• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

SSD Advice

Shamil

Well-known member
#1
Hi all, I'm going to be getting an SSD for my new notebook when it arrives, and so far, I've come to three choices of 256GB of space:

  • Kingston Technology HyperX: 319.85
  • Samsung 470 Series: 200+ (unconfirmed)
  • Crucial RealSSD M4: 264.99
  • Intel 320 [300GB]: 358.62
All prices are in GBP, but I can't find the symbol in Parallels.

Anyway, what do you think I should choose?
 

Jake Bunce

XenForo moderator
Staff member
#2
My research is a year old...

I went with an Intel SSD. When I purchased a year ago Intel was by far the most reliable with the most consistent performance. Other brands had problems with degraded performance over time and poor reliability.
 

Shamil

Well-known member
#3
My research is a year old...

I went with an Intel SSD. When I purchased a year ago Intel was by far the most reliable with the most consistent performance. Other brands had problems with degraded performance over time and poor reliability.
Added that :)
 

Jaxel

Well-known member
#4
I recommend a OCZ Vertex 3 if your computer supports SATA6.

I would never PAY for anything from Kingston or Crucial. Intel is indeed probably the most reliable of all existing Sandforce (SATA6) controlled drives; but if you're looking for performance, OCZ is the way to go.
 

Shamil

Well-known member
#5
I recommend a OCZ Vertex 3 if your computer supports SATA6.

I would never PAY for anything from Kingston or Crucial. Intel is indeed probably the most reliable of all existing Sandforce (SATA6) controlled drives; but if you're looking for performance, OCZ is the way to go.
I've heard back things about OCZ and MacBook Pros. I've already have their 3.5 fail several times from several different outlets. Are they better with 2.5"?
 

Luke F

Well-known member
#6
Definitely go with the Crucial M4 - one of the most reliable controllers, and they've just released a firmware update which provides a ~20% speed boost :)

Avoid OCZ or anything else Sandforce based - tempting performance but not worth the failure rate.
 

MGSteve

Well-known member
#8
Take a look at tomshardware.com, they have an SSD comparaison chart that allows you to compare different SSDs over many different benchmarks.

Just make sure the SSD fits the notebook and that its compatible with it. I got a Crucial M225 64Gb SSD for my HP TouchSmart and it had a compatibility glitch with the controller that neither HP nor Crucial where interested in!
 

CTXMedia

Formerly CyclingTribe
#9
I've been using a Kingston SSD on my works PC (as the boot/Windows/application drive, with a regular HDD for data) and it's been absolutely fine.

I use an OCZ SSD on my gaming PC and that's been fine too so far.

I've also (last night) ordered a Kingston 128GB SSD for my laptop to make it work faster for when I properly get stuck into converting CycleChat.net over to XF.

There's some interesting stuff here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-solid-state-nand-reliability,2998-6.html

Crucial tests: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/m4-ssd-capacity-comparison,2957-10.html
 

maidos

Active member
#11
eh no, the new intel ssd has several major firmware issues and its not considered stable at all

google Bad Context 13x Error and you know, it gives you 8 mb storage
and before that bad context there were several other bugs with the ssd
 

Lucas

Well-known member
#15
I recently got a Crucial M4 as suggested by Darkimmortal, but I was suggested by people from HardForum.com due to the their high reliability. Got the 64GB version and it's working great. Going to try the firmware update now! :) Free performance and stability update!

Update:



Advertised speeds:

Sustained Sequential Read: Up to 415 MB/s (SATA 6Gb/s)
Sustained Sequential Write: Up to 95 MB/s (SATA 6Gb/s)

That's quiet an increase! Specially on read speed! :D
 

ManagerJosh

Well-known member
#18
and you are missing the keyfact that intel even allowed this bug to happend, thats why im saying its unstable and not wise to go with intel now till you know for sure that theres no more bugs left.
I think it would be naive to believe that Intel knowingly and willingly released a defective product to the market. Having watched the bug from both an external consumer and an Intel partner, I know for sure that it was an extremely rare set of conditions that no one really anticipated it could have caused these issues.

Exactly what was the problem? Simple: People improperly powered down their computers or was hit with a power outage at wrong point in time. It's a perfect storm type condition, something that sometimes the most strenuous testing does not unveil until it's put in the real world.

It's somewhat a sad fact of life...and it's especially visible in SDLC
 

Jake Bunce

XenForo moderator
Staff member
#19
The best policy is to wait a while before buying a particular model of solid state drive. Wait until the bugs are discovered and fixed. Then make sure you have the latest firmware when you install the drive. Solid state is a developing technology. Don't be the guinea pig with new models and new firmware. Intel wasn't the only one with problems when solid state started to become mainstream.

I waited a year before buying my Intel 160GB G2. That model had problems at first but they were fixed.