SSD's Questions

[DaemonCantor]

I'm looking at finally purchasing an SSD, but I'm stuck as to which one to go for. The criteria I've set is:
1) 256gig's or larger.
2) Priced under $350 USD.
3) Reliability and Performance.

I don't want to be saddled up with an SSD that's too small for my setup and at present I could get away with a 500gig HD but I have a 1.5TB Seagate HD. My current Load Out is only using 350gig's Total.
My Choices sofar are:
1) OCZ http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227781
2) Samsung http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147135
3) Crucial http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148449

My question is which one all of you recommend?

[Kipper]

Hi DC

Of the three listed my choice would be the Crucial, the Samsung and lastly the OCZ

I have two of the M4s and they are nice, not as fast as some but very reliable and you will never see the difference in speed in real world use.

I have several of the OCZ solid state drives and have had to RMA three of them over the past couple years; the good news is OCZ handles their RMA very quickly so that's a big plus.

My next SSD purchase will be one of the 830 Samsung's which I have heard nothing but good things about.

One more thing on the OCZ you are showing, it has the Indilinx Everest controller and OCZ recently bought out Indilinx so they can reduce the price some on their drives when using an in-house controller. However, the one OCZ drive I have with their controller is somewhat slower in bench tests and a couple points lower on the WEI score which means nothing.

[DaemonCantor]

Thank You Kipper, I'm not very knowledgeable on SSD's. I've been looking at them for a long time but between the price and all of the stories, I've been afraid to make the jump relying on Mechanical HD's but recently I've had a bad sting of HD failures so I figured it was about time. Next Month I plan on putting one in Lay-Away but I had been torn between the three. The OCZ is out from your recommendation and now it's between the Crucial and the Samsung. I have had Samsung products in the past and they have always been very reliable so it might be a good choice. I just don't know anything about Crucial other than I'll never use their RAM again, three bad sticks (Ballistix) in less than a month.

[InnervateD]

If you want reliability you got with the Crucial M4 series. They don't use the Sandforce chip, it's realitively fast but no where near as fast as the Sandforce counterpart.

I've heard a lot of issues with OCZ Vertex 3 SSDs. You can see that with the OCZ forums. I've already dealt with one issue personally with their drives on another build for my brother.

Samsung SSDs, I've haven't been able find them, hard to find.

Intel's especially the newer ones I heard are having issues compared to their last gen ones.

I personally have a pair of Corsair Force GTs and have them in RAID 0 and I'm having ZERO issues with them.

[DooRules]

Got two Intel 520's, never an issue, I have a couple of m4's, never an issue. Either or the sammy would be awesome drives.

[HiVizMan]

Hello DC

I have huge respect for Crucial M4 drives. But my first choice would be the Samsung. I use them for all my enterprise builds and have no hesitation recommending them to you.

OCZ um FAIL

[Kipper]

Yea, I think the Samsung is for sure my next purchase.

Samsung makes their own NAND and DRAM cache components and only using their own controller so you can count on all of the components being a nice match with each other and would be the cat's meow if you will.

For the time being I would avoid any of the SSDs that are using the 2xxx version of the SandForce controllers at least until they get all the problems sorted.

[flearider]

don't forget the corsair performance pro .. which uses the marvell chip ..

[chevy350]

I've got a pair of Intel 520's and a pair of OCZ Solid 3's in RAID0 and haven't had any issues with either. Intel's are on the SATAIII ports and OCZ's are on the SATAII ports. Updated the firmware on the OCZ's to the 2.15's and the Intels are on what they were when I bought them (400i) is what RST is saying. I did hear a lot of bad things about the OCZ vertex 3's as well but most I read about were on the x59 chipsets and or trying to use them on Marvell ports. I tried all my ssd's on the Marvell's and they would drop pretty much like clockwork during intense or prolonged use. The OCZ's dropped from time to time when comp was idle but after flashing the firmware that was resolved. Easiest way to determine what to get is read reviews and check forums of the brand your looking at since thats usually where the ones who run into problems post first. Good luck with your decision :cool:

[Area 66]

If you want reliability you got with the Crucial M4 series. They don't use the Sandforce chip, it's realitively fast but no where near as fast as the Sandforce counterpart..

it's why they are good, and they are far from been slow, the read is about the same ( see below) If you want a Sandforce the only one acceptable is my first choice will be the Intel 520 Series Cherryville 240 GB, only $ 330 with free shipping, and 5 years warranty , my second choice will be a Crucial.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167086

Here a good and reliable reference that show the difference of speed between an Intel 530 and a Crucial M4, read speed are about the same , the writing is slower on the Crucial

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/50980-intel-520-240gb-cherryville-ssd-review-6.html

[Henkenator68NL]

I have been using 2 x OCZ Vertex 3 120 Gb running in RAID0 since august 2011... I researched a lot of options back than. And they came out as fastets (arround that period). Since august I never have had any problem with the SSD'd they perform supperbly.

In that same period I migrated my system from Rampage Extrem (Sata 3GB) wit Intel Processor to Crosshair V Formula. No problems what so ever. Secure erased them, rebuild the RAID install OS and there it went !! Tops running on Sata 6 Gb.

I wrote a review on it its in Dutch but it had almost 10.000 page vieuws and 90% percent of comments was possitive. So I don't support the negative banter about OCZ. You picked out the Petrol Version of OCZ, they have lower reported Read and Write speeds, did you concider the Vertex 3? 2 x 120 Gb cost about $ 320 according to Newegg.

If you want to see the performance? I can post recent Benchmark results using AS SSD, Atto Disk Benchmark and CrystalDiskMark

What ever you choose, the performance leap compared to a "normal" HDD and an SSD is Huge! So taking that into concideration it wat by far the best upgrade I bought. In my review I compared singel HDD read and Write to SSD in RAID on Sata 3 Gb: the lowest inprovement was 450% (sequential read) running up to 68800% (4K QD32). I haven't done the math on comparing Singel HDD To my 2 SSD's in RAID0 on Sata 6Gb but its HUGHE.

Choosing the best for you're new setup is always fun but also exciting on which to pick! Well let us know whats it going to be!]

Happy Hunting

Edit: After reading review on harware canuck mentioned in previous post... i decided to post the benchmark results. If you want speed and performance...

7484

Compare those with results in review ;-)

[DaemonCantor]

Thank you all, and Area 66 especially, I never knew the Intel line to be cheap enough to consider. I've always seen Intel as being the best so it demanded High Price but never did think they would go with a middle of the road price. Now I'm intrigued... Would that Intel preform that nice without the Intel Matrix Storage thingy on an AMD Platform or do I have to have Intel Platform to get those numbers? Also I didn't see it compared to the Samsung SSD but most of the good things I have read about Samsung SSD's was over 4 years ago when they were actually faster than the Intel line, not by much but they were.

[HiVizMan]

Samsung are very focused on the Enterprise market. They do not really participate in the retail market in the way that the others do, Kingston, OCZ and Adata for example. Those guys like the hype and the mass consumer market but they have no penetration in the Enterprise sector to speak off. I have family who heads the HP Blade storage project and guess which SSD they opted for their systems?

Intel is a very good option and you would be able to use them with the AMD platform with no problem at all.

[Area 66]

.. Would that Intel preform that nice without the Intel Matrix Storage thingy on an AMD Platform or do I have to have Intel Platform to get those numbers? .

What SSD you think I have on my Crosshair V ? all true it's a 120 GB

[DaemonCantor]

I understand all of it plus I've been continuing my research into it and leaning towards the Samsung's more and more. they seem to be hitting a Higher IOPS score than all of the rest which is what HD's are really measured by plus in the real world test that I just found from Tech Powerup shows them on par with most of the others out there. It's looking like Samsung might be it with Performance and Longevity plus the Tools that come with it. I do like that Magic Drive Tool which none of the others seem to include but Norton anything can and will be dumped into the Trash before ever opening the package.