If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
the drive was sitting in the mailbox when I mentioned waiting on
shipping earlier to ray round and round getting the OS configured, drive format, solid binary backup. once over for basic measurements party time now 200G/s trx solid packed & undefragmented 2G large fat32 files pretty crappy for fragmented small files and lots of them - close to platter speeds is the 'looks to be' quick impression nothing unexpected though - sites w/ performance ratings already said as much could be the 200G/s may be faster than both my much older MLC drives, maybe 50G/s faster sent off to china for two newer SATA 3 cables - appears they're paired transport wires, ver 2 and 1 don't have. Interesting if that affects, helps w/ legacy speeds. Or not. I only paid .50cents a 'take what you get' cable. So much for the cake - the icing is it's a new SSD in MLC flavor for $35, which is current TLC prices, except at x2 the TBW ratings more than TLC. Budget TLC drives, that is. Samsung or Crucial 256G drives don't come in $35 flavors. And nevermind the DRAM buffering, the M700 lacks, either, if it's not going to be churning over a bunch of small files - not especially in theory. File transfers are for living with or getting used to it. I've already used up my used-to, anyway, for my money being on extra low money for unusual MLC longevity. It's installed, does what disc drives say they do, works, so it must thus and therefore be a done deal. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
On Sat, 03 Nov 2018 05:03:49 -0400, Flasherly
wrote: 200G/s trx solid packed & undefragmented 2G large fat32 files Correction: 200M/s, not G. It's rated SATA 6/G sec - standards rating. Transfer rate is 600M/s - specifications rated/seq. It's my very own "ugly duckling" SSD - nobody, largely, but nobody buys a HP M700 SSD. Might be people buy a whole laptop, desktop, in which case it makes sense, because that's what HP does and is known for: pre-assemblies;- hence HP needs their own end-build material supplies, such as big bin of SSDs for assembly workers to draw from. Why then sell me one - because it's flat-pancake NAND, inclusive as now are all my SSDs. Pancake NAND is bottom-barrel NAND: it only cooks wider, whereas V- and 3D-NAND for new and improved by being sandwiched, upwards, into tiny, thin layers. All hail the old;- Long live the new! I've seen opinionated HP M700 comparisons, on the high-end to a Crucial MLC SSD, on the low to Kingston series. Oh, yeah ... and do they ever have the opinion ratings. How many opinions are on mine: A Big One. And that one comes from a 5-star check only, on Amazon, without anything else;- might be checked by the HP agent or OEM marketeer listing it on Amazon. (NewEgg probably has more but I haven't looked yet.) Along, of course, with another correction: Mine's no big deal: Amazon is only a few bucks more, base line, being a presumption without anybody further jacking uncertainties around with shipping or tax rates. There are an extent of more of HP SSD reviews on hardware sites, though they tend favor the Pro HP model, a S700 series over the M700;- SLC NAND being presumably the S's logical extension. And a 6-year warranty I presumed is also wrongo. HP isn't giving me anything, not other than industry MLC rewrite ratings: The way that's read for HP-esque is a three-year replacement policy. Which is still something of shade better, looking to the brighter side of MLC, than low- to low/middle-pack assemblies in the latest TLC "stacked" technology, among general offerings to follow and monitor, when periodically to surface below or at usual $40 sale reductions. I overprovisioned for 10% in token principle accordingly (25% is de facto for many among TLC recommendations). Specifics as to the controller and related utilization, otherwise, due to lack of DRAM buffering, remain of empiric substances, if at all, to draw from the big world of real expectations, users see in actual applications and usage, from one of a discretionary viewpoint provided by technical specifications and material measures. And that means, most basically, since I've already bought three SSD drives, all five years ago, all being as well in MLC planar NAND -- 2 Samsung units, a 64 and 128G, plus one Crucial 256G MLC -- what more now can I expect, if very little or anything less than lacking in DRAM, from a HP M700 MLC planar NAND, effectively rendered obsolete, despite a 5-year advance for newer controller technology, for a subsequent cost of less than any of the above units. (Well, I did also pay $40 for my first and oldest SSD, as I recall, the Samsung 64G. On sale but of course.) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
On Sat, 03 Nov 2018 12:48:28 -0400, Flasherly
wrote: The way that's read for HP-esque is ... - Along with HP-esque M700 packaging specifications: At a minimum operational functionality, and placement, upon a Microsoft (TM) Windows 7 operational system (presumably 32-bit is A-OK, too). If it smells, looks like ... therefore and then it must be bull****. (Another: notably with Samsung: 'New and improved *NIX compatibility.) Not that I've gotten around to legal partitions permitted a software MBR arbitrator, or subsequent OS installs. But then I suspect, eventually, I shall, starting with the ABC's of FAT16 and a DOS command.com. The name of that tune: Controllers, controllers, controllers. A partial factor, nonetheless to not but have had some impact, upon noticing in a hardware forum where members were pairing up Samsung drives on AMD MB platforms. A posting I noticed was dated within this year. Samsung SDD drives were reported for issues with AMD supportive controller chipsets. As well subsequent action, to contact Samsung support for corrective measures, on a result that Samsung effected the user buy a new MB to support their SSD on other than AMD chipsets. What does that mean - I then looked up my MB's controller chipsets and they're the same as the above complainant, who subsequently returned the Samsung drive and bought another brand-make SSD. On principle I'm not believing that until I have the actual hardware, in hand, to duplicate an outside observation;- on the other hand, neither am I discounting it. IOW - I'd have had to pay $25, in addition, to process the validity of Samsung over an HP M700. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
On 11/3/2018 5:03 PM, Flasherly wrote:
the drive was sitting in the mailbox when I mentioned waiting on shipping earlier to ray .... I've already used up my used-to, anyway, for my money being on extra low money for unusual MLC longevity. It's installed, does what disc drives say they do, works, so it must thus and therefore be a done deal. Remember to backup things up periodically! Even Win 10 and its updates might all of a sudden delete your personal files... without being sued! -- @~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!! / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! /( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you! ^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3 不借貸! 不詐騙! 不*錢! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 不求神! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA): http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
Flasherly wrote:
On Sat, 03 Nov 2018 12:48:28 -0400, Flasherly wrote: The way that's read for HP-esque is ... - Along with HP-esque M700 packaging specifications: At a minimum operational functionality, and placement, upon a Microsoft (TM) Windows 7 operational system (presumably 32-bit is A-OK, too). If it smells, looks like ... therefore and then it must be bull****. (Another: notably with Samsung: 'New and improved *NIX compatibility.) Not that I've gotten around to legal partitions permitted a software MBR arbitrator, or subsequent OS installs. But then I suspect, eventually, I shall, starting with the ABC's of FAT16 and a DOS command.com. The name of that tune: Controllers, controllers, controllers. A partial factor, nonetheless to not but have had some impact, upon noticing in a hardware forum where members were pairing up Samsung drives on AMD MB platforms. A posting I noticed was dated within this year. Samsung SDD drives were reported for issues with AMD supportive controller chipsets. As well subsequent action, to contact Samsung support for corrective measures, on a result that Samsung effected the user buy a new MB to support their SSD on other than AMD chipsets. What does that mean - I then looked up my MB's controller chipsets and they're the same as the above complainant, who subsequently returned the Samsung drive and bought another brand-make SSD. On principle I'm not believing that until I have the actual hardware, in hand, to duplicate an outside observation;- on the other hand, neither am I discounting it. IOW - I'd have had to pay $25, in addition, to process the validity of Samsung over an HP M700. You could get a separate SATA controller card. The chip on the card should have a PCI Express x2 interface, rather than just one lane. The PCI Express card connector is then x4 wide (and only two lanes wired). An ASM1062 is an example of a chip with x2 interface. Two lanes at PCIe Rev2 gives 2*500MB/sec max transfer rate. The bus efficiency of 0.7 drops the total to 700MB/sec, which is good for a 500MB/sec SSD. You can do SSD to SSD transfers at full rate, because the PCIe interface is full-duplex. This gives a better chance of full rate transfer. The motherboard then needs an x4 slot for your new purchase. This could take the form of using one of the SLI slots on a motherboard. Or, some boards will have an x4 slot. Even if it's sub-wired, it might mate with the x2 on the card. A Google search right now is giving poor results, and I can't see a card I like. IOCREST is a possible brand. StarTech didn't seem to have what I wanted. They had a card with a Marvell chip instead. If for some reason you only had a motherboard with PCIE Rev1.1 slots, then you'd need a card with a PCIe switch chip onboard. Which are less common and could cost $100 (times trump tariff) to fit the machine. The prices on cards I didn't want, seem to have risen since the last time I looked. The tariff is only supposed to add another 10% to everything. And charged in every country. Paul |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 03:51:09 +0800, "Mr. Man-wai Chang"
wrote: Remember to backup things up periodically! Even Win 10 and its updates might all of a sudden delete your personal files... without being sued! I backup off a DOS FAT16 partition and keep most partitions at various sizes FAT32, which the FAT16 will see (from Windows 98 DOS command prompt). Since FAT32 partitions created with OEM partition managers are legally larger than anything at the time of W98, up to 2 terabyte partitions, some programs can be run while others should be differed to more modern OS. I've some IT-grade commercial backup utilities. Similar in a newer counterpart, the newer backup utilities will effectively "make their own" DOS 16 occurrences when they need to reboot and restore. All very time consuming and needlessly involved from the point of a boot arbitrator and running off a DOS16/20 partition. Although I also do use other older utilities in that environment, they're mostly for when preparing a HDD from a new build or assembly perspective. The "IT" stuff is old Norton Ghost Enterprise, which includes utilities for DOS. There's a DOS program for batching purposes for propagating automated partitions simultaneously across several computers connected on a network. Good'nuff in my book for IT. I've used that program for writing my automated boot disc batches for people simply to insert, repower, and restore the OS. Once or twice. I think it was freaking them out, the whole concept, and that somebody could actually do that. People, some, need their hand held, and that's what newer backup imagery utilities effectively do, to keep appearances as simple as possible on the front-end of operations. Not, of course, that they need to do more than what they say: restore the OS;- Norton Ghost will do the more, though. Of course if one misses the correct partition out of a DOS16 platform when "ghosting", overwrites another, it's nothing less than disastrous. Everything comes with intelligible disclaimers, unless it's from a snake-charmer, or possibly an actual programming editor, fully endowed and entitled to rewrite a HDD's MBR in hex. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
On Sat, 03 Nov 2018 16:24:36 -0400, Paul
wrote: You could get a separate SATA controller card. The chip on the card should have a PCI Express x2 interface, rather than just one lane. The PCI Express card connector is then x4 wide (and only two lanes wired). An ASM1062 is an example of a chip with x2 interface. Two lanes at PCIe Rev2 gives 2*500MB/sec max transfer rate. The bus efficiency of 0.7 drops the total to 700MB/sec, which is good for a 500MB/sec SSD. You can do SSD to SSD transfers at full rate, because the PCIe interface is full-duplex. This gives a better chance of full rate transfer. The motherboard then needs an x4 slot for your new purchase. This could take the form of using one of the SLI slots on a motherboard. Or, some boards will have an x4 slot. Even if it's sub-wired, it might mate with the x2 on the card. A Google search right now is giving poor results, and I can't see a card I like. IOCREST is a possible brand. StarTech didn't seem to have what I wanted. They had a card with a Marvell chip instead. If for some reason you only had a motherboard with PCIE Rev1.1 slots, then you'd need a card with a PCIe switch chip onboard. Which are less common and could cost $100 (times trump tariff) to fit the machine. The prices on cards I didn't want, seem to have risen since the last time I looked. The tariff is only supposed to add another 10% to everything. And charged in every country. Paul Of course. That also surfaced, by one participant, in the tech discussion on the Samsung, but I liked the one better where another decided to return to Samsung Samsung's disc for his money back. I've two of those boards, controllers, for poor foresight when I purchased a MB, (now 3rd backup and not the lightning-annulled one mentioned before), with only two SATA ports. They're both within arm's reach, although I'd rather not go (back) there after so many years of running with them. Even though both these newer MBs are the same model, essentially... Gigabyte 78LMT-USB3 R2 (rev1.0) Phenom II X4 810 Gigabyte 78LMT (rev6.0) FX-8300 Octal I'd have to look to check, as I believe the octal has eight SATA ports, whereas this quad has six. As you can see, I came prepared this time, and really do value all those native SATA ports. As per the (Tom's HW / ANAND) tech discussion and controller chips, HWINFO32 v4.32 reports: ATI/AMD SP5100 (SB700) SATA Native IDE Controller same to suffixed (sic) SB700/SB800 for virtually everything controller related on the MB, including one LPC Bridge. Or the very same as reported. FWIW. I'll see what happens with the new cables, which really should be paired up for matching 6G/s hardware, if nothing else for a matter of course. I've all but one SATA port left now, 3 SSD units, one mechanical, and a DVD. So it's comparatively all aboard the gravy train, for storage considerations and what I was running with on the two prior MBs. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
On Sat, 03 Nov 2018 20:03:27 -0400, Flasherly
wrote: all aboard the gravytrain - The only thing royally screwed is the quad. I should have got better, a FX 3.6GHz and overclocked it to 4. The Phenom is better in six or an octal configs, and AMD is besides no slouch in their redundancy dept. Still, if only I'd checked FX pricing, wasn't afflicted by a lightning strike, for Ebay FX 3.6GHz pulls. Ouch. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
On Sat, 03 Nov 2018 20:45:52 -0400, Flasherly
wrote: The only thing royally screwed is the quad. I should have got better, a FX 3.6GHz and overclocked it to 4. The Phenom is better in six or an octal configs, and AMD is besides no slouch in their redundancy dept. Still, if only I'd checked FX pricing, wasn't afflicted by a lightning strike, for Ebay FX 3.6GHz pulls. Ouch. Correction: Phenom II is up to x6 cores my MB's compatibility listing and there a no Phenom II octa-cores. FX series is still the value point, sub-$40 range, for raw speed at or near stock 3.6Ghz in a quad build. They look to be all fundamentally multiplier unlocked but, for that, still have low thread-core efficiency ratings. A value or dollar-per-MHhz, at what a FX does actually manage across ratings curves, may be another story entirely. (Among other a wider range of considerations for such as applications compatibility and expected support.) Where I fizzle-farted, apparently, is in already owning a Phenom non-II AM2+, updating to a AM3+ in cursory same-likeness fashion, while not adequately researching a field of performance expectations available from comments given on such as, starting at a FX-4100 to the FX-4300, and inclusive between a 4350 series, respectively clocking 3.6 to 4.2GHz, stock, all at a minimum margin of 95watts draw. (Overclocking potential is 5Ghz in some instances.) And that's where and what I could and should have had, essentially for a unresearched 2.6Ghz Phenom II I did buy - nor particularly for that being a good deal on a pulled/used CPU. A FX would have only been minimally more cost. I've managed, yes, to more than backup a failed computer, both being in CPU performance adequately quick. But the failed MB was maxed-out for the fastest CPU it was rated for. And that's not even remotely near what this new MB is capable to surpass. Hence, I missed the extra "bang" - and a big one I'll hazard at that - between a 2.6GHz Phenom II and a FX running even in single-core at a minimum of 3.6GHz. It's an AMD thing, I guess, even with another layer of high-GHz Athlon II series CPUs supported, all at a minimum of a quad build, on the socket AM3+: the ol' Baffle and Dazzle the propeller-heads with market saturation techniques. Damn it, everybody deserves to get their box banged once in awhile, and I should have seen it coming. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
dahm it took long SSD HP-M700
On 11/4/2018 7:37 AM, Flasherly wrote:
I backup off a DOS FAT16 partition and keep most partitions at various sizes FAT32, which the FAT16 will see (from Windows 98 DOS command prompt). Since FAT32 partitions created with OEM partition managers are legally larger than anything at the time of W98, up to 2 terabyte partitions, some programs can be run while others should be differed to more modern OS. ... Of course if one misses the correct partition out of a DOS16 platform when "ghosting", overwrites another, it's nothing less than disastrous. Everything comes with intelligible disclaimers, unless it's from a snake-charmer, or possibly an actual programming editor, fully endowed and entitled to rewrite a HDD's MBR in hex. I don't ghost partitions, only the data inside because I know where all my files are. I can re-install Window$ anytime as I don't keep data in the OS partition. -- @~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!! / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! /( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you! ^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3 不借貸! 不詐騙! 不*錢! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 不求神! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA): http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SMART long test taking too long | Tom Del Rosso[_4_] | Storage (alternative) | 5 | April 13th 14 06:55 PM |
P2P Shooters could get rid of cheaters for a long long time. | Skybuck Flying[_2_] | Nvidia Videocards | 5 | June 23rd 08 08:05 PM |
About how long to long format 500 GB My Book | [email protected] | Dell Computers | 11 | February 5th 07 04:43 AM |
About how long to long format 500 GB My Book | [email protected] | Storage (alternative) | 11 | February 5th 07 04:43 AM |
Compaq Deskpro won't boot, won't read floppy or CD, 1 long beep-1 short-1 long-1 short, pause then 1 long-2 short beeps | Olde Fortran | Compaq Computers | 2 | May 31st 06 04:45 AM |