No, I don't have stats. Where would you like me to get some? Seriously.
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 7:03 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Which is faster ? Well aware of the general issue. Can you answer my question - do you have stats to back up your statement? SSDs based on Indilinx controllers have 64MB cache on-board (to buffer small writes). Additionally the firmware supports OS TRIM commands, so you don't have problem where the SSD needs to rewrite entire 256KB blocks, because the data is actually deleted when the OS says to delete the data. Here are some stats: http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531 <http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3531&p=25> &p=25 OCZ Vertex (back in 2009 with original firmware ) is still 50% faster than a WD Raptor for 4KB random writes. And whilst there is the $/MB to consider, Raptops aren't cheap. >From my personal perspective, I'm a convert. I bought an OCZ Vertex - now Windows boots in <15 seconds. From logon to desktop is 3-4 seconds. I can suspend just about any VM I want to 2-3 seconds (1GB RAM or so). At home I then bought 3x G.Skill Falcon IIs (same Indilinx controller) for my server. I can reboot my Hyper-V host in ~15 seconds. I can install Exchange 2010 in 7 minutes. If anyone doubts the Read ability of SSDs to blow even WD Raptors out of the park, you need to watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch#playnext=1 <http://www.youtube.com/watch#playnext=1&playnext_from=TL&videos=XiCVUwcKJPc &v=T_Jz7IMwBt4> &playnext_from=TL&videos=XiCVUwcKJPc&v=T_Jz7IMwBt4 HIGHLY, HIGHLY recommended. If you haven't had the chance to use a decent SSD, it will blow your mind. The poster opens 51 applications on a WD Raptor and on a Intel SSD. The difference, is, well, you should watch. Whilst earlier consumer SSDs (with JMicron or Samsung controllers) suffered from poor write performance the combination of: a) New controllers (Intel or Indilinx) b) 64MB cache+ on board c) OS TRIM command support Means that any decent consumer SSD blows the best SATA drives out of the water. And for the enterprise, there is always the RAMSAN-6200 J 5,000,000 IOPS, 60GB/sec bandwidth, 100TB storage: http://www.ramsan.com/products/ramsan-6200.htm Cheers Ken From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, 1 March 2010 9:52 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Which is faster ? Google ssd write penalty. It's not huge, but it can be a problem. It's just a point that SSD is not the panacea that many folks expect. It's getting better, but not quite there. And there is still the $/MB factor to look at. From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 5:14 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Which is faster ? Got some stats? IIRC any modern consumer SSD (based on Indilinx controller) will blow a mechanical drive out of the water. I installed Exchange 2010 (CAS, Hub Transport, Mailbox) in a VM in 7 minutes running on an SSD (G.Skill Falcon II - Indilinx controller). Not sure I'd be able to do that with any SATA based mechanical drive. Of course, if you buy some really old SSD, or something cheap, then performance will probably be rubbish as well.. Cheers Ken From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:mblackst...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, 1 March 2010 9:01 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Which is faster ? For reads yes. For writes they can be slower. From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com] Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 4:38 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Which is faster ? WD Raptors are expensive. If OP is investigating the use of 10K RPM SATA disks, then they should look at buying SSDs. For speed, SSDs blow any mechanical drive out of the water. Cheers Ken From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, 1 March 2010 8:29 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Which is faster ? Tested doing what? There are only some very specific workloads where the performance difference will be noticeable. Video streaming and editing is a very different workload from manipulating lots of small, randomly distributed files. I'd favor cost rather than theoretical performance here, barring other information. -ASB: http://xeesm.com/AndrewBaker Sent from my Verizon Smartphone _____ From: "HELP_PC" <g...@enter.it> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 07:25:47 +0100 To: NT System Admin Issues<ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com> Subject: Which is faster ? How can I decide if a Hard disk WD 10000 rpm 16 mb cache will perform better than a WD 7200 rpm with 64mb cache Looking fore somebody that already tested TIA ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
