• 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.

The actual deal with the 320's? + M4 question

vbuggy

vbuggy

Golden Member
I'm looking to refresh a number of older PC's (with ~120Gb SSDs) which still have SATAII interfaces.

Now I've had zero issues with the X25-M's and so far no issues with the Elmcrests I've bought (and neither have found any real horror stories on the net) so I *thought* the 320's would be a shoo-in. My logic for the similarly priced Crucial M4's on the other hand is that as the older PC's die off, we'd be able to swap them over to new replacements with SATAIII interfaces with no speed penalty.

Generally speaking having trawled around various places, it seemed like everyone was having much more problems with the non-Intel SSD's so the choice of the 320 seemed logical at first. Then the '8mb' problem starts cropping up. How real is this issue? is the first question. Blogospherenavelgazingmoron hype or something a bit more substantial?

Also, regarding the M4 - should there be any issues if I use them in older desktops which are probably equipped with 1st-gen SATAII boards? And in terms of my logic, are there likely to be any issues if we transfer them down the line into SATAIII PC's?
 
the intel 320 issue will be resolved shortly

pls view http://www.thessdreview.com and at top-heaer-scroll right until samsung pm800 as yet another ssd (w/adapter of course - same as renice x series)

if you buy 3.0bbps ssd now, later (nearterm) you may select mb's supporting 6.0gbps and regret earlier decision. just a thought...
 
Last edited:
you may also want to view http://www.samsung.com/global/busine...s/SSD/Products_

2.5 pm810 & pm800 spec sheet download

these drives are somewhat difficult to find in retail package, and support 3.0gbps interface

i would give intel a few days to resolve 320 area of concern...

re: "link" - left margin "flash ssd" - pc ssd & left margin download tab pm810/pm800
 
Last edited:
The longer between now and when you will refresh the motherboards, the less sense it makes to go SATA III now. If it's more than a rear from now, the faster drives will be much cheaper, or, for the same money- even faster. Saving money now, and saving money then is a win on both ends. The SATA II drives will still have some value.
 
Well, the Intel 320 issue is very real for me. So glad to hear it's going to be resolved by Intel in a few days, though! GREAT NEWS.
 
I guess I'll hold off for a bit then and see how the 320 situation pans out. I was looking at the Samsungs too, but I don't really have the time cushion to try stuff out.

@FishAK, the logic of going for SATAIII drives instead was that as the old PC's that we'll be fitting these SSD's into die over time, we would be able to transfer the SSD's into more modern PC's. For that, a SATAIII drive seemed to make more sense. But I wasn't sure how the drives would behave (if there was any particular issue) if we operated these for e.g. 2-3 years at SATAII and then suddenly transplanted them into a SATAIII PC.
 
Yes, I was going to RMA my "8MB bug"-infested (but now reformatted) 320 but I'm going to hold off now too, knowing that the issue will be resolved by Intel shortly.
 
Regarding the 320s...

I think the bottom line is that only Intel knows the real failure rate of these drives. Yes, it's possible that they are not failing any more than any other Intel SSDs. It's possible that, because the current issue is now identifiable as the "8MB bug", that you're hearing more about it than other failing SSDs with no specific "bug". But I think the main reason most people are paying a bit more for Intel SSDs is specifically for their level of reliability compared to other brands. (My #1 goal with my new build was reliability.) If I were researching a boot drive for a new build NOW and I saw these posts, even taking into consideration that the people having problems are always more vocal...I would definitely hold off on buying a 320. I'm honestly not just saying that in hindsight. But that's just me. Call it a gut feeling that, since there's a specific "thing" happening with some of these drives, that there's a better chance of it being something that's causing a higher-than-expected failure rate than just the usual smorgasbord of reasons that a drive can fail. Doubt it will ever be proven either way and of course, everyone has to make his or her own call about it.

Unfortunately, I haven't yet figured out what other comparable drive IS the most reliable. Maybe it's impossible to know.
 
I recently got a couple of the M4's. I have visited their forums as well as OCZ's, Intel's and Corsair's forums. Far fewer posts and activity at the Crucial forums than the rest - if that means anything.

That being said, I currently have the M4's as well as 2 OCZ Vertex2's, 4 Intel drives as well as a couple of Kingston V+ drives. No problems with any of them yet.
 
Last edited:
sequoia464 said:
I recently got a couple of the M4's. I have visited their forums as well as OCZ's, Intel's and Corsair's forums. Far fewer posts and activity at the Crucial forums than the rest - if that means anything.

That being said, I currently have the M4's as well as 2 OCZ Vertex2's, 4 Intel drives as well as a couple of Kingston V+ drives. No problems with any of them yet.
Click to expand...

The only known issue with the m4 occurs with Link Power Management enabled on some systems when using m4 firmware 0001. A firmware update to 0002 fixes that. I don't really know much about Link Power Management, but I flashed to 0002 before I installed anything on my new m4 and have had no problems at all.

The m4 will read and write faster using SATA 6Gbps, but I can't see why any issues would arise with it on SATA 3Gbps other than not performing as fast as it can.
 
Last edited:
So I guess the choice is to sit and wait for the Intels - which historically have been fine for me as I said, or just go for the M4's.

Which sayeth the hive?
 
I have an M4 and have been very happy with it. I also have had Intel G2s as well (still have a 120GB although it's not my OS drive) I have a pair of Crucial C300s RAIDed as my OS drive and would not hestitate to recommend those either. They actually bench better than the M4 in terms of 4k random read/write speeds. 'Old Hippie' and I have gone through many SSDs. I think he has gone through about 12 and I have had about 15. We both agree that SandForce drives are 'weird'.

I am actually selling my M4 if you're interested. It's too small for my needs. PM me if you wanna know more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top