Access Time And I/O Performance
I/O Performance Results
15
Comments
Sponsored
Latest Internal Storage News
Latest Internal Storage reviews
- 16/05 – Intel SSD 330 Review: 60, 120, And 180 GB Models Benchmarked
- 11/05 – Do-It-Yourself: Upgrading Apple's 27" iMac With An SSD
- 01/05 – Marvell-Based SSDs From Corsair, Crucial, OCZ, And Plextor:...
- 26/04 – Best SSDs For The Money: April 2012
- 25/04 – Hitachi's 4 TB Hard Drives Take On The 3 TB Competition
Err... have you completely forgotten the OCZ Vertex? Sheesh... It's currently the best reasonably priced drive - £120 for 30GB.
And it's perfect as a boot drive for a laptop. Head over to Anandtech for a review of that drive.
Thanks tom's - ive just spen 20mins reading about how good the new samsung drive is, only to find out you cant actually buy them.
I've a question on the MTBF. For hard drives you give a lower end of 350,000 hours. This is 14580 days (350000/24) or 40 years (350000/24/365)!
If the MTBF were as given, then a PC could run non-stop for an average of 40 years before we saw a HD failure. In other words we would very, very rarely have hard disk failures. So how come HD failures are much more common?
I think it's because 'enthusiasts' unknowingly or unwittingly use or abuse their hard-drives outside of the manufacturers specifications - ive got a 7gb fujitsu hdd in a web-server box thats been going solid for around 12-13years now - no errors....
Thanks tom's - ive just spen 20mins reading about how good the new samsung drive is, only to find out you cant actually buy them.
It said on the first page, second to last paragraph
I've a question on the MTBF. For hard drives you give a lower end of 350,000 hours. This is 14580 days (350000/24) or 40 years (350000/24/365)!If the MTBF were as given, then a PC could run non-stop for an average of 40 years before we saw a HD failure. In other words we would very, very rarely have hard disk failures. So how come HD failures are much more common?
Data corruption doesn't count as a failure, and most problems will be like this. Also, I'll bet keep turning them on and off doesn't help. 350,000hrs doing very little work?
And since when could you only get hard drives up to 500GB?!? (page 2)
Currently 2.5" drives only go up to 500GB. The last paragraph on Page 2 puts this in context (sort of).
I walk away from all of Tom's reviews with doubt ever since I started reading the more thorough and confident reviews at Anandtech...
[quote=joebloggs]Err... have you completely forgotten the OCZ Vertex? Sheesh... It's currently the best reasonably priced drive - £120 for 30GB.
And it's perfect as a boot drive for a laptop. Head over to Anandtech for a review of that drive.[/quote]
couldn't agree more, the OCZ Vertex is one of the best SSD's
I will be heading over to Anandtech to find out how this new(ish) Samsung drive stacks up against the OCZ Vertex with a proper SSD test (4K random writes).
Come THG leaving out OCZ is just stupid...
Bob
Totally agree with all the comments about Anandtech and the also the missing OCZ Vertex. Also want to point out that if anyone does actually want to buy the Samsung drive then SCAN seem to be selling it. They also have a Corsair P256 which I believe is the same drive.
Page 2 under 'Enthusiasts or professionals' heading
"Enthusiast desktop PCs should be running a 1+ TB drive,"
Huh? Professionals (ie those that get paid, those who work) have tiny hard drives as all of their data is stored on 'professional' servers. Even at home I have a single 300gb 'raptor on my main PC, everything else (films, music, web development etc etc etc) is on my 5tb server so everyone else on the house can access it.
Also - you are journalists so basic grammar and a proof read should be a given. On page 1 you have MB instead of GB and in the table on page 2, you have MTBD instead of MTBF. I haven't read any more yet so I don't know if they are the only basic errors.
The new Samsungs are available from Novatech.co.uk - good price on them too. Other UK retailers (overclockers for onne) are also going to retail the oem drive.
That is not how MTBF works. MTBF works on field accumulated operation time across many devices. In your example of 40 years MTBF, it would mean that if you operate 40 of these devices, you can expect one to be returned every year. If you operate a datacenter with 15.000 drives then on average you can expect one drive to fail each day.