OCZ Synapse Cache SATA 3 64GB SSD Review Discussion Thread

[The SSD Guy]

Yes your performance will improve but not to the extent that you saw in my review because you are on a SATA 2 system. Dont get me wrong. In typical user activity you will SEE exactly as I did including the significant decrease in start time. You just wont see the SATA 3 speeds and will be limited somewhere around 280MB/s read and write. Remember, these are high sequential speeds and used very little in normal activity. You will be fine.

Also welcome to the site and post often!

[spidertaker23]

Thanks for the advice. Yea I knew I would be limited to sata II speeds. but, thanks for the information .

I wish you had a 128gb drive that you could test in similar way you did with the 64gb to see if you gain anything. Having the extra space would just give the drive/dataplex software more space to cache make any difference.

[The SSD Guy]

Ummm... I dont know what there would be to gain except a few Vantage points maybe as we were already nearing the top of listed specs. Logically, the ONLY difference would be the total lifespan of the cached drive and NOT performance as there is no change in the processor configuration at all.

[spidertaker23]

Well that's good to know. I think you have me convinced. I'll have to pick up the 64gb version! yay!

[Squeeky]

Is the Dataplex cache a write-through or a write-back cache? Is the type of cache configurable?

If it is a write-back cache, then the hard drive won't have a complete system image ... some of the image will be on the cache drive.

I use Norton Ghost to image my system for safety/archive purposes. If I image the system from *inside* Windows, then I will have a complete Ghost image of the system drive/cache drive (as Ghost won't be able to tell, and won't care, what is on the system drive and what is in the cache ... C:\ will be C:\).

What if I image the C:\ drive from the Ghost CD (another Ghost option, using the WinPE environment). In that case, I will presumably see only the C: drive (and not the cache drive) ... resulting in a complete image if it is a write-through cache, and a broken\incomplete image if it is a write-back cache.

Next question: the restoration of a Ghost image to a system drive is *always* done from outside Windows (using the WinPE environment). If I created the image from *inside* Windows, it would be a complete/integrated image of both the hard drive and the cache drive. But that image will be restored entirely to the fixed drive, yes? And what happens when you restart Windows and the files in the cache drive are no longer the same as the files on the hard drive (and the files on the hard drive are the ones that are correct ... even though the files on the cache drive may have newer dates)?

[Bill Gates]

Just to play the other side of the fence like I usually (always) do: I think the important thing here is VANTAGE which shows a somewhat different picture which is clearly that this combination cannot match what an all ssd os drive can do. No not even close. What happens to the data if one of the drives drops out? oh i'm sure nothing bad right? why would I even want my data on a ssd? personally I only want my os and apps on my ssd and my supremely important data on a tried and true hdd (this will change in the near future im sure but for now it holds true for me) to me this drive is for those who believe there is only one drive the "c" drive (these are the same people that get viruses on the "c" drive and disaster ensues). to ME this is like mixing oil and water they just don't go together. would you want that vantage score or this one:

which is from a drive i own but dont really like much (and is by no means the fastest drive in my collection) but still costs less than the cache drive

[The SSD Guy]

Agree totally! This is why I provided the review from and for the perspective of the typical user. If it looks like an SSD and sounds like an SSD well....

[Bill Gates]

Agree totally! This is why I provided the review from and for the perspective of the typical user. If it looks like an SSD and sounds like an SSD well....

the review is excellent as always however I am a purest and do not like caching

[spidertaker23]

Honestly, I don't understand the hate for caching. My friend bought a vertex 3 240gb hdd and at the time it cost him almost $500. That's insane for a product that can only fit his OS, some apps, and a few games (you could buy a laptop or an iPad for that lol). Overall, this ocz caching solution seems like a great solution for someone who might normally buy a 120gb ssd for the OS and apps and normally not have enough room for games.

Once you can buy a 240gb or 480gb ssd for a reasonable price this will change. But, I think caching is pretty cool considering it will allow me to cache the most commonly used data on my 1tb hdd.

Also, you don't have to hassle around with managing your data between ssd and hdd this way.

Obviously, all of this issue will go away in 5 to 10 years when ssd's turn into the new hdd's.

[The SSD Guy]

The 'hate' for caching is most probably through experiences previous to the Dataplex entry. I remember tons of complaints with respect to the Momentus XT and its lack of ability.