Prev: Password protected laptop HDDs?
Next: Supermicro C2SEA problems with Windows 7
From: Paul on 1 Jul 2010 09:54
~misfit~ wrote:

>>
>> Note that those are not a "perfect solution", as Molex
>> has +5V, +12V, while SATA has +3.3V, +5V, +12V. But currently,
>> there are very few SATA devices operating from 3.3V, so you
>> don't have anything to worry about today.
>
> It's my understanding that the 3.3V is only needed for true hot-swapping of
> SATA HDDs such as when they're used in a RAID array. I could be wrong
> though, I haven't Googled it. :-)

There are some SATA flash drives that use 3.3V. Those are the only
ones I've see comments about. I've noticed some reviews on Newegg,
where the drive wasn't getting power, and it was because the person
was using one of those Molex adapters (which doesn't have 3.3V).

http://www.microsatacables.com/

It seems to be a micro SATA thing, at least in this example.

http://ssd.toshiba.com/SSD-product-guide.html

Paul
From: Gerard Bok on 1 Jul 2010 13:48
On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 08:49:03 -0400, Paul <nospam(a)needed.com>
wrote:

>Gerard Bok wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 23:42:48 -0500, "Tiziano"
>> <nospam(a)example.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have this 11-year old PC and I am thinking about upgrading it by
>>> installing an SSD (SATA).
>>
>>> What do the experts think/suggest?
>>
>> What is the maximum speed you expect this motherboard to support?
>> My guess: 33 MB/s.
>>
>> So what do you expect to gain by replacing a HDD by SSD?
>> (Except from increasing the cost per gigabyte 100 fold or so.)
>>
>
>The seek time is better on the SSD.

That's true.

>And the PCI bus can operate at 110-120MB/sec or so.

The PCI bus might, but does an 11 year old motherboard ?

>Maybe add the PCI controller card first, and then buy the
>SSD if it seems to be working well.

I doubt that. Without a bootable media attached to the PCI
controller it is very hard to test whether it would boot if such
a media where attached ;-)

Maybe buy a CompactFlash to IDE converter ?

--
Kind regards,
Gerard Bok
From: kony on 3 Jul 2010 13:01
On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 17:48:43 GMT, bok118(a)zonnet.nl (Gerard
Bok) wrote:

>On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 08:49:03 -0400, Paul <nospam(a)needed.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Gerard Bok wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 23:42:48 -0500, "Tiziano"
>>> <nospam(a)example.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have this 11-year old PC and I am thinking about upgrading it by
>>>> installing an SSD (SATA).
>>>
>>>> What do the experts think/suggest?

.... that an 11 year old motherboard (and PSU, etc) are at
end of expected lifespan, that it makes no sense to upgrade
at this point unless you had the intended upgrade parts
lying around unused and they were of little value (unlike an
SSD of any reasonable capacity).



>>>
>>> What is the maximum speed you expect this motherboard to support?
>>> My guess: 33 MB/s.

66 MB/s


>>>
>>> So what do you expect to gain by replacing a HDD by SSD?
>>> (Except from increasing the cost per gigabyte 100 fold or so.)
>>>
>>
>>The seek time is better on the SSD.
>
>That's true.
>
>>And the PCI bus can operate at 110-120MB/sec or so.
>
>The PCI bus might, but does an 11 year old motherboard ?

That Via southbridge did not have very good PCI bus
performance, especially if other PCI cards were installed.
I'd expect a peak sustained throughput of about 85MB/s, or
less when using a PCI sound or video card.


>
>>Maybe add the PCI controller card first, and then buy the
>>SSD if it seems to be working well.
>
>I doubt that. Without a bootable media attached to the PCI
>controller it is very hard to test whether it would boot if such
>a media where attached ;-)
>
>Maybe buy a CompactFlash to IDE converter ?

Just for testing or for use? For regular use it would be
much slower than an SSD. For testing the OP might be able
to borrow someone's SATA HDD, or buy the SSD from someplace
with a good return policy so at worst if it doesn't work he
is out only (a typical average rate for refund is...) 15% of
purchase price plus return shipping cost.
From: Gerard Bok on 4 Jul 2010 09:15
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 13:01:14 -0400, kony <spam(a)spam.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 17:48:43 GMT, bok118(a)zonnet.nl (Gerard
>Bok) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 08:49:03 -0400, Paul <nospam(a)needed.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Gerard Bok wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 23:42:48 -0500, "Tiziano"
>>>> <nospam(a)example.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have this 11-year old PC and I am thinking about upgrading it by
>>>>> installing an SSD (SATA).

Bad quote ;-)
I do have 11 year old PC's around but it wasn't my idea to
'upgrade' them, using SSD ;-)

>>Maybe buy a CompactFlash to IDE converter ?
>
>Just for testing or for use? For regular use it would be
>much slower than an SSD.

On second thought that wasn't such a smart advice indeed :-)
Not with speed in mind, that is.
There are CF cards marked '133' out there, but that doesn't mean
133 MBps (rather: 133 times floppy speed.) Sorry.

--
Kind regards,
Gerard Bok
From: kony on 5 Jul 2010 17:40
On Sun, 04 Jul 2010 13:15:34 GMT, bok118(a)zonnet.nl (Gerard
Bok) wrote:

>On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 13:01:14 -0400, kony <spam(a)spam.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 17:48:43 GMT, bok118(a)zonnet.nl (Gerard
>>Bok) wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 08:49:03 -0400, Paul <nospam(a)needed.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Gerard Bok wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 23:42:48 -0500, "Tiziano"
>>>>> <nospam(a)example.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have this 11-year old PC and I am thinking about upgrading it by
>>>>>> installing an SSD (SATA).
>
>Bad quote ;-)
>I do have 11 year old PC's around but it wasn't my idea to
>'upgrade' them, using SSD ;-)
>
>>>Maybe buy a CompactFlash to IDE converter ?
>>
>>Just for testing or for use? For regular use it would be
>>much slower than an SSD.
>
>On second thought that wasn't such a smart advice indeed :-)
>Not with speed in mind, that is.
>There are CF cards marked '133' out there, but that doesn't mean
>133 MBps (rather: 133 times floppy speed.) Sorry.


There is a sale right now on a 32GB OCZ Onyx for $60 after
rebate, at that price point I might change my mind about
upgrading an aging PC with an SSD... though of course it is
slower than many but still leaps better than the jmicron
controller based SSDs of a couple years ago.

Problem is, older PCs probably aren't running Win7 and older
OS don't have TRIM support so the performance will degrade
once all blocks have had data written to them... though it
may still easily be faster than the old HDD it replaces or a
new HDD.

http://www.mwave.com/mwave/SKUSearch_v3.asp?px=HP&scriteria=BA37393
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Password protected laptop HDDs?
Next: Supermicro C2SEA problems with Windows 7