The SSD and you.

[Rbstr]

Originally Posted by Goku

Like I said have you used one before?

I have. I guess I'm just a lot more patient than the rest of you, but I don't find these to be a good benefit-per-dollar proposition in a desktop.

Honestly I hadn't really read up on the cache drives yet, though. It eliminates my primary issue, which is the lack of a large volume.
Sounds like a prime candidate for when win8 comes out and I go to a fresh disk. $300 for 2tb with lots of the performance of a $150 128gb SSD?

[The Desert Fox]

Okay what about a SanDisk Extreme SDSSDX-120G-G25? it's on sale for $120 but the sale ends today.

[Goku]

You could give this a shot http://slickdeals.net/f/4196360-128-...20-TAX-or-less

I just tend to avoid SF based SSDs due to the numerous issues that have been on going ever, since their release.

[Rbstr]

OK, I got bit by the bug. I'm going to get the crucial caching drive (it helped that I still had a good bit of Amazon gift$ sitting around).

Should be here Saturday. I'll post impressions.

[Goku]

Let us know how it goes. What size you get?

[Rbstr]

It only comes in 50gb

[Vancha]

So there seems to be two reviews for it that popped up today. Is it a new release?

Apparently it takes a while for the speed to kick in, as it learns which programs to "speed up". It sounds like a pretty nifty piece of kit...perhaps not as fast as a dedicated SSD, but it certainly sounds like the difference should be more than noticeable (at least once things get going, anyway).

[Baneblade]

So its basically a ReadyBoost drive?

[Rbstr]

Yeah, to some extent. All of these seem to use NVELO's Dataplex software. And yes, it's a fairly new release.

I think the best part is that it's continually learning. So as I cycle through games, it'll keep cycling what it's caching.

I wonder if I can keep it from caching my music, which really has no reason to be accelerated.

[Goku]

I wouldn't be shocked that it knows to avoid caching that sort of stuff tbh.

[Rbstr]

Well. It's installed. Pretty easy, hook it up turn it on, download the software, install. Dataplex runs completely in the background with no indication it's running at all, unless you go into the start menu and run "Dataplex status" which is just a command line thingy. There are no configuration options.
That's my kind of utility software. No bullshit, just does what it's supposed to.
There's a new process running "NVELO Desktop notification utility" not quite sure what that does, takes 1.3mb of memory, no biggy.

For now, all it's done is slow things down...when it boots, pre-windows startup, my computer is having to think about something with the infamous blinking "_". Probably just need to make sure it's pointed at the right drive. It did this after the disk install but before the software install, so I'm pretty sure it's my problem not the drive/technology's.

Going to reboot a couple times to get it cached and see how much time I save.

EDIT:
Ok, so going from "Windows Starting" to fully usable computer takes under 30secs now (after only one restart past the one that you do after the install". A portion of that is typing in my password. A substantial improvement. But the whole boot takes 1:30+ now. Which saves some time, but that blinking "_" is really ruining things. I tried rearranging the boot priority but that doesn't seem to fix it. Need to fiddle some now.

[Goku]

Have you noticed any major differences yet?

[Rbstr]

Yeah, there are differences. Once I open something up a couple of times loading speeds are way down in many cases. But, if the program doesn't use a lot of data multiple times you don't see benefit.
Media Player Classic boots up like it always does, because the bottleneck is from the video file which isn't going to be cached.
BF3 always loads faster but maps you haven't played will be noticeably slower than the others.
My monster set of firefox tabs comes up much faster after a reboot - from password to usable computer is incredibly quick. But, like I've said, I don't reboot much.

I'm pretty happy with it and it works as expected. But, I still stand by my original position. It's an amazing bit of hardware in 1% of computer usage time. I still wouldn't want a full SSD. At the $100 I spent a 64gb drive would be way too little space and just make me annoyed. To get the space I'd want/need I'd be spending too much. I'd say the point where I'd make the jump to full SSD is about 1tb for $200. As it stands, this cache + >1tb of a spinner is ~$250 (or better, WD green or those 5900rpm Seagates make a much more attractive case when paired with a cache drive IMO) .
I would put a 128, or even 64 in my work laptop that doesn't need big volumes of storage.

[Goku]

Glad it's working at least. I don't plan on getting another til at least 500gbs for 200ish. My current setup pulls around that so it will be plenty for me.

[Tuomio]

I had XP 32 and HDD, went to Win7 64 and 128gb SSD, difference is huge! Also i am now able to do RAM upgrade (4->8gb) to get rid of the swapping for good.

It mostly impacts the responsiveness of application use and load times. No other component you can buy off the shelf that has as great impact on those. It might also get rid of any texture loading times you might experience during gaming.

Its nothing you cannot live without, but if you can afford the extra 150-200$ go for it. There are certain issues if you plan on using XP with SSD, Win7 is much better prepped for it, going from 32-bit to 64-bit helped to open my wallet for that.