This post to ask if anybody has tried the 2.5" PATA "OWC Mercury Legacy Pro SSD in a ThinkPad T42 and if so with what results?

According to the specifications this 2.5" PATA SSD is using the "SandForce processor [controller] with full SF1200 Series 7% Over Provisioning firmware set" and also is has "Advanced TRIM Support in Windows 7" which makes it (potentially) interesting. The drive is based on MLC technology.

A thread over at the Notebook Review forum is discussing this drive --> here.

Johan

Yes, I have bought an OWC ssd for a few months ago to my T42. I've installed WinXP from the original recovery disks and used the computer as normal.

The earlier HDD was a Seagate Momentus 7200.1, and it was replaced by 60GB OWC Mercury Legacy Pro Pata/Ide.
I was suprised that the Momentus was so loud HDD. Now the computer is basically silent, with lowered CPU voltage by NHC.

Here are some results:
HD Tune: ST910021A Benchmark
Transfer Rate Minimum : 19.8 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Maximum : 46.9 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Average : 38.6 MB/sec
Access Time : 15.1 ms
Burst Rate : 71.7 MB/sec
CPU Usage : 3.6%

HD Tune: OWC Mercury Legacy P Benchmark
Transfer Rate Minimum : 70.5 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Maximum : 79.5 MB/sec
Transfer Rate Average : 78.2 MB/sec
Access Time : 0.1 ms
Burst Rate : 69.7 MB/sec
CPU Usage : 8.6%

I'm pretty happy to the OWC hdd, even though it was expensive. But it was probably the easiest option to install a SSD.

Hi Patrik,

could you run an AS-SSD benchmark and post here the results ?

As it is random performance that counts most, AS-SSD depicts in a better way the performance of SSD's.

I own a Photofast G-Monster 2.5" IDE V2 60 GB and maybe considering to get an OWC Legacy Pro

Thank You

Interesting find Johan, thanks. I missed this one completely.
Looks like a hassle free solution for an IDE PATA SSD.

@Patrik28: a few more benchmarks depicting the 4k performance would be really helpful.
one more disk benchmark program
Crystal Disk Mark

Here are Crystal results:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
Seagate ST910021A
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 38.320 MB/s
Sequential Write : 37.811 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 20.120 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 21.289 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 0.323 MB/s [ 78.9 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 0.523 MB/s [ 127.6 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 0.529 MB/s [ 129.3 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 0.558 MB/s [ 136.2 IOPS]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
OWC Mercury Legacy Pro SSD
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 83.128 MB/s
Sequential Write : 54.319 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 82.214 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 53.271 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 14.022 MB/s [ 3423.5 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 9.373 MB/s [ 2288.3 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 15.202 MB/s [ 3711.3 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 10.036 MB/s [ 2450.2 IOPS]

@ Patrik28:

Thanks very much for sharing this information - very interesting!

Compared to the Intel 320-series 1.8" SATA SSD used under XP in a T42p as reported in this post (which is using the 1.8"-SATA-to-2.5"-IDE/PATA-eBay-adapter also discussed in the thread 1.8" SATA to 2.5" IDE converter? see specifically e.g. in this post and onwards), the 2.5" PATA OWC Mercury Legacy Pro SSD however appears to be significantly slower, especially when it comes to the write-speed...

In the 2.5" PATA OWC Mercury Legacy Pro SSD websheet much higher speeds are claimed...?! It could be very interesting to see what speed the Mac-people (for which the OWC PATA SSD is not the least intended for) report in actual use for the OWC SSD? Note: I don't know if T42's and Mac's can be directly compared (owing to perhaps differences in bus speed/bandwidth, RAM speed and CPU and OS etc.).

Johan

I quess that the speed differences may be caused by misaligment.

The IBM recovery program probably didn't align the SSD and I don't know if the aligment can be done afterwards.

If someone knows, how to align the SSD after Windows XP installation, I would be glad. (and re-run the test).

Paragon Alignment Tool 3.0 maybe a possible solution - Has anyone tried this software?

I did, and it royally effed up my hard drive!
I wouldn't touch Paragon's crapware with a 50-foot barge pole

Even though the timings might be a bit slower, than what others have measured,
the numbers seem fast enough to me. I would not change anything as long as it
appears sufficiently fast for yourself and it does not have any intermittent freezes.

You could download a free trial version of Argus Monitor,
which displays some alignment info in its "Drives - Information" sub menu.

The speed-issue won't bother me. It is the lifetime, since I have read different stories, that non-aligned SSD will wear 2x faster. And Windows XP already is not the SSD frendliest system.

OWC however advertises, that it has some special wear-management system on the disk. It is too early to say if it works, but surely the disk should last its 3 years warranty period at least.

What comes to aligning, one option is availeble too. I could format the SSD with my other computer (Win7) and let the system align the disk (Win7 can automatically do that).
But does somebody know, if WinXP can be installed from "IBM rescue and recovery cd's" to an existing partition? Normally the recovery program creates hidden + system partitions and that destroys the alignment. Recovery-cd's are my only copy of XP (+ there are drivers ready on the cd's).

Good point.
You could create a backup and then restore to properly aligned partitions.
I used Acronis True Image Home 2012 with lots of bugs/hassels. Others wrote
that EaseUS® Partition Master Home (Free) is supposed to be better (not verified by my own experience yet).

But in first place, what are your actual alignment values? (Argus Montior, GPartEd Live CD/USB)
Could OWC-support be of any help? Do they offer analysis tools?

I had the same problem with Acer's Recovery Cds. It was a totally automatic procedure that the user could not interfere and resulted in a misaligned OS.

I tried this guide only one time, with no success, but i think i did something wrong in the procedure, others did it successfully. Maybe you could try.

Two other useful guides for doing that are in Crucial's and in OCZ's Forums, but some links are dead. You can use them for user feedback only (i think method is the same).

I solved my problem by re-installing XP Home, by injecting my XP Keys from my recovery discs into an XP Home iso i found. No activation required, since it is using my legit keys.

EDIT :

Here is an old CrystalDiskMark

I wish i can get this or better numbers with OWC

Argus shows:
Start sector 63
Alignment: 32KB 64KB 128KB

msinfo32 shows:
Partition starting offset: 32256 Bytes

I don't know what Argus means, but I have understood that the "Partition starting offset" should be divisible exact with 4096. Now it isn't, 32256/4096 = 63/8 = 7.875
OWC probably don't have own alignment software, I have to ask that from customer service.

Hi Patrik28,
I have now aligned my Intel 320 with GPartEd 0.10, by using auto align to 1MiB.
Only sequential Read/Write speeds returned to the values of first day benchmarks.
The 4k performance was not changed significantly.
Only time will tell, if this alignment was of real benefit.

See the results of Crystal Disk Mark 3
Intel 320 1.8inch after partition aligment

Hello, again!

Finally I got a chance to align my OWC Mercury SSD with another Win7-computer.
Then I had to find a retail Win XP CD, because that crappy Rescue-and-Recovery partition and CD's messed up the alignment.

But here are the improved (write-) results.
Looks like the aligment really does matter: inside the brackets are the non-aligned values from the post #5.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
OWC Mercury Legacy Pro SSD - Aligned
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sequential Read : 82.761 MB/s.......................................(was: 83.128 MB/s)
Sequential Write : 65.704 MB/s......................................(was: 54.319 MB/s)
Random Read 512KB : 81.231 MB/s..................................(was: 82.214 MB/s)
Random Write 512KB : 66.167 MB/s.................................(was: 53.271 MB/s)
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 13.203 MB/s [ 3223.4 IOPS]..........(was: 14.022 MB/s)
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 24.910 MB/s [ 6081.6 IOPS].........(was: 9.373 MB/s)
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 15.887 MB/s [ 3878.6 IOPS]........(was: 15.202 MB/s )
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 36.353 MB/s [ 8875.4 IOPS].......(was: 10.036 MB/s)

My results with the same drive on a 2003 X31 1.4 GHz
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 81.430 MB/s
Sequential Write : 55.226 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 80.084 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 72.771 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 14.283 MB/s [ 3486.9 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 27.725 MB/s [ 6768.7 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 16.656 MB/s [ 4066.4 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 35.035 MB/s [ 8553.6 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [C: 31.1% (11.5/37.2 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2012/01/28 12:25:37
OS : Windows 7 SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x86)