• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Sunfox

  • Rank
  1. Yup. But a big boo to Intel. "According to case notes and based on our warranty files, unfortunately these units are not entitled for Cross Ship replacement. That is the reason why the technicians processed the RMA as Standard Warranty Replacement. We have a list of parts that can be returned as Standard Warranty Replacement only, the part number you need support on is listed on this file. There is not an specific reason or further details from Intel why these units do not apply for Cross Ship replacement." Basically I'm screwed for 2-3 weeks (especially having to deal with them from Canada) unless I spend another 600 bones and buy a second drive.
  2. I started another thread on the matter. But basically on Friday it started to feel "slow", like I was on a notebook hard drive. Later my automated WHS backup failed, which usually indicates a file system error, and when I went to use it again it was slow and I had a mail program complain about a corrupt file. Checked SMART statistics, everything was fine, so I scheduled a chkdsk. Chkdsk ran - detected 8 "unreadable file record segments". It finished stage 1 of 3, then rebooted, and did it all again. This time there were 32 bad segments, and a ton of other errors. This time Windows didn't start. Rebooted into Startup Repair, wouldn't get out of it even if I tried to force Normal or Safe mode. So I let that run for 4 hours (it says it may take an hour), gave up, tried a bunch of other things to get into Windows - nothing. So I put it into another system - it wanted to run chkdsk on the drive but I skipped it - however the system then saw the drive as "RAW" file format and corrupt. Did a bunch of tests, SSD Toolbox read/data verification tests failed, so I tried another chkdsk and this time there were 40 bad segments and pretty much every single file on the drive reported an error of some sort (I'm talking an hour of quickly scrolling text of errors). So I wiped the partitions - worked - used SSD Toolbox to secure erase - worked - and tried to recreate a partition - failed. Right now all I can do is see the drive and access SMART/info properties. Any attempt to create a partition just hangs with the HDD LED on (rest of the system works, but the SSD hangs - if I try to read SMART it takes over 60 seconds to get a response). Only interesting SMART statistic was 74 reallocated sectors, but that never grew during this (although I will say I could have sworn it said 73 before my first chkdsk, but I could have been wrong).
  3. That's not the drive's fault. That's the crappy Marvell controller's fault, and any SATA3 drive will end up with roughly the same performance. That said my 510 failed tonight rather spectacularly (attempts to fix it only made it worse). If I have to wait 1-3 weeks for an RMA replacement from Intel (I'm at nearly 60 days, which is outside the retailer's 30 day replacement window) I will have to buy a new drive as I can't go that long without my system... so I'm kinda deciding whether to get another 510 or go for something else.
  4. Ugh. Hooked the drive up to another i7-based Windows 7 system. When I booted it wanted to chkdsk it, but I cancelled. Drive reported in the system as "raw" file system type, and when I tried to access it the system said the drive or folder is corrupted or unreadable. Installed the Intel SSD Toolbox, ran a quick scan and read passed, but data integrity seemed to hang. So I cancelled and ran a full scan, but both tests failed within a few minutes with a note to contact Intel. Tried again, same result - failed. I'm guessing the drive really is dead. Edit: decided to let it do another chddsk... bad file records has gone from 8 to 32 to 40 now, and number of corrupt attribute records is now in the hundreds.
  5. Installed an Intel 250gb 510 SSD a couple of months ago on a new system with the Intel DX58SO2. Everything was great until I rebooted yesterday, and the whole thing seemed slower than usual - like it was hanging reading files. Then later my automated WHS backup failed, which usually indicates some sort of disk error, so tonight I scheduled a scandisk. It's giving me "File record segment ##### is unreadable" errors. These come in groups of 8, and there's about 4 groups of these 8. There were also a pile of corrupt file attribute records, and right now it's processing "32 bad file records" which is taking forever (now up to 26 of 32). Is the drive toast already? I checked the Intel SSD Toolbox's SMART readings before starting the disk scan and it didn't report anything wrong - though I'll check again if I ever get the system back up. Edit: great, after chkdsk completed the system won't even boot again... gets part way and then reboots to the Windows 7 "Startup Repair" option which it claims could take over an hour.
  6. Yup, it's pretty much new (nothing on it for those tests, and I did wipe it between tests - using the SSD toolbox). Some interesting things I noted: * The 510 seems to work very well on SATA2, something that I don't think can be said for all SATA3 native drives (compared to SATA2 native drives). Very balanced read/write throughput, seemingly up to the absolute maximum interface limit. * The Marvell controller really doesn't seem to use SATA3 speeds at all for writes - even with interface limitations I would expect it to be higher than SATA2 based on what the drive itself is capable of. * The interesting difference in read speed ramping in the 0.5 to 16kb section of the ATTO chart for Marvell versus Microsoft drivers. * Even if SATA2 users can't make use of SATA3 drive speed, the improvement in even SATA2 write performance (versus say the X-25m or C300) could make the latest SSD generation worthwhile.
  7. I received the remainder of my system components tonight, including an Intel 510 250GB SSD which I debated long and hard before purchasing. Before re-installing the operating system (I have been stress testing while I waited for the SSD), I just wanted to make a quick comparison between running the drive as SATA 3.0Gb/s on the ICH10R, and 6.0Gb/s on the Marvell 88SE9128 controller. The motherboard is an Intel DX58SO2 with the latest BIOS and available drivers. I know that due to the single lane PCIe interface the Marvell controller is performance limited to below full SATA3 speeds, but it can still offer higher maximum transfer rates than SATA2. Note that on the Marvell the drive is by itself, while on ICH10R there are 5 other SATA devices - 4 HDDs and a BD drive. Intel ICH10R Marvell 9128 with Marvell Driver Marvell 9128 with Microsoft Driver In the end, these are exactly the results I expected. The Marvell is only 3.3% slower than the ICH10R, but that's after it's obvious sequential read performance advantage of 35.6%. I think which controller to use will depend on what you'll be using the drive for. If video editing or reading a lot of large files, probably the Marvell would be a better bet. For general system/program performance, probably the Intel. Myself, I do video editing, but I also have a short-stroked RAID0 of four Seagate Barracuda XT drives on the ICH10R that can deliver up to 520MB/s for data files... so the extra read performance of the Marvell isn't likely to be that important to me. So I'll be putting the SSD on the ICH10R as well. I know with the SSD and RAID0 both on the same controller I won't be able to use both to full potential at the same time, but I just don't see any scenarios in my usage where that would be happening. Anyways, I hope this is of some use, even if only for confirming what we already knew...
  8. Sunfox

    Plextor M2 SSD Now Shipping

    So what's going on with this puppy. I know you've been dealing with "something"... defective sample? Compatibility issues? Initial reviews on the Egg are positive, but this drive seems to be generally ignored by all reviewers, despite being priced attractively (less than Intel 510 or Corsair Performance 3) and having good specs.
  9. Sunfox

    Intel SSD 510 Review Discussion

    Intel claimed $584 for the 240gb in quantities of 1000. That doesn't include markup.
  10. Sunfox

    Intel SSD 510 Review Discussion

    Except you can't buy the Vertex 3 yet? At least all I can find is the Vertex 2. Found a listing for the Vertex 3 (holy crap, $1800+ for 480gb, so much for 25nm cost savings) on NCIX, but no stock.
  11. Sunfox

    Intel SSD 510 Review Discussion

    I just realized something. What about the Plextor M2? Last I heard you guys were still figuring out some stuff with it. How's it compare to the 510? If you had to buy a 250gb drive today what would you go for that's 1) good performance and 2) not going to cause any sort of system problems or fail unexpectedly?
  12. Sunfox

    Intel SSD 510 Review Discussion

    Beyond the mild color blindness issues, I think the main issue for me is that the color sample next to the model name is so tiny, especially on a high resolution screen, that I'm left sort of squinting, trying to decide if that circle is medium green or light brown. At any rate, I noticed that I kept trying to match up colors one at a time, but I realized that it's easier if I treat the two paired colors as a pattern. By that I mean, I may not be able to clearly see the difference in the tiny circles between "dark light brown" and "dark light green", but I *can* see the difference between the pair of light browns and the pair of light greens. Still, it's time to figure out something that's a bit more... accessible... that doesn't rely entirely on color detection. Try printing out one of your pages on a black-and-white laser printer. The graphs are utterly useless. But to end - thanks for being the first to review the 510, even if some of us are still figuring out exactly what it scored! ;-) I basically have to buy a SSD within the next week, minimum 250gb, and it looks like I'm stuck between the 510 and the C300 (please suggest others if there are others I should be considering). However the C300 stuttering issue has me concerned, so I'm leaning towards the 510. Also regarding 512gb at a "reasonable" price - right now I'd say under $1000. Frankly even that's too much, but I seem to recall hearing that the C400 512gb was going to sell for ~$875 wholesale, and that seems good compared to the $1300 I'm seeing them for now.
  13. Sunfox

    Intel SSD 510 Review Discussion

    I think the short answer to that is "no", but I haven't seen many tests yet (and not on the Intel specifically). The 9128's system interface is simply incapable of offering full 6.0 speeds, although it will be higher than the 3.0 interface. However the general crappyness tends to ensure performance is worse than the ICH10R. Plus no trim support. For example, a review I saw on the Vertex 3 showed... ICH10R / 9128 / LSI 9260 Seq Read: 213 / 374 / 586 Seq Write: 217 / 166 / 374 4K Read: 21 / 20 / 14 4K Write: 62 / 52 / 42 4K-64 Read: 168 / 169 / 146 4K-64 Write: 161 / 160 / 101 Score Read: 217 / 228 / 220 Score Write: 248 / 229 / 182 Score: 579 / 570 / 508 So you gain sequential read speed, but lose out on write speed. Although oddly both it and the Intel did better than the LSI on some other things.
  14. Figures, just after I pick up 4 2TB Barracuda XTs. Still, 4TB fully mirrored is probably enough space for me... especially coming from 1.5TB usable.
  15. Sunfox

    Intel SSD 510 Review Discussion

    I know there are 512gb SSDs, but the ones I've looked at are all rather expansive... and seem rather slow for the price (excepting the PCIe models). Technically I'd love to get a Crucial M4 512gb, but I doubt I'm going to be able to wait that long. I hate being on the cusp of a new technology - but when I started gathering the parts for this system, there were no super fast SATA3 SSDs to even worry about.