New storage device advice

[slugger_2003]

Hi all,

I've an Acer Aspire 4750G and booting time from sleep mode and sometimes navigation between programs is REALLY sluggish, so I figure it's possibly time to upgrade to an SSD drive.

My thinking was that I'd swap the DVD drive for the LSV2 480GB version of this Corsair LS drive.

I mainly use my laptop for internet browsing, coding with Android Studio and streaming from online services like Netflix. I currently have a 500GB HDD with 196GB free and have had this laptop for about 2 years, so 500GB seems more than enough for me, so maybe the 120GB drive would be a better option for me as the SSD would be purely for the OS and Apps.

I notice there are GTX, GS and LX drives and understand NVMe are rearing their beautiful heads round the corner but given my limited needs, is the drive I linked above recommendable? Anything I'm missing or should watch out for?

 

[dragonstongue]

for the longest time I used 60gb ssd and was left with ~18gb unused before "tweaking" after which 24gb free, 120gb leave more room of course probably a good 50+ unused without tweaking but I personally would go with a 256/512gb version for performance as well as capacity and the secondary drive at that point is for extra games or stuff that is not used as often. I myself use Crucial MX100 256gb and has been very fast in everything from bootup, to delete to move files to other hard-drive, gaming, searching you name it. The BX100 is also a very capable version and sometimes can be had less expensive, there is also Samsung 840 Pro which these days goes for around the same cost, I would hedge away from the EVO drives however.

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Crucial-MX100-256GB-vs-Corsair-Force-LS-240GB/2317vs3340
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/corsair_ls_ssd_benchmark_review_test,17.html
that LS seems fast however there are better options that seem to provide more consistent speed as well as durability for around the same price if not less expensive possibly.

I don't know about Corsairs firmware update process but Crucial and Samsung(if I recall) are super easy to do so if needed.

 

[slugger_2003]

for the longest time I used 60gb ssd and was left with ~18gb unused before "tweaking" after which 24gb free, 120gb leave more room of course probably a good 50+ unused without tweaking but I personally would go with a 256/512gb version for performance as well as capacity and the secondary drive at that point is for extra games or stuff that is not used as often. I myself use Crucial MX100 256gb and has been very fast in everything from bootup, to delete to move files to other hard-drive, gaming, searching you name it. The BX100 is also a very capable version and sometimes can be had less expensive, there is also Samsung 840 Pro which these days goes for around the same cost, I would hedge away from the EVO drives however.

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Crucial-MX100-256GB-vs-Corsair-Force-LS-240GB/2317vs3340
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/corsair_ls_ssd_benchmark_review_test,17.html
that LS seems fast however there are better options that seem to provide more consistent speed as well as durability for around the same price if not less expensive possibly.

I don't know about Corsairs firmware update process but Crucial and Samsung(if I recall) are super easy to do so if needed.

Thanks for taking the time to offer a valuable reply. After looking into the links and info you provided it looks like the mx200 can be had for 2.08GBP CHEAPER (including shipping etc) which seems to offer significant performance benefits over the Force LS. Thanks.

So now the question stands - I assume there'd be no issue with drive compatibility (Crucial website says it's fine but I thought it's worth asking to be sure...)? Anyone see any practical reasons why this wouldn't be a good idea? It'd work fine in place of my existing DVD drive (right connections etc)?

 

[dragonstongue]

the thing is where DVD drive normally sit are not meant for SSD install the mounting hardware wont work, so you may need to ziptie it into place or some such thing besides this there should be no reason why it would not work.

AHCI will allow it to work best as well as sata 3/6gbps to be available, as in sata 2 speeds most "modern" SSD will not function at their highest speeds. Performance on paper and in the real world are always very different things, I just ordered a 500gb mx200 for myself so I can keep my mx100 256gb as a game specific drive and be ready to go for windows 10.

It should however be faster, but I think in this case, if it is less expensive and even the same speed that is still a win.

 

[michaelvvang]

there are some really good SSD deals from time to time. Tigerdirect recently sold (I think it was an OCZ) 120gb for $35 after rebate. You just need to wait for the deals and you should have a cheap memory upgrade without the high costs.

 

[dragonstongue]

sometimes TD does, more often I used Newegg (did for my MX200) NCIX (for pricematching) etc paired up with shopbot it def can save quite a bit, but hard to argue with neweggs low to free shipping cost and generally very fast to delivery speeds. Personally 256gb is minimum I would go for performance/cost per gb reasons for SSD, 480gb or higher if the $/gb is just right, but for sure I would research the crap out of any potential purchase not just for SSD/HDD but for any tech related thing as there are many companies out there that simply are not worth the cost of doing business with them

 

[slugger_2003]

...there is also Samsung 840 Pro which these days goes for around the same cost, I would hedge away from the EVO drives however.

Why would you hedge away from the EVO drives? The reviews on them seem pretty good, benchmarks suggest the 850 EVO is faster than the mx200 and it's also cheaper than the mx200.

 

[slugger_2003]

there are some really good SSD deals from time to time. Tigerdirect recently sold (I think it was an OCZ) 120gb for $35 after rebate. You just need to wait for the deals and you should have a cheap memory upgrade without the high costs.

Yeah, certainly worth consideration although I'm based in the UK now, so my options for retailers are a bit more constrained.

 

[dragonstongue]

more then one complaint about the drives up and failing for no apparent reason (which can happen) but they also not giving RMA or even any response on the matter to those customers affected, 840 EVO had major performance issues that many customers were left hanging until just shy of the 850 series being released.

benchmarks and real world are 2 vastly different things, mx2000 and 850 EVO are direct competition as were the MX100 and 840 more or less. Going by that article you posted and I have seen it and others hence my conclusion, the 840 EVO and 850 EVO can give great performance until their turbo-write is filled or not functioning appropriately then their performance is affected by no small margin.

Now said EVO can only buffer 3gb of data, whereas the MX200 can effectively make the majority of the drive act in a similar fashion so will gain this boost to base numbers as well.

Either way, when looking at multiple benchmarks comparing stated MX200(or 100) vs 840/850 EVO the numbers are close I would count it a wash for the most part, but the performance DOES seem more consistent with the 100/200 then the 840/850. Crucial also put something new in their software storage executive, momentum, which essentially acts as a more fine grained ram drive to boost endurance as well as overall burst speed for better performance.

Less expensive is nice but at what true cost?

 

[slugger_2003]

Fair point. This is a benefit of communities like this, there's usually someone who has paid attention to what has went on so that information beyond statistics can be shared. Again, thanks