Crucial V4 256GB SATA2 SSD $164.99 FS @ TigerDirect.com

[VirtualLarry]

Crucial CT256V4SSD2CCA v4 256GB SSD with Easy Laptop Install Kit - 256GB, SATA 3Gb/s, 2.5-inch, Data Transfer Software, USB to SATA Cable

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...044&CatId=5300

This is a "laptop upgrade kit", with a USB-to-SATA notebook adaptor, and presumably, some sort of cloning software.

Note that this is not an M4, this is a V4, and they are only SATA2, not SATA6G.

Still, a decent sized drive for the price.

 

[SickBeast]

......

 

[Zap]

I don't make a practice of thread crapping. I see value in AMD processors, VelociRaptors, Windows Millenium and even the Mustang live axle. However, this drive is such a poor value that I feel a PSA is in order here. Considering the normal Crucial M4 has been available at these prices and sell for $30 more as a regular price, this drive is a terrible value.

AnandTech reviews Crucial v4 256GB

This drive uses a Phison PS3105 controller. From the review:

Those unfamiliar with the Phison name might find it interesting to hear that their controllers are often found in budget USB flash memory devices (where performance is often a minor concern).

I will let the benchmark results speak for themselves.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Since this drive is SATA2, it seems unfair to post benchmark comparisons of SATA6G drives.

I would be more interested in seeing comparisons between the Barefoot 2 (OCZ Vertex Plus R2), and SandForce Gen1 (Vertex/Agility 2) and this drive. Got any?

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

Since this drive is SATA2, it seems unfair to post benchmark comparisons of SATA6G drives.

I would be more interested in seeing comparisons between the Barefoot 2 (OCZ Vertex Plus R2), and SandForce Gen1 (Vertex/Agility 2) and this drive. Got any?

Yea except the Intel 320 is on that benchmark which is a SATA II drive.

As well as the Samsung 470...

 

[Charlie98]

Since this drive is SATA2, it seems unfair to post benchmark comparisons of SATA6G drives.

In regards to it being a Hot Deal... it's all based on value and performance per $ vs what else is out there.

 

[Termie]

Since this drive is SATA2, it seems unfair to post benchmark comparisons of SATA6G drives.

I would be more interested in seeing comparisons between the Barefoot 2 (OCZ Vertex Plus R2), and SandForce Gen1 (Vertex/Agility 2) and this drive. Got any?

Yea except the Intel 320 is on that benchmark which is a SATA II drive.

As well as the Samsung 470...

Actually, all the drives in that Anandtech test that do not say 6Gbps are being tested on SATA 2.

The interface is clearly not the bottleneck in this situation.

Going to agree with Zap here. Honestly this isn't VirtualLarry's fault. This is exactly the type of mass confusion that Crucial was likely hoping for when it introduced this weak product with a name so similar to its highly-respected M4.

 

[Zap]

Going to agree with Zap here.

Thanks for the support Termie and TakeNoPrisoners.

VirtualLarry, as pointed out there are some SATA II SSDs in the benchmarks that shows just how horrible a drive this is.

You can find more benchmarks using this controller by searching for Patriot TorqX 2 reviews.

Patriot Torqx 2 Phison Solid State Drive

AS-SSD puts it at just above the original Indilinx Barefoot in read performance.

Random IOPS is not so good. The original Indilinx Barefoot (which is no IOPS monster) is around 4x the performance. Heck, even Jmicron based SSDs outperform the Phison.

I'll end this post with a link to the Crucial M4 256GB for a mere $5 more.

If I could get the Phison based V4 256GB for... HALF the cost (around $80) I would probably do it. Sequential reads are high enough that this would make for a decent drive for game installs.

Actually, I wouldn't, because I already have four 256GB SSDs based on the original Indilinx Barefoot.

At $165, it makes about as much sense as a VelociRaptor at MSRP. (Yes, give me a 1TB VelociRaptor at $100 and I'll buy several!)