Vista or XP ?

Quote from paulxx:

Tried an OCZ SSD last month on a new quad core system. XP booted in about 20 seconds and some activities were fine but the performance was really let down by the small-file random-write speed at around 7MB per second on a quoted 'up to 90MB per sec' write speed drive.

I'm not interested in odd non-standard tweaks, so I sent it back and am much happier with a 500 GB WD caviar 'black' with a second removable SATA archive drive.

Totally agree with all negative comments about vista. But it will run OK for an average user - with some basic tweaks. Just dumping Norton/Macafee will make an enormous difference to any machine (use Avira antivir - only uses about 10MB of system memory)

Nobody likes microsoft, but XP Pro is the ideal for a trader. For trading software at least, forget Linux, Mac (piggy back XP if you already have one) and avoid vista if you can.
More...


Regarding the SSDs.

1. You really should do the tweaks. XP was built for the hardware available at that time. Correct alignment of the partition can make a big difference as it prevents XP writing to two blocks every time it wants to write small blocks.

2. Small block writes are doubly bad if you don't have correctly aligned partitions. In my situation there are few small writes (cache, temp, pagefile on ramdisks) but those who care about smallwrite performance on SSDs seem to use MFT to resolve that problem.

The way I've set it up you get the promised performance particularly the benefits of fast random access reads.

The biggest benefit of the SSD for me is that I run a near silent machine and the SSD lets the harddrive spin down and stay silent most of the trading day - green too without hd power use. All that with an exceptionally fast setup.

Its horses for courses though and I wouldn't want to be without my hard disk either. With what I've learn't setting up and optimizing the ssd I would now run a hard disk based system differently and could make it almost as quiet and green ... but not quite as fast, the random read performance is pretty cool.



>>>>>>>>>>>

Note: My data/program partition uses MFT. Here are comparisons (KBps or MBps) between the MFT partition and my Seagate 500G 7200.

Block size MFTSSD HD7200
512B 2.1MB 310KB
1KB 4.5MB 602KB
4KB 65.4MB 2.3MB

So running MFT you outperform the hard disk by an order of magnitude. By comparison for small block writes like this the HD was faster than a raw SSD without MFT.
 
Quote from bighog:


Who in their right mind would even want a touch screen for a desktop? Can you imagine all the coffee that will be spolled reaching for the screen? How about some trader getting out of a losing trade smashing his fist into the screen just as the trade turns around after he bails out.
More...

Or imagine how "Fat Finger" errors will actually be attributed to people who have fat fingers and touch the wrong trade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top