Originally posted by shaffaaf:

---

the windows 7/vista delay i never had on my DFI mobo, but all the ASUS boards i have had have had it.

interesting list sam, esp with ASrock being top for failure rates consdiering asus are their parent company.

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

Originally posted by shaffaaf:

---

the windows 7/vista delay i never had on my DFI mobo, but all the ASUS boards i have had have had it.

interesting list sam, esp with ASrock being top for failure rates consdiering asus are their parent company.

---

But not Asus themselves you notice... work that one out :P

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Sandforce is a good controller, I don't think it is a negative that Intel has switched over. For me Size/Price is most important as I've have bought brands that some say are bad and they work perfectly, without flaw! I haven't used OCZ which seem to be considered the worst but I will and I'm sure they will work fine too.

So if you like Intel go with them and the new controller.

As Intel's second SandForce-based drive line-up, the SSD 330s are positioned underneath the SSD 520s as inexpensive performance-oriented alternatives offering SATA 6Gb/s-class performance more affordably. The SSD 330 series is only available at three capacity points: 60, 120, and 180 GB.

The following table allows you to contrast the specifications of Intel's SSD 520 and 330 families, both of which employ second-gen SandForce controllers.

---

Intel SSD 330 / 520

Compressible Performance                (60 GB)            (120 GB)           (180 GB)

========================            ===============     ===============    ===============

4 KB Random Read (IOPS)             12,000 / 15,000     22,500 / 25,000    42,000 / 50,000

4 KB Random Write (IOPS)            20,500 / 23,000     33,000 / 40,000    52,000 / 60,000

128 KB Sequential Read (MB/s)          500 / 550           500 / 550          500 / 550

128 KB Sequential Write (MB/s)         400 / 475           450 / 500          450 / 520

---

The SSD 330s certainly doesn't appear to be hobbled at all, despite Intel's apparent value focus. Because they occupy a space one tier below the SSD 520s, these 330s go heads-up against mainstream SSDs like OCZ's Agility 3 and other drives that combine asynchronous flash with SandForce's tech.

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Sandforce is a good controller, I don't think it is a negative that Intel has switched over. For me Size/Price is most important as I've have bought brands that some say are bad and they work perfectly, without flaw! I haven't used OCZ which seem to be considered the worst but I will and I'm sure they will work fine too.

So if you like Intel go with them and the new controller.

As Intel's second SandForce-based drive line-up, the SSD 330s are positioned underneath the SSD 520s as inexpensive performance-oriented alternatives offering SATA 6Gb/s-class performance more affordably. The SSD 330 series is only available at three capacity points: 60, 120, and 180 GB.

The following table allows you to contrast the specifications of Intel's SSD 520 and 330 families, both of which employ second-gen SandForce controllers.

---

Intel SSD 330 / 520

Compressible Performance                (60 GB)            (120 GB)           (180 GB)

========================            ===============     ===============    ===============

4 KB Random Read (IOPS)             12,000 / 15,000     22,500 / 25,000    42,000 / 50,000

4 KB Random Write (IOPS)            20,500 / 23,000     33,000 / 40,000    52,000 / 60,000

128 KB Sequential Read (MB/s)          500 / 550           500 / 550          500 / 550

128 KB Sequential Write (MB/s)         400 / 475           450 / 500          450 / 520

---

The SSD 330s certainly doesn't appear to be hobbled at all, despite Intel's apparent value focus. Because they occupy a space one tier below the SSD 520s, these 330s go heads-up against mainstream SSDs like OCZ's Agility 3 and other drives that combine asynchronous flash with SandForce's tech.

---

Mr-Movies,

I tried a little experiment. I played swap the two Sata III SSDs. Even thought the performance numbers are very similar, the Intel is much faster in the real world. As near as I can figure, it's about 20% faster than the Patriot, not in terms of numbers, but in terms of executing the work! Any time I can save 5 minutes off of a 25 minute encode, just by installing a higher quality and faster SSD drive, I've accomplished something worthwhile! A 20% gain is amazing with such a small time line to start with! It's running at 3.8GHz, and runs as smooth as glass!

I have a problem with my computer set up, and I can't figure out what is causing it. I have the Sata drives set to AHCI mode, but it gives me a message that Windows has detected a Raid array. I didn't install any raid array! Any suggestions?

Best Regards,
Russ

---

Originally posted by shaffaaf:

---

the windows 7/vista delay i never had on my DFI mobo, but all the ASUS boards i have had have had it.

interesting list sam, esp with ASrock being top for failure rates considering asus are their parent company.

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Sandforce is a good controller, I don't think it is a negative that Intel has switched over. For me Size/Price is most important as I've have bought brands that some say are bad and they work perfectly, without flaw! I haven't used OCZ which seem to be considered the worst but I will and I'm sure they will work fine too.

So if you like Intel go with them and the new controller.

As Intel's second SandForce-based drive line-up, the SSD 330s are positioned underneath the SSD 520s as inexpensive performance-oriented alternatives offering SATA 6Gb/s-class performance more affordably. The SSD 330 series is only available at three capacity points: 60, 120, and 180 GB.

The following table allows you to contrast the specifications of Intel's SSD 520 and 330 families, both of which employ second-gen SandForce controllers.

---

Intel SSD 330 / 520

Compressible Performance                (60 GB)            (120 GB)           (180 GB)

========================            ===============     ===============    ===============

4 KB Random Read (IOPS)             12,000 / 15,000     22,500 / 25,000    42,000 / 50,000

4 KB Random Write (IOPS)            20,500 / 23,000     33,000 / 40,000    52,000 / 60,000

128 KB Sequential Read (MB/s)          500 / 550           500 / 550          500 / 550

128 KB Sequential Write (MB/s)         400 / 475           450 / 500          450 / 520

---

The SSD 330s certainly doesn't appear to be hobbled at all, despite Intel's apparent value focus. Because they occupy a space one tier below the SSD 520s, these 330s go heads-up against mainstream SSDs like OCZ's Agility 3 and other drives that combine asynchronous flash with SandForce's tech.

---

Mr-Movies,

I tried a little experiment. I played swap the two Sata III SSDs. Even thought the performance numbers are very similar, the Intel is much faster in the real world. As near as I can figure, it's about 20% faster than the Patriot, not in terms of numbers, but in terms of executing the work! Any time I can save 5 minutes off of a 25 minute encode, just by installing a higher quality and faster SSD drive, I've accomplished something worthwhile! A 20% gain is amazing with such a small time line to start with! It's running at 3.8GHz, and runs as smooth as glass!

I have a problem with my computer set up, and I can't figure out what is causing it. I have the Sata drives set to AHCI mode, but it gives me a message that Windows has detected a Raid array. I didn't install any raid array! Any suggestions?

Best Regards,
Russ

---

That is normal my setup reports the same thing and it is because you are using the RAID controller for your AHCI mode, Windows isn't smart enough to know that you are only using AHCI. Don't worry about that message even though I too find it very annoying.

As to numbers, that is why I always go by tried and true performance and don't get too wrapped up in statistics. I do use statistics and like them so don't get me wrong but you need the big picture in the end and statistics can be lied about and miss-used, on purpose!

Don't fret all is well,
Stevo :D

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by shaffaaf:

---

the windows 7/vista delay i never had on my DFI mobo, but all the ASUS boards i have had have had it.

interesting list sam, esp with ASrock being top for failure rates considering asus are their parent company.

---

shaff,

My first experience with Asrock was in early 2004. My landlord's computer caught fire, and luckily I was home. I walked in the room, just as the drapes lit up! It was an exciting few minutes! LOL!! Anyway, the motherboard he bought was from Asrock, and was a cut above the basic 2 memory slots, socket AM II, DDR2, $39 boards, many are known for selling. Turned it on one morning, and it went "PoP!" I took it over to Asrock (about 45 minutes away), and they exchanged it for a new board. In short, 3 new boards and none lasted the 1 year warranty. The 3 combined didn't last 14 months! I've never had much interest in Asrock since!

Best Regards,
Russ

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Sandforce is a good controller, I don't think it is a negative that Intel has switched over. For me Size/Price is most important as I've have bought brands that some say are bad and they work perfectly, without flaw! I haven't used OCZ which seem to be considered the worst but I will and I'm sure they will work fine too.

So if you like Intel go with them and the new controller.

As Intel's second SandForce-based drive line-up, the SSD 330s are positioned underneath the SSD 520s as inexpensive performance-oriented alternatives offering SATA 6Gb/s-class performance more affordably. The SSD 330 series is only available at three capacity points: 60, 120, and 180 GB.

The following table allows you to contrast the specifications of Intel's SSD 520 and 330 families, both of which employ second-gen SandForce controllers.

---

Intel SSD 330 / 520

Compressible Performance                (60 GB)            (120 GB)           (180 GB)

========================            ===============     ===============    ===============

4 KB Random Read (IOPS)             12,000 / 15,000     22,500 / 25,000    42,000 / 50,000

4 KB Random Write (IOPS)            20,500 / 23,000     33,000 / 40,000    52,000 / 60,000

128 KB Sequential Read (MB/s)          500 / 550           500 / 550          500 / 550

128 KB Sequential Write (MB/s)         400 / 475           450 / 500          450 / 520

---

The SSD 330s certainly doesn't appear to be hobbled at all, despite Intel's apparent value focus. Because they occupy a space one tier below the SSD 520s, these 330s go heads-up against mainstream SSDs like OCZ's Agility 3 and other drives that combine asynchronous flash with SandForce's tech.

---

Mr-Movies,

I tried a little experiment. I played swap the two Sata III SSDs. Even thought the performance numbers are very similar, the Intel is much faster in the real world. As near as I can figure, it's about 20% faster than the Patriot, not in terms of numbers, but in terms of executing the work! Any time I can save 5 minutes off of a 25 minute encode, just by installing a higher quality and faster SSD drive, I've accomplished something worthwhile! A 20% gain is amazing with such a small time line to start with! It's running at 3.8GHz, and runs as smooth as glass!

I have a problem with my computer set up, and I can't figure out what is causing it. I have the Sata drives set to AHCI mode, but it gives me a message that Windows has detected a Raid array. I didn't install any raid array! Any suggestions?

Best Regards,
Russ

---

That is normal my setup reports the same thing and it is because you are using the RAID controller for your AHCI mode, Windows isn't smart enough to know that you are only using AHCI. Don't worry about that message even though I too find it very annoying.

As to numbers, that is why I always go by tried and true performance and don't get too wrapped up in statistics. I do use statistics and like them so don't get me wrong but you need the big picture in the end and statistics can be lied about and miss-used, on purpose!

Don't fret all is well,
Stevo :D

---

Stevo,

It won't let me set up the drive properly using trim, it just repeats the error message but won't let you do anything. Can I re-install the correct driver, or is it a one time only windows install deal?

Best Regards,
Russ

---

Originally posted by Russ from a few days ago:

---

I've been hearing rumblings about hard drive prices going up again, after all these big drive sales are over. I just bought two of these drives from Newegg for $63.99. Came to just over $135, delivered. I went back the next day to buy 4 more, and they were $93.99 each! I passed!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a...#scrollFullInfo

Maybe there is something to that rumor, since the price increased about 50% above the sale price! WD, Enterprise drive, 64 MB cache buffer, 7200 rpm, and a 5 year warranty! What's not to like? :)

Best Regards,
Russ

---

Originally posted by harvardguy:

---

Russ, it sounds like Sam has heard about those drapes on fire. So I'm waiting to hear, was it the PSU, or the Asrock board? LOL

Originally posted by Russ from a few days ago:

---

I've been hearing rumblings about hard drive prices going up again, after all these big drive sales are over. I just bought two of these drives from Newegg for $63.99. Came to just over $135, delivered. I went back the next day to buy 4 more, and they were $93.99 each! I passed!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a...#scrollFullInfo

Maybe there is something to that rumor, since the price increased about 50% above the sale price! WD, Enterprise drive, 64 MB cache buffer, 7200 rpm, and a 5 year warranty! What's not to like? :)

Best Regards,
Russ

---

Hey guys, all of you who discussed this caviar black drive about 6 days ago (sorry for the lag) used the word "enterprise" but I can't find anything indicating the drive is an enterprise drive. I found a caviar blue over at the egg for about $69, but with less cache, at 16MB not 64BM - but still not an enterprise drive.

Enterprise drives, to the best of my memory, support the spindle on both sides rather than just on the bottom, are capable of running at higher temps (up to 50, versus up to 40) have about 1/10th the non recoverable error rate, usually have more platter alignment sensors, are built to higher standards, are supposed to last longer in 24/7 operation, etc. per all my research 18 months ago building a triple raid mirror photo server for my animator buddy, Miles, for his family pictures and videos. I bought two 1TB Enterprise drives that I used in a Raid 1 mirror Cavalry E-Sata external enclosure, for maximum peace of mind, cross my fingers.)

So, again, why do you guys think that Russ bought Enterprise drives?

Like others have said, nice work on that hardware failure chart, Sam. That chart has gone straight to PaperPort for future possible review. (So you're saying that AfterDawn helped you get your current job, and your current boss - way to go!!)

Rich

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by shaffaaf:

---

the windows 7/vista delay i never had on my DFI mobo, but all the ASUS boards i have had have had it.

interesting list sam, esp with ASrock being top for failure rates considering asus are their parent company.

---

shaff,

My first experience with Asrock was in early 2004. My landlord's computer caught fire, and luckily I was home. I walked in the room, just as the drapes lit up! It was an exciting few minutes! LOL!! Anyway, the motherboard he bought was from Asrock, and was a cut above the basic 2 memory slots, socket AM II, DDR2, $39 boards, many are known for selling. Turned it on one morning, and it went "PoP!" I took it over to Asrock (about 45 minutes away), and they exchanged it for a new board. In short, 3 new boards and none lasted the 1 year warranty. The 3 combined didn't last 14 months! I've never had much interest in Asrock since!

Best Regards,
Russ

---

Russ, I'm certain that the drapes on fire instant you told me was an AOpen PSU, not an ASRock motherboard.

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

Originally posted by theonejrs:

---

Originally posted by shaffaaf:

---

the windows 7/vista delay i never had on my DFI mobo, but all the ASUS boards i have had have had it.

interesting list sam, esp with ASrock being top for failure rates considering asus are their parent company.

---

shaff,

My first experience with Asrock was in early 2004. My landlord's computer caught fire, and luckily I was home. I walked in the room, just as the drapes lit up! It was an exciting few minutes! LOL!! Anyway, the motherboard he bought was from Asrock, and was a cut above the basic 2 memory slots, socket AM II, DDR2, $39 boards, many are known for selling. Turned it on one morning, and it went "PoP!" I took it over to Asrock (about 45 minutes away), and they exchanged it for a new board. In short, 3 new boards and none lasted the 1 year warranty. The 3 combined didn't last 14 months! I've never had much interest in Asrock since!

Best Regards,
Russ

---

Russ, I'm certain that the drapes on fire instant you told me was an AOpen PSU, not an ASRock motherboard.

---

That's how I recall it too I just wasn't going to point it out.

---

Originally posted by Mr-Movies:

---

I hate to disagree but like Sam I recall it was a PSU not a motherboard and it sure seems odd that we would both get it wrong....

---

Originally posted by sammorris:

---

I don't mean to be rude, but it was definitely the PSU. It wouldn't ordinarily matter but a brand is being attributed to a major failure (safety hazard, even) on a widely viewed public forum for a fault that occurred in a different component. That's pretty unfair, even if I'm not an ASRock fan myself.
As quite a vivid story I remember the detail (the story may even have originally been on DVDHounds I'm not sure, so I don't know how many others here would know it, but it may well have been repeated since) but you even remarked that the system was still on with the PSU on fire, when you would have expected such a failing to switch off the system, due to where the fault was located. Also, if the fire had been on the motherboard, it would have had to be quite serious to escape the case at right angles and reach drapes behind (which would not be immediately touching the rear fan exhaust anyway), whereas the story told, where the fire came out the rear fan on the PSU into the drapes behind, is very plausible.
It was also your machine, not someone else's.

Motherboard fires do happen I'm sure, but please don't see this as some petty correction of insignificant information. Attributing ASRock to the fire is a pretty major allegation.


Rich - I believe the larger WD Green drives also support the spindle on both sides (although that may have been past models, not sure) but you're right about the URE being 1/10 of that with consumer grade drives - it's 1x10^15 for enterprise, which makes them a lot more viable for bulk data storage in RAID, at least for now.

---