SSDWorld - SSD Vs. HDD using Microsoft applications

[marxjo]

Such comparision is pointless and kid-level. Were these applications started already before windows was up and so, they were loaded from cache second time ? MAybe there was some background program running on one of them (AV, defrag?, windows update). Geee, internet is full of....you see. Comparision is not worth anything. Ideal situation would be to execute tests at 10 min Windows uptime, and then clone partition to SSD and execute tests again. This is the way test procedure should be carried ou

[java575]

in porn will it make them people come faster too?

[Vargas1349]

i7 950

4GB Corsair Dominator 2000mhz

Rampage III

ATI HD 4890

Tested a OCZ agility 2 vs WD black. The SSD performed alot better. Especially in high end PC's. A typical HDD will slow the systems down due to the arms needing to seek and write the data. IMHO I think if your going to go hard on having a fast and powerful PC using HDD will make the value/performance lackluster. I also use SSD in my laptops, cause they do make my machines run smoother and less worry of moving parts malfunctions.

[happygamestvfun1]

windows 7 boots stuff quicker than vista

[RetroRepair]

This is impressive but the uploader fails to mention the $2k price tag!!

SSD is the future but it'll be a while before the masses have them.

[moha84]

Wow HDD sucks! we know now what causes all this slow down in boot up computer running applications although you may have a really good CPU and RAM!

[RykerBlob]

The main advantage that SSD's have over HDD's is the lack of any mechanical latency. Since there are no platters to spin-up, read times are accelerated. Additionally, the lack of a read/write head also decreases the overal read/write latency. Because physical location of data has no affect on seek time, SSD's overall average a higher per-kernal read write time. Shenanigans.

[manuman333]

lol fail my hdd is faster than your ssd but now i have a ssd and its uber mega fast

[efranchi4]

and so it is

[toocoolforu]

SSD are obviously faster, but i am not sure about this test.

both laptops (or drives) need to have the SAME configuration and data to make a revelant test.

[electrocomm]

For sure there is a speedup in overall system performance using SSD, but I can tell you for sure that if your HDD is defragmented and you tune-up a little bit your system, you can achieve the same access speed and better perf. So this test with the Microsoft apps, is irrelevant because my apps (on HDD) start-up even faster than yours (with SDD). Other tests are relevant !!

[ScrewFearMe]

HDD is way slower than SSDs on not just boot up but the start of apps and everything else mostly... even when they are fragmented

[ambientmf]

Err, ESPECIALLY when fragmented.

[ScrewFearMe]

i said EVEN when they are fragmented... meaning that they are slower than any ssd at all...

[dragonballjiujitsu]

The funny thing is that I'm running Windows XP and all of my Microsoft programs come up just as fast . My specs are 2.4 GHz dual core, 4 gigs of RAM ad a 320 gig SATA drive. People only think this is fast because they have gotten used to how slow Vista is. I guess the moral of the story is if you are going to use Vista get an SSD.

[efranchi4]

You simply don't talk about one "before" and one "after", what you write it doesn't help to understand SSD.

[toocoolforu]

If you had a SSD your pc would load programs even faster.

[plusrep]

so what is better please let me know

[fibertech9]

The SSD world website does not load. I would like to visit it.

[slaugh84]

goddamn Microsoft... thank God i trust my e-mails to Mozilla Thunderbird...

[efranchi4]

and I can send you an SSD to test it in your machine for compare your result with and without an SSD.

YOU CAN NOT COMPARE ONE RESULT WHO WAS MADE INTO TWO DIFFERENT PC, you need to test it in the same machine.

[Teslatez]

@efranchi4 you re right! my father bought a 128GB samsung ssd, his acer aspire one is almost 10x times faster! its original HDD was not faster than 28MB/sec, with the SSD its 108MB/sec of phisical speed!

why constructors keep building faster and faster pc's and keep those sluggish, slower like hell HD's? better have a quick 128GB SSD than a sloooww 1TB HD

[dragonballjiujitsu]

I have a windows XP machine with standard HDD that matched your times. I can post videos to prove it if you like.

[wrathofheaven1]

then imagine the times when u will use an ssd instead of ur hdd..... Thats the whole point dude.

[johnnyfast]

Interesting how NONE of the SSD tests show a real world multi-tasking environment.

I have an OCZ SSD 64 and it totally fails, as soon as my PC is doing 2 or more read/write multi tasks I get horrendous lock ups. It is going back to the shop as unfit for purpose.

SSD is a one trick (read speed) pony.

[fleckx]

OCZ seems to be the only manufacturer that has this issue with multitasking. Also I hope you tweaked the OS accordingly.

[vd853]

dangit, maybe that extra doh$ is worth it.

[BurtWilson1]

Application loading times are impressive.

[Kaddasi]

WoW, that was awesome, Mr.

I'm going to get my self one too.

[efranchi4]

We are not interested in bench, because the net is full of news with bench, we only want to show the reality.

The difference between any HD and a Memoright is so big that you don't need to do anything other than to put it in, and the performance are there, without touch anything in BIOS, Windows, superfecht or others thing.

Simply easy, simply very very very fast...and silent

[efranchi4]

The applications was opened for the first time, not charged before in the memory, as we explain on our website. We expected that it will be for sur someone who will think like you, and we understand you, because of the HD light, or maybe others because of the quickness. But is like this.

[Krmelj]

This is brilliant, thanks for posting! Can you please tell us how long it would take for Photoshop to open, and maybe large 10/12mpx tiff files? And does the SSD generate much heat (i.e. does the laptop fan start rarely, or quite often)?

[efranchi4]

I don't know what superfecht is, and more important a normal user is not supposed to know what superfecht is, so used only the basic installation of the drive and it's all, no change of setting at all.

[danwat1234]

Post#3

Good attempt though! Just remember to disable the Superfetch from loading, under Windows Services.

[danwat1234]

Post#2

Furthermore, during the IE 7 SSD test, the hard drive does not blink at all, none, nada, indicating that either you have Superfetch enabled, and it has been trained to expect you to launch IE 7 right after it boots, or you just launched IE 7 beforehand, and it is still in memory. Completely in memory.

I also feel the same situation with outlook 07, there would of been more HD light blinkage with the SSD, if parts of the program were not already in memory.

[danwat1234]

This video is not a valid bench!

It looks as if Vista Superfetch is enabled and is caching data from the hard drive to memory, as you bench the launch times! - evident (but could be other process polling HD) because of the disk activity before trying to launch said application. Could be that the SSD finished Superfetching stuff to RAM before the HDD did, so HDD is still doing that while benching?

[gulllars]

It's a matter of priority.

Three questions you need to ask yourself when choosing between SSD and HDD is:

1. Do you have the money to spend?

2. Do you hate to wait for loads?

3. Do you use the computer enough to justify the expence?

My answer is yes, and i will buy 2 32gb MTRON PRO's to have in raid0 for OS, progs, and games, while having 1 or 2 1TB HDD's for storage of music, films, pictures, etc.

[First2ner]

SNNNNNNNNNNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPP­PPPPPPP!!!!!

can't wait to hae one

[1dgg9h4dr6ppp8]

God damn! That shit is fast!! Like the equivalent of a 6Ghz quad core!! I say a notebook with an SSD and a pretty shitty processor to save money, and you're set.