Adding SSD to a 6-year-old desktop?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I see - I guess that's like Samsung "Magician" SW that comes with their SSDs - it has all kinds of tools, looks like, to optimize and tune the SSD etc.
leaning VERY strongly towards the 840 Pro Series right now. (IF i make the jump...)
 
Well, I have the desktop up and running with the Intel SSD 530. So far so good. I still have to install all the apps that I frequently use.

ATTO Disk Benchmark reports sustained transfer speeds of around 270-280 MB/s. That's roughly 4x faster than my old HDD (around 70-80 MB/s) which I'm still using to store some data in this setup.

Things are certainly more snappy, but I'm sure a lot of it is thanks to a clean fresh Windows 7 install.

ssd530_raid.png
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Well, I have the desktop up and running with the Intel SSD 530. So far so good. I still have to install all the apps that I frequently use.

ATTO Disk Benchmark reports sustained transfer speeds of around 270-280 MB/s. That's roughly 4x faster than my old HDD (around 70-80 MB/s) which I'm still using to store some data in this setup.

Things are certainly more snappy, but I'm sure a lot of it is thanks to a clean fresh Windows 7 install.




Your SSD is limited by the Sata 2 connection, but as you see, it is 4x faster than your old HD even being handicapped.

Honestly, the clean W7 install helps, but most of what you are noticing is from the SSD. I've done installs with both at the same time (SSD & clean W7), just a clean W7 install and just an SSD on existing (old install) W7 system, and the SSD improvement is by far the biggest improvement.

Glad to see you are enjoying your results. That should hold you over for a while.
 
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more

SSD's are still a nascent technology and those purchasing them are "early adopters"; and "best bang for the buck" is absolutely the last thing you're going to get.

They're faster, usually, yes; but only, for obvious reasons, on disk-intensive actions. Processing RAW images in Photoshop, for example, may consign your CPU to the role of "bottleneck" and render (no pun intended) your super-fancy SSD operating well below potential (read: wasting your $).

I ran a recording studio for several years recording 24 channels of 24 bit, 96KHz audio; often bi-directionally with a tonne of I/O going both ways. A (quality) 7200rpm HDD is just fine.


We will have to agree to disagree. Yes, to realize the maximum potential of the latest Sata 3 SSDs, the rest of your system has to be up to snuff, but the bottom line is, an SSD drive in any configuration will be a night and day difference compared to a conventional platter drive. I have personally installed or guided friends through installs of over 50 SSD drives and EVERY single owner told me they were blown away by the improvement that the SSD provided over their old regular HDD. These systems range from old dual core to quad cores and all the way through the multiple iterations of I3, I5 & I7 CPUs running anywhere from 1gb of RAM up to 32gb of RAM. So yes, IMO, they are by far the best bang for the buck in the PC component world right now. They are the only PC component upgrade that, without fail, makes people say "WOW" or other words I can't type here.

Ironically enough, you know what customers talk about the most? How happy they are with the boot times. They don't have to go make a snack while waiting for the system to boot up. They like the snappiness of everything, but they seem to comment more about the boot times. I guess they are the most noticeable improvement.

Before the SSDs came down to the price levels they are now (roughly 50 cents per gig), most people couldn't justify the price, but now it's a no brainer. It was easy with desktops, because you could buy a small SSD for your OS and programs, and keep your platter drive for your data. You could even do that with a laptop if you were willing to sacrifice your optical drive bay, but most people didn't want to mess with it. It still makes more sense to have a dual setup, but most people now use laptops and want everything on one drive.

SSds are also a great stop gap as the OP has noticed. They will let you breathe new life into an old less than ideal spec system and enjoy the benefits now, but when he decides to upgrade, he can just put it in the new rig and see the full potential of the drive when it isn't bottle necked by it's connection.


Anyways, a recording studio huh? That sounds like a very cool job. I'm sure it wasn't all fun and games though. A lot of those musicians can be Prima donnas!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
Originally Posted By: Zeus33
To the OP: YES, an SSD will give you a very noticeable improvement and provides the biggest bang for the buck in PC parts today.


SSD's are still a nascent technology and those purchasing them are "early adopters"; and "best bang for the buck" is absolutely the last thing you're going to get.

They're faster, usually, yes; but only, for obvious reasons, on disk-intensive actions. Processing RAW images in Photoshop, for example, may consign your CPU to the role of "bottleneck" and render (no pun intended) your super-fancy SSD operating well below potential (read: wasting your $).

I ran a recording studio for several years recording 24 channels of 24 bit, 96KHz audio; often bi-directionally with a tonne of I/O going both ways. A (quality) 7200rpm HDD is just fine.



Cant argue with somebody like this ^^^^^ guy that "thinks" he knows what he is talking about. Its not just all about raw transfer speeds. With a platter drive the needle has to zip back and forth to read the data and that takes time. The data is instant with an SSD and that is why everybody loves them. You click on something and it opens NOW and not 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 seconds later. Windows loads up super fast and is usable NOW the second you reach the windows screen. It makes ALL computers feel super zippy even antique computers that still only have SATA II ports. Plus they have been out for years now and its not some new fangled technology. They are very reliable and have a long life much longer than a platter drive.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: ToyotaNSaturn
QP, in the BIOS, switch drive mode from legacy or ATA to AHCI. This is important.

I do not have an AHCI option in BIOS. My only options are IDE or RAID.

And this is already the latest version of BIOS that Dell provides for this machine.


My desktop doesn't have AHCI as well.
So I added this card SATA III, PCI-E x1
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B0A6ZS/
and ran SSD off it.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: kb27
My desktop doesn't have AHCI as well.
So I added this card SATA III, PCI-E x1
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B0A6ZS/
and ran SSD off it.

But how does that overcome the lack of AHCI in BIOS?

Anyway, PCI-E x1 is only 2.5 Gbps, so that's less than SATA II speed.

It doesn't overcome the lack of AHCI in BIOS as I think this may have to do with a chipset function.
The card just allows you to run AHCI mode for the SSD.

I remember doing some numbers and the SSD run much faster than directly connected to the board SATA II

Also, at a low price of $20, it gives me extra SATA connections.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: kb27
My desktop doesn't have AHCI as well.
So I added this card SATA III, PCI-E x1
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005B0A6ZS/
and ran SSD off it.

But how does that overcome the lack of AHCI in BIOS?

Anyway, PCI-E x1 is only 2.5 Gbps, so that's less than SATA II speed.

It IS NOT about raw transfer speed. Unless you do a ton of encoding or copying or file moving you will never max out the bus speed. Never.

AHCI dictates the method the peripheral speaks to the HBA. It works best when both devices are using their native AHCI language as it's optimized for high speed transfers.

It is faster to attached an AHCI HBA to a theoretically "slower" BUS connection than it is to use a "faster" native connection but force the peripheral into using IDE translation. The bottleneck is the translation!
 
Originally Posted By: Zeus33
Anyways, a recording studio huh? That sounds like a very cool job. I'm sure it wasn't all fun and games though. A lot of those musicians can be Prima donnas!


You hit the nail on the head, there! I was running a smaller studio (I charged $450/ day) and it was an education to see how the characteristics of a prima donna are in no way inhibited by a hitherto total lack of success of any kind. I put my equipment under covers when my first daughter came along 6.5 years ago but got to have a good 15 years or so of great fun!

Thanks for your thoughtful rebuttal: I am certainly in agreement that SSD's are the storage media of the future and their myriad advantages are indisputable. What I do happen to dispute, though, is their usefulness in systems where they'd not be the bottleneck of performance (read: old computers). Of course, this opinion does not factor in any given person's specific uses, their budget, nor their computing priorities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top