1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

SSD choice?

Discussion in 'Storage' started by qu4k3r, Jun 13, 2013.

  1. qu4k3r

    qu4k3r

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    253 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    156
    Location:
    Valencia, Venezuela
    Hi there,
    I'd like to buy a ssd.

    Size? 256, 250 or 240gb.

    I really prefer 256gb to maximize capacity. Actually my main HD is 320gb and have only 46gb free, so I think 256gb would feel a little tight.

    Budget? 150 to 180$

    I was going to buy this one last week at 149.99$ but now that offer is over.
    SanDisk Extreme SSD 240 GB ...................................................... 174$

    Other options:
    SanDisk Ultra Plus SSD 256 GB .................................................... 170$
    Samsung MZ-7TD250BW 840 Series Solid State Drive (SSD) 250 GB ... 172$
    Mushkin Enhanced Callisto Deluxe 240 GB ...................................... 170$
    Mushkin Chronos 240 GB ........................................................... 170$
    Kingston Digital 240GB SSDNow V300 ........................................... 175$

    I sorted them in capacity terms, my main concern.

    What would be the best chioce in terms of performance?

    Thanks in advance ;)

    pd: If you can find other option at amazon in that range of price and capacity do not hesitate to let me know :)
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  2. jmcslob

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,933 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    475
    Location:
    Internet Heaven
    SanDisk Ultra Plus models are slow they are basically meant for laptops and whatnot...
    SanDisk Extreme's are nice! I'm running 2 Extreme's in RAID0 and I get an average of 1Gb/s read write speeds on their own they do about 550Mb/s

    The Samsung is in the same boat as the Tha SanDisk Ultra Plus with fast reads and slow writes.

    That Mushkin is SLOW!!!!! 285MB/s read 275Mb/s right

    The Kingston is 450Mb/s average The Sandisk Extreme is 550Mb/s reas 520 Mb/s right
    and imo your only choices here are the Kingston and the SanDisk....Personally I'd go for the Sandisk.

    Given if you don't have a SATA 3 (6gb/s) mobo you wont notice a difference but you will if you upgrade.
     
  3. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,683 (6.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
  4. jmcslob

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,933 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    475
    Location:
    Internet Heaven
    Just my opinion....I wouldn't buy OCZ regardless...
    They have had more issues with their SSD's than any other company and they charge a premium for what amounts to be junk...and it hasn't stopped yet and their quality still hasn't gotten any better...
    Seems like they are the only company that sells a shit load of refurbished models for every single SSD they sell and that tells me they are shit...here have a look
    PCs & Laptops, Laptop Accessories, Internal SSD, ...
     
  5. qu4k3r

    qu4k3r

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    253 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    156
    Location:
    Valencia, Venezuela
    Yes, I have sata 3 mobo.

    When you say "slow", you mean they are slower than other ssd's which are faster, right?

    But generally speaking a "slow" sdd is still much faster than any hard drive, or am I wrong?
     
  6. jmcslob

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,933 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    475
    Location:
    Internet Heaven
    Yeah...I mean slow compared to other SSD's which are still faster than Mechanical HDD's

    That Mushkin SSD is the slowest of them all...
    Max Sequential Read
    Up To 285 MB/s

    Max Sequential Write
    Up to 275 MB/s

    The SanDisk Ultra Plus
    Max Sequential Read
    Up to 530 MB/s

    Max Sequential Write
    Up to 445 MB/s

    Samsung 840
    Sustained Sequential Read
    530 MB/s

    Sustained Sequential Write
    240 MB/s

    The Kingston has a Sustained Sequential Read 450Mb/s
    Sustained Sequential Write 450 Mb/s

    SanDisk Extreme comes out on top with
    Sustained Sequential Read 550Mb/s read
    Max Sequential Write 520 Mb/s write.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  7. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    Those problems are history, they use a different controller
     
  8. jmcslob

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,933 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    475
    Location:
    Internet Heaven
    Nope....They are showing up on the Indilinx controller as well
    PCs & Laptops, Laptop Accessories, Internal SSD, ...

    They are already having issue with the Vertex 4's just like they have with every other model they have ever had...
     
  9. pigulici

    pigulici

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Messages:
    442 (0.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    144
    Location:
    Romania
    +1 Samsung(I have 2...)
     
  10. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,683 (6.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    Those are the cheapy drives most companies have issues with cheapy drives. I rather like the indilinx based controllers, I still have my several year old barefoot controller based drives (one of the original TRIM setups) running in raid 0 with TRIM disabled. Basically everything they say not to do I have done and they still work. The crossover year when it when it had the marvel controller (barefoot2) I could care not.
     
  11. Jetster

    Jetster

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,242 (2.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,168
    Location:
    Oregon
    I have three OCZ drives and not one issue. Vertex 3 and 4. I was under the impression that firmware fixed there issues. I know they were up for sale but got new investors.
     
  12. jmcslob

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,933 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    475
    Location:
    Internet Heaven
    OCZ is using a tweaked version of the barefoot 3 that runs slightly slower at a lower voltage and I think they are doing that because of their MLC memory is crap.

    I think Intel, SanDisk and Kingston have kinda proven that its something else besides the Sandforce controllers that are at fault...sure they all had issues with em but not even close to what OCZ had and I think the reason for that is OCZ is cutting corners on its choice of MLC memory...

    I'm not saying everything OCZ makes is crap I'm just saying I'd rather you find out if it is or not and I'll take your word for it and buy something else...LOL
     
  13. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,683 (6.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    Cheap (crap) MLC memory was at fault on the older drives the Vertex 4 and Vector series supposedly fixed all of those issues. Reviews are quite good for the Vector's and there are next to no "issues" floating around the web about them.
     
  14. RCoon

    RCoon Gaming Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,737 (8.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,848
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    Samsung 840
    Plextor M5 Pro
    OCZ Vector
    Toshiba's new line

    Shouldnt look at any others, these are pretty much the best performers IN ACTUAL USEFUL TASKS. They are also the only SSD's that dont seem to blatantly lie about their performance.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  15. ne6togadno

    ne6togadno

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,374 (2.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    607
    Location:
    GMT +2
    4 is vertex, vector doesnt have numbers yet
     
    RCoon says thanks.
  16. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,683 (6.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    Correct and the Vector is a better drive.
     
    RCoon says thanks.
  17. RCoon

    RCoon Gaming Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,737 (8.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,848
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    Cheers, edited.
    Stand by my statement however. TPU has a large SSD review thread on here, very useful for this.
     
  18. ne6togadno

    ne6togadno

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,374 (2.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    607
    Location:
    GMT +2
    yap that is what i have used when i bought ssd.
    now i am gathering $ for 2nd one. this time 256 vectror
     
  19. Fourstaff

    Fourstaff Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,202 (5.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,985
    Location:
    Home
    I like my 840 non pro, write is bad in comparison to its peers but if you don't write a lot that will be my recommendation
     
  20. qu4k3r

    qu4k3r

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    253 (0.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    156
    Location:
    Valencia, Venezuela
    First of all I'd like to thank for all your answers. I've read a lot of reviews of those models mentioned above. Most of them are focus on benchmarks that I don't really care. But there are a few with "real world tests" that I consider more important such as loading time for OS or programs. I also found that in some cases, some reviews favored certain models over others while others reviews do the opposite. However I can see they perform relatively similar, I mean the difference is not like day and night.

    Said that, I think in terms of performance 3 runners up are...
    Sandisk extreme 240gb > Samsung 840 250gb ≈ Sandisk ultra plus 256gb.

    With a tight price variation, only 4$.

    Considering that once having format the real capacity changes:
    256gb become 238gb
    250gb become 232gb
    240gb become 223gb

    I think I'll grab Sandisk ultra plus 256gb.- :)
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2013
  21. jmcslob

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,933 (1.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    475
    Location:
    Internet Heaven
    Show me where SanDisk lied so I can prove to you that you're 100% wrong.
    My SanDisk Extremes are dead on what they were claimed to be and even better than expected in RAID0 with less than 100 MB/s average combined speed loss over the controller giving me just under 1Gb/s speeds and they are as fast as expected IN ACTUAL USEFUL TASKS.
     
  22. MasterInvader

    MasterInvader

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    Messages:
    275 (0.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Location:
    Portugal
  23. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    Look at the vertex2 controller. They changed. Show the issues......
     
    jmcslob says thanks.
  24. CrAsHnBuRnXp

    CrAsHnBuRnXp

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    5,569 (2.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    675
    Ill be the fish out of water here and say http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005D0AE8K/?tag=tec06d-20. I have the 120GB model and love it.

    He has 2 mushkin drives listd there. Not just the one thats slower. Im also willing to bet that its a Sata II drive and not a Sata III.
     
  25. Arctucas

    Arctucas

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,776 (0.58/day)
    Thanks Received:
    296
    jmcslob says thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page