120GB Kingston Digital SSDNow V300 2.5" SATA III Internal Solid State Drive SSD (SV300S37A/120G) $79.99 + Free Shipping

there was some serious discussion going on in another thread about TLC vs MLC...correct me if i am wrong but after carefully reading through that and an article on anandtech i got the impression that for an average user (read/write less than 10 gb/day), it won't matter

we can also note the very low write speeds for the TLC-equipped Samsung 840.

The voltages we recorded with the Samsung 840 are higher than the Samsung 840 Pro across the board, and also exhibit one of the highest idle voltages that we have witnessed. This is probably due to some hefty background processes to handle the TLC NAND. The only area where the Samsung 840 performed admirably was in the Startup voltage, which came in at a very low 1.13W.

The random write voltage was unsurprisingly very high, and the sequential write voltage requirement is also on the high end. With this being a relatively new SSD, with its TLC destined to begin producing more errors over the life of the drive, we would expect these power consumption figures to grow over the life of the SSD. Even with these relatively 'fresh' readings we feel that this would not be the best SSD for mobile applications.

The low write speed offered with the Samsung 840 Series is going to be a concern for some users. It is especially important that users with moderate to heavy write workloads carefully weigh other options before making the jump to a TLC SSD. The low write speed will be an immediate problem in large file transfer situations, and endurance will be a long-term problem. It is also important to note that the 120GB model of this SSD only has a sequential write speed of 130MB/s and random read IOPS of 32,000, significantly lower than the lackluster write performance that we observed today in our testing.

Including a thermal pad for the controller would help to keep the device cool. We would like to see thermal pads with this SSD when we take the higher power consumption figures from TLC NAND into consideration.

Our steady state testing essentially places a workload upon the SSD until it is forced to begin running the internal management routines and garbage collection during actual usage. This is especially important with this type of NAND as it is definitely going to experience far more data errors than MLC over time. This will create increasing overhead for the MDX controller over the lifetime of the device. The read speed degradation that we observed is worrisome due to the fact that the increasing error rates can trigger these drive management routines, in effect creating read speed degradation in lower usage scenarios than with MLC NAND.

The extreme loss of write performance in steady state in our Iometer testing can also be a sign of long term performance issues in steady state as the NAND ages.

So the key comparison to this deal is the 120GB Samsung 840 ends up pricing out at $78.99 + tax.

The low write speed offered with the Samsung 840 Series is going to be a concern for some users. It is especially important that users with moderate to heavy write workloads carefully weigh other options before making the jump to a TLC SSD. The low write speed will be an immediate problem in large file transfer situations, and endurance will be a long-term problem. It is also important to note that the 120GB model of this SSD only has a sequential write speed of 130MB/s and random read IOPS of 32,000, significantly lower than the lackluster write performance that we observed today in our testing.

Do you have freeze up problems with your Intel 330?

I do - updated the intel chipset drivers, intel raid drivers, did the registry tweaks - still freezes in Chrome often.

Thinking of getting the m4 Crucial to replace my intel 330.

Anandtech tends to write flawed articles.

Performance comparison graphs (I think the model reviewed is the 250 GB one).
http://www.hardocp.com/images/art...DY_8_5.png
http://www.hardocp.com/images/art...DY_8_6.png

For average user, I noticed the boot time. I am just an average user. The main reason I purchased SSD is because I hate the booting time of the Window. After installing samsung, the booting time is very quick, but with M4 I have to wait a few more seconds. But I see the difference. It is same window with same applications. Samsung SSD is faster than Crucial M4 SSD.

The boot times are virtually identical of the M4 and Samsung 840 Pro. After the bios screen (which the SSD speed doesn't affect), the M4 takes around 8 seconds to boot. The 840 Pro takes almost the same.

Here are a couple of videos illustrating this:

Crucial M4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aACDtbh17Yc
840 Pro: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khSJbe4grKg

Both drives boot in around 8 seconds from Windows first logo to Desktop.

As an average user, you would not notice any difference on boot times as there virtually isn't one.

I have both drives. They are 128GB. I put both drives in Thinkpad x230. both drives are installed Window 8. I see the difference. I don't know why ? but, do you know why ? do you have both drives and test it ? I don't know about reliability since both drives have not been broken yet.