ZeroOne Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 It seems that lower than the 256GB zone, changes happen to write speeds and IOPS between certain drives that make the "best" drive unclear.... Just trying to determine which one would be the best to get and at that size, newer does not seem to equal "better." Any thoughts? Would like to try the new LAMD controller but have the fastest possible responsiveness in windows and programs. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wired Posted September 15, 2012 Share Posted September 15, 2012 Depends on what you want to do. Some are better for different types of read/writes, e.g. better for video editing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZeroOne Posted September 15, 2012 Author Share Posted September 15, 2012 I'm really just looking for the fastest possible response time when loading multiple applications / browsers / game loading. Load times / windows boot is the highest priority. It's probably true that any of these drives would be fine for this I guess. Just feels a little unclear at the top, the real differences between them other than speed numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsair Employee RAM GUY Posted September 17, 2012 Corsair Employee Share Posted September 17, 2012 I would suggest doing a search for the drives you want with key word like Reviews as you will likely find some comparisons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowbeard Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 GT vs GS will show mixed results with each outperforming the other by a TINY margin depending on what benchmark you use, what controller you are using, etc. At the end of the day, they are so close in performance that it would be impossible to clearly say that 1 is a clear cut winner over the other. And, they are both extremely fast to the point that it is impossible to tell them apart in real world usage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralEclectic Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 You know, there's a point of diminishing returns when it comes to Windows boot times WRT/SSD speed. At some point, boot time will be dominated by initialization of drivers and peripherals, rather than the speed at which the SSD can deliver up data. I just configured an ASUS Z77 board with a Force3 drive. Initially, I was getting the desktop in 13 seconds. However, as I added in USB drivers, the add-on SATA driver, (this was the strange one) a AFT USB3 card reader, and blah blah blah it stretched out to 21 seconds. The AFT reader accounted for an additional 5 seconds all by itself -- probably something to do with creating a list of five virtual (and empty) drives reserved for flash memory cards. Anyway, it's to the point now where there would probably be little percentage difference in boot time between the fastest SSD in the world compared to a heavily-used Force 1 SATAII drive with 50TB of writes to it. Moral of the story: Don't make yourself crazy. Don't waste your money chasing geese. Buy a proven reliable drive that won't require a lot of in-service screwing around because the time you waste on the bleeding edge will quickly negate a couple of seconds here or there booting or loading an application. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
..AlLkNoWinG.. Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 I would suggest the Neutron GTX. The reason I pick it over the others is it has overall better real world testing results. Again based on what Yellowbeard stated you wont really know the difference in loading times or boot times (results are too close), but if you were to transfer files from one location on the SSD to another on the same SSD and time it, you might know the difference then (given its a large transfer 10GB or more). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.