Page 1 of 1

SSD in T61p

Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:40 am
by radiodavid
I am tempted to order the OCZ OCZSSD2-1C128G Core Series which is a SATA II 128 gig solid state drive to replace the mechanical drive in my T61p.

I travel over 150,000 miles a year, so avoiding mechanical devices is an objective. I have upgraded drives before, so the cloning is not an issue but compatibility and operability is. I'll be losing capacity, but having an SSD is very appealing.

Has anyone put an SSD in a T61 series? Any advice or caveat?

Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 12:02 pm
by Johan
You may try Search this forum for e.g. "SSD" (and) "T61" and see what comes up - one hit being the thread SSD for my T61 (pic).

Johan

Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 12:33 pm
by radiodavid
Johan wrote:You may try Search this forum for e.g. "SSD" (and) "T61" and see what comes up - one hit being the thread SSD for my T61 (pic).

Johan
That link is a big help. It appears that at least one brand does install and easily. The OCZ's, at under $500 after rebates, are close to a good price point for a 128 gig laptop drive, but they are so new that there seems to be no "real world" experience with them. I expect one tomorrow or Friday, and will see how it performs... althogh power consumption and lack of heads and platters are my main interests in going SSD.

Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 8:00 pm
by radiodavid
After the fact report. I put the (former) boot drive, the Hitachi 7K200 in the hard drive bay adapter, put the new OCZ Core 128 gig SSD in the internal drive bay, booted to the 7K200 and used Acronis 11 to clone Hitachi to the SSD.

After the cloning, I removed the drive bay adapter, and rebooted to the SSD. No annoying message about the drive not being the right kind, and it booted. I have no timing for before and after, but this is what I last saw going from an 8088 to a 286 (the replacement card on a Compaq Lunchbox). Obviously, it is quiet. I will try some battery 100% to 5% checks, as it should extend the life of the battery.

Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 11:29 pm
by phr
The newegg reviews indicate that the OCZ Core is quite slow at random writing or at mixed reading and writing. If you are trying to accelerate a database (say), you have to get one of the more expensive models, or maybe the Samsung or Mtron. I believe the more expensive OCZ is actually a rebranded Samsung. The Mtron high end model is the fastest of all, but much more expensive.

I have an OCZ Core 64gb in my T61p.

Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 8:36 am
by mybellyisempty
It opens files faster than my quad core w/ 8gb RAM and a 250gb 7200rpm OS drive, if that's of any use.

Also, this is while the laptop is running at its slowest speed.

I'm not sure how much of an improvement it's giving me, I don't think boot times have changed all that much, but then I never measured my old one, but the system does generally feel snappier.

They're releasing a 2nd revision of the Core in 30gb, 60gb, 120gb, and 240gb sizes. Supposedly, these fix issues had with the older version of the Core.


Actually, I just realized that I can bench all my drives.

The 7k200 200gb I replaced with the 64gb SSD is in my HP now.

Lenovo:
The Core gave me:
Random Access: 0.5ms
CPU utlization: 9%
Avg Read: 74MB/S
Max was about 87MB/S
Minimum was about 67MB/S

The WD 320gb 5400rpm gave me:
Random Access: 16.8ms
CPU utlization: 10%
Avg Read: 52.0MB/S
Max was about 63MB/S
Minimum was about 34MB/S



HP:
The 7k200 gave me:
Random Access: 14.9ms
CPU utlization: 18%
Avg Read: 52.8MB/S
Max was about 68MB/S
Minimum was about 32MB/S

The WD 160gb 5400rpm gave me:
Random Access: 17.8ms
CPU utlization: 11%
Avg Read: 39.5MB/S
Max was about 52MB/S
Minimum was about 26MB/S


Desktop:
Seagate 250gb 7200 OS drive gave me:
Random Access: 13.1ms
CPU utlization: 2%
Avg Read: 56.1MB/S
Max was about 67MB/S
Minimum was about 27MB/S

Samsung 320gb 7200 Games drive gave me:
Random Access: 16.2ms
CPU utlization: 4%
Avg Read: 66MB/S
Max was about 84MB/S
Minimum was about 40MB/S

Seagate 500gb 7200 Storage drive gave me (I have 2, will assume same data:)
Random Access: 13.2ms
CPU utlization: 4%
Avg Read: 65.3MB/S
Max was about 82MB/S
Minimum was about 38MB/S


Kind of surprised by how fast the Samsung 320gb was, and how slow the WD 160gb was

Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:01 am
by phr
I'd be interested in seeing random (not serial) read and write speeds for the Core if your benchmark program can measure those.

Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:03 am
by pksw
I am waiting for the second generation of the OCZ drives that mybellyisempty has referred to.

Retailers in Australia have dropped the price of the old stock in preparation for the new drives.

If you can hang on, wait a month.