Kingston V300 240GB MLC SATA6G SSD $56.99 FS Newegg via ebay

[VirtualLarry]

301380765684

Kingston SSDNow V300 Series 2.5" 240GB SATA III Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Limit 5 per customer

240GB V300 MLC SSD

Yes, this is the drive (well, this model) that had the "NAND swap" to async some time ago. AFAIK, it's still an MLC design with a SandForce 2nd-gen controller, which is likely better than newer TLC drives like the BX200.

I think under $60 shipped for a 240GB MLC is a deal.

I'm in for a couple. NAND swap or not, my V300 120GB SSD in my HTPC (before I replaced it with a mini-PC box, with an Atom and eMMC) ran fine for like 1.5 years. Barely 1-2% wearout in that time.

 

[KillerBee]

.../itm/Kingston-SSDNow-V300-Series-2-5-240GB-SATA-III-Internal-Solid-State-Drive-SSD-/301380765684

Kingston SSDNow V300 Series 2.5" 240GB SATA III Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)


Spindle Speed = 7200RPM


The fastest Spinning SSD on the market!

 

[VirtualLarry]

301930430283

Kingston 240GB SSDNow UV300 SATA 3 2.5" w/Adapter - SUV300S37A/240G

antonline

$54.99

Anyone ever heard of a "UV300"? Is this some new model? TLC? Strange, never heard of it before. $2 cheaper than the V300.

Edit: See here.
http://www.hardwarebbq.com/kingston-ssdnow-uv300-240gb-ssd-review/

It's a Phison S10 controller.

"Kingston also emphasized in its page that it’s using TLC chips for this SSD."

Ugh, TLC.

"For some very strange reason, Kingston UV300 is not available in any online retail websites except in Amazon India."

"Taking everything into consideration, SanDisk Ultra II 240GB has a better random read and sequential/random write skills compared to the SSDNow UV300. Not a favourable position to be in. Ultra II is insignificantly cheaper, but it comes with three years warranty too but with better performance. UV300 needs to be priced lower so that it attracts buyers, especially for casual users who may not have a lot of write intensive tasks. Ultra II is pretty attractive for many types of users including gamers."

http://digitalconqurer.com/general/hard-drives/kingston-ssdnow-uv300-review/

http://www.techpowerup.com/217110/kingston-unveils-the-ssdnow-uv300-line-of-mainstream-ssds

 

[VirtualLarry]

Now $59.99 FS AC @ Newegg

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...C-042816-Latest-_-InternalSSDs-_-20721108-S0C

ESCETGM25

Kingston V300 240GB SATA6G MLC SSD

 

[dannydiscus]

Picked one up thanks

 

[Mike64]

Anyone ever heard of a "UV300"? Is this some new model? TLC? Strange, never heard of it before. $2 cheaper than the V300.

From what I could find on the web, it seems to have been targeted at "emerging markets". It was first released late last year in Russia, then India, presumably intended as an "inexpensive" option. But at least far as what's available here, I think they missed the boat by at least a year - with its performance being what it is and SSD prices being what they are in general these days, it really didn't strike me as worth even a second glance...<shrug>

 

[VirtualLarry]

with its performance being what it is and SSD prices being what they are in general these days, it really didn't strike me as worth even a second glance...<shrug>

Hmm. I guess I'll be the guinea pig... I bought several to test out.

 

[BenJeremy]

I see a lot of deals for the V300, but that was the bait and switch model.

I'd just as soon as spend a few more bucks for a company that isn't known to cheat consumers.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I see a lot of deals for the V300, but that was the bait and switch model.

I'd just as soon as spend a few more bucks for a company that isn't known to cheat consumers.

Considering that nearly ALL of the "budget" / non-Premium SSDs have done that (Silicon Power, PNY, Sandisk, maybe Team), would it be fair to just single out Kingston?

I mean, even Samsung has updated their popular 850 EVO SSDs, with 48-layer V-NAND, up from the 32-layer that they used before - WITHOUT changing the customer-oriented model number.

Are you going to swear off all Samsung SSDs then? Including the sweet 950 Pro M.2 NVMe PCI-E drives?

Edit: And to their credit, Kingston DID introduce a new model number for their first TLC drives ("UV300"), as mentioned in this thread, rather than swapping the controller and the NAND in their V300 drives, and simply just pricing them cheaper.

Edit #2: And even with the Async MLC NAND, the V300 240GB is still quite a bit faster than the Crucial BX200 with TLC memory and an SMI controller.

I've used VisionTek GoDrive drives, which explicitly advertise Async MLC NAND, and they use a SandForce 2nd-gen controller just like the V300 does, and they were pretty darn fast. Maybe not Samsung 850 EVO fast, but they weren't lagging.

 

[BenJeremy]

Considering that nearly ALL of the "budget" / non-Premium SSDs have done that (Silicon Power, PNY, Sandisk, maybe Team), would it be fair to just single out Kingston?

I mean, even Samsung has updated their popular 850 EVO SSDs, with 48-layer V-NAND, up from the 32-layer that they used before - WITHOUT changing the customer-oriented model number.

Are you going to swear off all Samsung SSDs then? Including the sweet 950 Pro M.2 NVMe PCI-E drives?

Edit: And to their credit, Kingston DID introduce a new model number for their first TLC drives ("UV300"), as mentioned in this thread, rather than swapping the controller and the NAND in their V300 drives, and simply just pricing them cheaper.

Edit #2: And even with the Async MLC NAND, the V300 240GB is still quite a bit faster than the Crucial BX200 with TLC memory and an SMI controller.

I've used VisionTek GoDrive drives, which explicitly advertise Async MLC NAND, and they use a SandForce 2nd-gen controller just like the V300 does, and they were pretty darn fast. Maybe not Samsung 850 EVO fast, but they weren't lagging.

The comparison of Samsung's V1 to V2 change is very disingenuous. V2 (48-layer) actually performs a tad faster.

Kingston didn't deliver the same model to consumers that they delivered to reviewers, and the performance drop was significant in the "consumer" batch. Worse, their management tried to laugh off the criticism by saying they promised "up to 450MB/s", so 200 MB/s was, technically, within spec.

 

[VirtualLarry]

The comparison of Samsung's V1 to V2 change is very disingenuous. V2 (48-layer) actually performs a tad faster.

Maybe. But it's a change in the NAND, without changing the user model number. Which is exactly what Kingston is accused of doing.

Kingston didn't deliver the same model to consumers that they delivered to reviewers, and the performance drop was significant in the "consumer" batch. Worse, their management tried to laugh off the criticism by saying they promised "up to 450MB/s", so 200 MB/s was, technically, within spec.

No, that's not correct. The early batches of that drive DID go out with Sync NAND. In fact, there are reviews on Newegg, where users obtained different drives from different batches, and they compare them. (Which wouldn't be possible if what you say is true.)

Part-way through production, Kingston had problems sourcing Sync NAND, so drives went out with Async, and tweaked firmware to support the new NAND type.

And the drives with Async NAND STILL performed according to their specs. They used ATTO, with compressible data. The major complaints started, when users started hitting the drives with benchmarks that used incompressable data, the SandForce controller's weak spot, and noticed a difference in performance that way.

IMHO, it was really blown all out of proportion.

Yeah, Kingston should have changed the model number, when they changed components, that affected the specs.

But so should Samsung. Did they? NOPE.

 

[BenJeremy]

Maybe. But it's a change in the NAND, without changing the user model number. Which is exactly what Kingston is accused of doing.



No, that's not correct. The early batches of that drive DID go out with Sync NAND. In fact, there are reviews on Newegg, where users obtained different drives from different batches, and they compare them. (Which wouldn't be possible if what you say is true.)

Part-way through production, Kingston had problems sourcing Sync NAND, so drives went out with Async, and tweaked firmware to support the new NAND type.

And the drives with Async NAND STILL performed according to their specs. They used ATTO, with compressible data. The major complaints started, when users started hitting the drives with benchmarks that used incompressable data, the SandForce controller's weak spot, and noticed a difference in performance that way.

IMHO, it was really blown all out of proportion.

Yeah, Kingston should have changed the model number, when they changed components, that affected the specs.

But so should Samsung. Did they? NOPE.

Samsung changed the part number. Kingston didn't.
Samsung's change was, arguably an upgrade. Kingston's performance was cut in half by its change.

It's a different situation entirely. Samsung's benchmarks actually got BETTER after their change.

That people "didn't notice the performance difference" with the crappier Kingston drivesis purely subjective. If I'm paying for 450MB/s, I better get something resembling 450 MB/s. Worse, I will damn well notice for the things I do with my computers.

Saying that Grandma doesn't notice isn't a legit excuse to say what Kingston did was OK.

 

[Captante]

Samsung's benchmarks actually got BETTER after their change.

This is pretty much the point that matters here. :thumbsup:

Covertly swapping components which increase performance is fine. The reverse not so much.


Having said that, this drive is roughly $30 less then I've seen the Evo going for so not a bad price provided you know what your buying. Also in my experience Kingston is a reputable company which stands behind what they sell.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Samsung changed the part number. Kingston didn't.

That's the best reference you have? An anonymous comment on an article? No engineering / product change notifications (PCNs) from Samsung?

You would think that if what you are saying is true, that Samsung themselves would want to tell someone...

 

[BenJeremy]

That's the best reference you have? An anonymous comment on an article? No engineering / product change notifications (PCNs) from Samsung?

You would think that if what you are saying is true, that Samsung themselves would want to tell someone...

So you didn't bother to look at the pictures of the two versions of 850 EVO drives?

The part numbers are DIFFERENT.

 

[VirtualLarry]

So you didn't bother to look at the pictures of the two versions of 850 EVO drives?

The part numbers are DIFFERENT.

So, where is this info available, if I'm buying from Newegg or Amazon, so that I, as a customer, can tell whether or not I'm buying a V1 or a V2 drive?

Edit: Note that what I said is correct. Samsung did NOT change the MODEL number of the drive. They made have made an obscure change to a supplier P/N, but unless that information is conveyed CLEARLY to the consumer, to let them know which drive they are buying, then again, Samsung is JUST AS GUILTY (or not) as Kingston is.

After all, the different drives from Kingston had different firmware revisions too. So shouldn't, by your standards BenJeremy, Kingston be absolved of any guilt? Regardless if the firmware revision of the actual drives being sold weren't clearly communicated to the customer? (As I am sure Samsung's obscure P/N changes likewise aren't either.)

 

[VirtualLarry]

Note that I haven't even begun to bring up how much better Kingston's service/RMA is, compared to Samsung. (I've read multiple accounts how Samsung's is awful, and outsourced.)

 

[BenJeremy]

Note that I haven't even begun to bring up how much better Kingston's service/RMA is, compared to Samsung. (I've read multiple accounts how Samsung's is awful, and outsourced.)

I'm glad you value customer service over quality. It sure helps when you have to return a lot of merchandise to a manufacturer, as is likely with Kingston.

Anandtech reports that Kingston's V300 bait and switch resulted in a drop from 450MB/s to 170MB/s.

I honestly don't know WTF this has to do with Samsung, anyway. I own a ton of Samsung SSDs and they all still are chugging along great, and performing quite nicely. If only more manufacturers would "bait and switch" to better, faster parts without informing consumers.

You keep plucking that chicken like you own stock in Kingston; I don't know why. You post some great deals, but users here deserve to be well informed - yet you seem very upset and antagonistic about this information.

If a user doesn't mind getting an SSD tops out at 170MB/s to save a few bucks, from a company that effectively installed 4-Cyl engines in a sports car after Car and Driver awarded them 5 stars, 'cause that's not shady at all, and no worse than that other company that replaced their 8-cyl engine with a 12-cyl engine... go right ahead.

 

[Macgyversite]

This is May 2016. Not 2014 from Anandtech. Lets see some Data from today to back up your words BenJeremy. Thats a lot of verbiage to swallow. Sounds like its coming from a Samsung fanboy perspective to me.

The OP CLEARLY made it know what was going on with the product. No need to bash him for it.

A review and way more current than your words are Ben. A year ago and sorry but you can Eat your words as far as I am concerned. Its 2016 and the hardware is fine........

And dont even go into review samples to try to cover your tail between your legs. All you are doing is speaking without any thing to stand on. Scour the web. See what you can come up with on TODAYS DRIVE.

Great deal OP. In for two.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=2718

Just for fun. Amazon.......

http://www.amazon.com/Kingston-Digi...8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=recent&pageNumber=1

 

[VirtualLarry]

Anandtech reports that Kingston's V300 bait and switch resulted in a drop from 450MB/s to 170MB/s.

If a user doesn't mind getting an SSD tops out at 170MB/s to save a few bucks

But it doesn't "top out" at 170MB/sec. That's with INCOMPRESSIBLE data, which we already knew was SandForce's weakness.

So, yes, if a user is using an NT-based OS, WITH NTFS COMPRESSION ENABLED FOR ALL FILES, or ... STORING PRE-COMPRESSED MEDIA (movies, etc.), then they may see some reduced performance.

BUT...

If they are like most normal users, with a standard Windows install, they will see the normal performance, of roughly 450-500MB/sec, since things like Windows executables and data files are normally highly compressible.

AND...

As I said in my OP, these are still FASTER than many modern TLC-based drives. Even with Async NAND. Not to mention, much better endurance.

SO...

Keeping everything in perspective, these are not bad drives. They may be middle-of-the-road as far as performance goes, but they DO perform like SSDs are supposed to.

This is May 2016. Not 2014 from Anandtech.

Great deal OP. In for two.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=2718

That review is a lot more in line with what I remember of these drives' performance capabilities.

 

[VirtualLarry]

You keep plucking that chicken like you own stock in Kingston; I don't know why. You post some great deals, but users here deserve to be well informed - yet you seem very upset and antagonistic about this information.

Not at all. I mentioned the "NAND swap" to Async in my OP!

What I am antagonistic about is your posts that are factually incorrect, to the point of practically libeling Kingston. You obviously have some beef with them that rises above a slight loss in performance with their V300 drives when used with incompressible data.

Edit: I notice you haven't said anything about long sequential writes on Samsung EVO 850 drives losing performance, once they exceed the size of Samsung's internal write cache NAND area. Maybe Samsung is "cheating" customers with "performance tricks" too. (In truth, they are not - they are just optimizing for the common case.)

 

[Macgyversite]

AMD/INTEL

SAMSUNG/KINGSTON

There are fanboys for all things. The problem is most ignore their respective weaknesses and forget that GOOGLE is out there.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I mean, I'm not trying to sound like a Kingston fanboy. These are definitely budget drives, they are not the best drives out there, but I think that they're passably decent for budget drives. I think actually that the SandForce controller is a bigger issue for some, than whether the NAND is Sync or Async. At least, the use of the SandForce controller basically guarantees that the drive uses MLC, which is important to me.

Sometimes you have to take a little bit of bad (NAND swap, possibility of Async NAND) with the good (MLC drive, budget price, good support).

And if someone wants to buy a Samsung drive, then good for them. They're probably faster, but they have some of their own issues. (Like how Samsung left 840 non-EVO users high and dry.)

Edit: I personally prefer the SMI 2246EN-based MLC drives more than either the SandForce or Samsung TLC drives. Like the Crucial BX100, and PNY CS1100, etc.

 

[Macgyversite]

I wasnt saying the above for you. We all have our favorites. You did well informing us of what this deal WAS> Not what it is now.

People come in bashing and forget we have the same tools and knowledge to find info and counter them. Very rarely is it a one way argument.

I was visiting my sons last week. They are both in the Air Force stationed in Omaha. I was using a spare PC I gave them years ago to play games with them.

AMD Phenom 955 Quad core OC to 3900mhz
ASUS Mobo M4N68T-M-V2.
8gb DDR3 1600 OC to 950 something
Nvidia GTX 770 2gb VC
Corsair CX600 PS
500GB 7200rpm slow ass HD

The system ran great (1080p) once in game on BF4, WOTanks, Warthunder tanks and planes, WOWships, Mechwarrior online. Just slow load times.

I ordered the above drive times 2 for a boot drive and a game drive. This will be installed on my next visit. This old system will be totally different once these drives are in place. This is far cheaper than a new system too.

Thanks again OP.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Interestingly enough, Newegg now has a listing for a 120GB and a 240GB UV300 drive, like antonline is currently selling on ebay.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820242239&ignorebbr=1

Says "Coming soon". No price yet.

Could Kingston be planning on phasing out their veritable budget V300 drive, in favor of an even cheaper TLC UV300 drive?

Edit: The SandForce 2nd-gen controller is getting pretty old in the tooth these days, and uses a compression "cheat" to achieve the performance that some modern controllers (Samsung's triple-core controller) can achieve largely without tricks. Not to mention the SandForce bugs, and bricking / panic-locking. I'm sure that some customers, and Kingston's RMA dept., would be happy to do without those things.