Best reasonable performance SSD

So my x201 is being built, I have ordered my RAM upgrade, last thing I need is a SSD.
I have done a little research, but none of the articles I can find is 100% upto date.
I am looking for around 60GB storage space, a little less is fine if it makes a significant difference to the price, and a little more is good if it provides adequate value. I had been looking at 3 primarily, but I am open to anything:

1. Intel X-25M 80GB version (Frys has it for $140 AIR)
2. OCZ Vertex 60GB version (seems to run around $100)
3. Kingston SSDNow V Series 64GB version (seems to be about $80)

Obviously it seems a clear case of you get what you pay for, but I have two questions, is the Intel worth the premium (the 20-16GB extra is nice but not required) and is there anything else I have overlooked (other models or something wrong with these) that I should be aware of.

 

Is there a specific price range you would max out at?

What are your usage patterns like?

 

I'm trying to keep under $150 (all said and done this whole experience is gonna cost me about a grand). My usage patterns are probably pretty normal basic web, light gaming, some photo editing work, email (my pst file is a few GBs).

 

You can pick up a 60 GB SF based SSD for around 120-140 usually with MIR. I have an Agility 2, but you can also consider Vertex 2, G Skill Phoenix Pro.

 

Thank you Tsunade, is there a significant difference between the vertex/agility 2 and the intel? They seem about $20-25 cheaper but I pick up 20GB with the intel.

 

The Agility 2 and Vertex 2 I do not believe so, same SF-1200 controller. Intel uses their own controller. I might buy an Intel SSD for my next laptop so I could probably tell you then

 

No I assumed the Agility 2 and Vertex 2 were about the same, similar price same controller, etc. I know intel was king and much better than the 1st series OCZ drives, but wondering if they have surpassed intel or merely caught up, the extra $25 for 33% more storage is appealing on the intel, but I can live with the 60GB if the OCZ is noticeably better.

 

Noticeably? Probably not. In benchmarks, Sandforce scores better, but for the usages you've stated, the only times you're likely to notice a difference will be software installations, and maybe the photo-editing (mostly because Intels have slower write speeds). The real-world difference between an Intel and a Sandforce is probably unnoticeable for the most part, unless you run applications/do things that actually emphasize the differences.

 

Yeah my photo editing is with relatively small files. I'm leaning towards the intel, the price per GB is better and the performance seems roughly equal, unless I can find one of the 60GB SF drives for less. Thanks everyone, time to hit google shopping

 

Personally, I would not consider any SSD less than 100G for a typical Windows installation.

I know we don't need that space but free space is important in life and performance and if you want persistent performance, it is better to have around 40%of so free space.

and between sandforce and intel, intel is a better option in terms of TLC needed(it doesn't need much other than free space, sandforce however has much more do and don't)

 

Thank you for your input. I know 60GB isnt much (maybe the 80GB of the intel is looking good), but my HDD usage is only 30GB and I have a couple of games that probably wont be on the new system. Maybe I will look at the price of the 100GB OCZ drives too. Could you maybe point me to a link of the extra TLC for the SF controlled drives, I remember a long time ago reading about disk alignment and stuff, but that was prior to this current generation of SSDs

 

I have a setup(for work) that is using a 80G x25m and used about 30-35G. However, being a work machine means I don't download video, games etc.

For the TLC of sandforce, go to OCZ support forum where you can find what I meant. Basically, after looking at their official recommendations, I said to myself 'forget it'. I buy the SSD to help me, not the other way round.

 

The Intel drives are more money per GB, that's why I initially didn't buy Intel SSDs. Also the terrible write speeds 70 MB/sec. The 80 GB Intel is nearly 200 dollars, the 60 GB Agility I got was 100 after MIR. And couple weeks ago the 120 GB Phoenix PRO SSD was 189 after 20 MIR, 50% more SSD space than X25-M 80 GB.

 

The kingston drives are really not worth it. They are as fast as a hitachi 500gb 7200rpm drive.

 

I don't usually look at $/GB but rather the net cost for my desired usage. I bought a Sandforce(OCZ Vertex 2) first but their problems out weight any performance difference over x25m.

 

Well that might just be 1 bad apple in a sea of 2000. I am not quick to judge right out of the box. You can't brand an entire brand SSD just because of 1 bad experience, though most people do.

 

I can because I am the one to choose for myself. And go over to Corsair/OCZ and read the reported problems, it is not about bad apples but a general compability issue with certain models(not one brand).

My judgement about Sandforce is simple:

If it is known to work with the intended model AND the usage pattern isn't a victim of DuraWrite, by all means get it as it seems that it can handle multiple simultaneous request better than Intel (check IOPS).

For my case, I cannot get say yes to the first question, so I opt for the tried and true x25m.

 

Consider battery life too. Most SSD's will do better than an HDD, but many will greatly improve your battery life if that's important to you. Intel is one of the better ones for power.

Benchmark Results: Power Consumption : Roundup: The Best SSDs For Enthusiasts

 

Well it depends which one, I have the 40gb SSD v series that came out a while ago and it is very fast.

I actually just ordered an X201 as well and got the 120GB Intel X25-M on black friday. Depending on what you plan on installing I think you could make 80GB work but you will have to try and make your W7 install as small as possible. I went with the 120GB drive so I would not have to worry about space at all, I am sure I could have made the 80 work but that would have required some tweaking I dont feel like doing.

 

yeah, I regret not jumping on that 120GB Intel deal. I could use it now that I'm swapping my netbook for an M11x. I'll be installing more games that's for sure. But I guess I'll have to make it work.

There will probably be another deal sometime soon I hope. With new SSD's just around the corner, I'm sure current gen ones will have decent price drops. I'd buy an Intel G2 120GB for $200 without rebate right now.

 

Well I can grab the 80GB intel for $140 AIR and the 60GB OCZ is about $115 AIR so I think price per GB is pretty close. Either size I think would work for me (tho the 80GB would give me a little more wiggle room). So it appears to come purely down to performance. Since I wont be doing any writing of large files to the SSD (no video edditing, no installing large programs or copying large media files) it would appear in general day to day usage I probably wont notice a huge difference. So I think I have decided on the Intel since it gives me the most GB for my budget and appears to be slightly more robust than the OCZ (or other SF) drives.

 

I suppose it's when you find it on sale. I am looking to get an Intel SSD for my incoming Latitude 13 but then the G3 is coming out so might as well wait for that, as they will drop the price of G2 and supposedly G3 is better GB/price ratio. So I wish Intel would hurry up so I can finish my fanless notebook project

And tell me where I can get X25-M 80 GB for 140 because I would purchase that?

 

I thought it was Macmall or Frys but now I can't find it, I think the rebate might have ended yesterday

 

lol thanks -_-

Reminds me when I was hunting for a Vostro V13/Latitude 13. I saw the configuration I wanted on the Outlet store and I jumped on that deal quick!

 

Eh no biggie, my X201 doesnt ship till the 10th, plenty of time to find another deal.

 

My x201 ship date was suppose to be December 6th and it shipped November 26th. They over estimate the ship dates by a lot I think.

And I would strongly recommended against 60gb, the fit will be super tight and itll probably be a pain in the trying to get everything you want to fit on it. Its also good to have a little free space on SSD's as well.

 

Don't know what you are talking about. I had 43GB free after Windows 7 Home Premium and driver install on my Vostro 1500. After installing MW2, DoD:S I still have 23 GB free which I think is plenty fine, my Vostro 1500 is now a gaming laptop.

 

Your Window 7 install will only get larger over time, I guess super tight fit was an over exaggeration but 60 gigs is not a lot to work with.

 

I never said it wasn't but everyone's exaggeration that 60 GB is super tight fit is crap. I would know as I have an OCZ Vertex 30 GB for my i7 desktop, and THAT hardly has any space left but everything else in on a mechanical drive.

 

Yeah I think I am leaning towards 80GB + and probably the intel, seems price is about the same and the only place it lacks performance I probably wont notice and price wise it is on par with the OCZ (except the you get 10GB more on the 80/90GB model). Now to find that amazing deal.

 

40GB is perfect for a Windows 7 OS only drive. Move all your documents and everything else to a secondary.

80GB IMHO is minimum if you plan on doing anything more than web, office apps, and basic photo work.

 

Agreed. I have been using 32GB SSD's as boot drives for several years and there is always 10-12GB free at all times. I disable hibernate gaining about 1.2GB. Only the OS, updates, and a few pieces of software go on my boot drive. You just have to be careful where your downloads go and not perform "default" installs.

 

Yeah I can attest to that also. I have an Vertex 30 GB SSD for my i7 desktop. Right now I have about 10 GB free, only OS and drivers went on the SSD. As a small boot drive it is okay but hey it was only 60 bucks at the time, fantastic deal.

 

I'm getting a newer SSD for a boot drive soon because mine are very old and don't support trim etc.

I'll likely go for a 60GB partly because they are pretty cheap now and partly to give myself a little more wiggle room even though I've never needed the extra space.

 

Well as long as your drive can GC, there is no reason really for TRIM. I believe some of the Samsungs have good GC. Also Vista/XP don't support TRIM and many manufacturers also have a GC utility if your OS doesn't support TRIM.

 

60GB is good, and can even install your most commonly used apps on it too.

 

Yeah, I'm using W7 Ultimate now and the new drives are much faster to boot so it will be a nice upgrade.

 

Ah so tempted to order 160 GB Intel X25-M for 219...or the i7 970 -.-

 

??? Correct me if I am wrong but a SSD performs 100% whether it's 10% full or 90% full...

You must be thinking mechanical hard drive.

Also 80gb is plenty. You can always swap your laptop's DVD player for another hard drive if it bothers you so.

 

you use the SSD for write as well. READ from SSD is always the same speed(except Sandforce that depends on content), WRITE depends on how much spare there are for the controller so it can reduce the WA(that affect both speed and endurance).

Not all model allows you to switch the optical drive out.

 

Where can you get it for that price?

 

There are generic drive bays that fit most laptops. Either check eBay or newmodeus.com.

Yeah really. I think he meant the 120GB but can only still find it for $239 now. I kick myself for not getting the $199 deal with the $35 MIR and free game Lost Planet 2.

 

Intel Retail Edge has it for 215. You need to work in a retail job to get access.

 

Not all models allow you to take out the optical drive. I have a 1737 which has a slot load DVD(well it has a second HDD space but the point is some model doesn't have the design to allow end user to take out the DVD).

Saying you can always use the optical space for another HDD is like saying you can overclock a CPU to get more speed, something most end user would not do.

 

Right. Just that a very large majority of laptops with an optical drive have the option. Just something to consider if yours does.

 

Hmm I see.
How much performance is lost as the drive gets full? Is it like Mechanical hard drives were performance can literally drop 2-4 fold?

 

Actually you can remove that slot load dvd, just requires a bit more work. IIRC I've worked with a few Inspiron with slot loading, I am quite certain you can fit a 2.5" hard drive dvd bay module instead of a DVD drive.

 

It really depends on the controller involved, and yes, it can drop that low. Here are 2 pages from Anandtech's SSD Relapse that cover this subject, the first page shows how write amplification goes down (and thus speed goes up, because the higher the write amplification, the more the drive has to actually write for any given amount of "written data") as you have more spare space to move things around on/with. The next page gives both some percentage performance drops for new vs used drives, and the page after that shows some 4K numbers for a clean and used drive, and how TRIM can become so important in maintaining the speed of a used drive, since without it, the SSD won't "realise" that there are blocks that could be "pre-emptively" cleaned and restored to the spare area pool.

 

it can drop way more than 2-4 fold. If an erasable block is 1MB and you write 4K to it, it is 256x.

 

I see. I will take a look at this at work. I need to brush up on my reading on SSD, and irrelevantly displays as well.