SSD for the new Win7 OS?

So as my Win7 is upgrade is coming, I was thinking of installing it on a SSD after reading that it optimized for it.

I want to buy a cheap (<~$170) 64GB SSD for Win7 + Office and Photoshop.
I want to decrease boot time and loading time/ increase responsivness of the OS - thats what I expect from a SSD vs. normal HDD. I dont really mind the SSD having slower write times, I just want a really small read time.

Which SSD would you recommend?
Is there a big different in read time for example betweent he Kingston V-series and an Intel X25M

I found this one so far
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...004&cm_re=kingston_ssd-_-20-139-004-_-Product
Any other suggestions?

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...eoOnlyMark=False&VendorMark=&Page=1&Keywords=

 

Is that a common issue?

 

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/...&cs=04&c=us&l=en&dgc=SS&cid=39888&lid=1021909

 

On my desktop I'm running 7 Pro on an older Samsung RBX that's of fairly similar speed to the Kingston V series drives, and it hasn't given me any problems. Blows away the 7200RPM laptop drive I was previously using, and if you're not doing anything really HDD intensive, you most likely won't notice the difference between the V and an X25-M.

That being said, I'm happy with my X25-M too

EDIT: Also, if you live in California, and you have a local Fry's, they have 64GB V drives for $90 after MIR today.

 

Whichever SSD you buy, keep in mind that if you want the speed improvements SSD's offer, don't fill it too much past 50% of its capacity.

As for the drive you linked - I wouldn't even consider it after my experience with a 64GB Patriot Torqx (I returned it in less than 48 hours) which is rated (by reviewers/benchmarks) much higher than the Kingston V series you linked to.

 

I'm not really going to do anything hDD intensive just normal browsing, maybe from the more demading side Photoshop, but thats about it. Would I notice a big difference in boot/ loading app's compared to the 7200RPM in Win7 or only a slight?

I only want to install the OS + Office ( maybe Photoshop), so that would take around 30 GB which would fill around half of the SSD.

What happened?

 

What happened?

See for yourself:

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

 

Isn't the Kingston V, Jmicron?

 

Hard to tell with the Kingston V series.

They can use Intel controllers (40, 80 and 160GB versions);

They can use Indilinx and Samsung (I'm pretty sure, not 100% though);

They also used the Jmicron too!

 

The Kingston V+ is Samsung based. That much I know. The other series... *shrugs*.

 

The regular V 64GB and 128GB is definitely not built with several different controllers. Maybe several different brands of flash, but certainly not controllers. It's a Toshiba controller based on the JMicron with some sort of stuttering fix:

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1005/2/

The regular V 40GB, however, is effectively an 80GB x25-M G2 with half the flash.

 

Technically, the 40GB V is closer to an Intel X25-V than an Intel X25-M.

 

I don't get it? There's no such thing as an X25-V?

 

No joke, see:

http://www.dvhardware.net/article37755.html

and;

http://www.fiercecio.com/techwatch/story/intel-adopts-new-approach-spur-ssd-adoption/2009-11-12

 

Does the SSD which I linked to have any stuttering issues?

 

Ah ha ha, X25-Value, I get it.

It shouldn't afaik.

 

Are these drives using the same controller as the newer Toshiba SSDs (that Lenovo uses?):

http://www.toshiba.com/taec/Catalog/Family.do?familyid=7&subfamilyid=900314

 

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1474282

"Kingston phasing out V series
Just talked with a Kingston rep. This also includes the new 40Gb models with intel controllers..."

 

And you believe him? Hmmm.... I think you don't likey Intel, huh?

 

If it's true, I bet it's because Intel is making it on its own now...