32GB 2.5" SATA/USB SSD $79.99 at buy.com

[bigd480]

Link

It was hard to find reviews other than the single one on buy.com but the price at most other retailers is over $150. Figured it would be good for anyone w/ a SATA laptop (extend battery life and hopefully increase performance). If anyone has experience w/ this drive or knows which OEM drive is inside please post.

Features
32 GB 2.5 SSD
Sequential read/write: 130MB/sec & 90MB/sec
Random read/write: 80MB/sec & 25MB/sec
Noiseless (Acoustic = 0dbB)
Ultra-durable (Operation temperature 0C to 70C and withstands Operation shock 15000G)
Low power consumption (5V, 200mA)
Complete metal casing
Mean time before failure (MTBF): 1,300,000hrs +
Access time: 0.1ms



Tech Specs
SATA II (when used as internal)/USB 2.0 (when used as external) Interface
Dimensions: 2.75" x 3.94" x 0.31"
Weight: 0.2lbs

 

[msi1337]

found this link with a pic of the inside..can't quite tell who it is actually made by

 

[Gibson486]

32 GB....that is like....back up media. There is no way i can use below 60GB now for a main drive. For back up though...man....I hate you because you are tempting me to spend money.

 

[kimchee411]

Originally posted by: Gibson486
32 GB....that is like....back up media. There is no way i can use below 60GB now for a main drive. For back up though...man....I hate you because you are tempting me to spend money.

Why use an SSD for backup? That's the last place you'd need the performance. The only reason to get an SSD IMO is for the OS/pagefile disk.

 

[Gibson486]

Originally posted by: kimchee411

Originally posted by: Gibson486
32 GB....that is like....back up media. There is no way i can use below 60GB now for a main drive. For back up though...man....I hate you because you are tempting me to spend money.

Why use an SSD for backup? That's the last place you'd need the performance. The only reason to get an SSD IMO is for the OS/pagefile disk.

See...i like you b/c you knock sense into me. My money is stored away

 

[jlee]

148 years before failure? :Q

 

[Fayd]

Originally posted by: kimchee411

Originally posted by: Gibson486
32 GB....that is like....back up media. There is no way i can use below 60GB now for a main drive. For back up though...man....I hate you because you are tempting me to spend money.

Why use an SSD for backup? That's the last place you'd need the performance. The only reason to get an SSD IMO is for the OS/pagefile disk.

or in a high vibration prone environment. (car)

 

[frostedflakes]

Isn't the JMicron JMF602 controller the only flash controller out there that supports SATA2 and USB? Chances are this drive uses the JMicron controller and MLC flash, so be weary of the random write issues similar drives have.

 

[CosmosRewind]

It would be interesting to use one of these as a boot drive on a desktop. My boot partition is only 16gb right now, so this is plenty big enough.

Do they recommend FAT32 like they do on USB Flash drives still? I've read NTFS is rather chatty being a transaction based file system (lots of extra writes).

 

[imported_browsing]

I'm really slow when it comes to SSDs. Could you install windows on this thing and have it run decently or would it just be a novelty?

 

[bob4432]

read on the ocz forums about their ssds and do the tweaks. the drive i have - a ocz v2 core 30GB ssd is extremely fast when it comes to seek and transfer and even large writes, but does stutter every so often w/ random writes - just do what is suggested on the ocz site and it is definitely liveable. and i am comparing to new gen 15k scsi....

to really fix the issue, put a pair of these in a raid0 on a hardware raid card w/ some memory - write problem solved

i wouldn't call them a novelty, but know you are an early adopter and there are some issues to be dealt w/, but overall the performance is good, at least w/ the one i have

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Gibson486
32 GB....that is like....back up media. There is no way i can use below 60GB now for a main drive. For back up though...man....I hate you because you are tempting me to spend money.

oh its much worse then that
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3403&p=8
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3403&p=9
cheap ssd is unfit for desktop duty

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Gibson486
32 GB....that is like....back up media. There is no way i can use below 60GB now for a main drive. For back up though...man....I hate you because you are tempting me to spend money.

oh its much worse then that
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3403&p=8
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3403&p=9
cheap ssd is unfit for desktop duty

those graphs are defintely not what i have been experiencing w/ mine and again, i am coming from a new gen 15k scsi drive. for the $60AR i paid for mine, easily worth it. maybe my computing just doesn't require many random writes, who knows, but the graphs vs real world that i am experiencing are totally different, and i doubt i am alone.

 

[bond007taz]

I have a SSD in my HP mini-note and I love it - battery life and boot time is crazy - I also use these SSD's in HTPC that I use to view media off of a NAS - so the HTPC only needs to boot and run windows/XBMC - I am going to get this and put it in my APPLE TV (aka HTPC) for heat issues and less moving parts

GREAT FIND!

 

[nobodyknows]

These would be the cat's ass for a small laptop and a GPS. I have an old LS400 with a 12" screen that I use for GPS but it's IDE.

 

[Finalnight]

.

 

[hans007]

they changed the price...


if anyone cares... the transcend version

http://www.amazon.com/Transcen...&qid=1232282327&sr=1-2

is $78.24 at amazon, which means no tax if you live in CA also.