Patriot Torqx 128 GB SSD review

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Guru3D News, Jul 9, 2009.

  1. Guru3D News

    Guru3D News Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,462
    Likes Received:
    0
    When Guru3D reviewed the OCZ Vertex we where flabbergasted when we tested the G.Skill Falcon SSD we where absolutely amazed. And today's product from Patriot memory is not at all different. Armed...

    More...
     
  2. Ven0m

    Ven0m Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,769
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    GTX 1080M
    Thank you for the review.
    10-year warranty sounds really cool as well as 3.5" bracket. I wonder how this thing would work with 128MB cache - maybe you'll be able to compare them.

    btw, I own Vertex 120GB SSD. It came with 1.30 firmware (1275 was in your review, then 1.10, then 1.30) and the performance is better than in the review.
     
  3. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    38,904
    Likes Received:
    7,567
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    Yeah the vertex performance increased with the new firmware's, it's really on par / the same as the Torqx review you just read.

    Unfortunately we had only 3 days with the Vertex and shortly after shipping it back the new 1.10 firmware was relased. So we not able to retest it.
     
  4. unrealtincan

    unrealtincan Member

    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    XFX Core 216 Blck Edition
    Amazing. With that ten year warranty, I would actually consider getting one. The only concern I have left is that cache. That sounds like the same situation as a raid card with cache, if the power goes out, the cache gets wiped out and the data goes out the window... :3eyes:
     

  5. Mannerheim

    Mannerheim Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,796
    Likes Received:
    18
    GPU:
    Gigabyte RX580 8GB
    When does price come down? Its a legal robery...
     
  6. TheSarge

    TheSarge Master Guru

    Messages:
    805
    Likes Received:
    14
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 GAMING X
    Great stuff as always, Hilbert. If I could just make one request, though: Could you bench these with real-world apps, please? Sythentic benchies are fine and great, but I'd really like to see which apps benefit the most from having less of a Bottleneck at the hard drive side of things.
     
  7. Ven0m

    Ven0m Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,769
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    GTX 1080M
    I can tell you SSD without cache = not even worth considering. Write (and mixed usage) performance is totally different. I guess that drives with more cache will wear out less than ones without it. Add 10 year warranty on Patriot, bracket and that they want to add extra cache and you have really sweet drive. Better RAID controllers have cache battery. SSDs probably haven't got them, but I wouldn't be worried too much when using file systems with journal. If your data is really sensitive, you should already have UPS.

    btw, there might be some RAID problems too. On OCZ forums I've seen some topics that might suggest that, but I didn't read as I don't use RAID. I also think that TRIM might not work while using RAID. Just like Vertex, other Indilinx-based SSDs should support TRIM. OCZ guys declared that Summit will get TRIM support when Windows 7 if officially released, so it should rather work for all Samsung drives.

    Personally I chose Indilinx over Samsung because of more frequent firmware updates (I heard that the latest don'twipe yoru data, but T didn't verify it) and AnandTech tests showing greater write performance degradation in Samsung drive (but they tested very early models of both Vertex and Summit so I don't know if that applies to the current drives too). If you're low on $$$ and can wait a bit, there should be some fast and cheaper SSDs around Q4 09 / Q1 10. Win7 Superfetch also does wonders when you have a lot of ram and may move the decision to buy SSD in time. SSDs are still much better than HDD + Win7 + Superfetch. If they weren't I wouldn't even think about buying one.

    TheSarge - it's difficult to test such drive with real apps, seriously. There were CoD4 loading times, around 3x less than HDD. From my experience, I can tell you that some things work more or less the same on Win7 with Superfetch as on SSD, but some things are just different. Don't think about SSD as "faster", but rather as "quicker". The best comparison I can think of is like moving from single-core to quad-core machine. Stuttering is gone. You don't wait for folders or start menu to open. You don't really wait for apps. You don't care that 3 apps have been just launched and you start another. You just don't think about storage as a bottleneck that kills multitasking.
    If you don't play games that load a lot of data frequently and don't do heavy multitasking / databases stuff, then SSDs aren't worth it. Get Win7, good defrag (I use Puran, another good is PerfectDisk and free JkDefrag), loads of RAM for Superfetch and you're set. However, if you play games that load a lot of data frequently (eg MMO's), use lots of programs at once and waiting for computer to respond despite having multi-core CPU irritates you, then SSD is the answer. It may be Indilinx, Samsung, one of the upcoming new controllers, just anything with RAM on it.
    I may sound as Microsoft fanboy (and yes, I like this company), but if you can, try Win7 64bit before buying SSD. Perhaps storage performance improvement will be big enough to make SSD investment not worth it.
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2009

Share This Page