SSD V Ramdrive

Discussion in 'hardware' started by Franklin, Dec 4, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. axial

    axial Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Posts:
    479
    Have you considered another Sandforce-based SSD, the Mushkin Callisto Deluxe series
    http://www.mushkin.com/Digital-Storage/SSDs.aspx

    The Mushkin forums have good info about SSDs in general, too. Their RAM is great, highly recommended. I can vouch for their excellent customer support.
     
  2. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,042
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Yeah, well, my grandkids call me "old" so it's all relative! ;)

    As for Mushkin, I've been using their RAM a lot in the last couple years and have been very happy with them. And their PSUs are great too.
     
  3. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,491
    Would love to jump in the SSD bandwagon but it's still expensive for my Non-Existent budget :D
    And i'm also waiting for the tech to mature more, too scared it would die fast due to Write cycles.

    I remember somewhere that it's not recommended to install Windows on a SSD because Windows does a lot of file movements which would shorten the life span of an SSD quite fast :rolleyes:
     
  4. moontan

    moontan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2010
    Posts:
    3,931
    Location:
    Québec
    tnx Raza.

    that helps me a lot deciding for or against a SSD drive.
    i think i will wait another year or 2.
    my present mobo does not support AHCI so if i wanted a SSD i would be looking at buying a new computer, basically.

    this is not an expense i am willing to make ATM as this computer is only 3 years old.
     
  5. Raza0007

    Raza0007 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Posts:
    1,691
    Location:
    USA
    Same here. I currently have not switched to SSD in my home PCs because the cost to benefit ratio is still quite high for me. I do not do any extensive disk I/O related activity so the added speed is wasted. Also most SSDs that are somewhat affordable use MLC NAND flash cells, which can only withstand 10,000 read/write cycles before they fail. SLC NAND flash based SSDs (100,000 read/write cycles) are still quite expensive. Most companies like to confuse consumers by writing the mean time between failures (MTBF) on their SSD. However this is only related to the electric components not the flash modules that actually store data. For example, intel boasts of 1.2 million hrs MTBF for their 80 GB X25M drives, but they are all MLC. Intel's SLC based drives are still insanely expensive see 64 GB X25E.

    So I have also decided to wait 1-2 years for upgrading to a SSD. I am quite happy with the 7200 rpm drive in my laptop.
     
  6. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,042
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Price per Gb for SSDs are still very high compared to today's harddrives. And considering today's harddrives, especially if the latest SATA 6 and if loaded with 64Mb buffer are pretty darn quick. The truth is, most folks just don't need SSDs. After all, once the file is loaded into RAM, the drive is out of the picture. Of course, lots of RAM so you aren't banging on the Page File all the time is a good thing too - and fortunately, RAM is cheap as well.

    Hybrid drive technology is a promising compromise.
     
  7. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    Yes, I had my eye on the Mushkin, that series, as well, but the specs between it and the OCZ are similar, so the $30 < price tag on the OCZ, along with positive reviews, has me leaning toward the OCZ.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.