BF2S Forums SSD/HDD benchmark

Finray wrote:

I actually get the speeds the benchmark said.. I'm really pleased with these drives.


http://static.bf2s.com/files/user/33829/transfer.PNG

(Yeah it's a bit off 120mB/s but it started at 112 and went down to that.. That seemed the stable speed).

25% off 120 MB/s.

My F2 gets 90MB/s - you should expect more from an F3 - but I suppose it's only 500GB. These small drives do tend to be slower.

Finray wrote:

Show me a hard-drive that gets the same everyday speeds as a benchmark cranks out of it and I shall show you a blue plucked chicken.

Mine typically outperform my benchmark scores.

Example - with a Spinpoint F2 since that's what I mentioned earlier:




(Started on 115MB/s, dipped to 90MB/s ended on 100MB/s) and that drive is 50% full. Read speeds are all we're looking at here - copying to an SSD RAID array to eliminate any bias from slowdown of destination drive.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2010-03-01 12:55:00)

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

Is there any reference to how accurately windows shows the read speed? I mean it could be just Windows over exaggerating things like usual.

It's exactly the same method he used, so the margin of error should be comparable.

Bertster7 wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

Is there any reference to how accurately windows shows the read speed? I mean it could be just Windows over exaggerating things like usual.

It's exactly the same method he used, so the margin of error should be comparable.

Yeah but just wondering how accurate it is in general. In the past Windows has been notorious for telling fairy tales about read and write speeds.

Last edited by GC_PaNzerFIN (2010-03-01 13:15:50)

Samsung Spinpoint F1 320GB 16MB Cache with AHCI Enabled in BIOS.
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit.

intel x25 - m



i've got a 74gb raptor that i had a pagefile on, and used it for a photoshop scratch disk.

Last edited by burnzz (2011-03-03 06:30:35)

That seems like a lot of wear for such little a time and such expensive an item.

JahManRed wrote:

Im thinking of getting an ssd. My pc is really struggling with arma2. I am getting 7.9 on everything in the windows experence thingy, but getting 5.1 on my HD which is a western digital caviar 500gb. On paper my pc is top spec and should run arma2 on full settings no probs. But I hear HD access is a major thing in arma2. Anyone have an ssd and arma2 can tell me if their is a big improvment in graphics smoothness by getting an ssd?

I have an SSD and I can say that the only difference it made is loading times. I still can't turn off Vsync (even when I force it off in CCC) so I get a constant 60fps and shitty mouse lag despite the fact I have a high end PC that should be getting  good fps.

Last edited by Little BaBy JESUS (2011-03-05 23:44:59)

Finray wrote:

In theory it should aid texture loading times, but I suspect the majority of that would happen when loading. Worth buying one if you've got the cash, no matter if you have a problem or not.

I bought some really fast ram which didnt make a difference. I hear that an ssd helps texture loading in ARMA2 which is my problem.

Bearing in mind that Arma 2 textures are, well, fucking gigantic, it probably would help.

TimmmmaaaaH wrote:

Only issue is having to constantly rotate what games I have on there because it gets filled up.

This is why I don't want to get one. I'm out of room on my 250GB partition on my 1TB HDD, seriously considering expanding it.

Last edited by Finray (2011-03-08 08:10:34)

Finray wrote:

Bearing in mind that Arma 2 textures are, well, fucking gigantic, it probably would help.

TimmmmaaaaH wrote:

Only issue is having to constantly rotate what games I have on there because it gets filled up.

This is why I don't want to get one. I'm out of room on my 250GB partition on my 1TB HDD, seriously considering expanding it.

Yeh, I dont even have the majority of my games on there. Steam almost has its own harddrive at this point. I just put games on there I am currently playing (using linked folders so steam thinks they are on the other drive) or dont want to move back and forth (generally non steam games like Starcraft 2 or MMO's).

You really start noticing how much space things like temporary files take up.

It is all worth it though :p

OCZSSDPX PCI-E 120GB in PCI-E



Mirrored WD1002FAEX 1TB 7200 RPM

burnzz wrote:

i feel for you people, that never spent $250 on a eighty megabyte hard drive . . . i've learned file management, where you guys just run off and buy more storage . . .

I don't go that far back but far enough back that file management was a necessity as storage space was pretty expensive (relative to the time period) and I love the fact that I no longer have to deal with that.  Occasionally over the last 4-5 years I've run into times where my needs out weighed my storage, but a quick upgrade (usually $100 or less, only drive I paid more for was my 74 gig raptor that I later traded for a 320 gig drive) does me good for a couple years usually.  I did have to go through some steps to get my SSD set up right and save some space but it has everything but my games on it and is less than half full with just over 51GB formatted space.