Information

Did you know you could become an X-bit labs fan on Facebook or follow us on Twitter?



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Solid State Drives with SATA-600 Interface

Started by: Zshazz | Date 07/11/11 09:24:11 PM
Comments: 8 | Last Comment:  08/04/11 08:30:28 AM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-6]

1. 
Take the "winner" with a grain of salt. I gambled on a sandforce based SSD and it came in DOA. I decided to return it for a refund and get a Crucial m4 (since it's significantly cheaper than the Intel 510) so I didn't have to deal with the inordinately high amount of failures associated with sandforce.

In practice, you won't be able to see/feel any difference between the Crucial m4, Intel 510, or Vertex 3... but, at least in my case, I would have had a SSD in my computer nearly 2 weeks earlier if I had just heeded the warnings of the reviews on newegg and across the web. Now that is a difference you can feel.

And yes, ALL of the newer SATA-600 Sandforce drives are affected. Even OWC drives.
2 0 [Posted by: Zshazz  | Date: 07/11/11 09:24:11 PM]
Reply
2. 
Can you make please a comparison test with PCI-Ex SSD also?? I think they are much better than any SATA-600 drives. Let's check that!
1 0 [Posted by: TAViX  | Date: 07/12/11 01:36:53 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
i've only seen OCZ sell them for non enterprise purpose but there a price clas higer like 500€ for 120 gig whit 700+mb/s write
0 0 [Posted by: massau  | Date: 07/17/11 01:55:16 PM]
Reply
3. 
You only had a 120mb vertex3. Can you compare the 60/64 and 120/128gb drives of all the competitors please?

This is the size of drive most readers will buy after all.
0 1 [Posted by: Dribble  | Date: 07/12/11 10:19:32 AM]
Reply
4. 
Nice review Nikita. Thank you.
Ummmm... Will you please include review's preface just on the first page ?
1 0 [Posted by: Pouria  | Date: 07/12/11 01:19:48 PM]
Reply
5. 
great review thanks for making this review Nikita.
3 0 [Posted by: 3Dkiller  | Date: 07/12/11 08:45:21 PM]
Reply
6. 
Strange test setup with 1GB ram. I rather see reviews on real world hardware and check the results. What i get from the upgrade.

Same for GPU reviews. I dont want to know what FPS i get from a intel extreme 4+GHz processor. I want to see what FPS i get on basic phenom CPU and if there is a reason to upgrade.

Tests these days are so out of reality on every site. Is it so hard to test everything on more than one setup ?

1 1 [Posted by: Zool  | Date: 07/13/11 04:21:19 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
While I agree with you on the 1GB RAM used in this review, I can't disagree more on the GPU test suggestion. Why whould you test $500 video card on a $100 CPU. That is very unbalance testbed (just as in the case of this review). And for the cheeper GPUs, you ask; if they used different testbed for these test, then the results would not be comparable with the higher end. Anyway, system without bottlenecks is the better option than one that is constrained.
0 2 [Posted by: jonup  | Date: 07/15/11 06:10:31 AM]
Reply

[1-6]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment


Our Sponsors

Crucial.com Western Digital G.Skill