What is the more stable and durable SSD ?

E

Edde

n00b
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
33
Hello to everyone.
I am newbie in the forum.

And I am full of doubts. But the more immediate question I have is in relation to SSD. I've always had good experiences with products from Intel and I'd buy a SSD 510 series, there was launched the 520 series SATA III. After that, some people told me the 520 SATA III is not mature and it had bugs, do not know if it's true. I was advised to buy Corsair GT SATA III or SH100S3B Kingston HyperX. Some people told that Marvell was safer and then also said it was better SandForce for speed. some said that synchronous memories are better, but not everyone has. Now here I am full of doubts. I'll try to be clear what I want. I do not mind a small difference in speed between 5-15%. All I want is an SSD super ultra reliable, bug-free, and excellent durability. What would be the best option? OR what would be the best options? I'm not taking into account the price, I prefer to make a good buy once than buying bad twice. I want one to use in the sata 6.0 port.

Thank you in advance,

Edde
 
Last edited:
I've got several Crucial M4's with the latest two firmware revisions in the field in servers and desktops and I use them in all my personal equipment. Not one has failed me once. And they are wicked fast.

These things are great in small business servers. I wouldnt recommend them in top tier data center database servers that move multi hundreds of GB's a day. They are just not designed for it. But stability under light to even heavy loads for a moderate server or heavy hard hitting enthusiast desktop cant shake these little boys. Crucial uses a Marvel controller which is proven to be a top tier performance and stability. The actual controller in the M4 is the 88SS9174-BLD2 made by Marvell. These are not Sandforce powered drives which I have come to not like so much personally. But Sandforce drives are still really nice non the less. I just dont like their average random IO performance which in SSD is where it counts the most.

Just my recommendations.
 
tangoseal said:
I've got several Crucial M4's with the latest two firmware revisions in the field in servers and desktops and I use them in all my personal equipment. Not one has failed me once. And they are wicked fast.

These things are great in small business servers. I wouldnt recommend them in top tier data center database servers that move multi hundreds of GB's a day. They are just not designed for it. But stability under light to even heavy loads for a moderate server or heavy hard hitting enthusiast desktop cant shake these little boys. Crucial uses a Marvel controller which is proven to be a top tier performance and stability. The actual controller in the M4 is the 88SS9174-BLD2 made by Marvell. These are not Sandforce powered drives which I have come to not like so much personally. But Sandforce drives are still really nice non the less. I just dont like their average random IO performance which in SSD is where it counts the most.

Just my recommendations.
Click to expand...

Hello tangoseal,
Thank you for your comments.
Oh, great to know about it.

But the Intel 510 series also have Marvell controller, right?! What do you think about it?

And if 510 series is also good. Crucial M4 and Intal 510 are more stable and durable than Cosair GT and Kingston HyperX ?

Thank you
 
so... even with the fact that Intel is using SandForce in series 520. The models are more stable with Marvell, it? Like the 510 series and Crucial M4 ?
I am talking about "stability and durability" ;)
I don't care about 5-15% of speed. I want no bugs and it works fines at least for 3-4 years.
why intel 510 series is not an option? because is it not good? or the price?

By the way... I will install the windows 7 professional on the SSD
 
I have not seen a single complaint about instability with the 520. Since you brought up durability, the 510, 520, Corsair Performance Pro, Plextor M3/M3P, and all the higher end Sandforce SSDs (Vertex 3 max iops, Patriot Wildfire, Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe, etc.) all use 34/24nm Nand which have a 5000 write cycles. Most of the other drives not mentioned are rated for 3000. I realize they're not all available where you live, but figured I'd answer the durability question.
 
Hello MissJ84,

I love the products from intel, I was determined to buy the 520 series, when people told me that even with the SandForce and writing and reading in 500 that would be more interesting to buy the 510 series with Marvell controller reading 480 and writing 210.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state-drives/solid-state-drives-510-series.html
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state-drives/solid-state-drives-520-series.html
http://www.corsair.com/ssd.html
http://www.kingston.com/en/ssd

As I can see, for professional purposes, Marvell is better even with low speed than Sandforce, I am right?
 
I have had a 510 in my personal system at home and a M4 in my work pc for about a year now (since they were each released), no issues with either of them. I'd have no problem at all buying a 520, M4, or Samsung 830 with my own money.

I've done about 30 installs of SSDs now and have had no failures at all from Intel X25-M G1, X25-M G2, 510, Crucial C300, M4, Corsair Force series, Kingston V100+, ADATA, and Patriot.

Anandtech.com SSD reviews have been pretty good, check them out.
 
I have an Intel 320 running in my rig and it's supposed to be one of the most reliable around. No SF controller, supercapacitor and Intel waranty. Agreed, the speeds are not as insane as a Crucial M4 or Samsung 830 due to SATA300 (two newer and reliable non-SF SSD's) but it's still pretty damn fast :p.
 
Thank you for all replies.

So, since I want ultra reliable, bug-free, stability and excellent durability should I buy Intel 510 or Intel 520 series?

THank you
 
Edde said:
Thank you for all replies.

So, since I want ultra reliable, bug-free, stability and excellent durability should I buy Intel 510 or Intel 520 series?

THank you
Click to expand...

Well it sounds like amidst all of the recommendations you have been fixated on Intel so I say buy it and walk away with it and never look back. You will be happy with either or.

If you really want to talk stability you need to start looking at Enterprise SSD as in $1000.00 USD +++ in price starting.
 
In real world terms you won't notice much difference between the 510 and 520. The 510 has been out a year with no issues. Intel only came to market in the last month with the SF-2281 based 520, they spent a bunch of time validating it (the controller came out a year ago). Either is a winner. Personally, I'd go for the 520.
 
tangoseal said:
Well it sounds like amidst all of the recommendations you have been fixated on Intel so I say buy it and walk away with it and never look back. You will be happy with either or.

If you really want to talk stability you need to start looking at Enterprise SSD as in $1000.00 USD +++ in price starting.
Click to expand...

Hello Tangoseal. :)

Well, I am not represent Intel, lol. BUt I had very good experiences with it.
My last computer with mobo and processor have 5 years old and still working, none issue in 5 years! I like other brands like Kingston ( the memories I use) , I like Corsair ( the power supply I use) and other good brands. But I had serious problem with one computer I had before this one I used Asus motherboard, I lost 2 times. So...
Because this reason I intend to buy an SSD Intel.
Only rest to know if is better the 510 or 520 series, like I said before I don't care about the faster speed on 520 series, I want the more durable and MEGA reliable one. that also supports TRIM, I will use the windows 7.

The enterprise starting in $ 1000,00 USD is expensive for me. But thank you for the sugestion. :)
 
[LYL]Homer;1038620344 said:
In real world terms you won't notice much difference between the 510 and 520. The 510 has been out a year with no issues. Intel only came to market in the last month with the SF-2281 based 520, they spent a bunch of time validating it (the controller came out a year ago). Either is a winner. Personally, I'd go for the 520.
Click to expand...

Hello Homer,

So, are you sure ( not talking about speed) the 520 is better than the 510 with Marvell controler ?
 
I know its generalizing and its a terrible habit but after owning a near flawless 80GB Intel X25-M then "upgrading" to a 120GB OCZ Vertex 3 and having it be the biggest piece of shit I've ever bought, I will ALWAYS buy Intel SSD's from now on.

120GB Intel 520 series in the mail now. Good riddance to this POS OCZ.
 
criccio said:
I know its generalizing and its a terrible habit but after owning a near flawless 80GB Intel X25-M then "upgrading" to a 120GB OCZ Vertex 3 and having it be the biggest piece of shit I've ever bought, I will ALWAYS buy Intel SSD's from now on.

120GB Intel 520 series in the mail now. Good riddance to this POS OCZ.
Click to expand...


Hello Criccio. it's good to hear about it.

But between 510 with Marvell ( very stable and reliable) and 520 with sandfoce ( I know is more faster), So... Are you sure is better buy 520 series?

Thank you
 
Edde said:
Hello Criccio. it's good to hear about it.

But between 510 with Marvell ( very stable and reliable) and 520 with sandfoce ( I know is more faster), So... Are you sure is better buy 520 series?

Thank you
Click to expand...

I have the Intel 510, an Octane, a M4, and a Plextor M3P all which use the Marvell controller. The M3P has a 5 year warranty and is the fastest of the 4 drives, but they're all pretty good. The 510 is still excellent, but it is overpriced for the performance you get nowdays.

The 520 is perfectly fine, cheaper, and has a 5 year warranty.

I also have a HyperX, and that and the Intel 520 are probably the two best SF drives on the market (I don't own currently own a 520). If this is your first SSD, you may want to go conservative. If you can get a really good deal on a SATA II Intel SSD, then I'd get that if the price were right. Otherwise, there are a ton of great drives.

One drive not mentioned is the Samsung 830 -- which is also a drive to consider.
 
I can tell you one thing.. if you're betting on two companies with quality control.. bet on Intel.
 
ckryan said:
I have the Intel 510, an Octane, a M4, and a Plextor M3P all which use the Marvell controller. The M3P has a 5 year warranty and is the fastest of the 4 drives, but they're all pretty good. The 510 is still excellent, but it is overpriced for the performance you get nowdays.

The 520 is perfectly fine, cheaper, and has a 5 year warranty.

I also have a HyperX, and that and the Intel 520 are probably the two best SF drives on the market (I don't own currently own a 520). If this is your first SSD, you may want to go conservative. If you can get a really good deal on a SATA II Intel SSD, then I'd get that if the price were right. Otherwise, there are a ton of great drives.

One drive not mentioned is the Samsung 830 -- which is also a drive to consider.
Click to expand...

Hello ckryan, It's my 1st SSD, because this reason I am not sure and not decided.
 
criccio said:
I can tell you one thing.. if you're betting on two companies with quality control.. bet on Intel.
Click to expand...


Ok, Criccio, so I´ll get one intel, only I don't know If I should get the 510 series ( marvell controler) or the 520 series ( sandforce controler) Speed is not important for me, the important thing is the one more reliable, stable with less blue windows. Thank you

I would like to apologize to everyone. the reason I have lot of doubting about it because it's my first SSD.
 
Last edited:
I appreciate the kindness and all the attention people here gave me in your answers, thank you. I think I'll get even with Marvell and synchronous memories.
The model 510 has synchronous memories?
 
I'd recommend a Intel 320 series drives. Those are super reliable and proven. More so than any other SSD besides the enterprise 710 series.
Yes, they are SATA 300 but you won't notice a difference unless you're benchmarking.
 
As commonly recommended here as well.

Crucial M4 is reputably good.
Samsung 830 is reputably good.

In the running xtremesystems forum ssd endurance tests, above two running configs have accumulated over 700TB each. The current leader is (slower)Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V) 885TB . These figures are Host-writes. how that translate to actual physical wear I am not sure though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top