[font="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"][color="#808080"]Hello all,
I am kinda new to all this and since I am about to get a new 6GB/s Sata3 system I need to ask this

The main two SSDs that I am considering are the Micron's C400 or the OCZ Vertex3 120' version.
I can see that their sequential speeds in both write and read are completely different with V3 winning
but their Random IOPSs (always comparing the 120GB V3 and the 128GB C400) differ with C400 winning in reads and V3 winning with big difference in writes.
I must say I am planning to install my windows 7 OS in this new SSD I am getting and what I would
consider doing is the following:
-Compiling
-Installing 1 game at a time, playing, erasing, redo
-Maybe Adobe work: Photoshop etc

So I have other hard drives to store stuff but the SSD would make my work and gaming quite faster.
The question is, C400 gives 40K of read which is more important for an OS whilst V3 gives better overall stats and is only lacking in random reads. What would be more important for me? Thanks![/font]

[color="#808080"]

[color="#808080"]What would be more important for me?

[/quote]I think thats a trick question....

You kinda hint that you want the C400, but personally I'd go the V3, when your loading a program, your looking at sequential reads to get data into the memory, random reads are things like the spontaneous I need a DLL file (or atleast this is what I am lead to believe).
Since even my old fashioned HDD is fast enough to handle the most part of my random reads, I wouldn't think that overly improtant when considering a SSD.

It'll be your own choice in the end, and I'd suggest you do more research, find out the definition of random reads, I think you'll find fast sequential read is the important one, while random reads equivelant to HDD speed are still more than enough for most things.

If you do get the V3 and want to optimize it - run a good defrag program on it frequently (like everytime you log-off), then you are almost gaurenteed to have sequential reads more often than not, my money would be on the V3....

when your loading a program, your looking at sequential reads to get data into the memory,

No. This depends totally on the program. If the program is a standalone executable with nothing else, and you have no fragmentation problems, then that ends up being a sequential read. However, that's actually fairly untypical. Most programs, especially games, touch tons of files when they're loading, creating a storm of random reads.

C400 will be cheaper and will have faster random speeds but will lack everywhere else
V3 will be more expensive, lack random speeds but will be a monster to everything else

I want to follow C400 as it was last year's leader in benchmarks and OCZ have a history of not really
having the best support but I am still considering both

Of course it depends on the usage, but contrary to the above. random reads and access time are in fact everything. Also, be sure to find stats for a used disc; they can be radicaly different from stats of a new drive.

Personally, id say sequential reads and write speed in general is hugely overrated. Remember, during their lives bytes are read far more often than they are written. What was the last time you were frustrated over the writing speed of your harddisc? Unless your daily use involves copying huge movies or datasets around, do yourself a favor and get an intel X25M. It is still the best performer in terms of random reads/acces time in used state, which is what makes history of those moments where you are ready to throw your computer out of the window because popping up a right click context menu takes several seconds.

Not that a more expensive sata6 SSD wouldnt accomplish that, but theoretically not even as well, and at a far higher price.

doing is the following:
-Compiling
-Installing 1 game at a time, playing, erasing, redo
-Maybe Adobe work: Photoshop
etc

You are overthinking it.

For these tasks any generic modern HDD will be more than adequate. Even constant installing of your games, which I assume means from disc or from a network, is going to be far more of a bottleneck than local HDD speed.

A faster HDD might save you a 1-2 minutes per day, but considering the time you have already spent and the cost difference between drives it generally isn't much of a concern.


If you were building a data center or other heavily data-centric system where HDD time is a bottleneck then it may become significant. For a consumer machine, not so much.

Loading times in games will go down considerably and that's my main aim, also opening programs such as photoshop
and ok compiling is far fetched but it could benefit as well. It is as said that read times are important and no I don't copy
around huge databases etc, it seems like I'll be going for the crucial C400 and save some money as well, although it
comes out in half a month or more and I am about to buy a new machine.