SSDs for Charting Platforms

[TheNegotiator 13]

I thought I'd put the question to our community of what you think about Solid State Drives (SSD) for data storage. I use a large databases for instrument data and having a drive with high performance is something that I feel is an extremely useful thing for me. Technical or not, I'd really like to here the opinions of other members.

 

If anything remotely technical simply puts you to sleep, I have sectioned the next part out

 

#################################################

Yesterday, saw the release of the new OCZ Vertex 4 drive and this is what prompted me to start a thread. You can see it here.

 

There are a few major considerations in selecting a quality SSD. Probably the two most important:- flash memory type and controller.

 

Without getting too technical, the flash memory type will affect the life and ability of memory chips on the drive. At the moment, Toshiba make the best "toggle" flash. The main thing I would say about it is compared to the other types, it does not get the same kind of performance degredation as the drive is filled up. A full drive using "asynchronous" flash memory won't be likely to achieve anywhere near the specified performance.

 

The controller is the other main factor. Recently a popular choice for drive manufacturers has been the latest Sandforce offerings. They give the highest headline read/write peformance with current generation drives using the latest controller topping 500MB/s read and write. The thing is, different controllers use different methods for transferring data. Specifically, the Sandforce controllers compress data, transfer it, the decompress it. What this means is that incompressible data (already compressed data amongst other types) does not transfer at the same kind of rates as other data. My data uses compression and so Sandforce based SSDs will lose read/write performance in this case.

 

The reason I mentioned the OCZ Vertex 4 is that it uses a new controller - Indilinx (controller manufacturer which OCZ purchased). The 128GB drive has a similar read but really low write speed (200MB/s compared to Sandforce ~ 500MB/s). So what is the point then? Well, the drive tends to get much better all around performance and does not suffer so much from the incompressible data issue.

 

There is another major controller make due to release a new model soon - Marvell. They should be able to show all around performance which I need like OCZ's Indilinx controller.

 

I'll be looking out for Plextor drives when the new Marvell chip comes out.

#######################################################################

 

Anyway, my point is that an SSD for charting is at least for me, a very useful thing. But, not all SSD's are made equal. What do you think?

[Kiwi 16]

I started with SSD's some time back and the thing about SSD's is they are fantastic for reading but not as fantastic for writing. The earlier one experienced bottlenecks and all SSDs have a fast wear out rate.

 

So I go a different way. I put my OS and common programs on an SSD. I also store old data files on the SSD if I'm going to be using them. But I put the things that get accessed frequently on a RAM disk. HD's store bulk items.

 

On the RAM disk (only 2G but RAM is cheap):

- Sierra Chart instances for day trading and their actively used data files

- IB TWS

- Temp files including browser temps

 

That way I get maximum read and write speed for my day trading apps, great read speed for most everything else and good speed for archives.

[TheNegotiator 13]

I started with SSD's some time back and the thing about SSD's is they are fantastic for reading but not as fantastic for writing. The earlier one experienced bottlenecks and all SSDs have a fast wear out rate.

 

So I go a different way. I put my OS and common programs on an SSD. I also store old data files on the SSD if I'm going to be using them. But I put the things that get accessed frequently on a RAM disk. HD's store bulk items.

 

On the RAM disk (only 2G but RAM is cheap):

- Sierra Chart instances for day trading and their actively used data files

- IB TWS

- Temp files including browser temps

 

That way I get maximum read and write speed for my day trading apps, great read speed for most everything else and good speed for archives.

 

Thanks for sharing Kiwi. I am currently looking at Sierra more thoroughly than I have before. I use IRT for the most part and the data files for my extended volume profiles(back from early 2007 right now) can be cumbersome. The space issue isn't such a big thing considering most SSD's(or even RAM) sizes. I hadn't considered the possibility of a RAM disk so perhaps need to look into it. I do think that the current SSD's are getting better and better though. One thing is that the provising is growing for the shrinking and more cost efficient manufacture. So you won't get as much "real" storage space per disk. I hope that while other companies are driving down the cost per gig, there will be a few companies driving quality innovation. That's why I will be on the lookout for offerings from plextor for example. Their last drives tested very well according to multiple sources.

 

Not totally sure which way to go yet so maybe when I have a better idea I will post again.

[tradeX 10]

Yesterday, saw the release of the new OCZ Vertex 4 drive and this is what prompted me to start a thread. You can see it here. There are a few major considerations in selecting a quality SSD. Probably the two most important:- flash memory type and controller.

OCZ must have the WORST track record of drives in terms of reliability. You pretty much want to avoid any SandForce drive unless it's the Intel 520 series. The drives are fast, but they fail very quickly.

 

The new OCZ Vertex 4 you mentioned DOES use a different controller (thank god) and with the 5-year warranty it MIGHT be a safe bet. Based off OCZ's track record though, they have NEVER proven themselves to be reliable at all. Did OCZ finally get their act together with the Vertex 4? Maybe, only time will tell. Do you want to be their guinea pig? Probably not. There are already existing drives on the market that have proven themselves. Like Anandtech says, avoid new SSDs until they're validated.

 

If you're in the market for an SSD and want the best performance and reliability, the Intel 520 SSDs are your best bet. They come with a 5-year warranty as well but the drives have also been very thoroughly tested hence the price premium. For ultimate peace of mind, the 520 is a no-brainer.

 

The only other drive I would consider is the Samsung 830 series. This drive is even faster than the 520 in some areas and Samsung has an outstanding track record in terms of reliability. It only comes with a 3-year warranty, but I'd feel very confident using it. When the next gen Intel processors are released in a few weeks I'm making a new build. I will be choosing the Samsung 830.

 

Therefore, the Samsung 830 and Intel 520 should be your only two options on your shortlist. You can't really go wrong with either.

[coldrunner 10]

This is an old link but here are some updated ideas:

 

If you are considering an SSD, a recent improvement in SSDs is in the Intel 520 series.

The problem with SSDs is that writing to the NAND memory in SSDs wears them out

over time. Another company invented a hard drive controller called SandForce.

It spreads the writes all over the hard drive like holographic memory in the

human brain. That evens the memory wear over time.

 

Intel gave in and licensed that technology. Intel also created additional

memory that can only be accessed by the SSD. When a memory

location wears out, it assigns that memory location to a new location in

that fresh unused memory.

Intel is confident enough to offer a 5 year warranty on this hard drive.

A 120 gigabyte drive is $200. (I don't work for Intel nor am I associated

in any to that company except a customer.)

Other companies' SSDs have the Sandforce controller, but not the warranty

that I am aware of.

 

I use my SSD by loading only my applications to it, not my Operating System.

I really don't care how fast my computer boots up. I want my trading

platforms to run fast. That would be Interactive Brokers TWS for 1 application.

I can tell that TWS runs faster, although the real bottleneck is my Interent

access speed.

 

Also, a securtiy consideration:

Password crackers run at 300 billion password crack attempts a second

on an SSD drive. But if your OS is on slow spinning hard drive, that's like

an eternity to a password cracker and it makes it hard to get that much

time to crack a password. Slow is more secure in this case.

 

Any other SSD insights specifically for running trading applications on an SSD

are appreciated.

 

coldrunner

[joshdance 10]

N, what is the primary benefit of a SSD for your trading application--to reduce latency?

 

There are things which could potentially slow down my system during heavy market activity, but I wonder if my system performance would be greatly enhanced by a SSD? There are many barriers to low latency -- the data feed itself, internet connectivity, calculation of custom indicators, etc.

[tradeX 10]

but I wonder if my system performance would be greatly enhanced by a SSD? There are many barriers to low latency -- the data feed itself, internet connectivity, calculation of custom indicators, etc.

Anytime there is read or write I/O (aka when system wants to read/write data from the drive), and SSD will be ENORMOUSLY faster than even your fastest HDDs on the market. To answer your question, buying the right SSD WILL greatly enhance system performance. I don't know however how useful an SSD would be for charting because that relies on your internet provider's connection to your charting machine.

 

As for the charting software running on your local machine, I don't think an SSD would make any difference in charting performance because the application should be running in RAM. The only thing an SSD would speed up is the time it takes to START the charting application.

[TheNegotiator 13]

OCZ must have the WORST track record of drives in terms of reliability. You pretty much want to avoid any SandForce drive unless it's the Intel 520 series. The drives are fast, but they fail very quickly.

 

Well, I have heard this about OCZ too. I also have run an original vertex turbo and although it is an indilinx based drive not sandforce, it has never been unreliable at all. As far as avoiding Sandforce goes, I disagree. Some of the fastest and more reliable drives use sandforce controllers. In any case you should be backing up mission critical data. I think you also need to qualify your statement that they fail very quickly. Maybe compared with a mechanical drive, but then if you run the same OS drive for 10 years without reinstalling you won't have a fast system anyway. Re-installing gives you the chance to put in a more up-to-date drive.

 

N, what is the primary benefit of a SSD for your trading application--to reduce latency?

 

There are things which could potentially slow down my system during heavy market activity, but I wonder if my system performance would be greatly enhanced by a SSD? There are many barriers to low latency -- the data feed itself, internet connectivity, calculation of custom indicators, etc.

 

Loading lots of data into memory is what an SSD is good for. So loading lots of locally stored chart data for example will be much quicker than a standard mechanical drive. If it's latency you have a problem with, big factors include the amount of charts and studies you have open, your cpu, your OS settings, your ISP, the time of day.

[joshdance 10]

On the RAM disk (only 2G but RAM is cheap):

- Sierra Chart instances for day trading and their actively used data files

- IB TWS

- Temp files including browser temps

 

That way I get maximum read and write speed for my day trading apps, great read speed for most everything else and good speed for archives.

 

Sounds like a great idea. What software do you use to manage your ram disk? I saw one from DataRam that is free up to 4GB. Do you auto-save the disk every so often--basically, how do you preserve the data so it's available when you restart?

[tradeX 10]

As far as avoiding Sandforce goes, I disagree. Some of the fastest and more reliable drives use sandforce controllers.

SandForce is known for being the fastest but at the same time the most unreliable . The Intel 520 is the ONLY exception with the SF controller.

 

I think you also need to qualify your statement that they fail very quickly. Maybe compared with a mechanical drive, but then if you run the same OS drive for 10 years without reinstalling you won't have a fast system anyway. Re-installing gives you the chance to put in a more up-to-date drive.

Compared to other controllers on the market, SandForce has had more RMAs than you could wrap your head around. It's no secret. This knowledge is wide spread throughout tech and e-commerce web sites.

 

Your mention about running the same OS for 10 years has no relevance to the topic at hand. I'm comparing SandForce to other controllers on the market. If I was bashing SSD technology as a whole, I wouldn't be targeting only the SandForce controller as an issue...

[TheNegotiator 13]

SandForce is known for being the fastest but at the same time the most unreliable . The Intel 520 is the ONLY exception with the SF controller.

 

 

Compared to other controllers on the market, SandForce has had more RMAs than you could wrap your head around. It's no secret. This knowledge is wide spread throughout tech and e-commerce web sites.

 

Your mention about running the same OS for 10 years has no relevance to the topic at hand. I'm comparing SandForce to other controllers on the market. If I was bashing SSD technology as a whole, I wouldn't be targeting only the SandForce controller as an issue...

 

I agreed in that I have heard about OCZ's reliability issues, but not so much sandforce- although I'm not saying this is untrue. But if it were so unreliable, it would have been dropped by manufacturer's pretty quickly rather than used more.

 

The comment about running the same OS drive for 10years was based on :-

 

OCZ must have the WORST track record of drives in terms of reliability. You pretty much want to avoid any SandForce drive unless it's the Intel 520 series. The drives are fast, but they fail very quickly.

 

It sounded like you were saying that these drives really don't last any time at all and that's just not true. I have been running a sandforce based drive for well over a year now and expect it to be a good performer for a good while yet. Admittedly it isnt an OCZ but it is sandforce and it has a three year warranty- just as OCZ. As you mentioned the OCZ Vertex 4 has 5yrs although that doesnt automatically make it better. However, I think that I will be looking more at drives with other controllers in future as I believe that there are some key areas where the sandforce controllers fall down as I have already mentioned. I don't know about the intel drives you mention from personal experience although I know some really hold them in high esteem. I don't think that's automatically going to be the case with the new 330 though looking at the price point. Who knows.

[Kiwi 16]

For the record my drive was from OCZ (as is half of my RAM) and both have been perfectly reliable. What's more it is pre-write distribution technology so it's old and reliable

[TheNegotiator 13]

Not sure that anyone is too interested, but it seems OCZ's new Vertex 4 actually uses the latest Marvell controller just with Indilinx firmware. Interesting...

 

anandtech article

[joshdance 10]

OK, so my Win7 performance score is 5.9 -- processor, ram, graphics all in the 7.4 range; HD is 5.9 .. I have a core i5 750 quad 2.67GHz, 8GB RAM, radeon 5700 which has I'm guessing 128MB ram. Basically, my computer is reasonably speedy, but I'm a sucker for fast hardware.

 

I am only using about 120GB in my current HD, and am considering either an Intel 520 or Samsung 830 SSD, at 256GB.

 

I know this is a blanket, non-technical question, but: generally, will my "experience" be rewarded by upgrading to a SSD, and if so, can you ballpark a "percentage increase" I might be looking at for "overall speed"? Very vague I know, but I'm just looking for a general idea of whether this will be a very low return on investment given the cost, or whether it will be easily noticeable?

[TheNegotiator 13]

OK, so my Win7 performance score is 5.9 -- processor, ram, graphics all in the 7.4 range; HD is 5.9 .. I have a core i5 750 quad 2.67GHz, 8GB RAM, radeon 5700 which has I'm guessing 128MB ram. Basically, my computer is reasonably speedy, but I'm a sucker for fast hardware.

 

I am only using about 120GB in my current HD, and am considering either an Intel 520 or Samsung 830 SSD, at 256GB.

 

I know this is a blanket, non-technical question, but: generally, will my "experience" be rewarded by upgrading to a SSD, and if so, can you ballpark a "percentage increase" I might be looking at for "overall speed"? Very vague I know, but I'm just looking for a general idea of whether this will be a very low return on investment given the cost, or whether it will be easily noticeable?

 

Depends really. I think generally you will see the difference. I'd go for a 60-120gb OS/freq app (e.g. trading stuff) drive with a bigger mech storage drive (although thai floods have jacked the prices up on these), but then I will hazard a guess that you're memory is 1333mhz. Memory is a big performance driver. At the moment memory is dirt cheap so could be worth looking at an upgrade at the same time.

[joshdance 10]

Kiwi, you said that you loaded your sierra and trading stuff onto a ram drive.

 

I tried loading IRT on a ramdrive, but strangely saw no noticeable improvement in speed on the load of the program at startup, as well as execution. It takes about 60 seconds to start my platform and load all my charts. Starting from a RAM drive it was about the same.

 

N, I did some memory benchmarks and have attached the screen shot. What do you think? The program is free from:

MaxxPI² - Download (MaxxMEM² - PreView)

[TheNegotiator 13]

Kiwi, you said that you loaded your sierra and trading stuff onto a ram drive.

 

I tried loading IRT on a ramdrive, but strangely saw no noticeable improvement in speed on the load of the program at startup, as well as execution. It takes about 60 seconds to start my platform and load all my charts. Starting from a RAM drive it was about the same.

 

N, I did some memory benchmarks and have attached the screen shot. What do you think? The program is free from:

MaxxPI² - Download (MaxxMEM² - PreView)

 

Not too good but not too bad either. Take a look at Technology content trusted by users around the world :: TweakTown USA Edition for reviews (lots of decent tech sites about but tweaktown's methodical reviewing nature is good for comparisons). For benchmarking memory, they use aida64 which used to be everest. I never got around to buying a copy but they have an evaluation version for free. $39.95 though is cheap and it's a very useful bit of software (esp if you build/overclock your own rig:D)