Which SSD right NOW?

[pinkfloydhomer]

I want to buy an SSD right now, not wait until Vertex 3 and all the other next-gen drives are available and bug-free.

I will be buying a Sandy Bridge motherboard (probably some ASUS with H67) along with it, and I will be running Windows 7 64-bit. This will be my everyday desktop.

I have narrowed it down to Vertex 2, C300 or X25-M G2, either 64 GB or 128 GB (or thereabouts). I was leaning towards 64 GB since it will be enough for my OS drive, and also cheaper. Then I could always upgrade once Vertex 3 (or similar) was stable, if I wanted. And the 64 GB drive could then find use in one of my other computers. But as I understand it, the 128GB will be both faster out of the box and will have less performance loss as time goes by because each memory cell will be have less wear on average, all else being equal.

Can you help me make the final decision? Which model? Which size?

Thanks

 

[Veliko]

Intel G2 160GB. Personally I think the 64GB is just too small even when used only as an OS/boot drive.

 

[pinkfloydhomer]

Intel G2 160GB. Personally I think the 64GB is just too small even when used only as an OS/boot drive.

What are your reasons for choosing Intel G2 over Vertex 2 and C300?

I am beginning to think that a larger drive (120GB - 160GB) is wiser, too.

 

[Veliko]

What are your reasons for choosing Intel G2 over Vertex 2 and C300?

I am beginning to think that a larger drive (120GB - 160GB) is wiser, too.

The Intel drives are considered to be the most reliable and various forummers on here have said the customer service from some of the other makers is very bad.

The Intel drive may not be the fastest but from what I have read on here the difference isn't all that huge anyway when it comes to actual useage. Intel is the 'safe' option.

 

[Bauss]

Two questions will help me answer this better:

1) What's your budget?

2) What are you using for other than booting? File copies? Working drive for some specific task?

 

[COPOHawk]

I would still recommend an Intel drive in whatever your price range is. Reliability is a top issue for me. Also, I own a couple of C300 drives (both 64GB) and while the performance is fine, there are no noticable benefits over my Intel G2 drives.

Also, Intel has a great utility (Intel SSD toolbox), while I can find nothing like that for the Vertex or C300 drives.

I won't buy an OCZ drive for a while due to their recent bait-switch with the 25 nm flash in their SSD's. It is shitty business practices.

 

[finbarqs]

I have a intel g2 160gb, and my GF has the hp envy 14 C300 256GB, and mine system boots up CONSIDERABLY faster than her system!

 

[Bauss]

I have a intel g2 160gb, and my GF has the hp envy 14 C300 256GB, and mine system boots up CONSIDERABLY faster than her system!

Keep in mind, with SSDs the biggest slowdown in boot times is no longer loading the OS. There are many things one's BIOS does that can take much more time in the boot process.

As for the SSD purchase, do you have SATA III? If not, get the cheapest 120+ gb made in the last year, man. It'll all be fine for an OS drive to be honest. Besides, they all pretty much choke a SATA II slot.

If you do have a SATA III slot, then answer this: Is cost a huge factor? If not, I'd look to get the 510. Fastest on the market until the V3 gets here. Besides, Intel is pretty friggin' trustworthy as far as SSDs go. But they are expensive right now. If cash is a huge issue, then get a C300. It's the fastest thing you can put on a SATA III port without spending over $300.

 

[Termie]

Corsair Force 120 for $220: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820233125.

You get a nice capacity, max speed (unlike Crucial 128 and new Intel 120, which are cut down in specs), and you don't deal with OCZ bait-and-switch.

Bench: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4244/intel-ssd-320-review/8

If you want to take advantage of SATA3, the Crucial C300 is also a pretty good bet.

Crucial 128 is $210 at superbiiz with coupon MAD15 through Mar. 31st. Link: http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php...28GB-RealSSD-C300-SATA3-Solid-State-Drive-MLC

But there are reports of problems on P67 chipset: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2139854

 

[groberts101]

I would agree with Bauss. At least until the V3's are here anyways.

HOWEVER,.. anyone considering a V3 on a laptop would be well advised to research V2/Sandforce compatibility for their specific model first, though. Sleep/hibernate causes many issues with Sandforce regardless of the mfgr.

 

[boozie]

Two questions will help me answer this better:

1) What's your budget?

2) What are you using for other than booting? File copies? Working drive for some specific task?

I wouldn't mind suggestions for my own situation. I am looking to buy in 2-4 weeks so I can bide my time for a sale. I am building a new rig so I will have SATA III but I'm not really in need of the uber fast stuff coming out as I'm just getting an SSD for the snappiness and marginal gaming benefits. No crazy amounts of data transferring or anything, just lots of gaming.

My target is ~120GB for $200. There is some leniency in the budget if it's warranted but hard cap of $250 and preferably under $220.

[e] This will be on a P67 mobo.

Bottom line is reliability and storage space are more important than speed for me.

 

[Bauss]

I wouldn't mind suggestions for my own situation. I am looking to buy in 2-4 weeks so I can bide my time for a sale. I am building a new rig so I will have SATA III but I'm not really in need of the uber fast stuff coming out as I'm just getting an SSD for the snappiness and marginal gaming benefits. No crazy amounts of data transferring or anything, just lots of gaming.

My target is ~120GB for $200. There is some leniency in the budget if it's warranted but hard cap of $250 and preferably under $220.

[e] This will be on a P67 mobo.

If the V3 comes out and can maintain the pricing they claim, get it. Personally, I doubt that'll be the case. The demand for them is huge right now, and the constant delays don't instill confidence in me at all. Going with my gut, I'd get the C300. The prices they're selling those at is very impressive given its 34nm flash memory.

 

[groberts101]

even though I'm a "known Sandforce fanboy", I'd probably go for the C300 in that case too.

 

[tweakboy]

C300 all the way! quality part.

 

[Arcadio]

I bought a Crucial C300 last week, but I wasn't aware that the issues with freezing and stuttering were still a problem. Now I need to decide whether I should return it and get another C300, or just go with a different model...

 

[stahlhart]

I wouldn't mind suggestions for my own situation. I am looking to buy in 2-4 weeks so I can bide my time for a sale. I am building a new rig so I will have SATA III but I'm not really in need of the uber fast stuff coming out as I'm just getting an SSD for the snappiness and marginal gaming benefits. No crazy amounts of data transferring or anything, just lots of gaming.

My target is ~120GB for $200. There is some leniency in the budget if it's warranted but hard cap of $250 and preferably under $220.

[e] This will be on a P67 mobo.

Bottom line is reliability and storage space are more important than speed for me.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820167035

Working beautifully for me, and exactly at your price point after rebate. Just need to keep an eye out for when they're back in stock (5 days).

 

[Martimus]

Corsair Force 120 for $220: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820233125.

You get a nice capacity, max speed (unlike Crucial 128 and new Intel 120, which are cut down in specs), and you don't deal with OCZ bait-and-switch.

Bench: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4244/intel-ssd-320-review/8

If you want to take advantage of SATA3, the Crucial C300 is also a pretty good bet.

Crucial 128 is $210 at superbiiz with coupon MAD15 through Mar. 31st. Link: http://www.superbiiz.com/detail.php...28GB-RealSSD-C300-SATA3-Solid-State-Drive-MLC

But there are reports of problems on P67 chipset: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2139854

Damn, I just bought the C300 128GB from Newegg last night for $255! Oh well, I guess I should have put more effort into finding a better price. The funny thing is that I bought the processor and motherboard from SuperBiiz, and the savings I would have gotten from buying the SSD there as well was bigger than the combined savings of both the CPU and MB.

 

[pinkfloydhomer]

I decided to disregard the smallest drives and go for appx. 120 GB.

But boy, is the situation frustrating.

So, to sum it up:

Intel 510 - Reliable (we don't really know yet, do we?), slower than V3, more expensive than gen2 drives, SATA III

OCZ Vertex 3 - FAST! But not available. And do we trust OCZ after the bait-and-switch on the Vertex 2?

Intel X25-M G2 - Reliable but "slow" and "old", cheaper than gen3 drives, SATA II

Crucial C300 - Stuttering bug! Fast gen2 drive, SATA III, a little cheaper than X25-M G2

OCZ Vertex 2 - Bait-and-switch from 34nm to slower 25nm. SATA II, is faster than X25-M G2 and a little bit cheaper than this and C300.

Cheap, fast, reliable - pick two?

 

[groberts101]

I always luck out and pick fast and reliable. The cheap part is the trickiest without losing one of the other attributes. lol

 

[slapkey]

I decided to disregard the smallest drives and go for appx. 120 GB.

But boy, is the situation frustrating.

So, to sum it up:

Intel 510 - Reliable (we don't really know yet, do we?), slower than V3, more expensive than gen2 drives, SATA III

OCZ Vertex 3 - FAST! But not available. And do we trust OCZ after the bait-and-switch on the Vertex 2?

Intel X25-M G2 - Reliable but "slow" and "old", cheaper than gen3 drives, SATA II

Crucial C300 - Stuttering bug! Fast gen2 drive, SATA III, a little cheaper than X25-M G2

OCZ Vertex 2 - Bait-and-switch from 34nm to slower 25nm. SATA II, is faster than X25-M G2 and a little bit cheaper than this and C300.

Cheap, fast, reliable - pick two?

Rather than the x25-m G2, wouldn't it make sense to get the newer 320? If you're sticking with SATA II, this should be faster than the older gen stuff. It's 25nm, but they're adding in extra reserves for that, and from the numbers I've seen you're still not looking at burning the drive out through normal use in this lifetime. It's $230 but has gone out of stock at newegg. Haven't looked elsewhere.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-050-_-Product

 

[cever89]

What are your reasons for choosing Intel G2 over Vertex 2 and C300?

I am beginning to think that a larger drive (120GB - 160GB) is wiser, too.

Same here. I was hoping to get away with a cheaper 64GB because of my limited budget, but after seeing my C: drive balloon after getting my iPod Touch (it syncs to your C: drive and you can't change it... damn iTunes!), I think 120 is a lot safer.

Will definitely go SSD for my next build!

 

[COPOHawk]

Same here. I was hoping to get away with a cheaper 64GB because of my limited budget, but after seeing my C: drive balloon after getting my iPod Touch (it syncs to your C: drive and you can't change it... damn iTunes!)

I am sure you were kidding here. After all, while the iTunes application is on the C: drive, the media/music folder can be moved anywhere and simply re-directed via the advanced options in iTunes. Since the application files are pretty small...this addresses the space concerns of a large music file archive.

 

[beginner99]

If you never had an ssd, even a G2 will be blazing fast.

I'm currently looking at ssd too for my soon to buy laptop and my dads PC. They c300 128 GB seems to offer best price-performance but the stuttering issues are mentioned everywhere and won't buy and pray it will work.

64 Gb would be enough if you really limit yourself to OS and the most important apps, that are not games (Browser for sure any whatever else you use most). I have a G2 80GB and it's enough. Anything else like games can go on a spindle.

I would go with one of the new intel drives. Even if the small chance of a bug manifests you can be sure of a fast and appropriate response. I'm staying away from OCZ and Sandforce has a lot of issues too. The difference between a G2 and a never drives is liek 10 times smaller than to a spindle drive.

 

[Emulex]

most people can't tell the difference when putzing around between the most expensive and X25-V (Reads at 240-250mbps) it is writing that hurts. so when you are updating flash it could take twice as long. this doesn't bother most people as the write speed is about 5400rpm which they are used to and if you WROTE more than 5% (95% read) you would kill the drive anyways.

i'd say 99% of the folks wouldn't know the difference between a $99 ssd and a $499 one other than free space

 

[slapkey]

most people can't tell the difference when putzing around between the most expensive and X25-V (Reads at 240-250mbps) it is writing that hurts. so when you are updating flash it could take twice as long. this doesn't bother most people as the write speed is about 5400rpm which they are used to and if you WROTE more than 5% (95% read) you would kill the drive anyways.

i'd say 99% of the folks wouldn't know the difference between a $99 ssd and a $499 one other than free space

If you're taking reliability/longevity out of the mix, I would mostly agree with you on this. But I feel like the slight premium you pay for getting the more reliable drives is worth it. You most certainly will notice whether or not your drive just stops working prematurely.