Hardware Canucks

Hardware Canucks (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/)
-   Storage (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/storage/)
-   -   Corsair Accelerator 60GB SSD Cache Drive Review Comment Thread (http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/storage/54321-corsair-accelerator-60gb-ssd-cache-drive-review-comment-thread.html)

SKYMTL May 16, 2012 10:33 PM

Corsair Accelerator 60GB SSD Cache Drive Review Comment Thread
 
Corsair's aptly named Accelerator series is aimed at breathing new life into older HDD-based systems by caching your most-used information so it can be quickly accessed. But in a market that's filled with similar solutions that perform the same basic functions, has Corsair been able to differentiate their offering?

Read more here: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...ve-review.html

Jebusman May 17, 2012 06:55 AM

Well then.

This entire review just sort of read really depressingly. I guess they can't all be winners.

sswilson May 17, 2012 07:02 AM

Is there any reason why Data-Plex couldn't just sell the software stand-alone to allow folks to use whatever smaller SSD they might have kicking around?

Jebusman May 17, 2012 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sswilson (Post 630551)
Is there any reason why Data-Plex couldn't just sell the software stand-alone to allow folks to use whatever smaller SSD they might have kicking around?

Because the moment it hits the internet people would pirate the **** out of it. They probably figure they get a lot more money licensing it to manufacturers rather than sell it directly to the public.

sswilson May 17, 2012 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jebusman (Post 630626)
Because the moment it hits the internet people would pirate the **** out of it. They probably figure they get a lot more money licensing it to manufacturers rather than sell it directly to the public.

I buy the idea that they might make more out of licensing to manus, but I'd argue that they're inviting hackers / pirates by not making it available to the general public.

Jebusman May 17, 2012 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sswilson (Post 630630)
I buy the idea that they might make more out of licensing to manus, but I'd argue that they're inviting hackers / pirates by not making it available to the general public.

I guess, but Hackers gonna Hack, regardless of what they do. Sooner or later some free implementation of it will be available, whether or not Dataplex likes it.

AkG May 17, 2012 03:06 PM

I would not be overly surprised if the next "generation" is open to gen public...as I consider this gen of Dataplex a more "reconnaissance by fire" than anything. Why spend all the money on marketing and building a market when you can simply get your -existing - customers to do it for you.

Honestly, the Accelerator is a decent solution. Just one that is a touch pricey. One good price cut or MIR and it would turn into a very, very good bang for your buck setup. :)

MARSTG May 17, 2012 09:23 PM

isn't there any software solution that would do a similar stuff but with system ram?

Galcobar May 17, 2012 10:00 PM

One suggestion I might make in regards to the review is to identify why the SF-2100 series of controllers is less capable than the SF-2200 series in the introductory page.

I am left wondering about the conclusion stated on almost every testing page that the difference between the two drives is due to using a SATAII controller. The 64GB OCZ Synapse uses 16 NAND chips, according to the earlier HWC review. That would mean all eight channels are populated with two devices per channel, allowing for interleaving. The 64GB Accelerator is described as using eight modules, with the part number indicating they're 64Gb packages, with the 10th letter being B, indicating one die per module.

http://www.micron.com/~/media/Documents/Products/Part%20Numbering%20Guide/218numngnand.ashx

Thus the Synapse has 16 devices to the Accelerator's eight -- that would mean no interleaving could occur on the Accelerator. Given almost all of the reads and writes are done well below the SATAII limit, would the difference in number of NAND devices -- and subsequent limitation on interleaving -- not be at least as likely to be the source of the small performance discrepancy seen under the synthetic tests?

Also, typo at the bottom of page 3 (SF-2182), and second sentence/second paragraph on page 11 (Unlike the competition, Corsairís implementation uses SATA 2 rather than SATA 3and relies upon a lower-performance controller).


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:34 AM.