Great tip for a speedy boot drive!

[supernova777]

where can i get this quickbench app?

[Knezzen]

where can i get this quickbench app?

http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=306.0;attach=133

[supernova777]

i ordered a bunch of adapters the other night.. sata-IDE adapters and compact flash to ide adapters.. i will have to get a couple sd to ide adapters aswell
Anyway i look forward to testing once i get them!

[Knezzen]

I look forward to the benchmarks! I got a PowerMac 9500 with a 400mhz G3 in it, but without a hard drive. Going to buy a PATA PCI card for it, but I don't know what I should use for boot etc.

I will probably go for another DOM drive, but if CF speeds are allright, I might try that instead.
With a PCI bracket for easy access

[supernova777]

yes i quite like this idea.. of being able to coldboot + switch the drive instantly.
 

i will use this for my windows 3.1 + windows 95 machine aswell to be able to switch between the two os... one 2gb for fat16/win3.1 .. and one 8gb for fat32/win95

i like the idea of doing this in a lowend g3 build tho too..
i would like to find a mac from the early 90s.. but things get wierd there.. with nubus + wierd non standard networking...

it would be cool to have a mac capable of running mac os 7.x but i think i have enuff machines as it is ..

[Knezzen]

The 9500 can use 7.x and that's what I intend to run on it. And BeOS

[supernova777]

i think u have the advantage in your area in that the people who own these older machines keep them altogether with original proper packaging + all related material + peripherals. whereas in usa + canada u find things basically thrown out.. and in the posession of dumpster diver people that are trying to profit from the sale and all the while not having any of the original materials to 'complete the package'

i cant find any pre-1999 macs around here, except for maybe a bondi blue imac

[Knezzen]

New results! This is from the same PowerBook G4 Titanium 1ghz running Mac OS 9.2.2, but this time with a KingSpec 2.5" SSD linked in a post above instead of the original apple branded 60gb Fujitsu drive.

QuickBench™ 1.5 Test Results File
©2000 Intech Software Corp.
Test file created on måndag 13 april 2015 at 10.23.11
Test Volume name: TiBook

Xfer Size     Sequential Read   Sequential Write    Random Read      Random Write

1 KByte         3.411 MB/sec      2.426 MB/sec      1.857 MB/sec    312.061 KB/sec
2 KBytes        7.564 MB/sec      4.135 MB/sec      4.906 MB/sec    839.490 KB/sec
4 KBytes       13.255 MB/sec      6.229 MB/sec      9.009 MB/sec      1.542 MB/sec
8 KBytes       21.732 MB/sec     18.051 MB/sec     15.735 MB/sec      2.741 MB/sec
16 KBytes      32.363 MB/sec     22.642 MB/sec     25.173 MB/sec      4.574 MB/sec
32 KBytes      42.785 MB/sec     30.366 MB/sec     35.792 MB/sec     10.280 MB/sec
64 KBytes      50.751 MB/sec     33.986 MB/sec     45.415 MB/sec     14.562 MB/sec
128 KBytes     52.365 MB/sec     36.791 MB/sec     49.323 MB/sec     21.194 MB/sec
256 KBytes     55.020 MB/sec     39.262 MB/sec     53.337 MB/sec     28.463 MB/sec
512 KBytes     56.209 MB/sec     39.043 MB/sec     55.471 MB/sec     33.220 MB/sec
1 MByte        57.024 MB/sec     40.762 MB/sec     56.702 MB/sec     36.713 MB/sec

Old results for comparison (60gb Apple branded Fujitsu drive):

QuickBench™ 1.5 Test Results File
©2000 Intech Software Corp.
Test file created on söndag 12 april 2015 at 19.24.30
Test Volume name: PowerBook G4

Xfer Size     Sequential Read   Sequential Write    Random Read      Random Write

1 KByte       159.380 KB/sec      4.083 MB/sec     70.915 KB/sec      3.804 MB/sec
2 KBytes        9.051 MB/sec      8.906 MB/sec      8.747 MB/sec      7.936 MB/sec
4 KBytes       15.440 MB/sec     14.944 MB/sec      7.124 MB/sec     12.724 MB/sec
8 KBytes       24.293 MB/sec     24.809 MB/sec    722.198 KB/sec     21.945 MB/sec
16 KBytes       8.864 MB/sec     32.230 MB/sec     17.853 MB/sec     31.157 MB/sec
32 KBytes      16.304 MB/sec     44.270 MB/sec      2.438 MB/sec     43.223 MB/sec
64 KBytes      21.526 MB/sec     49.631 MB/sec      4.941 MB/sec     51.781 MB/sec
128 KBytes     16.207 MB/sec     52.605 MB/sec      7.980 MB/sec     52.064 MB/sec
256 KBytes     16.026 MB/sec     10.666 MB/sec      9.076 MB/sec     20.633 MB/sec
512 KBytes     15.742 MB/sec     18.357 MB/sec     12.177 MB/sec     11.653 MB/sec
1 MByte        16.050 MB/sec     16.498 MB/sec     14.389 MB/sec     12.243 MB/sec

[Knezzen]

Just to add to it, while I noticed it...

The fans hardly come on. They came on when I restored 10gb of backed up files through FireWire. They hasent come on since. So I have an absolutley silent PowerBook G4 Titanium now that flies. It's insane. Everything in Mac OS 9 is extreamly sped up. I can really recommend the KingSpec SSD's for anyone who wants a cheap speed boost for their old machine.

Specs of the PowerBook:
PowerBook G4 Titanium
1GHZ PowerPC 7455
1GB RAM PC133 (2x512mb)
ATi Radeon 9000 64mb
60gb KingSpec SSD

[supernova777]

its an IDE 44pin 2.5" SSD?

[Knezzen]

its an IDE 44pin 2.5" SSD?

Correct!

EDIT:
To be more specific, this is what I used in the PowerBook:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/KingSpec-PATA-IDE-44Pin-2-5-64GB-MLC-SSD-drive-for-Desktop-Laptop-IBM-Asus-A6JC-/261504082711?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3ce2dba317

[Philgood]

Hi Knezzen.
Can you comment on the longtime performance of that DOM Drive now that you have run it during a longer time.
What about the infamous degradation in performance of this technology when you are filling up near the capacity of the drive or are missing support of the trim function as i understand will be the case when using OS9 or anything under 10.6...
Regarding trash data management what would be better technology DOM or CF cards ?

[Knezzen]

Hi Knezzen.
Can you comment on the longtime performance of that DOM Drive now that you have run it during a longer time.
What about the infamous degradation in performance of this technology when you are filling up near the capacity of the drive or are missing support of the trim function as i understand will be the case when using OS9 or anything under 10.6...
Regarding trash data management what would be better technology DOM or CF cards ?

Haven't felt any loss in speed yet with the TiBook, my Atari Falcon 060 or my Dual 1.5ghz G4 in the studio.
I have posted benchmarks from both the systems in April, so I could run them again so we can compare.

The DOM probably has better trash data management than a CF card. I have tried to stay away from CF cards in general after some bad experiences with CF cards and my Falcons (data corruption etc).

[Philgood]

Cool.Thank you Knez. So any recommendation where to buy them ?
I looked at eBay but would prefer to buy at the same seller like you as you are also living in Europe like me.
I think these things are difficult to find in consumer shops as a random search on Google didn't show me any manufacturers selling them directly.
As a known brand on eBay I saw only Transcendend I think so I have few reference. Any recommendation is welcome.

[Knezzen]

New results! This is from the same PowerBook G4 Titanium 1ghz running Mac OS 9.2.2, but this time with a KingSpec 2.5" SSD linked in a post above instead of the original apple branded 60gb Fujitsu drive.

QuickBench™ 1.5 Test Results File
©2000 Intech Software Corp.
Test file created on måndag 13 april 2015 at 10.23.11
Test Volume name: TiBook

Xfer Size     Sequential Read   Sequential Write    Random Read      Random Write

1 KByte         3.411 MB/sec      2.426 MB/sec      1.857 MB/sec    312.061 KB/sec
2 KBytes        7.564 MB/sec      4.135 MB/sec      4.906 MB/sec    839.490 KB/sec
4 KBytes       13.255 MB/sec      6.229 MB/sec      9.009 MB/sec      1.542 MB/sec
8 KBytes       21.732 MB/sec     18.051 MB/sec     15.735 MB/sec      2.741 MB/sec
16 KBytes      32.363 MB/sec     22.642 MB/sec     25.173 MB/sec      4.574 MB/sec
32 KBytes      42.785 MB/sec     30.366 MB/sec     35.792 MB/sec     10.280 MB/sec
64 KBytes      50.751 MB/sec     33.986 MB/sec     45.415 MB/sec     14.562 MB/sec
128 KBytes     52.365 MB/sec     36.791 MB/sec     49.323 MB/sec     21.194 MB/sec
256 KBytes     55.020 MB/sec     39.262 MB/sec     53.337 MB/sec     28.463 MB/sec
512 KBytes     56.209 MB/sec     39.043 MB/sec     55.471 MB/sec     33.220 MB/sec
1 MByte        57.024 MB/sec     40.762 MB/sec     56.702 MB/sec     36.713 MB/sec

So I benchmarked the TiBook today to see if performed differently after 8 months of heavy daily use. These are the results:

QuickBench™ 1.5 Test Results File
©2000 Intech Software Corp.
Test file created on söndag 13 december 2015 at 14.42.19
Test Volume name: TiBook

Xfer Size     Sequential Read   Sequential Write    Random Read      Random Write

1 KByte         2.723 MB/sec    407.299 KB/sec      1.242 MB/sec    206.688 KB/sec
2 KBytes        5.869 MB/sec    729.235 KB/sec      3.685 MB/sec    480.769 KB/sec
4 KBytes       10.234 MB/sec      1.582 MB/sec      7.111 MB/sec    981.258 KB/sec
8 KBytes       16.105 MB/sec      3.117 MB/sec     12.428 MB/sec      1.906 MB/sec
16 KBytes      26.600 MB/sec      6.425 MB/sec     20.875 MB/sec      3.572 MB/sec
32 KBytes      36.838 MB/sec     10.930 MB/sec     31.209 MB/sec      6.521 MB/sec
64 KBytes      45.000 MB/sec     17.225 MB/sec     40.245 MB/sec     10.426 MB/sec
128 KBytes     47.127 MB/sec     23.164 MB/sec     44.586 MB/sec     16.593 MB/sec
256 KBytes     50.723 MB/sec     28.946 MB/sec     49.349 MB/sec     23.429 MB/sec
512 KBytes     52.567 MB/sec     33.000 MB/sec     51.545 MB/sec      8.186 MB/sec
1 MByte        53.409 MB/sec     33.613 MB/sec     52.978 MB/sec     32.521 MB/sec


I will benchmark the DOM in the studio MDD later today. Will be interesting to see how it performs since it gets pretty much the same type of use are the SSD in the TiBook.
More or less anyway.

Philgood:I just bought the cheapest KingSpec 16gb DOM I could find on ebay. Im pretty sure I bought the one in the MDD straight from Hong Kong.

[Knezzen]

Next up is the current boot drive, a 16gb KingSpec Disk On Module (SSD). Connected alone on the ATA66 connector.

Xfer Size     Sequential Read   Sequential Write    Random Read      Random Write

1 KByte         4.209 MB/sec      2.050 MB/sec      1.647 MB/sec    461.638 KB/sec
2 KBytes        8.507 MB/sec      4.778 MB/sec      6.489 MB/sec    884.603 KB/sec
4 KBytes       12.572 MB/sec      3.486 MB/sec     10.809 MB/sec      1.777 MB/sec
8 KBytes       21.351 MB/sec     14.735 MB/sec     18.614 MB/sec      3.143 MB/sec
16 KBytes      32.798 MB/sec     14.569 MB/sec     28.554 MB/sec      5.421 MB/sec
32 KBytes      42.985 MB/sec     16.507 MB/sec     39.274 MB/sec      7.666 MB/sec
64 KBytes      50.796 MB/sec     20.446 MB/sec     48.073 MB/sec      8.914 MB/sec
128 KBytes     52.409 MB/sec     22.214 MB/sec     51.373 MB/sec     15.947 MB/sec
256 KBytes     55.402 MB/sec     24.053 MB/sec     54.810 MB/sec     19.964 MB/sec
512 KBytes     56.388 MB/sec     23.999 MB/sec     55.947 MB/sec     21.453 MB/sec
1 MByte        57.575 MB/sec     24.458 MB/sec     57.249 MB/sec     19.771 MB/sec

Benchmarks from today for comparing performance loss. This system has been in use every day for at least 8 hours since it got the DOM drive installed. Installed alone in the ATA66 slot in my dual 1.5ghz MDD running 9.2.2.

QuickBench™ 1.5 Test Results File
©2000 Intech Software Corp.
Test file created on söndag 13 december 2015 at 18.52.21
Test Volume name: System

Xfer Size     Sequential Read   Sequential Write    Random Read      Random Write

1 KByte         4.209 MB/sec      1.761 MB/sec      1.665 MB/sec    352.063 KB/sec
2 KBytes        8.719 MB/sec      3.085 MB/sec      6.427 MB/sec    845.059 KB/sec
4 KBytes       13.314 MB/sec      6.346 MB/sec     10.638 MB/sec      1.923 MB/sec
8 KBytes       22.514 MB/sec     10.408 MB/sec     16.976 MB/sec      2.051 MB/sec
16 KBytes      32.922 MB/sec     12.262 MB/sec     26.497 MB/sec      3.888 MB/sec
32 KBytes      42.505 MB/sec     16.437 MB/sec     37.220 MB/sec      7.496 MB/sec
64 KBytes      50.290 MB/sec     20.622 MB/sec     46.600 MB/sec     11.440 MB/sec
128 KBytes     52.636 MB/sec     22.349 MB/sec     50.515 MB/sec     16.261 MB/sec
256 KBytes     55.564 MB/sec     24.414 MB/sec     54.334 MB/sec     19.917 MB/sec
512 KBytes     57.169 MB/sec     23.959 MB/sec     56.408 MB/sec     21.851 MB/sec
1 MByte        57.994 MB/sec     25.298 MB/sec     57.501 MB/sec     19.523 MB/sec


So according to the benchmarks the drive has lost pretty much no performance at all after 16 months installed and many many hours of hard useage.

[Protools5LEGuy]

And this is QuickBench test of the Sandisk Extreme Pro 240GB SSD connected to an ATA 66 port through a SATA to PATA converter:

Are almost the same? DOM was cheaper than SATA SSD and doesn't need the converter.

Degradation could be because the disk is "fuller"

[MacTron]

Are almost the same? DOM was cheaper than SATA SSD

...may be. The Sandisk Extreme Pro 240 GB SSD  cost me 104 EUR :

https://www.alternate.de/Sandisk/Extreme-Pro-SSD-2-5-240-GB-Solid-State-Drive/html/product/1149504?event=search

and doesn't need the converter.

... because the converter is inside the SSD. This have some benefits and some drawbacks ...