• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Crucial M4, 256GB...any good deals out there?

I want a standalone SSD. I haven't put even 100 gigs on this 1TB HDD. I want to use it for a business pc that needs lots of storage.
 
I bought a 2nd hand Crucial C300 256GB for about $270 4 months ago 🙂

If you can find a cheap 2nd hand C300 256Gb it will perform just as good if not overall better. Sequential speed is 50MB/s slower, but 4k random read/write (app loading, windows loading, virus scans, file searching, databases, etc) is much better on the C300 and that's what you want for a SSD anyway, not huge sequential file transfers.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...0-vs-510-vs-320-vs-x25-M-vs-F120-vs-Falcon-II

The C300 is on older flash chip on a larger process node (38nm?) vs 25nm on m4. The program/erase cycle on 38nm is at least twice that of the 25nm. The C300 is likely to last longer
 
Last edited:
That is a good deal for the M4 256GB. If I didn't have my 320 300GB already, I'd go for that.

Someone is testing their M4 64GB and it's at 750TB of writes so far. There hasn't been an update on the C300 for a while. It may have been around 400TB
 
I bought a 2nd hand Crucial C300 256GB for about $270 4 months ago
Click to expand...
You did good. :thumbsup:

The new ones are mostly still going for 400.00 on Ebay but once in awhile I see a few for 300.00-320.00.

These are fantastic drives and I doubt I'll ever sell the 2 I have in RAID0.
 
I ended picking one up from Amazon. Came out to $344 with my $20 Battlefield 3 credit. My WD 640gb dual platter black is too slow compared to my Vertex 2 in my laptop lol.
 
Dadofamunky said:
The bigger they are, the faster they are. Each chip is accessed in parallel.
Click to expand...

It tops out at the 256GB size for me. The 512 is no faster. The 256 is a little faster than the 128. The 128 is a big jump over the 64. Of course if one has the room (and a decent controller) a bunch of smaller drives striped will rule the roost for a long time. 😉
 
Rubycon said:
It tops out at the 256GB size for me. The 512 is no faster. The 256 is a little faster than the 128. The 128 is a big jump over the 64. Of course if one has the room (and a decent controller) a bunch of smaller drives striped will rule the roost for a long time. 😉
Click to expand...

That's because the contoller is limited by a number of channels (hence also number of NAND die) so that parrallelism no longer increase performance.

You lose trim doing RAID though and if you have a 4 disk RAID0, your data security isn't very good.
 
MobiusPizza said:
That's because the contoller is limited by a number of channels (hence also number of NAND die) so that parrallelism no longer increase performance.

You lose trim doing RAID though and if you have a 4 disk RAID0, your data security isn't very good.
Click to expand...

LOL I have arrays with 48 SLC drives, not worried about Trim. Never worried about RAID0 either. When we had 20 something member SAS 15K RAID0 arrays as scratch disks not once did I have an issue that caused data loss/corruption. Consider the 100s of thousands of terabytes that were written to those arrays, that's practically a miracle! :awe:
 
Rubycon said:
Rubycon said:
LOL I have arrays with 48 SLC drives, not worried about Trim. Never worried about RAID0 either. When we had 20 something member SAS 15K RAID0 arrays as scratch disks not once did I have an issue that caused data loss/corruption. Consider the 100s of thousands of terabytes that were written to those arrays, that's practically a miracle! :awe:
Click to expand...


Ah if you use enterprise class drives yes no problem. Even without GC, 48 disk is so quick even if the SSDs are dirty, sequential write speed won't suffer to much to be noticeable. Server activities tends to be read rather than write and as long as you can saturate the ethernet, e.g. Gigabit LAN (not hard) it's no problem.

I wouldn't do it with MLC consumer drives, you see, still quite a number of people having problems with some SSD dropping out of BIOS, freeze, bluescreens.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top