Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [THG] The SSD Power Consumption Hoax
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[THG] The SSD Power Consumption Hoax - Page 2

post #11 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldovi View Post
Their analysis is flawed, for several reasons:

1. When you benchmark the SSD versus the HDD in a 100% runtime scenario you are not mimicking real world environments. SSDs benefit from not consuming ANY power while they are idle, where HDDs still consume near their maxium level. That means that in reality (where the storage device is not at 100% utilization 100% of the time) the SSD will use less power than the HDD.
2. The SSD is faster than the HDD, meaning that it can finish a task faster than the HDD and go back into its no power use idle mode.

In addition SSD's are still valuable because they make less noise, are less prone to shock (laptops are mobile), and weigh less.
Having 100% load for the entire life of the battery should make the HDDs lose if the SSD were truly more efficient. But since SSDs either use on or off for their power consumption needs - no inbetween like HDDs - so they lose out over time. Even if the SDD is only being used say 1%, it still uses as much power as if it were being used at 100% because of the way they consume power. Plus, HDDs are often in use in some form, especially when you have a large page file! THG's analysis is the worst-case scenario for the HDD, and the HDD still wins. THG's analysis is perfectly legitmate.

Furthermore, the SSD is not faster than all HDDs. In fact, it only beats HDDs completely in access time. The SSD has far more shortcomings than it does advantages over the HDD, starting with the ridiculous price. The only true advantages of the SSD over the HDD are its weight and shock resistance.

Also, "several" implies 4 or more reasons, and I only see 2. What am I missing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipp View Post
Valid points - the issue here is that the manufactures didn't sort out their fine print, or at least give themselves an "in real world performance tests..." option.

Toms is correct - but the issue is not one of lying, but semantics.
No. See above. And it isn't simply an issue of semantics because manufacturers are advertising better battery life. That is either true, or false. There is no grey area.
Edited by stargate125645 - 6/30/08 at 4:04pm
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargate125645 View Post
Having 100% load for the entire life of the battery should make the HDDs lose if the SSD were truly more efficient. But since SSDs either use on or off for their power consumption needs - no inbetween like HDDs - so they lose out over time. Even if the SDD is only being used say 1%, it still uses as much power as if it were being used at 100% because of the way they consume power. Plus, HDDs are often in use in some form, especially when you have a large page file! THG's analysis is the worst-case scenario for the HDD, and the HDD still wins. THG's analysis is perfectly legitmate.

Furthermore, the SSD is not faster than all HDDs. In fact, it only beats HDDs completely in access time. The SSD has far more shortcomings than it does advantages over the HDD, starting with the ridiculous price. The only true advantages of the SSD over the HDD are its weight and shock resistance.

Also, "several" implies 4 or more reasons, and I only see 2. What am I missing?

No. See above. And it isn't simply an issue of semantics because manufacturers are advertising better battery life. That is either true, or false. There is no grey area.
I could use a similar test to what they used to prove to you that a Prius is less fuel efficient than regular car by running it at 100MPH until it runs out of gas. But we all know that isn't what it is designed to do, or how it will be used...
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13 of 44


Their analysis and results don't exactly add up...

Looking at the runtime of the laptop is too variable to be useful. Power consumption you can't really argue with though.
It goes to eleven
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6300 DS3 EVGA 8600GTS 2GB XMS2 DDR2-800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
1.294 TB Arch Linux/XP Samsung 226bw Eclipse II 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair 520HX Lian-Li v1000B Plus G7 
  hide details  
Reply
It goes to eleven
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6300 DS3 EVGA 8600GTS 2GB XMS2 DDR2-800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
1.294 TB Arch Linux/XP Samsung 226bw Eclipse II 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair 520HX Lian-Li v1000B Plus G7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldovi View Post
I could use a similar test to what they used to prove to you that a Prius is less fuel efficient than regular car by running it at 100MPH until it runs out of gas. But we all know that isn't what it is designed to do, or how it will be used...
How do YOU know how consumers will use SSDs? There are many applications that tax the hard drive for long periods of time. And most HDDs are still faster than SSDs on sequential reads.

In other words, as long as your hard drive is defragmented (zomg, 20 minutes out of every month), the only advantage an SSD would give is a faster boot time.

Its just like comparing LCDs to CRTs. A cheap LCD is better than a cheap CRT due to the clearer picture, but there is no LCD in the world that can compare to a good CRT.
Server
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-3470 ASRock Z77 Extreme6 16 GB G.Skill Sniper DDR3-1600 1TB WD Caviar Black 
Hard DriveCoolingOSCase
4TB WD Caviar Red Cooler Master Hyper 212+ VMWare ESXi NZXT Crafted Series Tempest 410 
OtherOtherOther
LSI 9280-16i4e RAID Card Intel I350 Quad Port Gigabit NIC Intel Pro/1000 PT Dual Port Gigabit NIC 
  hide details  
Reply
Server
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5-3470 ASRock Z77 Extreme6 16 GB G.Skill Sniper DDR3-1600 1TB WD Caviar Black 
Hard DriveCoolingOSCase
4TB WD Caviar Red Cooler Master Hyper 212+ VMWare ESXi NZXT Crafted Series Tempest 410 
OtherOtherOther
LSI 9280-16i4e RAID Card Intel I350 Quad Port Gigabit NIC Intel Pro/1000 PT Dual Port Gigabit NIC 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manyak View Post
How do YOU know how consumers will use SSDs? There are many applications that tax the hard drive for long periods of time. And most HDDs are still faster than SSDs on sequential reads.

In other words, as long as your hard drive is defragmented (zomg, 20 minutes out of every month), the only advantage an SSD would give is a faster boot time.

Its just like comparing LCDs to CRTs. A cheap LCD is better than a cheap CRT due to the clearer picture, but there is no LCD in the world that can compare to a good CRT.
I don't. But I can assure you that most consumers don't run applications that put their device under 100% sequential load the entire time their laptop is on.

SSDs are often found in high end small laptops. These are used by "road warriors" and are valued because of their low noise, no risk (HDDs and movement aren't always good), high performance, and LOW tax on battery life. Most of these people are using Office and IE7, not applications that keep your storage active.
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldovi View Post
I could use a similar test to what they used to prove to you that a Prius is less fuel efficient than regular car by running it at 100MPH until it runs out of gas. But we all know that isn't what it is designed to do, or how it will be used...
You can give all the unrelated analogies you want, but it won't change that what THG did is legitimate. A SSD uses the same amount of power whether it is being utilized at 1% capacity or 100%. Everything was explained in my previous post so forgive me for not feeling like repeating myself further.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldovi View Post
SSDs are often found in high end small laptops. These are used by "road warriors" and are valued because of their low noise, no risk (HDDs and movement aren't always good), high performance, and LOW tax on battery life. Most of these people are using Office and IE7, not applications that keep your storage active.
Again with the misinformation. "No risk" is is just as blatantly false as saying the power consumption of SSD drives will save battery life when clearly they do not. Since the shelf lives of SSDs are much lower than that of HDDs at the moment. It's not exactly low risk if the drives fail more quicker. It's already been established that SSD transfer rates don't always exceed that of an HDD - and even then it's only at either read or write, and not both. Windows will keep your storage medium active, and you are dwelling on 100% HDD load when even 1% load to the drives when it makes no difference for an SDD whether it is being loaded 1% or 100%. See, now you made me repeat myself.
Edited by stargate125645 - 6/30/08 at 7:43pm
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargate125645 View Post
You can give all the unrelated analogies you want, but it won't change that what THG did is legitimate. A SSD uses the same amount of power whether it is being utilized at 1% capacity or 100%. Everything was explained in my previous post so forgive me for not feeling like repeating myself further.
I don't think you understand. The power saving potential in SSD's is not about their load power consumption. It is about their idle power consumption. SSDs use 0W at idle, where the HDD is using close to its normal power consumption at idle. Therefore a test that runs the SSDs and HDDs at constistent utilization is going to supress this advantage of SSDs, which what causes realworld power savings.
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldovi View Post
I don't think you understand. The power saving potential in SSD's is not about their load power consumption. It is about their idle power consumption. SSDs use 0W at idle, where the HDD is using close to its normal power consumption at idle. Therefore a test that runs the SSDs and HDDs at constistent utilization is going to supress this advantage of SSDs, which what causes realworld power savings.
I do understand. And I'm willing to put money on a storage medium seeing more use than not. At the very least this is something that needs to known and THG brings it to the public's attention - at least to the attention of those who care. Simply advertising better battery life is not an entirely accurate statement.
Edited by stargate125645 - 6/30/08 at 8:37pm
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #19 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargate125645 View Post
is yet another reason why high-RPM drives are still the best available and definitely better than what SSD has to offer by a long shot - especially considering the new VelociRaptor drives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargate125645 View Post
Furthermore, the SSD is not faster than all HDDs. In fact, it only beats HDDs completely in access time. The SSD has far more shortcomings than it does advantages over the HDD, starting with the ridiculous price. The only true advantages of the SSD over the HDD are its weight and shock resistance.
A flash drive has access times orders of magnitude better than the best mechanical drives, were as something like a Velociraptor has maybe 40-50% better access times that a good 7,200rpm drive.

Your statement regarding access times being the only advantage of an SSD over a high-rpm disk drive is quite true. However, this is the only real advantage of a Velociraptor over a good 7,200rpm drive.

I have nearly year old 250GB platter degate drives that can hit 110MB/s sustained at the beginning of the drive, and that average 80MB/s over the entire drive. A velociraptor is only about 10% faster than this.

The performance improvement going from a velociraptor to a good SSD is much greater than the performance improvement going from a good 7,200rpm drive to a velociraptor.

I completely agree with you that SSDs are far too expensive at this time, but I disagree that the best option is a high rpm harddrive. The best overall option is a newer 7,200rpm drive with high density platters.
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #20 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post
A flash drive has access times orders of magnitude better than the best mechanical drives, were as something like a Velociraptor has maybe 40-50% better access times that a good 7,200rpm drive.

Your statement regarding access times being the only advantage of an SSD over a high-rpm disk drive is quite true. However, this is the only real advantage of a Velociraptor over a good 7,200rpm drive.

I have nearly year old 250GB platter degate drives that can hit 110MB/s sustained at the beginning of the drive, and that average 80MB/s over the entire drive. A velociraptor is only about 10% faster than this.

The performance improvement going from a velociraptor to a good SSD is much greater than the performance improvement going from a good 7,200rpm drive to a velociraptor.

I completely agree with you that SSDs are far too expensive at this time, but I disagree that the best option is a high rpm harddrive. The best overall option is a newer 7,200rpm drive with high density platters.
I have no quarrels with what you've said except for speed. VelociRaptors are much faster than any other HDD available right now, and no SSD consistently beats them. The best option for most who want the most performance but can't/won't spend $500 on a single drive is a VelociRaptor. Even the new high density patter 7200RPM drives have issues competing consistently with the VelociRaptor, and it was only relatively recently that the original Raptor was challenged on a regular basis.
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
BladeRunner v3.0
(11 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-5930K @ 4.6GHz Core, 4.4GHz Cache ASUS X99 Sabertooth Sapphire R9 380 Dual-X OC G.Skill TridentZ 32GB DDR4 @ 13-15-13-33-1T 320... 
Hard DriveCoolingOSKeyboard
Samsung 850 Pro 512GB Noctua NH-D15S Windows 10 Home 64-bit Logitech G910 Orion Spark 
PowerCaseMouse
EVGA SuperNova 1000W T2 NZXT Phantom 820 Black Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [THG] The SSD Power Consumption Hoax