upgrading inspiron 1520 hdd to ssd

hi notebookreview members ..

I have an inspiron 1520 for almost 5 years. at that time it worked like how it should be but then, my hhd started to give so many errors, and a loud "beep" sound. I had to re-install the OS over 10 times in the last year. would replacing my hdd with an ssd be helpful ,and if I replaced my hdd with a ssd would it work, some people say it could work, and other said it won't.

i currently have : http://www.fujitsu.com/cn/Images/MHW2160BH.pdf

some people recommended me to get a: kingston ssd hyperx 3k 240gb

link : http://www.kingston.com/us/hyperx/ssd#sh103s3

Thanks.

 

1) your HDD sounds to be dead, seems like you were moving the laptop while it's on causing the read/write head to damage the magnetic platters

2) yes you can upgrade to an SSD

3) Buy ANY SSD except Kingston!!

Kingston SSDs use the crappy SandForce controller which can only achieve the advertised speeds when it deals with uncompressed data. That's why on the box of my previous Kingston HyperX 3K SSD it said "These results were achieved with ATTO Disk Benchmark" because it uses uncompressed data which means that it is compressible and that's where the SandForce controller performs well.. But in other benchmarks that deal with uncompressible data, I was getting around 170MB Read/Write, no where near the advertised speeds. I would never use a Kingston SSD even if you paid me.

upgrading from ANY HDD to even the slowest SSD would be a night and day difference. ANY SSD will blow an HDD out of the water. But when comparing these crappy Kingston SSDs with the high performers such as Samsung840/850 PRO or SandDisk Extreme II / SanDisk Extreme PRO / Crucial M550/Crucial MX100 they would leave the Kingstons in the dust.

you never know how much faster it would be until you try it

Just my 2 cents worth

Benchmarks:

ATTO Disk Benchmark-Windows 8 IRST 11.5.0.1207 (results look fine since it's compressed DATA which most data usually ISN:T compressed so this Benchmark that Kingston uses is meaningless in the real world):



Now, a benchmark....... watch how the figures suck so bad in write speeds when data is uncompressible

Crystal Disk Mark-Windows 8 IRST 11.5.0.1207




AS SSD Benchmark-Windows 8 IRST 11.5.0.1207

 

If your 1520's SATA interface is SATA II an Intel SandForce (520, 335, 530) wouldn't be bad. SATA II would be limited to about 300MBs so a Hyper Class SSD isn't really needed. Crucial MX100, OCZ Vertex 460, Arc 100... value drives.

 

The 4K speeds where all the OS / program snappiness matters is also low on the SandForce based SSDs so even if limited to SATA II, it's still a sucker.

 

Something like the Cruical MX100/BX100 is more then enough... No need to spend any more money on such an old laptop..

 

June 2011, I put a Kingston V+100 96GB drive in my ancient Inspiron 1720 and installed Windows 7 on it. I moved the HDD that came in the notebook to the second bay for a storage drive, and it's been working so well that I haven't felt the need to upgrade the notebook...yet.

 

Intel is a different breed with SandForce than others. Just ask @tilleroftheearth about his 520s.

 

It's still no more than best of the worst, though.

With a zillion other options on the market, why would anyone feel the need to grab a SF-based drive is beyond me.

My $0.02 only...

 

I'm sure some people buy Intel because it's Intel just as others buy Samsung because it's Samsung. despite the 840, 840 EVO issues. Intel doesn't have a bad SF image that others have.

Intel isn't bad in an OS environment with it's highly compressible files and mixed workload.
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/6775/intel-530-series-480gb-ssd-review/index6.html

 

Don't get me wrong: I'm a huge fan of Intel SSDs, just not of the SF-based ones.

Given the system that the drive will be going into, I'd echo the sentiment of MX100/MX200 as being the best bang for the buck.