cryan writes:
> ...That means that to review this one drive, I had to retest some fourteen
> other drives. Tedious, and time consuming, ...
I can definitely
empathise with you there.
I have though commented several times in the past three months
that the 830 is effectively null & void now. I really wanted to
get another for my 3930K build because I was amazed at the way
it maintains steady state performance, but they'd just vanished
from all the usual sellers ("It's *gone* McCready!"), so I bought
a standard 840 250GB which I have to say is quite good overall.
Irony is, not long after, I won two new Vector 256s on eBay...
Anyway, definitely a more relevant product than the 830 now is
the Vertex4 256GB which is still 'current' (continues to be for
sale in the normal way from the usual dealers). It's a little
more expensive than the 840 Pro, but it's a lot cheaper than the
Vector (why is the Vector now so costly? Scan lists it for 236 UKP).
Btw, have you heard anything about an updated Vertex3, called the
Vertex3.20? It's on Scan's site (code LN50566, have a look) with
a slightly higher IOPS rating than the normal Vertex3, though
bizarrely it's priced higher than the 840 Pro. Can't imagine why
OCZ would bother doing an update.
> ... or are you concerned because I changed the scaling for the 128 KB
> Sequential Line graphs? ...
Correct, the 128KB sequential graphs should have a Y-axis origin
of 0. I assume the X-axes are queue depth - as Sakkura says, both
just say 'Title' atm.
> No data is lost, but it does certainly make them easier to read. ...
I think it makes them harder to read, because one cannot use the
instant overall visual look of the graph to gain some idea of
relative performance. It makes the performance differences seem
wider than they really are. I know that zooming in on a narrow
range allows one to move the lines apart to make them clearer, but
the result allows one to infer incorrect relative performances (eg.
it makes the Intel units look terrible).
> ... I can always drop in the charts without the scaling as well.
Better idea: how about having both? eg. just click on the image
and it switches back and forth between the whole graph with 1,0
origin vs. the zoomed in graphs as they are atm? ie. I would
suggest the default should be the whole graph, then click to zoom
in to the way it looks just now, click again to zoom out. Is
that possible?
Ian.