Which SSD for today (literally, March 19)

[alizee]

I'm buying an SSD today. I'm tired of waiting to finish my MacBook Pro, so I'd like to get my SSD (finally). I'd only wait if I can find a firm date that's not too far in the future.

I am going to get a 250GB drive. I'm looking at 4:
Samsung 470 - low power and good enough performance, I know it's not the fastest
Sandforce 2 (I don't really care which one, please tell me a brand preference)
Intel 510 - is an extra $120 worth it?
Crucial C300

It's a brand new 2011 15" MacBook Pro, 2.3Hz Sandy Bridge quad-core. It has SATA 6, so it would be worth it to get the C300 or 510 (or wait for the currently vapor Vertex 3 and C400).

 

[Edrick]

I want a SATA 6GBs drive really bad. I came close to pulling the trigger on a C300 many times already, especially seeing how the new Intal scored.

But the C400 and Vertex 3 are due out early next week. So whats a few more days wait?

 

[cmanser7]

http://www.superbiiz.com/query.php?categry=0&s=c400

C400 shows will ship in 1-2 days.

 

[taltamir]

http://www.superbiiz.com/query.php?categry=0&s=c400

C400 shows will ship in 1-2 days.

plus a few days to make sure it doesn't have a critical issue they haven't been telling us about.
A real big issue is pricing... Right now a sandforce 1, C300, or intel G2 seem much more attractively priced then the intel 510 and sandforce 2.

But that C400 drive is priced very nicely... I just want to see how it reviews on anandtech. Any clue when we can expect one?

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

I'd vote C300. Why?

-It's been out a while, with no major problems reported, so it seems pretty reliable
-It benefits from SATA 6Gb
-It's a bit faster then the Sandforce drives, using 6Gb ports

One question, some PC laptops had problems with getting full speed out of their SATA II ports (even Intel G2's and Vertex I and II's drives were gettign lower then normal scores). Do you know if Macbooks have the same problem? (asking, I don't know)

I *think* it was linked to maybe power saving modes, but again, am not sure. If the macbooks have this issue, I'd maybe go with something slower (since you couldn't take advantage of the speed) and cheaper, maybe an Intel G2.

Of course, if the macbooks, don't have this issue, then I'd go with the C300

 

[sub.mesa]

I would wait for the Intel G3 and get a fast and reliable SSD with supercapacitor. Marvell C400 is a serious contender as well.

If you need something quick a Corsair F60 would be okay and rather cheap. Unlike OCZ, they still use 34nm NAND and thus retain the original speeds the Sandforce SF1200 was capable of.

 

[PascalT]

You're always going to wait for the next big thing.. I'd just buy the best value/performance drive out today. You'll want/need to upgrade in the next tech cycle anyway.

 

[alizee]

http://www.superbiiz.com/query.php?categry=0&s=c400

C400 shows will ship in 1-2 days.

How certain is that 1-2 days? I know Crucial is a Micron subsidiary, but all those drives are branded Micron. Is there anything to read into there? Also, disappointingly, there's no 256GB drive

I want a SATA 6GBs drive really bad. I came close to pulling the trigger on a C300 many times already, especially seeing how the new Intal scored.

But the C400 and Vertex 3 are due out early next week. So whats a few more days wait?

That's what I've kept telling myself, but it always seems like "just a few more days". Is there any confirmation that next week is the week for release?

One question, some PC laptops had problems with getting full speed out of their SATA II ports (even Intel G2's and Vertex I and II's drives were gettign lower then normal scores). Do you know if Macbooks have the same problem? (asking, I don't know)
...
Of course, if the macbooks, don't have this issue, then I'd go with the C300

not something I've heard of in particular. I was thinking the C300 for the same reason, it's SATA 6Gbps compatible

Thanks for everybody's input. I'm still as unsure as I was before the post, if not more

Are there any firm release dates? I can't seem to find any information.

 

[SickBeast]

I find that SSD prices have stagnated lately and are due for a large drop. Sandforce 3 and the new Intel X25-M drives are right around the corner, and I project them to impact the pricing of SSDs significantly across the board. I've heard that the X25-M in particular will cost around $1/gb which is fantastic. I realize you probably want something bigger and better than what the X25-M provides, but it will hopefully have a cascading effect on current prices, especially if Sandforce 3 drives perform well on the high end (which they should).

 

[taltamir]

I would wait for the Intel G3 and get a fast and reliable SSD with supercapacitor. Marvell C400 is a serious contender as well.

If you need something quick a Corsair F60 would be okay and rather cheap. Unlike OCZ, they still use 34nm NAND and thus retain the original speeds the Sandforce SF1200 was capable of.

the speed & size decrease in the V2 Vertex 2 is not caused by 25nm NAND, it is caused by further "cost cutting" of stacking (vertically) more die per "chip".
Vertex 2 models:
V1 - original 34nm model
V2 - 25nm, reduced speed and size
V3 - 25nm, same speed and size as V1; still suffers from reduced lifespan (although that shouldn't be a big deal).
Their free replacement offer is from V2 to V3, not V1s (V1s have been totally discontinued)

Anyways, the notion that 25nm is the cause of the problem, or that other companies will have the same problem with 25nm is false. In fact the Vertex 3 (aka Sandforce 2 drive) also uses 25nm and is much faster then older 34nm drives.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Oops. Voted before I read the whole thing. I'd go for wait, though. SF-2000 is something that I would want to wait for.

 

[Voo]

the speed & size decrease in the V2 Vertex 2 is not caused by 25nm NAND, it is caused by further "cost cutting" of stacking (vertically) more die per "chip".
Vertex 2 models:
V1 - original 34nm model
V2 - 25nm, reduced speed and size
V3 - 25nm, same speed and size as V1; still suffers from reduced lifespan (although that shouldn't be a big deal).
Their free replacement offer is from V2 to V3, not V1s (V1s have been totally discontinued)

While mostly true (the largest performance hit came quite obviously from the reduced number of channels), from what I've seen there's still some performance difference between v1 and v3, but by far not as dramatic as v1-v2.

 

[taltamir]

While mostly true (the largest performance hit came quite obviously from the reduced number of channels), from what I've seen there's still some performance difference between v1 and v3, but by far not as dramatic as v1-v2.

that is interesting. Do you have a source on that? hopefully one that explains the technical reasons behind it?

 

[Bauss]

Firstly, It's silly to worry about Flash memory lifespan. Modern drives are all good for many GB/day of writes for decades. It's literally a non-issue outside of server applications.

Secondly, in terms of what's available NOW, there are no SandForce 2 drives readily available. Not that I've seen anyways.

Personally, if you're looking for a drive now, I'd get a 510 if you can afford the premium. It outperforms the C300 more often than not, and will probably suffer from less reliability issues given Intel's great track record for validation and manufacturing. If you can't, the C300 will do just fine. It's still a great drive at a good price right now.

Then again, the story will probably change in the coming months...

 

[taltamir]

Firstly, It's silly to worry about Flash memory lifespan. Modern drives are all good for many GB/day of writes for decades. It's literally a non-issue outside of server applications.

Secondly, in terms of what's available NOW, there are no SandForce 2 drives readily available. Not that I've seen anyways.

Personally, if you're looking for a drive now, I'd get a 510 if you can afford the premium. It outperforms the C300 more often than not, and will probably suffer from less reliability issues given Intel's great track record for validation and manufacturing. If you can't, the C300 will do just fine. It's still a great drive at a good price right now.

Then again, the story will probably change in the coming months...

all good points. Although if the C400 really comes out tomorrow as someone else said in this thread I am more then curious to see it first... and give it a week in the market for people to catch any issues (if there are)

 

[Voo]

that is interesting. Do you have a source on that? hopefully one that explains the technical reasons behind it?

Some benchmarks of people in the OCZ forums, but no technical explanation.
I'm a bit in a hurry right now, but I'll go and skim through the quite large thread later and see if I can find them again - were just a bunch of AS SSD benchmarks of the new drives.

 

[taltamir]

Some benchmarks of people in the OCZ forums, but no technical explanation.
I'm a bit in a hurry right now, but I'll go and skim through the quite large thread later and see if I can find them again - were just a bunch of AS SSD benchmarks of the new drives.

Did those people test a V1 and a V3 on the same system? A benchmark done by anandtech or the like is going to be using a top notch test system, with a fresh windows install, etc.

 

[alizee]

Well, I didn't buy today. I'm still just as indecisive. I think I'm going to wait until Tuesday...

If I were to get a Vertex 2, how can I tell if it's the V1 or V3?

 

[Baasha]

if you've waited till now, what's a few more days? I'd definitely wait for the Gen 3 drives before taking the plunge.

I am really interested in seeing how the RAID setups of the C400 fare against the Vertex 3 drives in RAID. Hopefully, Anand will do a comprehensive review which includes RAID-0'ing these SSDs.

 

[Hacp]

I've been using SSDs for quite a while now. My first one was a 120gb indilinx drive I bought around 2 years ago. Since then, I've migrated to Intel, I have both a G1 and G2. Let me just say that performance doesn't matter! I noticed no huge performance difference between the G1, G2 and Indilinx. Everything to me was fast and snappy enough, which is what you want from an SSD.

Btw, Personally, I would get the SSD that Apple sells. Why? because it is the only one that supports TRIM. The most important thing about SSDs is lifespan and TRIM significantly improves the lifespan of a drive.

 

[SickBeast]

I've been using SSDs for quite a while now. My first one was a 120gb indilinx drive I bought around 2 years ago. Since then, I've migrated to Intel, I have both a G1 and G2. Let me just say that performance doesn't matter! I noticed no huge performance difference between the G1, G2 and Indilinx. Everything to me was fast and snappy enough, which is what you want from an SSD.

Btw, Personally, I would get the SSD that Apple sells. Why? because it is the only one that supports TRIM. The most important thing about SSDs is lifespan and TRIM significantly improves the lifespan of a drive.

This is the type of reply I like to see, perhaps because I'm too cheap.

I'm still waiting for $1/GB. Call me stubborn. I want more than 40gb for my OS partition.

 

[Voo]

Did those people test a V1 and a V3 on the same system? A benchmark done by anandtech or the like is going to be using a top notch test system, with a fresh windows install, etc.

Well sure it's not 100% comparable between different systems/chipsets, but I'd think that since it was a new SSD it'll hardly be used much.

But then the thread is over 60pages and I'd prefer not having to look it through to find it again. And luckily they've posted a AS SSD benchmark in the first post: here
And I think we can assume that an official OCZ representive won't paint their replacement drives in a bad light. 80mb is a whole lot better than the ~35 many used to get, but the older drives could do better.

 

[taltamir]

Well sure it's not 100% comparable between different systems/chipsets, but I'd think that since it was a new SSD it'll hardly be used much.

A fresh windows install so that there are no background processes interfering and slowing down the results. Not because of performance drop when the drive is used and there is no trim

And I think we can assume that an official OCZ representive won't paint their replacement drives in a bad light. 80mb is a whole lot better than the ~35 many used to get, but the older drives could do better.

How much better is what I am curious about. within margin of error? within margin of difference between a clean OS and top of the line hardware used by professional benchmark sites?
I am not discounting the possibility that it is slower, I just want to get confirmation about it. Until then I am going to file this in my mind as "maybe", I have no proof either way.

 

[Zillatech]

Well, I finally got tired of waiting for the new Intel Drives and picked up a 256GB Samsung 470 for $449 and I'm more than happy. Since I'm still using SATA 3 in an older system and needed at least 250GB, the Samsung will serve nicely as long as it holds up.

I'm not sure why AnandTech hasn't done a formal review of them or at least a short review because they have been out for a while now. I think more people should look at the Samsung 470's especially since the price is much lower now. Mine came with the newest firmware as well (Feb. 7th, 2011).

 

[Nintendesert]

I wanted to wait for the C400, but I did my computer builds a few weeks ago now and went with a 256Gig C300 when Newegg had 20% off, it brought the price/gig ratio down to the $1.6 range where I originally saw the C400 was supposed to be at.

When Crucial released their drive and I saw the ridiculous price they were asking, i figured I had to jump on the C300 at that price and with delays I needed an SSD a few weeks ago anyways.

I'm happy with it. Things just work better, snappier and you get so used to it. Then going back to a non SSD computer and things just take forever, or what seems like forever.

Everyone's circumstance is different but for me the C300 was the way to go.