SSD description

Updating the SSD descriptions. How does this look?

Also, for benchmarks, should I follow the results given by official reviews, or average user benches?
anandtech.com/show/8520/sandisk-ultra-ii-240gb-ssd-review/5
vs
ssd.userbenchmark.com/SanDisk-Ultra-II-240GB/Rating/2548
For the rand read/write, the user benches give a much lower rate.

For the comparison stats, I compare the rand/seq read/writes vs the best values I can find. Is it fairer to compare vs a single model, instead of the best stats from different models?

I put the seq values first. Change and put the more realistic rand values first?

Your suggestions, comments, and criticisms would be appreciated.

Other urls found in this thread:

techreport.com/review/30109/mushkin-reactor-1tb-ssd-reviewed/3
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Any feedback would be great.

you still work on a guide? haven't seen in posted in ages

It is stickied.

why don't you just approximate average between official and user benchmarks?

Isn't most of the benefit from SSDs to do with reducing the latency from milliseconds to nanoseconds anyway, not sustained transfer rates? I'd imagine most of the people who read your guide don't say things like "Well I run databases that I know do a lot of 4k random writes at a high queue depth..."

Unrelated: Have you ever considered adding a thing on your website for upcoming new hardware? In the past several months I've seen a lot of people saying they were/are holding off upgrades waiting for Pascal/Polaris/Zen/Broadwell-E/whatever, it'd be nice to have a notification that "such-and-such is scheduled to be released in four months, consider waiting for such-and-such component"

i see

why does the site use so much javascript?

Also your site works like total ass on phone, it's 2016 m8 make a mobile version

Best SSD should be compared to the best SSD in that same category- Compare m.2 SSDs to m.2, SATA3 to SATA3, PCIe to PCIe.

Looks like your 'compared to best SSD' is comparing SATA3 to PCIe, which is not very good because of the various problems with PCIe SSDs.

Because
P O O
O
O

do a case fan guide

add MTBF and Warranty, it would be nice it.

I'd go with the officialâ„¢ reviews benchmark since they're generally consistant between products.

As for the comparison I don't think it's really necessary to put it in the hover text since speeds are already listed and people will only compare it to others in the same "tier". It doesn't really matter how an 850 evo stacks up to a 950 pro.

I need to have a proper source to point to. Much more reliable than approximations, particularly if someone asks: "What is your source?"

Good point. Problem is that latency is not an easy metric to comprehend for those with little/no PC knowledge. I will need to add IOPS too, and that is even less comprehensible to the average Joe.

official reviews are better

Techreport has good SSD reviews
techreport.com/review/30109/mushkin-reactor-1tb-ssd-reviewed/3

>implying he who shant be named can code

Yeah, I may need to re-write the whole thing from scratch later.

I have a lot more to go first.

Noted.

OK, official reviews it is.

This is great, thanks!

This image is more or less why giving many shits about SSD performance is silly

That 1 second of extra time you save, can add up to a few minutes over a year!

But you make a good point. Real world results are going to be a lot closer than the benchmarks would suggest.

Any more feedback, or shall I proceed with the suggested changes, and come back later?

I got nothing to add. Just wanted to thank you for your website. It does help a bunch.
All the best!

Techreport is great for storage reviews.