Kingston HyperX 240 GB SSD

[W1zzard]

To read this review go to: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/K...HyperX_240_GB/

[erixx]

Great read, thank you Wiz!

I am a SDD noob and wonder if the nice program&games loading times need these programs installed on the SDD drive. If so, I don't think I will buy one anytime soon. Windows loading times don't bother me and my present system drive with software only has 200Gb occupied from 500 available.

[air_ii]

Originally Posted by erixx

Great read, thank you Wiz!

I am a SDD noob and wonder if the nice program&games loading times need these programs installed on the SDD drive. If so, I don't think I will buy one anytime soon. Windows loading times don't bother me and my present system drive with software only has 200Gb occupied from 500 available.

Yes, they need to be installed on the SSD. SSD does add much to system responsiveness though (I happen to own the Kingston), so it's not only system boot times. I would never go back to mechanical drives for anything else than storage.

[halfwaythere]

Y u no test Samsung 830?

On a more serious note the main reason the kingston came on top is because it probably has the latest firmware. If you update the other SF based ones and the Marvell ones the differences are even smaller.

[W1zzard]

Originally Posted by halfwaythere

On a more serious note the main reason the kingston came on top is because it probably has the latest firmware. If you update the other SF based ones and the Marvell ones the differences are even smaller.

Crucial M4 128 GB (6 Gbps) 0009
Crucial C300 128 GB (6 Gbps) 0007
Intel 320 Series 128 GB 0362
Intel 510 Series 128 GB (6 Gbps) PPG4
OCZ Agility 3 240 GB (6 Gbps) 2.15
Patriot Wildfire 120 GB (6 Gbps) 3.3.2
OCZ Vertex 3 240 GB (6 Gbps) 2.15

why are people always so convinced of themselves when they criticize reviewers?

[halfwaythere]

My bad on this one. I'm probably used to your vga charts where I'm pretty sure you don't test all of the previous cards with the latest drivers and that makes them a little bit irrelevant at times. That's ok also because it would be a gargantuan task.

[truehighroller1]

2 of the Sand Force 2281 controller 240GB SSD Drives in Raid 0.

One is the Kingston HyperX 240GB in the review and the other one is a Mushkin Chronos Enhanced Deluxe 240GB that has " had I suppose in Raid 0 with the slower one " a little more IOPs then the Kingston one, about 5k more I believe.

Isn't it beautiful lol. These are my boot drive. Everything I do, is instant.

Good review by the way wizzard. I have always appreciated everything you do for the community sir, thank you.

[Bot]

very nice

[erixx]

IS the old rule of thumb that you must have 25% free space on your system drive for Windows to run smoothly also valid for SDD?
That's why I said I have more than 200, nearly 300 Gb of programs installed and I would have to buy the biggest (and most expensive) SSD, bigger than the tested one, or would that be irrelevant?

[truehighroller1]

Originally Posted by erixx

IS the old rule of thumb that you must have 25% free space on your system drive for Windows to run smoothly also valid for SDD?
That's why I said I have more than 200, nearly 300 Gb of programs installed and I would have to buy the biggest (and most expensive) SSD, bigger than the tested one, or would that be irrelevant?

Smoothly no but you will want room for growth, think about that.. I only bought my second SSD the Kingston HyperX 240GB SSD, because my first Mushkin 240GB SSD was DOA. Otherwise I wouldn't be running the Raid setup I have going here.

If you use that many programs at a time, I would get two like me here and raid them for the best results for you. The install speed for things is amazing with these in raid0. I can't click fast enough any more lol.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by erixx

IS the old rule of thumb that you must have 25% free space on your system drive for Windows to run smoothly also valid for SDD?

Not true any more, at least with Win7 64-bit. I just moved from a system install with less than 5% on all drives, and they were all mechanical, too. 5% of a 2TB HDD is still a huge 100 GB, which is far more than enough free space. Anyway, on the new OS, with much more space, I cannot say that there is much difference. May have been an issue for Windows XP, or Vista, but not so much Win7.



I think it's more about having enough space for system restore, page file, and other Windows features like Disk Defragmenter(which SSDs will never use), and the needed size is going to depend on many factors, such as programs used, installed ram, drive size, etc ,etc.

[erixx]

The percentage rule, I see it is outdated, obviously

I will keep an eye on this thanks to you guys, up the techpower!

[Steven B]

Originally Posted by W1zzard

Crucial M4 128 GB (6 Gbps) 0009
Crucial C300 128 GB (6 Gbps) 0007
Intel 320 Series 128 GB 0362
Intel 510 Series 128 GB (6 Gbps) PPG4
OCZ Agility 3 240 GB (6 Gbps) 2.15
Patriot Wildfire 120 GB (6 Gbps) 3.3.2
OCZ Vertex 3 240 GB (6 Gbps) 2.15

why are people always so convinced of themselves when they criticize reviewers?

Because usually reviewers are wrong, I catch it all the time in a lot of motherboard reviews(not here). But then there are reviewers who think ahead, like you W1zzard, and thus are rarely wrong.

[erixx]

I am really getting warm for SSD, but I miss Samsung reviews W1zz! They have 1 special feature: all components are Samsung!