Mushkin vs. Intel SSD ?

[josejones]

Mushkin vs. Intel SSD ?

I've never had an SSD before and it's time for me to sus out which SSD is best for me and my new build. I'm looking for speed, of course, but, even more importantly reliability and long life-span.

This SSD is just for programs so, I figure all I really needed was a 120g, which is more than enough. I was going to use a regular HD for the rest. Wondering if this is the best set-up for what I need it for?

I was planning on the Intel 520, 120G "Cherryville" but, in the new: Best SSDs For The Money: May 2012
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-review,3194.html

Mushkin prices have really dropped and I'm still unclear which is the better SSD. Those low Mushkin prices could change soon too.

I will be getting an Ivy CPU: i7 3770 and most likely the Gigabyte z77 UD5 and I've been under the impression that only Intel SSD's take advantage of the SSD cache thingy?

We use Adobe CS, Word, Photo Shop, Office, XSite Pro and more almost everyday. We have to build our own websites create our own product description videos and HD documentary DVD's and do fairly large uploads to our manufacturer.

Here's my new build thread for more info:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/333702-31-bridge-work-build

 

[cuecuemore]

Mushkin makes the best SSD out there, in my opinion. I hear that Intel makes good ones too, but I have no personal experience with them. If I were to buy right now, it would be from the Mushkin Chronos line.

 

[cin19]

For benchmark, Mushkin Chronos is lower than intel because it use Asynchronous NAND. But for real world you can't see the big difference between them. I have Mushkin Chronos (not the DX which use Toggle NAND) and intel 320 too, now i have M4 that replaced the Mushkin. I have good luck w/ those SSD.

 

[josejones]

Intel Smart Response Technology:

"GIGABYTE 7 series motherboards are equipped with the much anticipated Intel® Smart Response Technology, allowing users to experience system performance similar to SSD only systems. Intel® Smart Response technology works by using intelligent block-based caching of frequently used applications to improve system performance and responsiveness. In fact, 7 series motherboards with Intel® Smart Response Technology are able to deliver 4x performance of HDD-only systems. "

http://www.gigabyte.com/microsite/306/images/ez-setup.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWBI7EMOhYQ

Will Mushkin work with Intel's "Smart Response Technology" on a Gigabyte z77 board? I thought I read not long ago that only Intel would work for that feature or perhaps I'm confusing it with a different feature??

 

[J_E_D_70]

If you get a 120GB drive and load your programs there as you originally suggested, there's no need to use SRT. SRT is good if you only have a 60GB-ish SSD and want to cache your HDD's most used files.

Suppose you could partition it and use part for the cache but probably not buying yourself a lot of performance there.

The Mushkins are getting good press, for what that's worth. Them, Intel, Samsung are all good choices.

 

[SinisterSalad]

I got the Mushkin 120GB(non DX) a few weeks ago. The 1st one was DOA, but NewEgg paid both ways for the RMA. This one flies. I don't regret getting it one bit.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

If you are going to purchase a SATA 3 6Gb/s 64GB or larger solid state drive, then Intel Smart Response Technology (ssd caching) is not necessary. According to Intel you would be better off and experience better performance if you installed Windows 7 and your software applications on the ssd instead of the hard disk drive. It makes more sense to to get the full benefit of the ssd instead of using it as a cache for a hard disk drive.

When Intel devloped SRT, they envisioned using a small 10GB to 20GB ssd as a cache for one hard disk drive. It was meant for individuals who could not afford a larger capacity ssd.

Since you work with photographs and video you will want a solid state drive that works well with "incompressible data" as opposed to "compressible data".

That pretty much leaves out solid state drives that use SandForce controllers. The SandForce controllers were designed to work well with compressible data.

Your two best bets are Intel and Samsung solid state drives. In real world performance both of them work very well with photo and video software applications.

Don't forget that photo and video work is cpu and memory intensive.

 

[Isaiah4110]

I would definitely recommend a Mushkin SSD. While I have yet to own one personally, I have been researching them for a few months, and from a price to capacity/quality/performance ration standpoint, their deluxe line is definitely in the top 3. I read everywhere that Intel makes a great product with a long warranty, but they are also charging ~$50 extra when compared to similar drives. As was noted in an earlier post, The Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe line uses Toggle NAND memory, while the standard Mushkin Enhanced Chronos line uses slower Asynchronous Memory.

Specifically, I would recommend the 240GB Mushkin MKNSSDCR240GB-DX model. It sells for $230 right now on Newegg. That is under $1 per GB, which is a great deal. Given the fact that it looks like you will have some pretty space intensive programs installed and are looking at the $1500 range for total PC cost, I think the added space will benefit you greatly. Additionally, it includes a 3.5" adapter bracket for installation into a desktop computer. You would be spending $185 for the 120GB Intel 520 SSD that includes an adapter bracket.

 

[cbrunnem]

Mushkin makes the best SSD out there, in my opinion. I hear that Intel makes good ones too, but I have no personal experience with them. If I were to buy right now, it would be from the Mushkin Chronos line.

some clarification is needed. Mushkin chronos DELUXE is what should be recommended. it uses toggle Nand which is better and top of the line.

For benchmark, Mushkin Chronos is lower than intel because it use Asynchronous NAND. But for real world you can't see the big difference between them. I have Mushkin Chronos (not the DX which use Toggle NAND) and intel 320 too, now i have M4 that replaced the Mushkin. I have good luck w/ those SSD.

again just so that people are not confused, mushkin makes basically two types of drives: chronos and chronos deluxe. they also make castillo or something like that but im not talking about those. Out of the two types the chronos is cheaper and slower and older gen. the chronos deluxe uses the best flash memory money can buy and is a top tier drive.

 

[RetiredChief]

Johnny
You said "That pretty much leaves out solid state drives that use SandForce controllers"
Intel 520 uses the SF22xx controller (tailored to intel), 510 uses marvel controller.

But for reliability (which is far more important than synthetic benchmarks, concur with Johnny on Intel -> Samsung -> Curcial M4. Personnally I buy whichever is cheapest, which generally leaves Intel Sata III out. I do Have a Intel G1 and a G2. Of the newer SATA IIIs, I have a pair of 128 Gig M4s and a Pair Of Samsung 128 gig 830s

 

[Isaiah4110]

Since you work with photographs and video you will want a solid state drive that works well with "incompressible data" as opposed to "compressible data".

That pretty much leaves out solid state drives that use SandForce controllers. The SandForce controllers were designed to work well with compressible data.

Your two best bets are Intel and Samsung solid state drives. In real world performance both of them work very well with photo and video software applications.

Don't forget that photo and video work is cpu and memory intensive.

I agree, but only if you are planning on storing all your data (pictures, videos, music, etc.) on the solid state drive. In that case, you would also need a much larger capacity drive. Prices go up really fast once you get past the 240-256GB capacity mark.

Your best bet is most likely to install all your programs on a solid state drive and have an HDD for use as a data storage drive.

It is also probably important to note, for emphasis, that any solid state drive will give you greatly improved performance in the way of load times and file transfers when compared to an HDD. The real world observed difference between different solid state drives (whether the difference be in memory type or controller) will be minimal by comparison.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

From the Tom's Hardware article the OP linked to:

"when it comes to SandForce-based SSDs, they only achieve their peak performance when you're moving around compressible bits of data."

Both the Mushkin Chronos and the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe use a SandForce controller. That pretty much rules out both for professional photo and video work.

 

[cuecuemore]

some clarification is needed. Mushkin chronos DELUXE is what should be recommended. it uses toggle Nand which is better and top of the line.

Yes, sorry I left that out.

 

[josejones]

Hey all, thanks for all the help here. I'm still learning about SSD's and the posts here have been quite helpful in that regard. Now, I've realized that I don't need to worry about the "Intel Smart Response Technology" since I'll be using a 120g SSD to reap the benefits while keeping prices low. Plus, I'll still use a regular HDD for data storage until larger SSD prices come down even further in the future.

Btw, I'll be using the Windows 7 OS.

From the Tom's Hardware article the OP linked to:

"when it comes to SandForce-based SSDs, they only achieve their peak performance when you're moving around compressible bits of data."

Both the Mushkin Chronos and the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe use a SandForce controller. That pretty much rules out both for professional photo and video work.

It appears Mushkin may not be the best choice regarding working with HD video, photos etc or will the Mushkin chronos DELUXE be just fine regardless? Will I be fine so long as I get the deluxe with the toggle Nand rather than the Asynchronous NAND? Would Intel or anything else be any better on professional photo and video work?

Best SSDs For The Money: May 2012
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-review,3194.html

 

[JohnnyLucky]

josejones - In all honesty you'll be okay with the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe. There's usually not that much performnce difference during ordinary everyday use. There might be a very slight difference when it comes to photo and video processes that involve rendering, encoding, or transcoding. You probably won't notice the difference unless you run synthetic benchmarks which are designed to grossly exaggerate minor differences in performance.

Chief - Correcto Mundo! I was in a hurry and didn't provide a more detailed explanation, especially about the 520 from an enterprise/business perspective.

Isiah - just a little more info - Typical solution for professional photo and video work is one ssd for applications, one ssd used as a scratch disk, and hard disk drive(s) for storage. In the event of a budget crunch priority goes to high performance cpu and memory first.

 

[Isaiah4110]

Hey all, thanks for all the help here. I'm still learning about SSD's and the posts here have been quite helpful in that regard. Now, I've realized that I don't need to worry about the "Intel Smart Response Technology" since I'll be using a 120g SSD to reap the benefits while keeping prices low. Plus, I'll still use a regular HDD for data storage until larger SSD prices come down even further in the future.

Btw, I'll be using the Windows 7 OS.


It appears Mushkin may not be the best choice regarding working with HD video, photos etc or will the Mushkin chronos DELUXE be just fine regardless? Will I be fine so long as I get the deluxe with the toggle Nand rather than the Asynchronous NAND? Would Intel or anything else be any better on professional photo and video work?

Best SSDs For The Money: May 2012
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-review,3194.html

If you are using the HDD for storage then there will be no difference.

The difference comes when writing incompressible data. If you don't store the data on the SSD then you never write it to the SSD. Therefore there is no difference. Additionally, what little difference there would be if you used the SSD for storage would be minimal compared to the performance difference between an SSD and HDD. If you wanted the absolute best performance possible in an SSD (and you are using it for mass data storage) then you would probably want to grab a Samsung 830 Series SSD. That said, the key in that case would be to get as large of an SSD as possible, regardless of controller. A 120GB Samsung 830 SSD does you no good if it is filled to the brim with pictures and videos, the 240 GB Mushkin drive would be better for you in that case.

 

[Isaiah4110]

Isiah - just a little more info - Typical solution for professional photo and video work is one ssd for applications, one ssd used a scratch disk, and hard disk drive(s) for storage. In the event of a budget crunch priority goes to high performance cpu and memory first.

*low whistle* That is one pricey PC! I'm not sure that type of setup will be feasible here. OP stated in another thread that his budget is ~$1000.

That is something I didn't know, so good info JohnnyLucky.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

Isiah - May not be that bad. A 128GB ssd is considered to be the sweet spot right now. That should hold Windows 7 plus applications and utilities with room to spare. Sale prices are dropping down to $99.00. The scratch disk does not need to be that large. A 64GB ssd would do. Sale prices for those have been down to $59.00. Just a matter of being patient and checking prices daily.

Easiest place to find daily ssd deals in the United States is over at Logic Buy. Here is the link:

http://www.logicbuy.com/categorydeals/computers/hard-drives-ssd

They check quite a few online vendors including Newegg and Amazon. Brands, models, and prices change daily.

Time for a break.

 

[josejones]

If you are using the HDD for storage then there will be no difference.

The difference comes when writing incompressible data. If you don't store the data on the SSD then you never write it to the SSD. Therefore there is no difference. Additionally, what little difference there would be if you used the SSD for storage would be minimal compared to the performance difference between an SSD and HDD. If you wanted the absolute best performance possible in an SSD (and you are using it for mass data storage) then you would probably want to grab a Samsung 830 Series SSD. That said, the key in that case would be to get as large of an SSD as possible, regardless of controller. A 120GB Samsung 830 SSD does you no good if it is filled to the brim with pictures and videos, the 240 GB Mushkin drive would be better for you in that case.

Ut oh, I was under the impression that I'd notice a huge performance increase by having an SSD for the OS and programs and use a HDD for storage and data? There seriously would be no performance increase? Crapola! 😱

I was going to hold out for a year or two before I buy an SSD bigger than 240g - partly for $$$ but also because I was hoping to get the newer SATA Express = 16Gb/s SSD. http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/03/08/ssds-faster-sata-express/1

We could use a 500g or 1T SSD but, the prices are not reality right now.

 

[Isaiah4110]

Ut oh, I was under the impression that I'd notice a huge performance increase by having an SSD for the OS and programs and use a HDD for storage and data? There seriously would be no performance increase? Crapola! 😱

I was going to hold out for a year or two before I buy an SSD bigger than 240g - partly for $$$ but also because I was hoping to get the newer SATA Express = 16Gb/s SSD. http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/03/08/ssds-faster-sata-express/1

We could use a 500g or 1T SSD but, the prices are not reality right now.

Don't forget, if you want to wait for a faster SATA interface in a Solid State Drive, you will also need to have a faster SATA Controller in your system. In other words, if you build a Sandybridge or Ivybridge computer now with a standard HDD, you won't be able to buy a high capacity "SATA 4" SSD in 12-24 months and get its maximum performance by simply plugging it into your existing motherboard. You would also need to either replace the motherboard with one that has the faster connection or buy a SATA 4 controller card that would plug into one of your expansion slots.


As a side note, I don't know if you have already made your purchases, but I gave you a system build recommendation a couple days ago on your other thread.

 

[JackNaylorPE]

Muskin Chromos Deluxe has premium 3Xnm Toshiba Toggle Mode Flash. The Chronos and Intel do not.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4328/mushkin_chronos_deluxe_120gb_solid_state_drive_review/index13.html

Other than a few really oddball entries, SF-2281 'consumer' SSDs come in three flash flavors. Starting on the low end, you have IMFT 25nm asynchronous flash, a budget flash used in the Agility 3, Force 3, Chronos (non-Deluxe model) and a few other drives that in our testing perform at around the same level as last year's SF-1200 controlled drives when filled to 50 percent capacity. A majority of drives use IMFT 25nm synchronous flash; Vertex 3, Force GT, S511 and so on.

Synchronous flash, also called ONFi 2.x is really the first step for enthusiasts, especially now that prices have really dropped. The final flash type used is 3Xnm Toggle Mode flash from Toshiba, a form of ONFi 2.x without the JEDEC classification. 25nm IMFT is rated for around 5K P/E cycles and 3Xnm Toshiba Toggle Mode flash is rated for around twice as many. Even though we are talking about writing a lot of data for a very long time, the 3Xnm flash will still last even longer.....

To sum it all up with a bow on top, you get amazing performance, extremely long service life and a hassle free low price point on a drive that literally has very little competition in the marketplace.

As for the Photo / video performance .... look here:

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4328/mushkin_chronos_deluxe_120gb_solid_state_drive_review/index9.html

HDD1 - Windows Defender
HDD2 - Gaming
HDD3 - Windows Photo Gallery
HDD4 - Vista Startup
HDD5 - Windows Movie Maker
HDD6 - Windows Media Center
HDD7 - Windows Media Player
HDD8 - Application Loading

The Deluxe rules the roost yet again .... doesn't hurt that its cost is only premium performance unit below the $1 per GB barrier

 

[JackNaylorPE]

Will Mushkin work with Intel's "Smart Response Technology" on a Gigabyte z77 board? I thought I read not long ago that only Intel would work for that feature or perhaps I'm confusing it with a different feature??

Smart Response Technology is useless in this application:

http://www.ukgamingcomputers.co.uk/difference-between-h67-p67-z68-and-h61-chipsets-a-22.html

Finally, another feature of a Z68 chipset is known as SSD caching which is where it allows the use of a small (say 10 or 20 GB) Solid state hard drive to act as a cache for a larger ‘traditional’ hard disk. If you are already planning the use of a Solid State drive this feature is redundant.

 

[josejones]

If you are using the HDD for storage then there will be no difference.

The difference comes when writing incompressible data. If you don't store the data on the SSD then you never write it to the SSD. Therefore there is no difference. Additionally, what little difference there would be if you used the SSD for storage would be minimal compared to the performance difference between an SSD and HDD. If you wanted the absolute best performance possible in an SSD (and you are using it for mass data storage) then you would probably want to grab a Samsung 830 Series SSD. That said, the key in that case would be to get as large of an SSD as possible, regardless of controller. A 120GB Samsung 830 SSD does you no good if it is filled to the brim with pictures and videos, the 240 GB Mushkin drive would be better for you in that case.

I was under the impression that I'd notice a huge performance increase by having an SSD for the OS and programs while using a HDD for storage and data? There seriously would be no performance increase? How are all those people using them who're claiming such performance increases?

 

[RetiredChief]

Hard to mix apples and oranges.
The SSD will load any program and associated files that are on the SSD Very fast compared to if they are on a HDD. If you have a given program on the SSD and your Generated file for that application on the HDD. The program loads at the speed of the SSD, but pulling in your generated file for the HDD will be at the speed of the HDD. In many cases caching an HDD does not improve performance a lot, as It caches most used files, if the files are constantantly changing, becomes hare to "quess" which files to cache.

What I do is My systems are setup with two SSDs and a HDD. 1st SSD (128 Gig) is the OS + Program drive, The 2nd SSD is for currently working projects for the applications one SSD1. The HDD is for storage, ie completed projects, and my data that is not used very often. An example, unless I'm editing a DVD movie file, it is on the HDD (playback of a Movie is No different than being on a SSD vs HDD). The many excell spreed sheets that I load up on a daily basis are on the 2nd SSD, ones that I may only call up once a week are on the HDD.

All comes down to Price vs performance.

And Yes I do prefer 2 SSDs vs a single larger one.
A single larger one (say 256 gig) is Faster than it's smaller sibling (128 Gig). But you can not do a simutanoues read/write to a single SSD.

 

[josejones]

So, is it even really worth it to get an SSD at all?

Here's what I'm considering for my new build:

MB: Gigabyte z77
CPU: Ivy Bridge i7 3770
RAM: Mushkin 16g
SSD: Mushkin 120g
HD: 1 Tera
PSU: Coolermaster 650w
Case: Antec 302
OS: Windows 7 Prof, 64-bit