will clock higher but i leave it there for now) and i am more than happy with the Intel G2s. From FSX launch to the opening screen takes about 4 seconds now... Trim works and takes about 2 seconds (if you disable and delete restore points - do this only when you have a mirror backup). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J van E Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 I wouldn't get the OCZ ones: right now the Intels (X25) are simply better. Specially avoid SSD's with jMicron controllers: they are bad. Right now 'cheap' really is 'not as good'. About the prices: they have been high for quite some time and you can indeed wait forever and ever because 'new' hardware is indeed very old very quickly, but I think that abulaafia has a point: this year we will see a very significant drop in prices and a huge step forwards when it comes to the size of SSD's. Read for instance the conclusion of a preview of a new OCZ ssd and the expectations for what's going to happen this year. Nevertheless I am also thinking about getting a X25 SSD right now (probably 80 Gb), because you can indeed wait forever and ever: in 2011 prices and sized will be even more lower and higher... But wait, what will 2012 bring us...! Anyway, don't buy the cheapest SSD you can get: spend some more and get a good one. (BTW Where I live I can get a 80 Gb X25 for less than an old crappy OCZ one...!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumsonly2002 Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 I bought 3 Samsung SSD's this month. Samsung sells such to OZC and others. I spent hours of research after the fact and trust the words of J Van E, different ssd = different quality. The older SSD has different firmware. Since de-fragging the drives shorten their life, a process called Garbage Collection is handled within the drive itself. The idea is the drive de frags itself. The newest drives handle this with a Win 7 program called Trim. Up / dowside of buying the first run of SSD's. Bad, no trim firmware. Some do not have garbage collection, thus Some of these drives can be flashed with the latest firmware. The ones without G/C slow down and have to be de-fragged via soft ware. The other thing that is not told, Trim enabled drives, will not benefit from that feature, when in Raid. Win 7 Trim cannot get to the drive due. The good is the older SSD's that have Garbage collection will self de-frag in raid. When i mention "older" that means eariler in 2009. My 3 drives have different firmware. The older units have G/C thus good for Raid, my newer one, I have not tracked the firm ware details yet. Now, that being said. I called Samsung tech support and asked about trim. The person I spoke to did not know about Trim, honestly, I kid you not replied "I do not know, this is technical support". Intel is on top of this. They have better technical support and from what I gather, more on hands vs Samsung. Samsung is slowly getting there. Apparently going to have a SSD forum on there cite. Go Intel, faster also. OCZ is re branded Samsung. Cosair and others also. Samsung has great marketing, but when their baby has a poop, you are left changing the diaper. OZC has a great support forum, here is a link to help tweek Win 7 for SSd's http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=63273 I got a great deal on my Samsung's, and knowing how to maintain them keeps me sain after paying an insane price for them, even though I got a good deal to begin with. If I ever do it again, Intel all the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J van E Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 BTW I see the main question still hasn´t been answered, and since I am thinking about buying an X25 SSD, I also wonder... is there any performance gain while actually playing FSX...? Loading the sim a lot quicker is nice too, of course, but will for instance textures load quicker while flying, thus giving a smoother flight...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abulaafia Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 There is very little difference in-game between a fast HD and an SSD. The HD is not really the bottleneck in FSX. If you switch scenery a lot (like switching between active AI aircraft) you will see faster load times, but not during normal flight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgruschow Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 There is very little difference in-game between a fast HD and an SSD. The HD is not really the bottleneck in FSX. If you switch scenery a lot (like switching between active AI aircraft) you will see faster load times, but not during normal flight. I am afraid I don't agree with you. The hard disk is still the bottleneck. In FSX I have noticed that I no longer have scenery materialising as I approach. It is all there,all the time. It is hard to put figures to it, but just on the "eyeball" system I consider the V/Raptor to be not a lot faster than a 7200 HD and the SSD to be twice as fast. Boot times are ridiculously fast. Again useing my system. From clicking the FSX icon until I have my default airfield and aircraft ready for flight I just have time to get a cigarette out of the packet and into my mouth. With V/Raptor I smoked half a cig.while it loaded. With 7200 I was sometimes on a second cig before it was loaded. I also have a 975 cpu which was installed the same time as the SSD and this is helping the load time too. On the subject of defragging and a reduced lifespan on the SSD. This is realy nonsense. The SSD has millions of read/writes before it wears out. Defragging uses a few hundred of these. Even if I never change it, the SSD will still be going when I'm feeding the worms. I noticed after installing FSX and all extras I had 16% fragmentation. So I defragged it with the Win 7 defrag program. Since then I have not had more than 2% . So I don't defrag. Remember, people who produce all these defrag programs etc. do so to make money. So treat their advertisements with the proverbial grain of salt. "Should I buy now? There's something better comming out soon." This question has been asked since the days of the DX2. And the answer is still the same. Wait and you will never have a top of the line computer. The best time to buy is NOW. At least you will have a top 'puter.Even if only for a short while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumsonly2002 Posted January 2, 2010 Share Posted January 2, 2010 Great reply Jack. After reading your post I feel a lot better as I spent a stink load of money on 3 drives though they were discounted. I did a ton of reading about SSD's but no hands on expierence. Thus I can add, as far as data throughput is concerned, they are the bee's knee's, top dog, the Big Daddy. They are raid friendly thus the more the merrier. Stuff like '''crazy fast" is used to discribe them. They run cooler, quieter, require less power and last longer. I consider the purchase of SSD's an investment. I say invested because, when my computer needs a upgrade, chances are my SSD's, computer case, cooling gear and power supply will not be needing replacement, the rest upgraded. Trying to get this build off the ground is harder that taking off in a overloaded Cessna filled with rum kegs for an emergency liquor run. SSD's are on the bleeding edge of technology, and have bled my wallet dry. I may be a broke bloke, but I have fast hard drives and bragging rights. One last thing, since they are so small, they are easier to sneak into the house without the wife noticing, so no explaining necessary when buying them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest boeingqa Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 Guys thanks for all the replys, has intel released something bigger than 80gig? l was looking at getting 5 drives, 2 in raid for os and 3 for fsx in raid. Thanks Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
))i7((SLI-Fire Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 If you are looking to buy some new SSD's. You may want to have a look at the new OCZ Vertex 2 Pro preview over at AnandTech. I like the look of the new OCZ Toolbox section on the drive. http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3702 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J van E Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 I am afraid I don't agree with you. The hard disk is still the bottleneck. In FSX I have noticed that I no longer have scenery materialising as I approach. It is all there,all the time. It is hard to put figures to it, but just on the "eyeball" system I consider the V/Raptor to be not a lot faster than a 7200 HD and the SSD to be twice as fast. That's what I like to hear. It would surprise me if a SSD wouldn't make a difference ingame, otherwise all those defragging suggestions to get FSX running better would be useless too...! (BTW I have never seen any benefit from defragging in FSX, but well...) I think I will just give it a (costly) try and get a 25X-M 80 Gb SSD!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alainneedle1 Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 There is very little difference in-game between a fast HD and an SSD. The HD is not really the bottleneck in FSX. If you switch scenery a lot (like switching between active AI aircraft) you will see faster load times, but not during normal flight. I am afraid I don't agree with you. The hard disk is still the bottleneck. In FSX I have noticed that I no longer have scenery materialising as I approach. It is all there,all the time. It is hard to put figures to it, but just on the "eyeball" system I consider the V/Raptor to be not a lot faster than a 7200 HD and the SSD to be twice as fast. Boot times are ridiculously fast. Again useing my system. From clicking the FSX icon until I have my default airfield and aircraft ready for flight I just have time to get a cigarette out of the packet and into my mouth. With V/Raptor I smoked half a cig.while it loaded. With 7200 I was sometimes on a second cig before it was loaded. I also have a 975 cpu which was installed the same time as the SSD and this is helping the load time too. On the subject of defragging and a reduced lifespan on the SSD. This is realy nonsense. The SSD has millions of read/writes before it wears out. Defragging uses a few hundred of these. Even if I never change it, the SSD will still be going when I'm feeding the worms. I noticed after installing FSX and all extras I had 16% fragmentation. So I defragged it with the Win 7 defrag program. Since then I have not had more than 2% . So I don't defrag. Remember, people who produce all these defrag programs etc. do so to make money. So treat their advertisements with the proverbial grain of salt. "Should I buy now? There's something better comming out soon." This question has been asked since the days of the DX2. And the answer is still the same. Wait and you will never have a top of the line computer. The best time to buy is NOW. At least you will have a top 'puter.Even if only for a short while. Bottom line........ SSD is a lot better for your health................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgruschow Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 Bottom line........ SSD is a lot better for your health................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest boeingqa Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Hi all again, does anyone know how big does a SSD need to be to fit FSX installation and all orbx airports and scenery? also with regards to my c drive os it shouldnt make a diff what SD l go for but as to FSX l need the best guys. Recommendations. would 2 80gig in raid be more than enough for 12 months Thx Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennyson Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 I got the 160gb Intel SSD and it's got 14Gb left on it. Mind you, I got about 50 aircraft (probably not that many!) I've bought over the last year in there and I think I got all the FTX stuff that's available to man, so the answer is buy 2 x 160GB drives if you want to have any hard disk space left after the next 12 months! Come on Intel, where are the 320Gb drives?? Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest boeingqa Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 thx for that.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgruschow Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 Hi all again, does anyone know how big does a SSD need to be to fit FSX installation and all orbx airports and scenery? also with regards to my c drive os it shouldnt make a diff what SD l go for but as to FSX l need the best guys. Recommendations. would 2 80gig in raid be more than enough for 12 months Thx Paul You don't need a very big HDD for FSX.I have 1 300 gig SSD. I hae partitioned it into C: and D:. C: is 90 gigs and contains the OS and all other programs. D: is about 200 GB and is used exclusively for FSX and everything to do with flight. My D: is just over 40 gigs used. I would say a 100 gig HDD is large enough for all you would ever need for flight sim and all the accessories. I can not see any point in making backups of all flight sim files, as when or if, you need them they will probably be out of date. I also have an E: drive on a 300 gig V/Raptor. I laughingly call this my backup drive. All it contains at the moment is a copy of OZx V3.0. And it's already out of date. Remember, if you do a re-install of windows, programs that write to registry have to be re-installed too. There is no advantage in putting flight sim on a separate drive. It's quite happy to share. I just keep it separate for conveniance. With everything on the same drive there is no need for useing Raid. To answer your question. 280 gigs for your flight sim drive would be more the enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J van E Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Well, what shall I say... I received my SSD (Postville 80 Gb). In installed FSX fresh with FTX. My first impression: boy, what a waste of money... It seems to load FSX and the flight a bit faster (pity I didn't use a stopwatch on my previous install) but it's not that I can say WOW, that was fast... On the contrary, already two times the loading would halt completely and I had to switch to Windows in order to let the loading continue... jgrushow said "In FSX I have noticed that I no longer have scenery materialising as I approach. It is all there,all the time." Well, not on my computer. I didn't expect a higher fps or anything, but I DID expect things to load snappier, sooner, fasters, but no... Compared to my Spinpoint F1, where I had FSX installed previously, it even seems things are loading slower... I see more blurries, more poppingup, but maybe that's because I am paying too much attention. Anyway, right now this was money thrown away. Buying the SSD for my i7 920 @ 3.3 with GTX285 system didn't make a real noticable difference. Maybe, just maybe, loading the flight is quicker (if I don't have to switch to Windows), but that's it and that's all... (And btw the time I win with loading FSX a tad faster is lost due to the fact I have enabled AHCI in order to get the best out of the SSD... I never ever had any luck with defragging: it never seemed to matter on my system, in this related issue also is a disappointment... BTW The SSD itself is working okay. I tested it with CrystalDiskMark 2.2 and the numbers are okay, just like others that have the same Postville. Somehow FSX doesn't like my SSD... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J van E Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Well, that's even nicer... I wanted to add the OZx scenery and FSX got stuck while loading it into the library. And now my fresh new install of FSX won't even START anymore!!! So not only my money is thrown away, but also my evening and tomorrow I can do the complete install ALL over again on my old hard disk, because this SSD clearly can't be trusted. **** EDIT: I deleted the FSX.cfg and FSX starts up again... after about a minute or two. Loading another plane takes another few minutes... if it doesn't lock up completely. Buy, this was my worst buy ever, so it seems. :'( EDIT 2: FSX loads again, but NOT fast, a few seconds slower. But if I want to load for instance my new Quest Kodiak, FSX locks up for about 4 minutes and then suddenly the plane is loaded... That used to take a second or so with my old HD... \ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest boeingqa Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 So from what people are saying SSD`s arent the very best in the way of FSX. Maybe 2 velociraptors in raid would be better off? unless it the SSD`s you are using. seems the intel could be better. Thx Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
))i7((SLI-Fire Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 Postville is the model name of the Intel SSD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennyson Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 J, If you bought the Intel G2 80Gb and are not happpy, then something is very wrong. Apart from my own experience, the documentation on these drives is extensive. Aside from the new OCZ new series with the SandTech controller, they are the fastest drives on the market. Granted, they are not the be all and end all of computing, but you should notice substantial increases in performance with FSX. Intel have also re-issued their firmware software which allows the full use of trim in Windows 7. Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heiko Glatthorn Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 I am more than happy with my two 160 GB G2s... From launching FSX to the menu it's about 4 seconds. Loading a flight is done in about half the time compared to my Raptor. PS opens in roughly 2 seconds and i don't need to go and make coffee anymore when i open a 3 GB tif. I can't tell anything bad, really... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgruschow Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 Well, that's even nicer... I wanted to add the OZx scenery and FSX got stuck while loading it into the library. And now my fresh new install of FSX won't even START anymore!!! So not only my money is thrown away, but also my evening and tomorrow I can do the complete install ALL over again on my old hard disk, because this SSD clearly can't be trusted. You sound like a woman. Because you have a problem it's the drives fault. Don't you think the cause might be somewhere else?To realy get the best speed you should also have your o/s on a DDS too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest J van E Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 If you bought the Intel G2 80Gb and are not happpy, then something is very wrong. Granted, they are not the be all and end all of computing, but you should notice substantial increases in performance with FSX. Intel have also re-issued their firmware software which allows the full use of trim in Windows 7. Yes, it's the Intel G2 (Postville) 80 Gb. Yesterday I managed to load and play FSX twice without locking up or very long loading times of the Kodiak: both times things weren't very different compared to when FSX was on my SpinPoint. I have the latest firmware. You sound like a woman. Because you have a problem it's the drives fault. Don't you think the cause might be somewhere else? To realy get the best speed you should also have your o/s on a DDS too. LOL, thank you. FSX ran fine on my system when it was on the SpinPoint. I think it is normal to expect a bit better performance with an SSD: it should load faster at least (read this for instance! And this and this!). But it hardly does and it locks up FSX constantly. Nothing else has changed in my computer. I installed the SSD, installed FSX on it and suddenly I get problems that very obviously seem related to the SSD (everything goes wrong when the SSD is accessed). So yes, I think somehow there is something wrong with the drive or at least something that is related to the drive. That isn't really weird, I think. My system has worked fine so far and I never ever had problems like this (Kodiak taking minutes to load). I don't really see why that would make me sound like a woman. Anyway, I will see what happens when I disable AHCI again and what happens if I disable the dvd drive that's connected 'before' the SSD (although AFAIK masters and slaves are a thing of the past with SATA...?). If nothing makes a difference and FSX stays completely unstable, I will install Windows 7 on the SSD (I will disconnect my current OS-drive so if things go wrong with the OS on the SSD also, I can simply use that drive again for my current OS: I think that should work...). If Windows 7 runs well on the SSD, then at least I won't have thrown away the money... And then I also might see then wat happens when I install FSX on the SSD with the OS also. (Usually it's wiser to install FSX on its own drive, but since these SSD's are supposed to be very fast, I think I might as well give it a try...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest boeingqa Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 l was looking at this one: http://www.scorptec.com.au/computer/34633-oczssd2-1vtxt120g maybe 2. unless the intel are better. whats your thoughts Thx guys Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennyson Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Paul, Go and have a look at Tom's Hardware guide or at the anandtech site. The Intel's are bloody expensive, but there's a reason. They're the fastest and most reliable on the market. The proof is out there on the right sites, Frank P.S. J, is your SSD being recognized as an SSD in Windows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
))i7((SLI-Fire Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 If you are going to go for the OCZ SSD, I would think about waiting until OCZ release there Vertex 2 Pro series SSD. I think it is out sometime in March. http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3702 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.