Id like to try out the SSD's but Id just use it for the operating system, games & programs. Which is the best priced/performing one? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...0510-_-EMC-080510-Index-_-SSD-_-20231377-L09C This link shows one I saw..
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Best priced/performing Solid State Drive
- Thread starter Pivo504
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 311
This might get moved to data storage, but there are a few good deals in the HotDeals forum. I believe a Corsair CT128M225 is there for $200, along with a Kingston 64gb for $100 AR and a OCZ Vertex 60gb for $125 AR.
Someone else said that particular G.Skill 64gb could be had for $140ish, but I have no idea where. It's a better performer than either the Kingston or the OCZ, but I'm not sure how much real world difference there is. Someone said it probably wouldn't be noticeable for someone making the jump from HDD to SSD. I'm looking at making the jump as well, and I think I might grab the Corsair deal. It's not the news generation of tech, but it supports TRIM and gives me enough space to install OS+Programs and some games with enough head room to keep the drive healthy (<80% capacity).
Someone else said that particular G.Skill 64gb could be had for $140ish, but I have no idea where. It's a better performer than either the Kingston or the OCZ, but I'm not sure how much real world difference there is. Someone said it probably wouldn't be noticeable for someone making the jump from HDD to SSD. I'm looking at making the jump as well, and I think I might grab the Corsair deal. It's not the news generation of tech, but it supports TRIM and gives me enough space to install OS+Programs and some games with enough head room to keep the drive healthy (<80% capacity).
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 311
No sorry, I guess I wasn't clear.
You most certainly WILL notice a huge difference between your HDD drives and any decent SSD drive. What I was stating was that, although the SSD you linked uses new generation tech, it's supposedly only a little faster than the ones I listed. So you COULD go for the G.Skill, but you'd be paying a premium for a drive that won't impress you any more than the Kingston or the OCZ (which are going to definitely impress you).
You most certainly WILL notice a huge difference between your HDD drives and any decent SSD drive. What I was stating was that, although the SSD you linked uses new generation tech, it's supposedly only a little faster than the ones I listed. So you COULD go for the G.Skill, but you'd be paying a premium for a drive that won't impress you any more than the Kingston or the OCZ (which are going to definitely impress you).
I disagree.. Unless your sitting there with benchmarks up all day the average joe will not see a noticeable performance difference in almost any new SSD from any other new SSD.. Basically what you want to make sure of is that you are working with a good controller that doesn't have any major flaws (like the 1st gen jmicron that stutters or the new marvell controller that doesnt have any good garbage collection). & Beyond that Just make sure you are getting something with a good size to cost ratio.. Best right now (without anything special) is the Kingston SSDNow V Series SNV425-S2BD/128GB @ 234.00 (also you can get a 64gb for 99 after rebate). While its not as fast as the intel Danny recommended you get alot more space for your buck& Going from a mechanical drive you will still be amazed at how fast everything goes.. Especially when you figure in that that extra capacity will allow you to store more of your apps and games on the SSD.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 311
How does that one stack up against the Corsair CT128M225?
cbliss1000
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 361
another good drive to consider are the new OCZ Agility 2's. Keep an eye on the sales forum and you can get one for ~100$ shipped. They use SandForce, which of all the controllers is one of the better.
Dangman
Ninja Editor SuperMod
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 46,056
From what I can tell from user experiences here on the forums, there are noticeable differences between many of the different SSDs out there in day to day usage. And we're not talking about the average joe here: we're talking about a PC enthusiast whose usage scenarios are far above any average joe. Would average joe build his own PC?
I'm basing my recommendation for the Intel 80GB SSD on the fact that it's still highly recommended by many forum members here. A quick search of the "SNV425-S2BD" in the Data Storage Subforum yielded no results of anyone actually recommending that drive to others.
$140 is not enough for any decent 80GB to 100GB SSD. Most SSDs in that price range are 32GB to 64GB.
Corsair doesn't make the CT128M225.. Crucial Does..
As far as which one is better.. The Crucial has the Indilinx Barefoot controller where the Kingston has the newer jmicron controller.. For the same cost the Barefoot controller is a better controller. Even for a small premium. But more then about 20 or 30 bucks for the same size & I would say its probably not worth the difference.
99% of all recommendations on the [H] for an SSD are intel drives or Intel made drives re branded to something else (like kingston or dane-elec).. That however doesn't mean that they are the only drives out there that are worth anything.
To quote the OP "Which is the best priced/performing one?" if that was just asking for the best performing one then yea I would say the Intel G2 as well.. But its performance doesn't make up for the premium that you pay for the drives if money is a concern. & You say there are noticeable differences depending on the drive.. Well I cant tell from surfing the web, watching movies & playing games & keep in mind that I have 2x Intel 80gb SSD's in raid 0.. Now sure if I am running benchmarks I am smoking the competition.. But to actually use the things it doesn't feel any faster then it did with just one of them. Or then it did with my brother in law's Crucial that uses the barefoot controller (single drive mind you, no raid)...
& yes the Average Joe would build his own computer. I know lots of them that do. Hell in this forum (being genhard) we price out systems all the time for people who could buy & get what they need, but prefer building because they like the feeling of doing it themselves..
Dangman
Ninja Editor SuperMod
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 46,056
Point taken.
But the SSD you recommended costs the same as the Intel SSD. Yes the Kingston does offer 48GB more storage. But does that 48GB more storage really offset its performance compared to the Intel SSD?
Like I said, that's what I've been seeing from other SSD users here in the forums. You may have a different experience from others.
Hmm it seems that you and I have different definitions of "average joe". I don't consider anyone asking for build help an "average joe"
horrorshow
Lakewood Original
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2007
- Messages
- 9,909
Yeah, I've heard/read Intel is def the way to go.
There not the same cost..
Kingston $1.82 per GB
Intel 2.68 per GB
So your talking about a difference of .86 per GB. That puts the intel almost 1.5 times the cost of the kingston. So for day to day use, No the intel's performance gain does not cover the cost difference.
& most users here that have intel SSD's are not average users & a fairly large portion of them Do run benchmarks for the sake of running benchmarks.
& yea thats just a difference in our opinions so meh..
Dangman
Ninja Editor SuperMod
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 46,056
Ahh righty then.
horrorshow
Lakewood Original
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2007
- Messages
- 9,909
Good to know.
Guys how much of a difference in performance would I get from using a WD black hdd over using my regular SATA drives in RAID 0? Is raid 0 noticeable in everyday computing: gaming, web browsing, moving files, burning, ect? If the Blacks would make a noticeable real world gain which is best bang for buck right now?
The best bang-per-buck HDDs that we often recommend are the WD Caviar Blue WD5000AAKS 500GB HDD, the Samsung Spinpoint F3 HD502HJ 500GB HDD, the Samsung Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ 1TB HDD, and the Western Digital Caviar Black WD1002FAEX 1TB (SATA III/6.0Gbps) HDD. All of those drives use 500GB drive platters and are competitive with the more expensive WD VelociRaptor HDDs.
Two of any of those drives in RAID 0 would outperform your current setup, but I can't tell you how noticeable it would be to you. But even a good (non-Raptor) RAID 0 configuration can't compete performance-wise against one good SSD.
Two of any of those drives in RAID 0 would outperform your current setup, but I can't tell you how noticeable it would be to you. But even a good (non-Raptor) RAID 0 configuration can't compete performance-wise against one good SSD.