New SSD for ~$350?

Hey, here's story, my Sager's hard drive just died yesterday and I'm looking to pick up an SSD for more speed and reliability. I have around $350 to drop on a SSD right now and I was looking for the best bang for the buck.

Ideally, I'd like to be at least 32 gb since I'll be replacing my old 320 gb hard drive under warranty and putting it in a external enclosure for more storage.

Any ideas?

PS, I realize my question is very similar to this: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=443549
but didn't want to hijack his thread

 

120gb ocz agility $319 after mir.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227462

If you can get by with 80gb the Intel G2 is faster with small writes in that price range.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820157021

 

80GB Intel Drive

(the 160GB ones are a bit more than your limit)

 

I just got an Intel X-25 34nm 80GB for $256 shipped from amazon.com (or some vendor on there).

 

Hm... an Intel 80 GB sounds good so far, any idea on where the best deals for SSDs are?

 

Difficult to say if you don't say where you are

I like Amazon in the UK - in the US you also have NewEgg and Bestbuy - amke sure you get a G2 (should be mentioned in the product number)

 

Get Intel 80GB G2C1 from tigerdirect for $254 - $32 Bingcashback = $222
Cheapest I currently see from any reputed dealer

 

Reliability, huh?

Intel is the only one that offers me peace of mind - but still be diligent in your backups.

Buy the biggest Intel G2 you can afford - the 160GB G2, while out of your budget is the only one I would consider for a performance and reliability increase over old mechanical HD. Bigger capacity almost always means better performance in SSD's.

Yes, currently (next two to four weeks) Intel's are the only viable solution to your goals. Just don't expect to fill them up (over 70 or 80%) and get the same performance out of them as when empty/new (this applies to any SSD, BTW).

 

Hm... is the extra performance for the bigger drive worth it? I was thinking of investing the remaining funds into a ~1TB backup drive

 

Depends on what you do...

the read speed is the same...

the 160GB one has faster write speeds... 40% more I believe... if you need it... your choice

Beats a HDD anytime anyway.

 

So the read times are untouched? That sounds good to me

So far, this has been the cheapest:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicat...CODE=GOOGLEBASE&cm_mmc_o=VRqCjC7BBTkwCjCECjCE

 

Depends on how long you think you'll be using the notebook and the new SSD (possibly in a new system, for instance) and on the fact if the 320GB replacement drive will be 'good enough' capacity-wise until you really need the 1TB backup solution. If the 320GB will suffice for now and you'll be able to afford the 1TB by the time the 320GB was almost full, I say you're wasting your money on an 80GB anything, even an Intel SSD.

To me, the benefits far outweigh the costs for the bigger drive - 40% write improvement and the possibility to use 76GB instead of 38GB (both 50% filled) with no significant performance loss is the real issue here (for me).

Even if I could make the smaller drive usable for now, it is only a matter of time before it is obsolete as servicepacks, software and especially, my data that I need to carry/process 'on board' eat into the performance aspect that buying the SSD in the first place would negate.

See:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=436882


I don't mean to infer I know how you use your notebook, just that I'd rather you have all the facts before making such an important decision.

Good luck.

 

The Intel Spec Sheets say you can fill them up to 80% without performance loss.

Also, at the moment the 160GB drives are well over 400$ - that means at the moment a 320GB drive would be well over 800$ - I think that's too much for hte OP.

 

Yes, it is but I believe he was talking about the broken normal HDD I'm sending back for replacement

 

Ups - yes he was actually.

Sorry tilleroftheearth.

 

Never recommended a 320GB SSD. Especially an Intel as they are not even available.

I haven't tested a G2 myself yet, but from my other SSD experience's, I would first disregard the claims Intel makes on the % filled performance - unless I tested it first hand in my own workflow (what Intel says is a performance loss may not be what I consider a performance loss. ).

The less than $200 price difference of the 80GB to the 160GB? I consider it part of a 'future-proofing' insurance that doesn't get simply wasted on $$$ premiums we'll never see again - the benefits are real and tangible except for the mere additional cost involved.

Edit: typing too slow - to both: no prob!

 

for $412 x-25M 160G deal it might be worth than $350 120G deal. but it's too late...
http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=51125&mpage=1&print=true

 

current best deal for x-25M 160G G2 deal, expiring soon, ordered one for a test.
http://www.anitec.ca/product/589850...ve-pack-of-1-ssdsa2mh160g2r5/promo/8okuih4rx0

 

Yep, well was too broke for the 160 so had to settle for 80... should be here Monday. I'm kinda excited about this, my first SSD.

 

You'll end up hooked to SSDs after this

 

Just one questions to mr tilleroftheearth:

Why are you using almost everyone single thread about SSD to spread your hate propaganda against SSDs? People have given you a fact from Intel, the developers itself, that you can fill the drives up to 80% without affecting the drive performance. And you respond with " I don`t trust Intel and i base this on a totally different SSD i`ve tested earlier which showed max 30%".
Parden me, but what kind of bull is that? Either you BUY the intel drive and test it yourself, or you can shut your mouth because you are claiming a fact based on something you cant prove.

 

First off, mr is wrong.

Second, no propaganda here.

I have my facts to back it up. If you disagree, show me your proof.

You can trust marketing claims all you want. I don't, nor do I let my clients fool themselves with marketing claims either. Why should I try to fool the others on this list then?

When/if I CAN buy an Intel 160GB G2 SSD (or better) I will test it. Until then you and I will have both have to wait for that scenario to happen.

So, now that I've answered your questions - not that I had to, I want you to stop putting words in my mouth that I did not say.

More importantly: I don't see you providing any data on this issue one way or another. So, just exactly what was the point of your post anyway? At least I offered the data that I could, what did you achieve? Besides showing your ignorance of the facts, not to mention the point of this thread?


This is my original post below:

 

Err no. You dont have any facts to back it up. That is what im commenting on. Yeah you are right that SSDs will slow down as they fill up, but you do not have any tests which shows us how much data needed to slow down an Intel G2 drive or any link. You only base it on the test of the other SSD drive where 30% or something was enough (if i can remember correctly).
I rather believe the marketing than what you wrote.

So yeah show us some proof. Thanks

 

Also, shure you are not talking about blocks filling up and not being deleted properly? From what i have read the TRIM will take care of that...

 

Trim is definitely important - and will improve performance, but from what Dave experienced with hos G1 there is not noticeable loss in performance without trim too.

(Now this is usage, not benchmarks!)

 

Cloudfire, thanks for continuing this on a civilized note.

Yes, I do have my facts. Doesn't mean you have to believe them. Believe the marketing if you want. I too hope its true.

Again, no G2 tested yet, but I have used a G2 on an AMD/Opteron setup that is much slower than my VRaptor setup. Doesn't matter if it's slow because of the AMD platform, the 'blocks filling up' or anything else for that matter ((to me) - because slow is slow and $600+ for that 'experience' is just not worth it, no matter how you may try to twist my words. And TRIM doesn't work on that system either from what I can tell - by the very low random read/write speeds - (again, because of the specific AMD/Opteron platform, I think).

This is my original post:
See:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=436882


Yes, not an Intel. But very much a highly rated SSD that got effectively spanked by a Scorpio Blue 500GB 5400 RPM HD with eBoostr beta running. This same configuration also spanked the AMD/Opteron Intel G2 160GB system above.

You may think/see this as anti-SSD's. No, it's simply my experience with them over a couple of months time (80+ hrs, estimated current to date).

Do SSD's flat out fail? The one (Torqx) I've tested with my system/workflow did. Have I given up on them? No, still trying to find the 'right' one. So far everything points at Intel G2's or their next gen models as the 'one'.

Do SSD's give glimpses of greatness? Yes, much more than glimpses when they're almost empty. But that is not the realistic use of them for me. If it is for you, then ignore my findings, but to me and my computer usage, these findings are facts and therefore are a deal breaker to me.

Sorry I cannot give you the 'facts' you require right now.

Take the claims made by the manufacturers with a grain of salt, take my experiences with two - just realize that I was disillusioned with my first, second third and fourth experiences with SSD's (because of everyone saying how they're so life changing), disillusioned even with an Intel G2 (because of the 'wrong' platform, I was told).

View them as a single technological step forward that one day will wow us when we compare them to the mechanical hd's we were used to, however, lets look at them today without our rose coloured glasses on, okay?

 

TilleroftheEarth - you just mentioned its slow on a certain system - "and you don't care if its slow because its an AMD based system".
That's like sticking a tank's engine on a small car (say Toyota Yaris) and then complaining you're not getting the performance you want.
(say speed - or mileage)

Obviously, Intel SSDs will benefit from an Intel Chipset - but more importantly a new (!!) chipset/computer.

And using a SSD on an old computer that you admit to being slow anyway is not a viable test.

 

But it's only obvious now!

Reading about SSD's before my direct experience everything was 'perfect' and fixed with an SSD - from old single cores to the latest and greatest whiz-bang money could buy.

And I now agree that that is not a viable test, but that is not an old computer (less than a year old).

We're agreeing here, but just the level of agreement is in question.

 

That's true.

Obviously a SSD isn't "the solution" to every problem you can encouter.
And there are physical limits - I can also imagine that the older the chipset is the worse a SSD performs.

 

to tilleroftheearth
"but I have used a G2 on an AMD/Opteron setup that is much slower than my VRaptor setup."

Does that computer belong to you? do you still have it?

 

a fast pc with a fast raptor setup beats an age old slow cheap pc with an ssd in.

 

Never mind. I guess my new notebook that is being shipped right now will beat the crap out of tilleroftheearth system anyday (just saying lol):

Core i7-720QM
4GB 1333 MHz DDR3
GeForce GT240M 1GB GDDR3
160 GB G2 Intel X-25 M

Maybe i should do some tests with it.

 

Make sure you're Intel is on the newest firmware

 

firmware for the SSD? Where can i find that?

 

Intel Website

New one since the 8th of December

Write speeds of up to 110MB/s
Read speeds stay at 250MB7s max on sequential read.

You need a blank CD for the update process.

 

Thanks

Will def try it out once i get my new notebook

 

Like I've mentioned before, this is a clients system.

While I'm not 'up' on AMD based solutions, 'age old' is quite inaccurate:

Quoting myself;

Cloudfire, I have no doubt your system clobbers (or at least, should clobber) any of my current ones. What I would love to test is what the storage subsystem would do under my workload on your new system.

I'm sure in due time, I'll be able to test that aspect to my satisfaction too.

Congrats btw! I'm sure you'll enjoy that system a lot.

 

Since this is my first SSD, would you guys mind answering a few questions or point a link towards an easy to understand site?

After I get my SSD, what should I do besides installing the new firmware? Anything needed to 'prepare' it?

 

Absolutely nothing.

Just put the OS on it and use it

Edit:
Just use 1 partition though, easiest way of using it

 

Cool, sorry for bugging you guys but is there an easy to understand comparison of SSD vs standard HD speeds? I've found a couple but they seemed to be... a bit dated.

EDIT: I have seen the sticky in here but that seems to be a lot of conversation and I'm having a bit of difficulty jumping in

 

Dated, just means that nothing newer has come out worth writing about.

Check out Anandtech.com - under storage and SSD anthology.

 

Haha, really? Thanks for the link, I've been using Tom's Hardware for my 'lite' computing news, this site seems a lot more technical which could be a good thing.

EDIT: Been reading for 2 hours now... not exactly how I wanted to spend my Friday night but this is fascinating stuff! Thanks again

 

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=444081

 

Am I the only person that finds this habit of posting links - with no word of explanation as to what it might be referring to, nor any clue as to which post it may be in repy to - incredibly annoying? I've never seen it on other fora, but it seems to be compulsory on NBR.

 

Well, as long as you see the address I can't see a problem with it.

 

yes. it's annoying. he could just copy the title of the link, or something, to give information why one should click on it.

 

Gen 1 160gb Intel SSd's $400 each

 

sgilmore62, yeah, they may be good for G1 prices, but a G2 is worth much more to me (enough that I wouldn't even consider these).

 

"Money orders and cashiers checks receive a $15 discount which makes the price $385."(Title didn't offer best price )

 

Not even $185 would get my money for a G1.