Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Screwyluie

my rig

29 posts in this topic

KQMGcoV.png

Intel i7 930

P6X58D motherboard

18gb corsair dominator ram

gtx480

Antec 902 case

Kingwin Mach1 1220w PS

Razor Lycosa keyboard

R.A.T. 7 mouse

Asus VG236 3D monitor (primary)

21" Samsung monitor (secondary)

(I had my 20" princeton hooked up in the above screen)

 

pics of the computer

http://imgur.com/a/iBk98

 

UPDATE:

so I changed my ram timings, tightened them up to 8-8-8, here's the difference, I think that's about a 7% gain... I get the feeling there's something holding me back, I'm still working on it.

 

3xUpF1E.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice, let's see a picture!

 

Any chance you could run CrystalDiskMark64 (free) and see what speeds you get with Dimmdrive and post a screenshot?  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty cool, the GPU and NETWORK meter are really nice.  I like them a lot.

 

I could probably add something like both of those to Dimmdrive.  Maybe some day...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regular HDD. I'm not interested in making windows boot faster

 

SSD is more than just making windows boot faster, load times on games is awesome with SSD.  Its a night and day difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SSD is more than just making windows boot faster, load times on games is awesome with SSD.  Its a night and day difference.

 

yes i understand that, but when i have a 1TB hard drive for windows and my games that is almost full, that I'm going to migrate to a 4TB here real soon... an SSD become very impractical and overly expensive, especially considering their volatility and failure rate.. oh yeah and did i mention the price! I have tons of ram i'm not using which is why i bought this program, this serves my purposes much better than an SSD ever would

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally am very nervous to use SSDs as boot.  I've done it twice before, in a laptop and on a PC, and both times the SSD "wore out" and flat out broke.  I had to reinstall and all that :( I'm doing it again right now, SSD on boot, and I wonder if I'll ever learn...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly! And honestly I would rather lose my windows install then my games... Reinstalling windows is easy enough but to get my games back would be next to impossible. I just don't trust ssd for anything I value

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes i understand that, but when i have a 1TB hard drive for windows and my games that is almost full, that I'm going to migrate to a 4TB here real soon... an SSD become very impractical and overly expensive, especially considering their volatility and failure rate.. oh yeah and did i mention the price! I have tons of ram i'm not using which is why i bought this program, this serves my purposes much better than an SSD ever would

 

They are no more volatile or prone to failure than a mechanical drive.   The price is very cheap now for SSD. I have yet to have a SSD give me issues out of the 12 or so i got installed in various systems.   :P    I would not trust a mechanical drive for anything of value now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are no more volatile or prone to failure than a mechanical drive.   The price is very cheap now for SSD. I have yet to have a SSD give me issues out of the 12 or so i got installed in various systems.   :P    I would not trust a mechanical drive for anything of value now!

 

SSDs can only be written a set number of time, and from there, they break.  Mechanical drives don't have that issue.  That is why, for example, windows swap on a SSD will destroy the drive.

 

There are plenty of scripts out there that you can run on a SSD which will cause it to fail in 24 hours just by write/rewrite/etc.  Those same scripts won't break a HDD when ran 24/7/365.

 

SSDs are volatile.  But fast!!   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not true at all anymore,  early SSD drives had this problem, like what you could pay $1000 for a 32gig SSD back in the day.  Now tons of error correcting and failsafes in firmware you don't have these issue.   In fact the average heavy use SSD will last 5+ years before it needs replaced.  I don't know anyone who keeps a HD for 5 years anymore.  I have a 900gig SSD on media server that is constantly running 24.7, for the last year without a issue.    You can also run programs that would break a  mechanical HDD fyi :P

 

Basic point is that SSD are reliable devices now, no point it not using them as main drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is still very much true.  SSDs will wear.  There are steps taken to prevent failure, such as underprovisioning of a SSD to route around failed areas, but the underlying physical technology is very much the same as it was 5+ years  ago.  

 

Reading from a SSD is just fine.  Repeated writing to a SSD will cause it to fail.  No amount of sugarcoating can escape that.  That is why having your OS, with it's scratch disk or otherwise repeat writing on an SSD, will cause it to fail eventually with a lifetime far less than a mechanical drive.  The MTBF of a SSD varies ginormously based upon how many writes it will do. 

 

Your SSD is either MLC or TLC, and even if SLC, still has wear limits.  Refer to the quote below.  For example, the Samsung 840 Pro, a highly regarded SSD with amazing speeds, is rated at 1000 write cycles per NAND.  

 

A hard drive, for example, for each NAND-sized cluster, has near infinite write cycles, with the only wear being overall mechanical falure.  

 

That's why SSD, in a high write environment (such as OS), even with wear leveling, will inevitably fail far sooner than a mechanical drive.  

 

Now, this doesn't mean that it is dumb to use an SSD as a boot.  

 

It just means that the argument of SSDs being as reliable and long lasting as a mechanical SSD is just simply not true.

 

 

 

  • SLC NAND flash is typically rated at about 100k cycles (Samsung OneNAND KFW4G16Q2M)
  • MLC NAND flash used to be rated at about 5k – 10k cycles (Samsung K9G8G08U0M) but is now typically 1k – 3k cycles
  • TLC NAND flash is typically rated at about 1k cycles (Samsung 840)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim, since you have been producing Dimmdrive, you obviously know the benefits of a RAMDrive as it pertains to to gaming. But I also have my RAMDrive (SoftPerfect) set up a 1GB drive at boot time that permanently contains my windows/temp and my users/temp files, as well as cache files for my browsers, and anything else that I don't need to keep permanently like install files that I'm going to run once and done. This is going to save my SSD, which is my system drive, a LOT of writes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

must be a motherboard thing.... my ram is clocked faster and has tighter timings... comes up slower in the test though

 

actually its probably more of a cpu thing. My AMD FX 8350 has an awful ram controller... but with the current oc settings is neck and neck with the 3770k for most criteria... where as the same ram with similar settings on a i7-3770k would rape my rig in a benchmark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Operating systems themselves aren't particularly write-heavy.  Caching is generally the biggest cause of writes.  With sufficient RAM, an OS running on an SSD should have the paging file disabled altogether.  It is going to have no impact on system performance and it will drastically reduce the number of writes hitting the SSD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

UPDATE:

so I changed my ram timings, tightened them up to 8-8-8, here's the difference, I think that's about a 7% gain... I get the feeling there's something holding me back, I'm still working on it.

 

 

 

Based on user feedback, I've seen speeds all over the place, but they do appear to be very uniform based on architecture and RAM specifics as well as CPU gen (eg, 1st gen i7).

 

All that said, by far and above the most popular setup is 2nd/3rd/4th gen i7 1600mhz 9/9/9  with peak speeds around 10,600 MB/s.  If you have that setup, you more than likely will hit over 10,000 MB/s.

 

Future Dimmdrives will go a long ways to benchmarking this and indexing it with your forum profile :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0