Which SSD for me?

[Thundaar]

Any recommendations for an SSD? I'd like ~120GB for like $100-$150. I see lots of people recommending the Crucial M4. Just curious as to why this SSD instead of an OCZ Agility/Vertex 3, or a Mushkin or one of the other highly rated SSD's at newegg.

[hapylol]

Crucial m4 128GB is great because it one of the most reliable and has been one of the lower priced ones.

The OCZ's had major issues when they first released and have had a bad rep ever since.

I just purchased the Mushkin Enhanced Chronos for $100 2 weeks ago and it definitely is worth it.

[Thundaar]

Thanks for the info. Anyone else have any preference or reason why one is preferred over the others? Reliability>performance also, I'd rather it be a little slower and dependable than fast and unreliable.

[Biged781]

Thanks for the info. Anyone else have any preference or reason why one is preferred over the others? Reliability>performance also, I'd rather it be a little slower and dependable than fast and unreliable.

That's pretty much it. I went with the Crucial M4 for reliability reasons as well. Don't worry; it's blazingly fast, and its MTBF is much better than many competitors.

The OCZ Vertex has a new controller and is being marketed as more reliable, but as it is pretty new (1-2 months I think) there just isn't enough information yet to know if the claim is true. I would go with the M4 (obviously, as I did).

[Perderder]

Intel 520's, Kingston Hyper X and Corsair Force Series are great as well.

[DeltrusDisc]

The OCZ Vertex has a new controller and is being marketed as more reliable, but as it is pretty new (1-2 months I think) there just isn't enough information yet to know if the claim is true. I would go with the M4 (obviously, as I did).

Do note, the Vertex 4 has a different controller, the Vertex 3 still has the SF-2281 controller.

[Christoffer1989]

Had my OCZ Vertex 3 max iops 120GB for like 9month now, and it worked like a charm all the time, no problem what so ever, nothing and I love it!
I heard alot bad stuff about OCZ when I was going to get it but I took my chance, as it was abit cheaper then most other "decent" ssd's.

[Deleted]

Intel 520's, Kingston Hyper X and Crucial Force Series are great as well.

I can vouch for Kingston Hyper X, no problems so far and it was super smooth to get up and running.

[DeltrusDisc]

Had my OCZ Vertex 3 max iops 120GB for like 9month now, and it worked like a charm all the time, no problem what so ever, nothing and I love it!
I heard alot bad stuff about OCZ when I was going to get it but I took my chance, as it was abit cheaper then most other "decent" ssd's.

You were a lucky one then. I got an Agility 3 120GB last June and suffice to say I returned it after a week and got the Crucial m4 128GB.

[Frozenbeef]

cruicial m4 is rather good :P...been using it for almost a year now and not had any problems...around 500mb read and 200mb write

[Creotor]

You were a lucky one then. I got an Agility 3 120GB last June and suffice to say I returned it after a week and got the Crucial m4 128GB.

That makes it sound as if most of OCZ's SSDs would not be functioning properly, instead of a smaller percentage, even if it was somewhat larger than that of its rivals.

[Deleted]

That makes it sound as if most of OCZ's SSDs would not be functioning properly, instead of a smaller percentage, even if it was somewhat larger than that of its rivals.

Actually around that time it wasn't some small % return rate, ~5-9% isn't small in my opinion. There is no doubt SandForce controllers has been less stable than say Marvell. OCZ at the time didn't handle the situation very well and to this day they still pay the price even if they're technically fine.

Considering the price, performance and reliability/history there is absolutely no doubt that the Crucial m4 is one of the best buys and has been for quite some time. Mushkin is a nice alternative as well as they can keep their prices down and delivering good performance, Samsung is following troop as the SSD price war continues.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

Hard Drive: Mushkin Callisto Deluxe 120GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($114.99 @ Newegg)
Hard Drive: Crucial M4 128GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($109.99 @ Newegg)
Hard Drive: Mushkin Chronos 120GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($99.99 @ NCIX US)
Hard Drive: Samsung 830 Series 128GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($129.00 @ B&H)
Total: $453.97
(Prices include shipping and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2012-05-14 20:53 EDT-0400)

[ApocolypticTampon]

OCZ got a bad rep from the 2nd generation of SSD's (early sandforce controllers), I own the Vertex3 and love it. tops in speed (520-550MB/sec) these use the 2281 Sandforce controller. which although better can still cause issues with performance and reliability from manufacturer to manufacturer.

The Crucial uses a Marvel controller which through generations have proven to be one of the most reliable. But that comes at a slight performance hit (430-480MB/sec)

In real world times, you may not even notice the difference until you get into raid configurations.

Mushkin Enhanced Chronos, and the Deluxe models also offer great performance, but have heard less horror stories than OCZ , oddly they use the same controller as the OCZ Vertex3

OCZ owns the Indilinx controller and is in the Vertex4 series. the newest firmware release has the drives performing at the maximum the SATA3 interface can support, would love to see a Thunderbolt version of this!

[Deleted]

Actually OCZ vertex 4 is Marvell based Silicon

(Marvell, not like Marvel, just messing with you Apo! (Marvel's The Avengers))

[Creotor]

Actually around that time it wasn't some small % return rate, ~5-9% isn't small in my opinion. There is no doubt SandForce controllers has been less stable than say Marvell. OCZ at the time didn't handle the situation very well and to this day they still pay the price even if they're technically fine.

I'm agreeing with all that, it's just that many curse at OCZ so much you'd think the return rate was about 30%.

[DeltrusDisc]

I'm agreeing with all that, it's just that many curse at OCZ so much you'd think the return rate was about 30%.

Well, it very well could be. I believe the return rate is only concerning the amount that actually were RMA'd and sent all the way back to OCZ. People like me I don't believe are included in that %, as I simply took it back to Micro Center and traded it in for the Crucial m4 I now have.

*I could be wrong, however.*

[Creotor]

Well, it very well could be. I believe the return rate is only concerning the amount that actually were RMA'd and sent all the way back to OCZ. People like me I don't believe are included in that %, as I simply took it back to Micro Center and traded it in for the Crucial m4 I now have.

*I could be wrong, however.*

It would be the same thing for all the other brands, then. So the ratios between them all would stay roughly the same.

Frankly, I feel like I'm derailing the topic... so I'll weigh in.

My PC currently has a 128GB Vertex 4 in it... has been stable for a month, no problems so far.
Just putting this out here....
http://thessdreview.com/our-reviews/...ur-vertex-4/3/

[DeltrusDisc]

Yes, but the RMA return % rate is still highest for OCZ, because where OCZ just tried ignoring the problem, brands like Corsair actually recalled their SF-2281-based drives to try and fix the problem - this is why so many of us (I'll admit me included of course) have such a sour taste in our mouths from OCZ, because they did not listen to/trust the customers and actually said "we can't replicate the problem with the SSDs in our testing facilities." Something along those lines. It was a literal smack in the face.