Showing Results: Most Recent
Pros: - great build quality -- sturdy and heavy
- nice looking drive for custom builds
- efficient packaging that includes back plate/screws
- plenty fast -- on par with the best consumer drives currently available
- MLC chips for durability
- rated for 50GB worth of writes a day for five years
- includes Acronis disc cloning software for easy swap with existing spindle drive
- SSD Guru toolbox has some useful stats for those that like that kind of thing
Cons: - expensive compared to the rest of the field
- somewhat heavy drive might not appeal to the notebook/ultrabook crowd
My notes will start here:
About the only things differentiating SSD's in the current market are cost, and perceived reliablity. Speeds are all in the same ballpark, warranty length is pretty much the same, and every maker claims excellent customer service.
I had nothing but high expectations when I reviewed the Vector 180. I've used OCZ SSD's since the 32GB Vertex era, and have had nothing but quality experiences. OCZ's reputation in the SSD business has taken a pretty good beating over the past few years, but out of the 20+ drives I've used in my personal builds over the past eight years -- zero failures or issues. Longest running OCZ SSD I still own is a 60GB Agility 3 that houses the OS for our home file server. My current gamer runs four 240GB Vertex 3 drives in a RAID 0 array (large game drive). That RAID array has been running strong for the past three years, and has survived three rebuilds, over three different chipsets. I'll also say that because I believe the performance you see across all of the SSD brands is about the same, I now go with the best price I can find on a brand I feel good about.
Other Thoughts: Benchmark results from the Vector 180 were comparable to many of the SSD's I've benched over the past six months -- fast access times (what the average consumer notices), and fast sequential read/writes. Like I said at the beginning of this review, all of the drives are fast these days. Every drive boasts the same 500/500 numbers, with a few drives actually coming close to achieving them, but even for those that don't, the speed available is plenty.
I installed SSD Guru to verify that I was running with the latest firmware. Frankly speaking, that feature (and to some degree, the secure erase feature) is the only thing that SSD Guru offers that carries any interest for me. Windows performs TRIM on it's own, and the rest is just pretty green and blue line graphs. Not a bad little app, but nothing ground breaking here. I used AS SSD for benching. Before I ran benches, I dumped a 115GB test file ontp the Vector 180. This is the standard file I use for testing, as I feel it represents what the average user would have on their drive. A mix of music, movies, Steam game folder, various documents, large PDF files, and a few operating system ISO's. A lot of people/companies bench these drives empty, which makes no sense to me, as nobody installs a drive just for benchmark runs. People use them, and as they fill the drive up, performance will take a hit. An average of five runs netted sequential reads of 492.51 MB/s, and writes of 349.99 MB/s. Overall average score was 641 for reads, and 378 for writes. Fantastic numbers that would make anybody happy.
As good as the performance is, I think it really comes down to cost for most people. I'm running a PNY 240GB SSD (same read/write speeds) as a boot drive for my test box. The drive has a three year warranty, and I paid $77 for it on a Newegg Shell Shocker. They run a lot of deals like this across many SSD brands. Off sale, your average 500/500 SSD runs in the $100 range. The Vector 180 is currently $145. I think that's a pretty tough sell for anybody but the extreme OCZ loyalist. You are definitely getting a quality product that performs at a high level, but so does the PNY drive I mentioned earlier. You'll see better benchmark numbers from the Vector 180, but real world performance feels the same.
Bottom line here is that while the Vector 180 is a quality SSD, and I have no qualms recommending it, I would be personally inclined to pay less for my SSD, and in this performance/capacity range, there are many choices that cost $40 less. Good drive, but the extra cost isn't justified by the overall package.
This review is from: Plustek eScan A150 Sheet Fed Document Scanner
Pros: • Compact and sturdy build
• Easy setup
• No PC needed for setup or use
• Quality touch screen
• Includes free software
• Good packaging with no frills
• USB port is conveniently located
• Plustek website is easy to navigate
• Good user manual available for download
• No need for firmware updates
• Small software footprint for connected clients
Cons: • Included instructions are next to worthless
• Issues with security levels for Google Drive
• Scanned image speed is not befitting of a $600 price tag
• Had to remove two-step Google account security to receive scans
• No user profiles (for individual scan job settings)
My notes will start here:
The Plustek A150 is a real mixed bag for me. It performs reasonably well, but the limited configuration options make it better suited for home use, or possibly for a very small office/business.
Build quality is solid, with a small desktop footprint. I’m not a fan of touch screen devices as I have dry finger tips that usually make for a lot of frustration. The A150’s screen was fantastic. Bright and easy to see, and very touch-responsive. Setup was extremely easy – Ethernet connection, power to wall – hit the switch. I stuck a flash drive in the sole USB 2.0 port, ran a quick alignment, then loaded ten pages from a script I had been working on. Paper fed perfectly, and then I was presented with options on where to send the job. Selected the flash drive – completed in a few seconds. I removed the Ethernet cable, and tried the same test using the included Wi-Fi – worked flawlessly, with no connectivity issues.
Installing the client software was a simple process. I just used the software version on the included disc, and there were no issues. After you scan your documents, you select “PC”, and you are then presented with a list of named devices. Sending to Gmail/Google Drive presented issues. I configured the required outbound information, but was not able to connect to the device. Some digging on the internet had me drop the two-step security for Gmail, and pretty much bottom-out the security settings for Google Drive. Once I did that, I was able to save my scans without issue. This seems to be a common theme across most of the reviews so far for the A150. This is one of the areas that makes me see the A150 as being better suited for home use, where security measures are usually lax.
Other Thoughts: Unlike some of the other reviews, I had no issues with poor paper feed performance. I used Office Depot 22lb bright white paper for my testing, and the A150 took three 50 page feeds with no issues. I also ran a few sheets of heavier card stock through, and things were fine. To top things off, I ran a mix of various sized coloring book pages from my daughter’s art desk. No issues with the jagged edges, and varying sizes.
User settings are pretty minimal on the A150. At this price point, I would expect the ability to setup a few user/job profiles for more efficient use. You are given plenty of output types (JPEG, PDF, TIFF, etc.), and transition between screens showed little lag. Overall scan performance was solid at 200 DPI, but changing the output to 600 DPI was unusable. 400 DPI wasn't much faster, with 300 DPI being the sweet spot. The thought of scanning a 50 page job at 600 DPI would be unthinkable in a working office.
So like I said, a real mixed bag. At middle of the road settings, the A150 performs at decent speeds, and gives quality enough output, but the minimalist interface, and lack of custom profiles seems better suited for home or SOHO use. Bottom line -- I expected faster performance, and greater configuration options at the $600 price point. I have to question who this device would really be targeted for, as all offices have some kind of computing presence, and most documents are built within some kind of software suite (Microsoft Office for example), so the ability to email, save to a file share, or a flash drive, well that would already be built in and ready for use.
Pros: • Sturdy packaging
• Mounting hardware for all modern consumer sockets
• Price is comparable to similar performing coolers
• Performance is comparable to similar priced coolers
• Installation is “possible” with a preinstalled motherboard
• Fan brackets are surprisingly easy to work with
• Pretty quiet for the level of received performance
• At stock voltages on two different procs – performance is within a couple degrees, using a single fan instead of two
• Mounting system places it about a ½” lower on the motherboard than most coolers this size
Cons: • Large size pretty much demands a full tower case
• Depth of cooler creates some “hang” off the motherboard
• Performance at this price will cost you
• Not very attractive for window builds
• Using both fans limits you to standard height ram – and blocks three RAM slots
Notes will start here:
Outside of physical looks, I was pretty impressed with what the Neptwin had to offer. I feel that just about ALL coolers this size, especially those with dual fans, look ugly in an otherwise attractive PC build. That aside, performance is what counts, and the Neptwin delivers in all of the ways that you would expect, as well as having a couple of nifty design tricks up its sleeve.
Installation was easy with the motherboard outside of the case, taking just 16 minutes from start to finish. Installation inside the case, while doable, was really tough. Part of the issue was the size of the Antec 1900, as I spent part of the install with the case tilted. Either install method will involve a standard Phillips screwdriver to tighten the screws on the holding plate. You have to leave the center fan uninstalled to do this, and thankfully, the included fan brackets are very easy to work with, to a point, I was able to install/uninstall both fans with the motherboard mounted – no issues at all. The mounted cooler also leaves enough space for easy top-mounted fan clearance.
I tested the Neptwin on two processors, using Prime95 (small FFTs) and a few rounds of Linpack. The room temp as about 19* Celsius, and the case used was an Antec 1900. I’m only going to include load temps, because frankly – who cares about idle temps!? Even the extremely lame Intel stock cooler maintains respectable idle temps. I also left the fan(s) on “auto”, allowing the motherboard to ramp them up and down.
Other Thoughts: Intel G3220@3.0 GHZ loaded at 45* Celsius after 22 hours of Prime95 Small FFTs (for maximum heat). No overclocking here, as the G3220 doesn’t allow it. The Neptwin produced identical temps with a single fan, or two (I removed the fan mounted next to the RAM after about 8 hours) with RealTemp logging 46* Celsius as a maximum.
Intel firstname.lastname@example.org GHZ loaded at 43* Celsius with 10 passes of Linpack. Same results with a single fan. Things got a little interesting as I added voltage. Max overclock was 4.46 GHZ@1.24vts. Temps averaged 65 Celsius with 10 more passes of Linpack. When I removed a fan, the Neptwin started to struggle, as temps climbed to 72* Celsius. So good news is that you can get away with running a single fan on the Neptwin, but don’t expect to break any temperature records. I will also say that with higher ambient temps in the summertime, you can be assured that single fan cooling on the Neptwin will get out of control pretty fast.
The Deepcool Neptwin delivers on performance, and gives you the advantage of running with a single fan (at low overclocks), with full access to all four RAM slots – and no restrictions on RAM height. Granted, most people will run the Neptwin with both fans, as these same people will be shooting for higher overclocks.
CPUs run on suck low voltage now, that a cooler this size isn’t really necessary if you are keeping things at stock. But turn up the juice, and the extra heat pipes/fin surface area will deliver enough of a performance boost to justify the extra dollars spent. Just make sure you pay close attention to the mounted height, and choose your case accordingly.
Some manufacturers place restrictions on how details of their products may be communicated.