[SteveNYC]

Ok, so... weird title, I know.

What I mean by it is this.... There have been tons of comments about how RunCore SSDs are the fastest on the DM9, the Stecs are ok, Super Talent is so-so and Crucial is the slowest of the bunch (wildly oversimplified). But then you hear how good Windows 7 is and how Windows 7 knows how to properly handle SSD drives where Windows XP Home really didn't.

What I'm trying to get at is this... Does Windows 7 make the manufacturer of the SSD less relevant? Is the difference between a RunCore and a Super Talent less under Windows 7 than it was under Windows XP Home?

I know this is a tough question to answer. It requires that someone have installed Windows 7 on more than one brand of SSD. But still, anyone with an opinion? I'd like to get a larger SSD than the 8GB STEC I already have but like the rest of you, I'd rather spend as little as possible (it's why I bought the $199 A90 in the first place).

Thanks in advance.

[holmes4]

No, I can't see than Win7 would make that kind of difference. What it's mainly doing is helping with wear leveling, disabling defrag, etc.

For myself, I don't mind spending more when I get more.

[zrtom]

I guess Windows 7 could make a big difference compared with XP if you don't align the OS partition for XP (W7 does it automatically).

This article is a must-read if you are thinking about an SSD. The SSD controllers out there (JMicron, Intel, Samsung, Indilinx, etc.) are all very different and produce VERY different results. I think the key is don't pay too much attention to the manufacturers' listed read/write specs. For SSDs that doesn't tell you much with respect to real-world performance.

AnandTech: The SSD Anthology: Understanding SSDs and New Drives from OCZ

Windows 7 supports TRIM and as the SSD manufacturers develop firmware to utilize the TRIM support (as far as I know, none do at this point but some are close), SSDs will be a little more equal....but, as holmes4 was saying, not much.