Originally Posted by Discombobulated (Post 57652860)

Newegg

For those interested

• 120GB Kingston Digital SSDNow V300 2.5" SATA III Internal Solid State Drive SSD (SV300S37A/120G) [newegg.com]
  • $79.99 + Free Shipping
  • Promo Code: EMCYTZT2964

Also available

• 256GB Crucial M4 2.5" SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive SSD (CT256M4SSD2) [newegg.com]
  • $159.99 + Free Shipping
  • Promo Code: EMCYTZT2956

Originally Posted by jinxeddeep (Post 57653024)

benchmark charts suggest that the kingston is a mid-range performer...i guess i'll hold out for a 120gb OCZ or samsung...or even the HyperX

Originally Posted by jinxeddeep (Post 57653024)

benchmark charts suggest that the kingston is a mid-range performer...i guess i'll hold out for a 120gb OCZ or samsung...or even the HyperX

Originally Posted by Binar (Post 57653218)

How can you compare OCZ with Samsung ?

Originally Posted by 91770 (Post 57653212)

I would suggest you to buy this cause the price is good and the random read and write is more important then seq read and write. You won't notice much different on the seq cause it isn't real life testing. That big number is all about marketing. If you are comparing this to Samsung TLC, then it is a huge different. Samsung 840 is TLC which is a lower grade NAND compare to MLc NAND.

Originally Posted by Binar (Post 57653218)

How can you compare OCZ with Samsung ?

Originally Posted by blazin (Post 57653926)

How is this drive compared to the Samsung 256GB 840 Pro?

I was looking at the consumer posted benchmark screenshots on Amazon for the Crucial M4, and they are absolutely abysmal compared to the Samsung Pro.

If those benchmarks are accurate, I'd rather wait for an 840 Pro deal to come along.

Originally Posted by waveofdestiny (Post 57654016)

get the M4 (or the 840 non-pro) and be happy :)

Originally Posted by blazin (Post 57654156)

Oh, if only I could ever be happy :lol:

On Amazon, the Crucial M4 has well over 1000 reviews, and the Samsung Pro only has a little over 100 reviews. So I'd say Crucial is selling 50x the drives compared to what Samsung is selling.

You would think Samsung would come to the realization that by competitively pricing their drives, they'd sell thousands more. I frigging hate when companies sell a slightly better product and gorge their prices.

Originally Posted by blazin (Post 57654156)

Oh, if only I could ever be happy :lol:

On Amazon, the Crucial M4 has well over 1000 reviews, and the Samsung Pro only has a little over 100 reviews. So I'd say Crucial is selling 50x the drives compared to what Samsung is selling.

You would think Samsung would come to the realization that by competitively pricing their drives, they'd sell thousands more. I frigging hate when companies sell a slightly better product and gorge their prices.

Originally Posted by tmoney468 (Post 57654690)

Anyone having trouble with the M4 coupon code now? Says its not a valid code anymore

Originally Posted by CoBrA2168 (Post 57654492)

Looks like the Crucial M4 deal got mistakenly merged with this Kingston deal..

Also, for those looking for the 7mm version of the M4, Adorama still has it for $168. See this post:
http://slickdeals.net/f/5861480-C...7mm-168-FS

Originally Posted by poetuan (Post 57654920)

It's a tad cheaper at B&H. $165

B&H [bhphotovideo.com]

Originally Posted by NORDO (Post 57655808)

Certainly not a bad deal.

However, a reminder for those of us close to a MicroCenter...

They're running a combo special through 3/3 (if not longer). Purchase a Samsung 840 SSD with any CPU, Motherboard, or PC and get $20 off on top of the sale price.

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

If you're already planning a build, it's a great deal. I picked one up to go along with a CPU + Motherboard (and also got that $50 combo discount!) a couple weeks ago.

Originally Posted by blazin (Post 57654156)

Oh, if only I could ever be happy :lol:

On Amazon, the Crucial M4 has well over 1000 reviews, and the Samsung Pro only has a little over 100 reviews. So I'd say Crucial is selling 50x the drives compared to what Samsung is selling.

You would think Samsung would come to the realization that by competitively pricing their drives, they'd sell thousands more. I frigging hate when companies sell a slightly better product and gorge their prices.

Originally Posted by waveofdestiny (Post 57654016)

For the average user, you will not be able to see a difference between the M4 of 840 Pro. Unless you have a particular application or task in mind for the Pro, get the M4 (or the 840 non-pro) and be happy :)

Originally Posted by supersoul (Post 57660240)

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.

Originally Posted by tennisplayer888 (Post 57660266)

How quick exactly? Like with an SSD is it instant? Or do you have to wait a little while like an HD as well?

Originally Posted by supersoul (Post 57660310)

With samsung, it is like an instant. I see "wow". I showed it to my friend. He said "wow it is faster than apple." But Crucial M4 is not instant.So, I see the difference. Window 8 is installed in both machines

Originally Posted by davejfr0 (Post 57660684)

What kind of solutions are people using to protect against SSD failure? I'm scared of losing everything…

Originally Posted by davejfr0 (Post 57660684)

What kind of solutions are people using to protect against SSD failure?

Originally Posted by NORDO (Post 57660550)

My only data point on boot time...

On my new desktop, with an Intel 330, it takes approx. 15-20 seconds from power button to seeing the Windows desktop (ready to go) - and that's with the BIOS splash screen and RAID information page each popping up for a second or two.

Originally Posted by jinxeddeep (Post 57653392)

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

Originally Posted by hardocp

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

Originally Posted by hardocp

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.

Originally Posted by hardocp

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.

Originally Posted by NORDO (Post 57655808)

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

Originally Posted by hardocp

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.

Originally Posted by Probedude (Post 57662932)

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.

Originally Posted by superstition (Post 57665266)

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

Originally Posted by supersoul (Post 57660240)

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.

Originally Posted by waveofdestiny (Post 57666808)

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.

Originally Posted by supersoul (Post 57667134)

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.