SSD's Still Running Strong

I just thought I'd pipe in here. My Intel X25-M 80GB SSD that is nearly 2 years old now is running great. It has been through probably a half dozen machines and has resided in my desktop for a solid year now at least. Maybe not the fastest, but after configuring a laptop for my dad and niece both with 5400RPM HDD's I can say that any SSD is still worlds faster than any HDD.



Since I got this Intel I ended up getting a Western Digital SiliconEdge Blue 256GB that I've been using in my HP laptop for six months now, an Intel X25-M 120GB in my Asus netbook, and a Kingston V+ in one of the netbooks now my kids have. Zero issues, still going strong, and has overall been one of the best experiences I've had with a piece of hardware. I still have a spare Intel X25-M 120GB that I need to find a home for. I may stick that in my desktop, and my 80GB in my WHS 2011 build.

 

I love my SSD drive, its makes the system so snappy.

 

I'd take your spare 120gb off your hands for a reasonable price

 

Naw, holding on to it! Except for the 80GB Intel SSD, I basically paid ~$1/GB for each of my other SSD's:

Kingston 96GB $100 ($149 with $50 MIR)
WD SiliconEdge Blue 256GB $200 (yes, fire sale at newegg, woot!)
Intel X25-M 120GB $130 ($160 with $30 MIR)
Intel X25-M 120GB $129 (can't remember where, but it was limited sale)

 

$1/gig is the price point I try to hit with my SSD purchases as well, and eBay seems to be about there right now.

 

But I don't think they'll be mainstream until they reach $0.50/GB. 256GB for $130-140!? Yes! I'll take it!

 

Here is a SanDisk SSD which is about there: 120 gig for $125 (free s/h).

Newegg.com - SanDisk Ultra SDSSDH-120G-G25 2.5" 120GB SATA II Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)


--

 

Wow, great deal. Decent performance for the price. I'd say 120GB is the sweet spot for most laptop users. Enough space for OS, apps, and a few games and/or multimedia.

 

I have no problems finding $1/GB drives, but they tend to be either SF-2000 drives (not sure if I want a Vertex 3 or a HyperX, even at that price point), or Kingston SSDNow something drives (no point downgrading to a drive slower than what I have now), or sub-120GB drives (too small to be practical).

If I could get a Intel 520/310, a Crucial M4 or a Samsung 830 for $1/GB, I'd snap it up in a heartbeat.

 

Yeah, not trying to be too sarcastic, but if I could get a Vette for $20 large, I'd snap it up in a heartbeat. There is a reason the others are cheaper, and the Intel, Crucial and Sammys are not.

 

Sorry, if you want something reliable you have to pay $2/GB. No free lunch.


--

 

my mtrons are now > 3 years old and still running strong (on my home server, that is..)

rest are intels and some sammies, all delivering their task perfectly, too.

during the same period, multiple hdds of me and friends died...

 

Only reason they're more expensive is marketing, which is clearly working. And not sure how people think they need absolute fastest drives. Some work demands it, but for most of us, Intel X25-M generation drives are more than sufficient. SF drives, OCZ primarily, have their issues with reliability and are also much more than $1/GB. I don't like how so far the SSD market keeps pushing faster faster faster when they should be pushing less expensive.

 

But I don't need any more SSDs!

A cheap SSD will perform almost as well as a fast SSD in real-life performance, and I don't really care about benchmarks. I run a no-name PNY SSD (~$100 after rebate, can't even find any reviews of it online) in my desktop and it loads Windows before the animation even has time to finish. Been dead reliable for the 6 months I've owned it, too. In terms of what we can notice without timing anything or running benchmarks, SSDs have definitely hit diminishing returns.

 

I think some of us were refering to the SF drives (OCZ in particular) when commenting about cost. I still have my Corsair Nova 128 running well in one of my kids lappys, and it is what? At least 2 years old/ And I have a great running x-25m. Very reliable. As stated, speed is not the only factor, because a lot of benchies are not real world. You will see a difference from a hdd in any sdd you get, so it comes down to price/reliability. I have never used a Crucial or Sammy, but the Crucial was the one I wanted, alas, no one had them, so I bought the Intel 510. I believe this was just before the Sammy's came out. After everything I have read and the reviews I have seen, coupled with the response of many owners, it seems clear (at least to me) thet the Crucial, Sammy and Intels are the most reliable. (caveat: there were soem problems with the Intel 320's, which seem to be resolved, but do make one take a second look at where they are going).

In all, I have Intel SSDs (310 mSata, 510 and x25-m which are all going strong after several TB's each,) and the Nova is running just as strong.

When I bought my tablet, it had a Sandisk ssd, but i replaced it with the 310, and I noticed quite a difference.
Sorry for the tl;dr version, but in short, I would advise to read, stay with reliable drives and don't just go for the fastest or newest, because sometimes if it seems too good to be true, it just might be. Good luck on your decision.

 

My Intel G2 160GB is about two years old and has gone through about 4.75TB of writes according to CrystalDiskInfo. It's running like a champ.

I have a week-old OCZ Vertex LE 240GB that I got from the NBR promotion, and it seems to be behaving. Much different from the problems I had when I got the same model a year ago.

 

You won't kill it. I believe someone got an X25-M G1 to over 200tb writes and it's still going.