Foxfury Breakthrough
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 62

Thread: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

  1. #31
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    134

    Default

    So are new time stamps being added, your files with time stamps currently will continue to have them. But after changing registry (and rebooting) are new one still being added? Thanks

  2. #32
    *Flashaholic* fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northern VA, USA
    Posts
    5,852

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
    Thanks, folks; I've been checking in but have been too busy to post a detailed follow up w/ replies, maybe this coming weekend. I am really happy with this setup, FWIW, I just want to dial in some of the finer aspects now.

    FWIW, of the 64 GB SSD drive, everything I want is now installed, only ~9 GB used - I'm definitely no 'power user' anymore. My Docs & Settings folder is another ~20 GB (mostly my ~700 KB photos), but those are on the 32 GB high-speed CF card. I'm pleased with this arrangement.

    The short version, I've already disabled last access time stamping via the registry, but WinXP only seems to apply it to fixed volumes (my NTFS SSD HD) and I'd like to apply it to my (Fat32-only) CF card and even my USB drives if possible. Just hoping to get a slightly snappier system and less wear&tear on the flash memory in the bargain, that's all. Couldn't care less about time stamping on my files. I'll be looking into this more later.

    Anyway, thanks all. Keep it coming,
    FAT32 only supports last-access datestamping, not timestamping. The datestamp doesn't get overwritten more than once a day. It's not a significant load on flash memory.

    It's really not a good idea to use FAT32 as the filesystem on your bootup hard drive nowadays. FAT32 doesn't have journaling, which means the computer doesn't pre-record a list of the changes it's going to make to the files before it actually makes them, so if your computer crashes (and you know it will eventually), the half-completed changes can't be completed or rolled-back on reboot, and the files will become corrupted. There's a reason all these features were added to modern filesystems, and unless you have a technical explanation why you don't need them, then you almost certainly do need them.
    Last edited by fyrstormer; 01-13-2012 at 08:09 AM.

  3. #33
    Moderator Kestrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Willamette Valley, OR
    Posts
    4,840

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jrubin View Post
    So are new time stamps being added, your files with time stamps currently will continue to have them. But after changing registry (and rebooting) are new one still being added?
    Yes, disablelastaccess continues to have no effect on my (Fat32) CF and USB drives. If I can convince WinXP to make at least my CF drive NTFS, I will gain a lot of flexibility as to how I want the file system to handle my 'auxiliary hard drive'. This would be pretty cool IMO, as I have no intent of removing the CF drive until I can get ~128 GB Sandisk CF cards at a very reasonable cost. I'm excited about this configuration, as that next upgrade is going to be the easiest storage upgrade I've ever done. Once I can fit my DVD library on my CF card (via MPEG-4), I'll be stylin'.

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    FAT32 only supports last-access datestamping, not timestamping. The datestamp doesn't get overwritten more than once a day. It's not a significant load on flash memory.
    This is CPF, when did we start worrying about only significant things, lol.

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    It's really not a good idea to use FAT32 as the filesystem on your bootup hard drive nowadays. [...]
    It isn't on my bootup hard drive. There's also nothing wrong with trying to use NTFS on my "removable" flash media as well, even though WinXP (Home) seems to need some convincing of that. My hard drives have been NTFS since 1996 - that's over 15 years of solid use, with virtually no issues. I haven't been so pleased with file/disk management since Stacker 4.0.
    Last edited by Kestrel; 01-13-2012 at 10:01 AM.
    In the past we have had a light which flickered, in the present we have a light which flames, and in the future there will be a light which shines over all the land and sea.
    - Winston Churchill

  4. #34
    Flashaholic* LEDAdd1ct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Hudson Valley
    Posts
    3,196

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    1) Is there a compatibility reason for which your CF flash cards can't be formatted NTFS?

    2) Is there another reason for which your CF cards can't be formatted NTFS?

    3) Are you willing to format your CF cards to NTFS?

    Since NTFS supports the change you desire, it seems like a step in the right direction.
    "...and the diode multiplied and grew in brightness. And God saw that it was good."

  5. #35
    Moderator Kestrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Willamette Valley, OR
    Posts
    4,840

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by LEDAdd1ct View Post
    Since NTFS supports the change you desire, it seems like a step in the right direction.
    "It's not a bug, it's a feature".

    WinXP (Home) doesn't permit NTFS on "Removable Disk" media, Fat32 is the best it can do unless I trick it via regedit or something similar, to fool NTFS into thinking its a fixed disk. Then my options are wide open and I can do all sorts of things.

    I think that one route would be along the lines of what fyrstomer suggested a few days ago re: the Hitachi driver.

    This and/or this.
    In the past we have had a light which flickered, in the present we have a light which flames, and in the future there will be a light which shines over all the land and sea.
    - Winston Churchill

  6. #36
    Flashaholic
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    134

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
    "It's not a bug, it's a feature".

    WinXP (Home) doesn't permit NTFS on "Removable Disk" media, Fat32 is the best it can do unless I trick it via regedit or something similar, to fool NTFS into thinking its a fixed disk. Then my options are wide open and I can do all sorts of things.

    I think that one route would be along the lines of what fyrstomer suggested a few days ago re: the Hitachi driver.

    This and/or this.
    so i dont have a Winxp and for sure a XP home to try this on but here is a link that seems to address your issue. they present a simple workaround that might work. but i dont know for sure that it will work on home version. also if you have someone with an xp pro/vista/windows7 or even DOS you can just format it to NTFS and you will be good to go

    to format the CF card under XP Pro:

    1. Place the CF in a USB to CF reader/writer
    2. Use UFDPREP.EXE on the CF, which is seen as a usb device. UFDPREP will allow for the CF to be partitioned and formated with NTFS.
    This only works on XP Pro since UFDPREP.EXE will only work XP.

    of course its possible that partition software will fix this problem. i use easeus (its free) on windows 7 and vista to format drives and its compatable with xp home

    http://www.partition-tool.com/download.htm

    y
    ou might just try that and see how it goes. of course you lose all data when you do this but you can work that out for sure.








    http://lifehacker.com/5195783/format...-in-windows-xp





    Last edited by Jrubin; 01-13-2012 at 01:33 PM.

  7. #37
    Unenlightened noglider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    New York City and High Falls, NY
    Posts
    6

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Hi there. This is my first post here, which is funny, because I'm here to learn about flashlights, but I saw this post and thought I'd respond.

    I'm an independent computer consultant. Mostly I serve small businesses and individuals. I hope to move my practice to only businesses eventually, but for the time being, I'm having fun. Most of my experience is in large corporate environments with lots of servers and/or large systems.

    I've had a small amount of experience with SSD. It's very exciting, and as a colleague said, now that SSD is coming, everything we know about storage management is going to be wrong. A lot of our long-earned tips apply to the characteristics of hard drives (with platters), with their advantages and disadvantages. So it seems to me that head crashes and similar mechanical failures are the main reason for RAID. So I wonder how useful RAID is when using SSD. I recently replaced a RAID-1 array for a client with a single SSD. I suspect it will be at least as reliable, though that's based on my educated guess. Any opinions?

    I've worked with a couple of laptops with hybrid drives that have a small cache with SSD and otherwise hard drives. In theory, they're a good idea, though I can't say they seemed fast.

    In my own system (a Mac Pro with four drive bays), I put my operating system on a 32 GB SSD and the user files on a 1TB drive. It's similar to having a hybrid drive. And I think it doesn't seem particularly fast.

    Earlier, I used the same 32GB SSD in my Macbook, the first model from 2006. Man, did it make the machine fast! It booted in about 10 seconds and shut down in about 4. It operated about as fast as the modern models. Sadly, the machine died, so I'm without a laptop for now.

  8. #38
    Moderator Kestrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Willamette Valley, OR
    Posts
    4,840

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jrubin View Post
    to format the CF card under XP Pro [...]
    Sounds good, I'll try this, I've started the format now.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jrubin View Post
    of course you lose all data when you do this
    Wait, what ?!?!?


    LOL, j/k.

    I'll see about exploring this topic more over the weekend.

    Oh, and noglider, welcome to CPF.

    Best regards,
    K
    In the past we have had a light which flickered, in the present we have a light which flames, and in the future there will be a light which shines over all the land and sea.
    - Winston Churchill

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    465

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Just remember with FAT32 it only support files up to 4GB's... so if you plan on having files larger then 4GB's on that drive make sure its formatted as NTFS.


    I've been using my 120GB OCZ Agility 3 Sata 6Gbps SSD for about 8 months now and been very happy with it.

  10. #40

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    SSD quick tip: software behaviors designed to improve HDD performance can have the opposite effect on an SSD. These are often turned on by default, with few ways to turn them off. Defragmentation, for example, has no benefit and will wear an SSD out prematurely.

  11. #41
    Flashaholic It01Firefox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    173

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by noglider View Post
    So it seems to me that head crashes and similar mechanical failures are the main reason for RAID. So I wonder how useful RAID is when using SSD. I recently replaced a RAID-1 array for a client with a single SSD. I suspect it will be at least as reliable, though that's based on my educated guess. Any opinions?
    I think that's just asking for trouble. The reason the client was using a RAID-1 in the first place was probably because a HD failure causing downtime wasn't an option. That didn't change just because the drives were replaced by a SSD drive. It's still a single point of failure. And SSDs are definitely not failure proof. We don't even have any long-term test results that prove that SSDs are more reliable or even as reliable as HDDs.

    I personally don't trust SSDs any more than any other HDD, meaning everything that's important is backed up somewhere else and any system that has to be available at all times is RAIDed.
    Last edited by It01Firefox; 01-16-2012 at 03:48 AM. Reason: typo

  12. #42
    *Flashaholic* fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northern VA, USA
    Posts
    5,852

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kestrel View Post
    "It's not a bug, it's a feature".

    WinXP (Home) doesn't permit NTFS on "Removable Disk" media, Fat32 is the best it can do unless I trick it via regedit or something similar, to fool NTFS into thinking its a fixed disk. Then my options are wide open and I can do all sorts of things.

    I think that one route would be along the lines of what fyrstomer suggested a few days ago re: the Hitachi driver.

    This and/or this.
    It's a little late now I suppose, but don't ever buy the "Home" edition of Windows again. It always lacks something important. I can't count the number of times I've had to tell someone they can't do something on their computer because they have Windows Home Edition.

    Anyway, you might be able to format it in NTFS by right-clicking on My Computer, selecting Manage..., and formatting the card through the Disk Management panel of the Computer Management window. If not, just plug the card into a different computer that has XP Pro on it and format it in NTFS there.

  13. #43
    *Flashaholic* fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northern VA, USA
    Posts
    5,852

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by noglider View Post
    I've had a small amount of experience with SSD. It's very exciting, and as a colleague said, now that SSD is coming, everything we know about storage management is going to be wrong. A lot of our long-earned tips apply to the characteristics of hard drives (with platters), with their advantages and disadvantages. So it seems to me that head crashes and similar mechanical failures are the main reason for RAID. So I wonder how useful RAID is when using SSD. I recently replaced a RAID-1 array for a client with a single SSD. I suspect it will be at least as reliable, though that's based on my educated guess. Any opinions?
    Head crashes and similar mechanical failures are not the main reason for RAID. The main reasons for RAID are redundancy, higher transfer speed, and expandability by adding extra disks. Head crashes and similar mechanical failures are reasons why platter disks need redundancy, but ALL disks benefit from redundancy if they have important data on them. A flash disk can become unusable just as easily as a platter disk if it gets dropped the right way, or hit by a power surge from a failing power supply, or if it's just plain old defective. Single points of failure are a Very Bad Thing when your computer can hold more data than the Library of Congress.

  14. #44
    Moderator Kestrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Willamette Valley, OR
    Posts
    4,840

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    It's a little late now I suppose, but don't ever buy the "Home" edition of Windows again.
    A more polite statement would be something like:
    "It's a little late now I suppose, but please don't provide advice in such a condescending manner."
    In the past we have had a light which flickered, in the present we have a light which flames, and in the future there will be a light which shines over all the land and sea.
    - Winston Churchill

  15. #45
    *Flashaholic* fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northern VA, USA
    Posts
    5,852

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Forget I said anything. I'm not going to get in a fight about the wording of my advice.
    Last edited by fyrstormer; 01-16-2012 at 04:53 PM.

  16. #46

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    You DO NOT want to enable write-caching on flash memory. There is no benefit because flash memory has no moving parts that need to be aligned before data can be written.
    Beg to differ on that. Virtualization, particularly *real* virtualization that uses a hypervisor crawls when write-through cache is enabled for a whole lotta reasons. None of them have anything to do with the mechanical speed of the drive. SSD's are slowly making their way into my data centers, but only for some IOPs intensive reasons where write latency in a concern. For laptops they should be mandatory. For desktops, maybe, if you have the cash and can afford the big Intel SSD's go for it.

    It's a little late now I suppose, but don't ever buy the "Home" edition of Windows again.
    Main difference between Win 7 home -vs- Pro (besides the price) is being able to join Active Directory and "XP mode". Home users have no need for AD and I increasingly discourage it for small business, and while XP mode is convenient it's obsolete in terms of virtualization. Sorry, but Win 7 Pro is not better than Home because the former says "Pro".

    Re: RAID 1:

    Set up a lot of servers in my day and RAID 1 *does not* have a positive benefit on performance and with some software based RAID cards can actually cost a bit of performance. To get a performance improvement from RAID 1, which is nothing more than a mirror, you need to add more drives in either a RAID 0/1 or RAID 10 array. Personally I prefer RAID 10 over RAID 5 anyday because RAID 5 can burn you if the parity stripe gets corrupted, which it does more than people admit. Frankly I'd fire anybody working for me who set up a RAID 5. However, it takes at least four drives to create a RAID 10, and the performance improvement isn't as good as RAID 0 for write or RAID 5 for read, but RAID 10 is pretty much bullet proof. In other respects, the *only* reason for RAID 1 is redundancy against drive failure. It's worth it for some home users provided other back-up scenarios are met and they need the redundancy.

  17. #47
    nfetterly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Cincinnati area, but lots of travel
    Posts
    2,435

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by LEDAdd1ct View Post
    Good News:

    1) Go to http://google.com

    2) Type "PCMCIA to flash adapter"

    3) You will get tons of hits

    Bad News:

    Not all of them provide maximum throughput. I am sure one of them is a good one, but many are most likely quite slow.

    Kestrel seems quite satisfied with his Lexar 32-bit CardBus PCMCIA adapter, so that might be a brand worth pursuing.

    EDIT: Illum, I would get Lexar RW021-001. Purchase from the most affordable dealer you can.

    @Kestrel, I'm not sure if this helps you or not:

    Link

    Link 2

    Link 3
    I have a CardBus adapter (efilm pro 32 bit cardbus adapter) - ROCKS, in my laptop right now. If anyone wants a PCMCIA CF adapter let me know and I'm pretty sure I have one that I can mail them - there is no comparison between the two. The only good thing about the cheap PCMCIA adapter is that it it recognized right away by XP. The cardbus adapter needs to be "installed" with software.


  18. #48
    *Flashaholic* fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northern VA, USA
    Posts
    5,852

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    .....
    Last edited by fyrstormer; 01-16-2012 at 04:52 PM.

  19. #49

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    This just in...

    Certain ZIF 1.8 SSD's can be installed into HD model iPods, including sought after 5th gens with Wolfson chips
    Last edited by ElectronGuru; 01-26-2012 at 03:23 AM.

  20. #50
    Flashaholic cdrake261's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Columbus, IN
    Posts
    448

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    I'm looking into an intel 510 SSD for the boot drive, and a TB HDD for my data

  21. #51
    Flashaholic* jamie.91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    635

    Default

    I've been considering an SSD for my netbook ( eeepc ), faster, quiet and better battery life, not got round to finding the right one yet though:/
    Four surefires and counting, this could be expensive

  22. #52
    Flashaholic* turbodog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    4,069

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by s.urfer View Post
    Don't you mean RAID 0 ? RAID 1 is the same speed or less as one drive.
    Raid 1. Reads are faster. Most of your time is spent reading. Use a good controller will help.
    This is your life, and it's ending one minute at a time.
    Be prepared for the truth.

  23. #53

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    My MacbookAir came with a SSD installed. I love it. I am not sure what kind apple uses but Macword(or maybe MacLife) has put the apple and other SSD's to the test and the apple drive lasts about twice as long (rewriting capacity)

  24. #54

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    I tried one in my puters but I wasn't impressed.

  25. #55

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Been running a sandforce SSD in my main rig for almost 2 years. Makes loading maps in BF3 very fast. My macbook air also has an SSD. I could never go back to a regular HD after using SSD's. They are the biggest bottleneck holding computer performance back.
    S18 Maelstrom, D40Avn, Nitecore P12, Thrunite TN11, Jetbeam BC20

  26. #56
    *Flashaholic* fyrstormer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Northern VA, USA
    Posts
    5,852

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Onthelightside View Post
    My MacbookAir came with a SSD installed. I love it. I am not sure what kind apple uses but Macword(or maybe MacLife) has put the apple and other SSD's to the test and the apple drive lasts about twice as long (rewriting capacity)
    Macbooks use Intel SSDs.

  27. #57

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Quote Originally Posted by fyrstormer View Post
    Macbooks use Intel SSDs.
    I have never heard of apple using intel ssd's. All the current airs use Samsung or toshiba
    S18 Maelstrom, D40Avn, Nitecore P12, Thrunite TN11, Jetbeam BC20

  28. #58
    Flashaholic* subwoofer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Hove, UK
    Posts
    1,721

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    The post below really presents the pertinent facts:

    Flash memory has limited read write cycles (far more limited than HDD) and will fail quickly when used for an OS. When you use this type of memory to record photos or videos and then copy these onto your PCs HDD, they are fine, but for an OS continually writing to its storage you will have problems soon.

    Flash memory also suffers form a lack of being able to recover data. Hard disks can be scanned and data recovered. Flash stores data here there and everywhere and when the FAT becomes corrupt you loose the lot.

    For a small device that you use just for internet access and you can live without (which probably uses ROM and RAM rather than flash memory) then it is a good idea, but for a laptop, until a new technology giving a long life with masses of read write cycles, I would steer clear and use a HDD (currently still the most reliable storage medium, perhaps competing with tape).


    Quote Originally Posted by flashy bazook View Post
    Yes, fyrstormer is correct that the SSD drive needs software support (the "trim" command"), available in Windows 7 but not WinXP.

    Note also that only certain SSD drives support the trim command, so you need compatibility both on the software and the hardware sides. There is an intel utility you can download free designed to measure specs for intel SSD drives, which can also be used with other drives to check them out for compatibility with the trim command.

    The trim command disables defragmentation of the HD (which is not helpful for SSD drives) and tries to minimize delete/write cycles, since SSD HD's have an upper limit and their performance degrades over time as these cycles increase. Operating systems have an unfortunate tendency to keep writing/deleting info. on the HD, and the availability of the trim command indicates some effort to reduce these cycles.

    Of course, if you are using an old computer and a new SSD revitalizes it, why not? You may not run up the cycles to the point where it becomes a problem and, in the limit, you could put in yet another SSD (kind of like replacing incan bulbs!) if necessary.

    The disadvantage of the SSDs is capacity. I put in one as my main bootup device and then found I was running out of space, even though it was 128GB.

    So you need a secondary standard HD with the large capacity if this is an issue with you. Put the minimum software necessary on the bootup SSD drive, and everything else on the large standard one.

    One interesting middle solution is to use a flashdrive which can be used together with an existing standard (magnetic) HD to speed up the bootup process. USB flashdrives that are compatible are labeled readyboost or something like it. It has software support in Windows Vista.

    Of course, one can also work to eliminate problems that are slowing up the bootup process, including cleaning up temporary files, defragmenting (standard) HDs, eliminating unnecessary programs and processes... regardless of the HD used.

    Probably the biggest bottleneck for old computers is actually graphics performance, with the internet and youtube and what have you throwing graphics challenges every day, not to mention games.

    Probably a good discrete graphics card, plus enough memory, are upgrades that can help revitalize a computer the most in today's environment.
    Subwoofer - Objective and Honest reviews
    Latest Reviews - @Subwoofer_CPF #SubwoofersReviews and Facebook
    ”The Torch Geek”

  29. #59

    Default

    My Macbook Air has SSD and it is screaming fast. I can't see going back to a mechanical drive ever again.

  30. #60
    Flashaholic* LEDAdd1ct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Hudson Valley
    Posts
    3,196

    Default Re: So who's went over to using SSD drives in their computers?

    Haven't closed my browser in a couple weeks and have 34 windows open, plus many tabs in each window. A zippy SSD drive would be a treat right now!
    "...and the diode multiplied and grew in brightness. And God saw that it was good."

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •