Crucial 256Gb C300 RealSSD SSD W7 64-bit Startup Times vs. Samsung 7200RPM HDD w/ 16Mb Cache

Ok guys. Here is the Crucial 256Gb C300 SSD in action. I do two comparisons with my old Samsung 7200RPM 16Mb Cache HDD. The first is to compare Windows startup times from hitting the power button to the desktop showing up. The second test is where I compare the ATTO benchmark results of the two drives.

I am not entirely conviced that the SSD was worth the $800 I spent for it. The startup times seem pitiful as compared to what I've seen the drive do in some laptops. I can't imagine my computer having some kind of startup issue, but if anyone has an idea or a suggestion please comment below. The ATTO benchmark is a lot better then what I had with the Samsung, but how will that translate into real world performance?

I was really expecting more from this purchase. Everyone talks about upgrading to an SSD is the single best performance boost that one can do for their computers. Again, I am not convinced...

Well, enjoy the video and let me know if something sticks out in your mind as to something I could be doing wrong. Thanks for watching!

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Crucial
• C300
• SSD
• 980X
• i7
• Intel
• ATI
• HD5970
• 5970
• Gaming
• Rig
• Best
• Build
• RealSSD
• M225
• Vertex
• OCZ
• Z-Drive
• ATTO
• HDD
• Hard
• Drive
• 256Gb
• Micron
• X25-M
• X25-E
• X25
• Core
• 975
• Benchmark
• Velociraptor
• Raptor
• RAID
• Startup
• Test
• Windows
• W7

[MrSeraphax]

You cant bitch at the drives performance if you dont use what its made for SATA 3 bro common you were paying 800$ for a sata 3 ssd not to use it on Sata2

[Trubyd44]

@MrSeraphax Read the comments, before you make a comment. Thx. Furthermore, the long startup time is due to BIOS, not performance of the drive that is also in the comments.

[cocacola443]

@Trubyd44 "Read the comments, before you make a comment."

There are a LOT of comments. No one is going to read through 25 pages of comments before commenting. However, many read the video description (at least I do) before commenting. This would be a good place to update your findings of the BIOS slowing the boot (the video description makes no mention of this).

Thanks for taking the time and doing this comparison!

[Trubyd44]

@cocacola443 Ok, fair enough...I've just been swamped...but for people that are truly interested a quick scan of the comments has many, many answers.

[Phen0mable]

Youve got wrong bios set up chap

[Trubyd44]

@Phen0mable Nope...read the other comments before coming to a very wrong conclusion, chap.

[MrBigsky13]

Am I the only one who can't believe this cat spent $800 bucks on a Crucial 256 in 2010 . Congratulations sweetheart you just won a Apple sticker and a Alien-ware sticker for the side of that black money pit. Stop timing your computer and get your homework finished or I swear to god Jr. I won't let Big Daddy take you to the Clan meeting this weekend.

[Keinnicknamemehrfrei]

Switch the monitor plug into the other jack for seeing the POST.

[sdm1234567890]

@sniper77shot sum rig!!

[sniper77shot]

2x Intel Xeon 6 core cpu

32 GB's of ram

2x GTX 580's and GTX 570(PhysX)

1x 512gb SSD

Boot time: 28.64 Seconds

[ChristRaper666]

The problem is the BIOS itself. It's not that he had wrong/outdated/crappy version, it's just that the underlying architecture of a BIOS is well over 30 years old now. We have just been bandaging them to work with modern technology (Pretty terribly I might add). The way a BIOS has to pre-load patched hardware files is really slow.

I guarantee if he took this exact setup and dropped it in a comparable motherboard with EUFI instead of BIOS that it would have insanely fast boot times.

[cyrax1311]

lol I have a 64GB version and its way faster. This is like trolling Crucial because its not a precise load time. Before you make a video be 100% sure that the drivers and everything are setup right.

[tjpld]

The real problem is windows itself. I don't want to sound like a linux fanboy but ohh boy that shit loads stupid fast. Load times under 10 seconds after Bios no problems at all. Windows is just very inefficient and bloated.

[ace420bud]

OH MY BAD AND THE BOOT TIME WAS 1;17.66

AND THE SHUT DOWN TIME WAS 11.6 SEC

[ace420bud]

WOW i didnt realize my comp was that slow at startup aint much slower than yours and slower hardware specs as Follows

AMD ATHLON II X4 630 2.8GHZ @ 3.61GHZ ON AIR

8 GIGS CORSAIR XMS3 1600MHZ @ 1767MHZ AT 1.65VOLTS 9-9-9-24 2T

ASUS M4A88TD-V EVO USB/3.0 MOTHERBOARD

HIS ICE-Q 4670'S 1GIG DDR3 VID CARD IN CROSSFIREX

CORSAIR TX750 WATT PSU

2X 320GIG HDD'S RAID 0

COOLER MASTER 690 II ADVANCED CASE

YOU CAN CHECK MY SECOND TO LAST NEWEST VID TO LOOK AT IT

OH AND THE COOLER MASTER HYPER 212 PLUS.