Showing Results: Most Recent
Pros: 100% Modular, Single 12v Rail, (runs it all), Long Flat-wire Cables, Quiet, Efficient.
The 3000 character limit would hold back this full review and explanation of the issues, I placed the first part of the review in the “Pro section, and the second part continues in the “Con” section.
I was deciding between the Corsair RM 1000 and a comparably priced EVGA 1000 watt PSU. After spending WAY TOO MUCH time researching the reviews for both, I chose the Corsair because it had the "Flat-Wire" cables.
I figured the cable management would be easier because I could hide them in the back. That was really the only reason when it came down to it because otherwise, the reviews were all pretty much equal. After running the “paperclip test”, I started installing the PSU I realized right away that the Flat-wire cables were stiff and not at all as easy to work with as I thought they would be.
They were all plenty long enough to reach everything in my Corsair 500R case but they didn’t twist and bend the way I needed them to. So I used the 24 Pin Flat-wire Cable because that one definitely helped the cable management, and I used the OCZ 700w cables for the rest of the connection work.
It wasn’t until I finished and plugged the PSU in to make sure everything turned on, that I had begun a multi-hour learning curve on ‘why I couldn’t use the OCZ cables in the RM 1000’. The short answer is that the OCZ 700 watt PSU was a (4), 12v-rail system and the RM 1000 is a Single 12v Rail system.
I knew the RM 1000 was a Single 12v rail PSU. In fact, most of the new PSU’s these days have applied the latest technology that now permits a single 12v rail PSU to deliver the same constant power to any and all those components that require it.
This ‘new’ single rail mentality adds to better efficiency, and less heat and I for one, am all for it. However, there was no indication in any paperwork or on the Corsair website that warned me about the possible compatibility issues if one was to use multi-12v rail PSU cables in a Single 12v rail system.
As a result, the first time I turned on the power after completing the cable connections and routing, (with my OCZ cables), I noticed that two of my 120mm Excalibur Case fans weren’t spinning.Yet, 3 of the 4 other Excalibur 120mm fans were and they were all connected to the same fan-connector junction plate. A closer look revealed that one of the fans was getting a hint of power because the blades would make an attempt to spin and then stop after only moving a quarter inch .
I can go on about this in detail but I’m approaching my max character limit. So I’ll say this, I had begun to suspect that there was a compatibility problem and not a DOA PSU when I noticed how may various case fans, (as well as my H220 Cooling pump), would not run, or would spin-up slowly.
There were other ‘hints’ like the system would fold and shut down after I booted to the monitor. A “lesser man” would have attributed the issue/s to a DOA
Cons: REVIEW Part 2 (Continued from "Pro" section)
Not me, I took it personal and wanted to know why I was having this trouble and after a few hours, I decided to look into the ends of the OCZ cables connector and compare it to the RM 1000’s replacement.
EVERY one of the OCZ cable connectors had one less contact within the configuration. NOT ONLY THAT, but most, if not all, of the OCZ Cable connector’s contacts had at least one contact out of place in the configuration when compared to the RM 1000’s configuration of the comparable cable!
EVEN the 8pin + 6Pin connectors in the R 7970 GPU were different between the two cables! I conceded, and replaced all of my OCZ cables that were installed to the RM 1000’s ports with the stiff, Flat-wire cables. These often had superfluous, additional connector plug inclusions, (the 8 pin + 6 Pin PCIE cable for the Graphics card had an additional 2 pin plug that, in my case, were not needed for the R 7970 card), leaving unconnected plugs hanging in the air for all to see.
Corsair included a cable set for their “C Link” monitoring software. I had to remove that connection as well because I believe it attributed to other strange anomalies. The latest software download for C-Link was apparently released just before I bought the RM 1000.
The Corsair website forum was slammed with people who complained of all kinds of problems with the latest version of that program. They were describing issues that made me wonder if this was REALLY my problem all along!
However, I dismissed that as a remote possibility and at this time, believe the missing, repositioned contacts in the OCZ cables when compared to those of the RM 1000, was the main problem. I must admit and note that it wasn’t until I removed the C-Link software and the cable that connected the PSU to the mobo via a USB port, that ALL the “strange, small issues” were extinguished.
The bottom line is that I have no problems with The RM 1000 since I sorted that out. I typically OC my i7-2600K to 5GHz and my 7970 to 1100 MHz core and 1500 MHz memory, when I run my Flight Sim. The PSU holds up for hours with no sign of trouble and that’s what it needs to do.
The 4 stars instead of 5 is for Corsair’s lack of considering that some people may want to use their cables from an older PSU. They made no effort to warn about the possible cable configuration compatibility that may be an issue in cases involving multi-rail system cables.
Other Thoughts: I have a number of Corsair products and I consider them to be a pretty good manufacturer of computer components. Nevertheless, they've always struck me as a company that wasn't interested in explaining very much in there paperwork unless it had something to do with self-promotions.
In other words, you need to have a decent idea of what's going on if, and when, you buy many of the Corsair products that I've bought. "You're on your own, kid" is the motto I tend to think of when I buy from Corsair.
Oh sure, they'll honor warranties and quickly process RMA's if needed, but I consider Customer Support to include trying to sort out the problem and dealing with it as if the tech was the one who owned the item in question.
You know, they should put themselves in the buyer's shoes when they're dealing with them. I did get a reply once or twice when I went to the forum with the issue regarding the Cables and the C Link software. However, whomever it was that was answering left me wondering who they were, (I never knew whom I was talking to, a name please!).
Perhaps more importantly was the fact that they answered the question in a vague way and then wouldn't reply any longer when I asked them for clarification, or if their answer spurned another question to deal with.
CS & S is top priority in my book and the star I took off on this PSU was way less than I should have removed. However, the end result is that the PSU does what it's supposed to do and it does it well, and quietly.
Pros: Faster random read speeds, (100,000 IOPS), than Samsung, Crucial, and OCZ by quite a bit! Max read: 540mb/s & max write: 460mb/s. Very reliable and I've had it for almost a year. Make sure you update the drive via Plextor's website.
Cons: can't think of a single one.
Other Thoughts: I run 2 1TB HDDs and this single 256GB SSD. But now I'm considering jumping to a 480/500GB SSD and using the 256 SSD for some exclusive stuff as well as faster cache memory for Photoshop.READ FULL REVIEW
Pros: This is my first SSD and I finally installed it into a new build I completed about a week ago, (I've done dozens of builds but with HDDs only). I have to say that it ripped through the installation of Windows 7 home premium 64 bit and all the updates incredibly fast.
I've done that exact installation on hard drives with 7200 RPM disks many times and when you take in consideration the constant updating after the initial installation and every subsequent update after major installations like Microsoft products such as Microsoft office or even products like Adobe, I could actually count the installation taking about 18 full hours of my time.
This OCZ 120 GB 3.5" drive did it in 4 hours. However, I am experiencing some anomalies such as system freeze ups for no reason that I can see. I'm not prepared to blame it on the hard drive at this point but then it's a short list.
It's very light and as far as quality is concerned well,... It's a sheet-metal construction with a plastic uppercase. That's about what I would expect when it comes to what essentially is nothing more than a flash drive.
The price was great and yes, it is a refurb but if the company is refurbishing their products responsibly, I see no reason that there would be a difference between this and a brand-new one.
I noticed that some people said their brand-new vision of some refurbished drives ran faster than their refurbished one. I don't understand why that would be. But then as I said, this is my first SSD so there may be reasons I'm unaware of.
Transfer speed, (using HD Tune Pro), test for a file length of 500 MB was 263023 kbps read and 227388 kB per second write. Compared against a Hitachi 500 GB 5200 RPM HDD, which got 133500 kB per second read, and 127184 kB per second write, (about half as fast as the SSD).
The Hitachi did 258 IOPS read and 321 IOPS right in 4 kB of random operation. The OCC did 333092 IOPS read and 34195 IOPS write in the same operation (4KB Aligned).
The Hitachi gave an average speed of 56.99 MB per second for a 1 MB transfer size in the Random-Access test, (short stroke, 40 GB).
The OCC did the same test incredibly faster with an average speed of 252.706 MB per second on a 1 MB transfer size! That's pretty much what they advertised it can do.
I also did a short stroke, 40 GB Benchmark Test to test the transfer rates and the OCZ hard drive average 196.4 mb/s and used 2.2% of the CPU to do it.
However, the Hitachi did an average of 131.8 MB per second and used 1.7% of the CPU to do it. I didn't see that to be too much slower than the OCZ.
Cons: I don't have the exact numbers for my Seagate 7200 RPM hard drive in my Intel-based system, but I believe the same test produced something like 185 MB per second meaning that the OCZ wasn't that much faster compared to that hard drive in that test.
The problem is that these tests do not cover real-world use and are a number of variables that do influence these hard drives that are not involved in these tests such as background programs running, opened browser pages, disk defragmentation habits etc. etc.
So the question I carry when looking at these comparisons is really a simple "is the SSD faster many HDD across-the-board?". The answer to that is yes and therefore, the expense of the SSD is justified. Particularly when were talking about operating system installation speeds.
There's a lot about hard drives, how they work, what are the most important speeds etc. etc. that I don't know so I can say is based on the real-world experience I had with the OCZ 120 GB SSD, it's a good drive and I recommend.
Other Thoughts: The capacity of the OCZ's is advertised at 120 GB and it is. The fact that it shows up as 107 GB when you plug it in is primarily due to the operating systems required format/system files that all hard drives and SSD's need to run Windows.
So really, this is not a "con", just affect. The specifications OCZ make, in part, are:
Max Read: up to 285MB/s
Max Write: up to 275MB/s
Random Write 4KB (Aligned): 50,000 IOPS
Seek Time: 0.1 MS
And as far as I can tell, all my tests show those specs to be correct. Certainly in the random write and seek time speeds my tests proved to show it was faster. As far as the maximum read/write speeds are concerned, again, those are subjected to the word "maximum". That is, it may indeed reach that speed over a given length of information but it's the average speed that you should be most interested in and as I noted above, depending on test the average falls between 190 MB per second and 250 MB per second which is pretty good, not great, but pretty good.
I do recommend this hard drive whether it be brand-new or refurbished.
Some manufacturers place restrictions on how details of their products may be communicated.