X200 Hard Drive -- SSD question

X200, X201, X220 (including equivalent tablet models) and X300, X301 series specific matters only.
Post Reply
Message
Author
dynamicnet
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Denver, Pennsylvania
Contact:

X200 Hard Drive -- SSD question

#1 Post by dynamicnet » Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:37 pm

Greetings:

At $830.00 over the "80GB Hard Disk Drive, 5400rpm" default hard drive option, what advantages does a 64 GB hard drive have over any of the other choices?

If I go with Vista Business 64-bit, how much disk space will the operating system use?

If I went with a 7200rpm hard drive, how much faster is SSD?

For those who have already purchased an X300 or an X200 with SSD, how do you like the hard drive?

Other than being a no-moving parts hard drive, does SSD bring any other benefits to justify the increased cost?

Thank you.
Peter M. Abraham
Dynamic Net, Inc.

awolfe63
ThinkPadder
ThinkPadder
Posts: 1155
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 9:41 pm
Location: Los Gatos, CA

#2 Post by awolfe63 » Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:03 pm

The primary performance benefit is when accessing many small files (such as boot up) An SSD can be 5-10 times faster in that environment.
Andrew Wolfe

akao
Sophomore Member
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 7:21 pm
Location: Los Angeles

#3 Post by akao » Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:47 pm

Very much enjoy it. Makes the X300 with it's slow CPU, extremely zippy. Launches applications faster than my Desktop (7200RPM, Quad 2.4). I do not dread rebooting my computer, even when it's on battery power.

Limited space is a big issue, especially with Vista keeping multiple versions of dll's. If the 128GB is SLC and has comparable performance, I suggest getting that.

Supermans
Freshman Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:12 pm
Location: Miami, Florida

#4 Post by Supermans » Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:08 am

awolfe63 wrote:The primary performance benefit is when accessing many small files (such as boot up) An SSD can be 5-10 times faster in that environment.
I was one of the lucky ones that got the 64GB SSD as an option free when I placed an order during a price mistake debacle which Lenovo honored. Space would be the only issue of concern if you need more than 64GB on your laptop. Apparently Lenovo is using the best SSD drive available and it is priced the highest when compared to the rest. However read the entire article below which compares all the brands available in actual tests and the Samsung comes out on top by far..


I suggest reading this article below which was posted August 18th and will answer all of your questions..

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fla ... 000-8.html

Samsung was one of the first manufacturers that contacted us once we wrote about the flash SSD Hoax. While well-designed flash-based solid state drives are both faster and more efficient than conventional hard drives, the majority of drives available are not (yet). Samsung, in fact, had good reason to submit its latest 64 GB flash SSD to us for review, as it is the only drive that truly combines high performance with amazing efficiency.

We first wrote about OCZ’s 64 GB SATAII SSD in our flash SSD Update instead of the Samsung drive, but mainly because the OCZ product, which is a Samsung white label, arrived at our test lab before the Samsung sample. At the same time, Samsung does not officially sell its Flash SSD at retail, preferring to provide the drives to system builders.

The performance results of the 2.5” 64 GB SSD SATA-2 are very much in line with what we measured for the OCZ 64 GB SATAII SSD, as both are based on the latest Samsung hardware. There is 90 MB/s read and write throughput as well as idle and peak power of 0.2 W and 0.8 W, respectively. I/O performance is acceptable, and application performance is at great levels as well. If you want to get the best flash SSD solution available, this is it.


Samsung’s 64 GB SSD SATA-2 drive provides high performance at superior energy efficiency and, as a result, receives the Best of Tom’s award, along with OCZ’s 64 GB SATAII SSD, which is also based on Samsung hardware.
The best things in life are free

Soon coming - Thinkpad X200 with FREE 64GB SSD :)

awolfe63
ThinkPadder
ThinkPadder
Posts: 1155
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 9:41 pm
Location: Los Gatos, CA

#5 Post by awolfe63 » Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:18 pm

Any idea if OCZ is coming out with a 128GB SLC as well?
Andrew Wolfe

Supermans
Freshman Member
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:12 pm
Location: Miami, Florida

#6 Post by Supermans » Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:30 pm

awolfe63 wrote:Any idea if OCZ is coming out with a 128GB SLC as well?
Whatever Samsung comes out with, OCZ will too..
The best things in life are free

Soon coming - Thinkpad X200 with FREE 64GB SSD :)

dynamicnet
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 9:36 am
Location: Denver, Pennsylvania
Contact:

#7 Post by dynamicnet » Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:19 am

Greetings:

Does the type of SSD drive used in the Thinkpad X200 have the same disadvantages as listed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_state_drive (not including the price issue)?

Thank you.
Peter M. Abraham
Dynamic Net, Inc.

awolfe63
ThinkPadder
ThinkPadder
Posts: 1155
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 9:41 pm
Location: Los Gatos, CA

#8 Post by awolfe63 » Thu Aug 28, 2008 11:29 am

Some of the Wikipedia comments are driven by the use of DRAM-based and Flash based SSDs in datacenters - not laptops.


# Capacity – currently far lower than that of conventional hard drives (SSD capacity is predicted to increase rapidly, with experimental drives of up to 1 TB in tests.[13][14])
Well - you know the capacity - 64GB and 128GB - either it is enough or it is not.
# Higher vulnerability to certain types of effects, including abrupt power loss (especially DRAM based SSDs), magnetic fields and electric/static charges, in comparison to normal HDDs (which store the data inside a Faraday cage).[dubious – discuss]
1) this is quite dubious. Both magnetic hard drives and flash based hard drives can lose data in a power loss. I'm not aware of any substantial difference. Of course, in a Thinkpad, you have battery back up for AC power loss.

2) most of these issues are unique to DRAM - not Flash.
# Limited write cycles – flash-memory cells will often wear out after 10,000-100,000 write cycles[citation needed], while high endurance cells may have an endurance of 1–5 million write cycles (many log files, file allocation tables, and other commonly used parts of the file system exceed this over the lifetime of a computer.[15] Special file systems or firmware designs can mitigate this problem by spreading writes over the entire device (so-called wear levelling), rather than rewriting files in place.[16] Today's drives can last up to 20 years with average usage.[dubious – discuss] An example for the lifetime of SSD is explained in detail in this wiki.[dubious – discuss] SSDs based on DRAM, however, do not suffer from this problem.
All laptop flash drives have substantial wear leveling - but this is a risk, especially if you get a malicious or broken program that keeps writing to the drive. SSD endurance is less than magnetic disk - but it is not yet very clear if this is a real-world problem.
# Slower write speeds – as erase blocks on flash-based SSDs generally are quite large, they are far slower than conventional disks for random writes and therefore vulnerable to write fragmentation,[17] and in some cases for sequential writes.[8] SSDs based on DRAM do not suffer from this problem.
Again - this is primarily a database issue. For the way most people use laptops - reading and writing files in large chunks - this is not an issue. Large hard drives use large sectors as well.

# Lower storage density – hard disks can store more data per unit volume than DRAM or flash SSDs, except for very low capacity/small devices.
Perhaps this is hypothetically true - but practically the SSD one would use in a Thinkpad is smaller and lighter than the hard disk one would use in a Thinkpad.
# Higher power consumption at idle or under low workloads laptop battery runtimes decrease when using an SSD over a 7200 RPM 2.5" laptop hard drive,[18] flash drives also take more power per gigabyte.
This has been observed. 2.5" hard drive power management is very mature. I think that the power management on some SSDs is simply poorly implemented and will get better over time. It is a minor effect.

Hard drive power is not very highly correlated with storage capacity.
* RAM based SSD require more power than hard disks, both operating and when turned off.[19]

Not important to a Thinkpad.
Andrew Wolfe

loyukfai
ThinkPadder
ThinkPadder
Posts: 1085
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 2:08 pm
Location: Hong Kong

#9 Post by loyukfai » Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:57 pm

awolfe63 wrote:
# Slower write speeds – as erase blocks on flash-based SSDs generally are quite large, they are far slower than conventional disks for random writes and therefore vulnerable to write fragmentation,[17] and in some cases for sequential writes.[8] SSDs based on DRAM do not suffer from this problem.
Again - this is primarily a database issue. For the way most people use laptops - reading and writing files in large chunks - this is not an issue. Large hard drives use large sectors as well.
I beg to differ on this... Even though the users may handle only large files, Windows itself have lots of small read & write operations (e.g. registry, logs)...

Sorry that I don't have figures on hand.

But then, most recent SSD seem to have improved controllers which speed-up random write operations considerably... Together with caching, and much much faster access time for flash, the performance impact may not be noticeable to end-users at all through.

Unsure about other OS...

jaytv111
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 7:09 pm
Location: Troy, NY

#10 Post by jaytv111 » Tue Sep 09, 2008 10:50 pm

loyukfai wrote:
awolfe63 wrote: Again - this is primarily a database issue. For the way most people use laptops - reading and writing files in large chunks - this is not an issue. Large hard drives use large sectors as well.
I beg to differ on this... Even though the users may handle only large files, Windows itself have lots of small read & write operations (e.g. registry, logs)...

Sorry that I don't have figures on hand.

But then, most recent SSD seem to have improved controllers which speed-up random write operations considerably... Together with caching, and much much faster access time for flash, the performance impact may not be noticeable to end-users at all through.

Unsure about other OS...
consult this article for further reading on MLC SSD's and SLC SSD's: http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/ ... i=3403&p=7
basically non-Intel MLC SSD's have a performance (lag) issue, which SLC and Intel's new MLC drives don't.

nesnet
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Upstate NY

#11 Post by nesnet » Wed Sep 10, 2008 6:34 am

Count me as another satisfied user of the Samsung 64GB SSD. In conjunction with a T8600 2.4GHz processor in the X200, it provides a great user experience. And the fan is never on.

Another "Samsung only" review not yet cited is:

http://www.geek.com/review-samsung-64gb-ssd/
Active: T400 2764CTO, X300 6476CTO, X61 7675CTO
Sold: X200 7454CTO, T61p 6459CTO, T60p 8741C3U

Puppy
Senior ThinkPadder
Senior ThinkPadder
Posts: 2217
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:52 am
Location: Prague, Czech Republic

#12 Post by Puppy » Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:37 pm

Is possible to use any other brand than Samsung safely ? I'm asking it because of famous BIOS problems with T43/R52 and certain drives.
ThinkPad (1992 - 2012): R51, X31, X220, Tablet 8

erik
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3592
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: United States

#13 Post by erik » Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:43 pm

Puppy wrote:Is possible to use any other brand than Samsung safely ? I'm asking it because of famous BIOS problems with T43/R52 and certain drives.
any brand SSD will work.   the BIOS limitations are only with the T43 and R52.

i have a samsung 64GB SLC SSD (same as in the X300) in my X61T and it works perfectly fine.   i tried crucial and mtron but the samsung is by far the fastest.
ThinkStation P700 · C20 | ThinkPad P40 · 600

jketzetera
Sophomore Member
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:29 pm
Location: Sydney Australia

#14 Post by jketzetera » Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:21 am

erik wrote:
Puppy wrote:Is possible to use any other brand than Samsung safely ? I'm asking it because of famous BIOS problems with T43/R52 and certain drives.
any brand SSD will work.   the BIOS limitations are only with the T43 and R52.

i have a samsung 64GB SLC SSD (same as in the X300) in my X61T and it works perfectly fine.   i tried crucial and mtron but the samsung is by far the fastest.
Well, no surprise that the Samsung blows the Crucial away but I am a bit surprised that you found it much better than the Mtron. The Samsung's performance must be really awesome.

erik
moderator
moderator
Posts: 3592
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: United States

#15 Post by erik » Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:37 am

jketzetera wrote:Well, no surprise that the Samsung blows the Crucial away but I am a bit surprised that you found it much better than the Mtron. The Samsung's performance must be really awesome.
the mtron i had was an engineering sample at 16GB with SLC chips.   it performed very close to the samsung but was slightly behind across the board by about 8%, possibly due to the controller chip.   new mtron drives may be better.

feel free to send me one and i'll test it back to back with my samsung. :D
ThinkStation P700 · C20 | ThinkPad P40 · 600

jketzetera
Sophomore Member
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:29 pm
Location: Sydney Australia

#16 Post by jketzetera » Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:45 pm

Yep. I am putting it in a (manilla) envelope as I am typing this ;-)

Hudson
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 8:14 pm
Location: Tampa, FL

#17 Post by Hudson » Mon Oct 06, 2008 10:48 am

Is having the SSD really an advantage that is worth the cost? I haven't had any problems with my other hard drives, I was going to opt for the SSD on my x200 but I couldn't justify the cost to the need. :?:
Regrets are a waste of time, they are the past hindering us in the present. (Unknown)
Macbook Pro 15" 2.4 Ghz 2gb Ram, 200Gb
Thinkpad X200 160gb, 3gb RAM, 2.4 Ghz

dfumento
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 891
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:27 pm
Location: Manhattan, NY

#18 Post by dfumento » Tue Oct 07, 2008 3:49 am

Hudson wrote:Is having the SSD really an advantage that is worth the cost? I haven't had any problems with my other hard drives, I was going to opt for the SSD on my x200 but I couldn't justify the cost to the need. :?:
Unless you need much better performance, it isn't worth the cost. If you're looking for better battery life, you might consider the X200s with the lower powered CPU and LED backlit display both of which add to battery life much more than an SSD hard drive.
X201s: 1440x900 LED backlit 2.13 GHz, 8 GB, 160 GB Intel X25-M Gen 2 SSD, 6200 a/b/g/n, BT, 6-cell, 9-cell, Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1, Verizon 4G LTE USB modem, USB 2.0 external optical drive, Lenovo USB to DVI converter
Previous Models: A21p, A30p, A31p, T42, X41T, X60s, X61s, X200s

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “ThinkPad X200/201/220 and X300/301 Series”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests