AVS Forum banner

SSD Prices to Drop Even More...

12K views 151 replies 36 participants last post by  whiteboy714 
#1 ·
#77 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick /forum/post/21973367


That's cool. I hear that.


Let me ask this,


Would you build a new PC without one? Not a PC for someone else, but for yourself for personal use. If you were upgrading or replacing a PC at work or home - with significant personal use planned- would you choose HDD in the future?


Having a preexisting HDD based PC and still owning and appreciating it for what it does is common and normal. Nothing wrong with that.


But- I am curious if someone who has used SSD would gladly go back if given the choice?


I am only asking you because you seem impartial and level headed. Your replies are often insightful and it's obvious you know certain things. In other words I would respect your opinion more than some of the others here.


What say you ?

Well , to be honest and I MEAN honest . Yes, I have built several pc (s) with only mechanic hdds . My work , my home and my in laws . They LOVE them !! No ****e ... really ?


Would I go back ? If that was the only way that I could keep rockin ?? You darn right , I sure would . There was life before ssd . There was life before the hdd. LOL ... You proly don't remember when we use to boot from 5- 1/4 disk drives .... Give us some credit man !!! We were rockin it way before you ever thought of it ... Piece to you ... if you can find it
 
#78 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by flocko /forum/post/0



Well , to be honest and I MEAN honest . Yes, I have built several pc (s) with only mechanic hdds . My work , my home and my in laws . They LOVE them !! No ****e ... really ?


Would I go back ? If that was the only way that I could keep rockin ?? You darn right , I sure would . There was life before ssd . There was life before the hdd. LOL ... You proly don't remember when we use to boot from 5- 1/4 disk drives .... Give us some credit man !!! We were rockin it way before you ever thought of it ... Piece to you ... if you can find it

Thank you for honest answer. I respect what you said too.
 
#79 ·
In case anyone is interested, Newegg has on sale a 256gb Crucial M4 for $199.99 with free shipping, and a 120gb AData for $104.99. A couple more "less than $1/gb" offerings. Prices are supposed to be good through May 10, unless they sell out sooner, which they often do on specials. No coupon or code or MIR required.


Oh, but there's a limit of 3 per person on the Crucial; 5 on the AData.



And if you want to go top drawer, they also have the Intel 520 Series Cherryville 120gb on sale for $159.99, also with free shipping. Yeah, you can only buy five of those too.
 
#83 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin /forum/post/22005088


Less than 5 minutes.

Really? It seemed available to me on my iphone newegg application for a while.


Any idea how many they sold ? The Vertex was $65 and also sold out quickly. I guess the prices are coming down and the sales must be up for SSD. The argument for HDD keeps getting weaker each passing day.


(Is it strange it angers me to admit I have an iphone? I feel like a liberal hippie and for some reason it embarrasses me I have an iphone. But it's a great phone even if I don't personally align with the traditional apple buyer)
 
#86 ·
I plan to go with a 128GB SSD soon when I build my i7 workstation build.


The main value to me for SSD is besides fast boot times, applications load much faster, especially some of the suite software I have like the Adobe Video Master Collection.


There are valid reasons why some would go with a regular HDD build, and its either because of cost, or they don't want to be bothered with the newer technology. You could never convince my dad to go into SSD; he just likes having a computer that works well and that's what it does for him.


The only SSD I have right now is in my i5 HTPC build in the main room. My bedroom one has the WD mechanical drive and its doing the job just fine.


I don't bother with the special deals half the time Newegg has them because by the time I have the money for one they are always sold out..so I don't bother. I just get them as I can afford them. And its good that the SSD prices are going down, and will continue to drop over the coming months.


But for server/storage use, HDD is still the better choice.
 
#87 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by dj4monie /forum/post/22005813


IPhone(s) stink, pew signed Samsung Infuse 4G Gingerbread... (4.5" screen)


Picked up my $50 60GB Agility 3 SSD.

I like my iphone. Very much.


And I generally hate apple and it's owners.


The apple freaks are always odd people to me.

The products often cost more and perform less.


But the iphone is a kick ass phone that is not buggy like a droid.
 
#89 ·
Just noticed some pretty massive price drops for Crucial m4's. 256GB: $199.99 and 512GB: $419.99. So so tempting...


The Intel G2 120GB used for virtual machines and 500GB mechanical drive on my laptop seem like they're itching to be replaced...


P.S.

Why the heck are Intel 320 SSDs still so expensive? They pretty much still hold the same prices they did at launch. Cherryville 520 and Elm Crest 510 saw significant price drops but the Postville Refresh still commands a hefty price premium despite being bottom of the barrel in terms of performance.
 
#90 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovejedd /forum/post/22090611


Just noticed some pretty massive price drops for Crucial m4's. 256GB: $199.99 and 512GB: $419.99. So so tempting...


The Intel G2 120GB used for virtual machines and 500GB mechanical drive on my laptop seem like they're itching to be replaced...


P.S.

Why the heck are Intel 320 SSDs still so expensive? They pretty much still hold the same prices they did at launch. Cherryville 520 and Elm Crest 510 saw significant price drops but the Postville Refresh still commands a hefty price premium despite being bottom of the barrel in terms of performance.

The intel 320 will be dropping.


Just wait.
 
#91 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick /forum/post/22091419


The intel 320 will be dropping.


Just wait.

Somehow I doubt it. I saw a few decent deals after rebates (e.g. Intel 320 80GB for $70 AR back in February) in light of the 8MB bug but nothing as of late.


I'm not waiting for price drops on the Intel 320. With the recent release of the SandForce-based Intel 330 which I assume has also undergone extensive validation testing, there's no reason to go with the much slower 320. The Samsung 830 is also another good option for reliability. Just wondering why Intel's "value" offering is now one of their most expensive consumer SSDs available. Pricing for the Intel 320 Postville Refresh is the same as Intel 510 Elm Crest (Marvell) and is more expensive than the performance-oriented Intel 520 Cherryville (SandForce).
 
#92 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by ilovejedd /forum/post/22092682


Somehow I doubt it. I saw a few decent deals after rebates (e.g. Intel 320 80GB for $70 AR back in February) in light of the 8MB bug but nothing as of late.


I'm not waiting for price drops on the Intel 320. With the recent release of the SandForce-based Intel 330 which I assume has also undergone extensive validation testing, there's no reason to go with the much slower 320. The Samsung 830 is also another good option for reliability. Just wondering why Intel's "value" offering is now one of their most expensive consumer SSDs available. Pricing for the Intel 320 Postville Refresh is the same as Intel 510 Elm Crest (Marvell) and is more expensive than the performance-oriented Intel 520 Cherryville (SandForce).
Samsung830's are a great choice for both performance and reliability.


They excel at incompressible data and media. They generally outpace the M4 in all performance and sell for the same price. They are also much more reliable than the M4 it seems.


If you did not want a Sandforce drive- that is what you should get. (Samsung 830 > Crucial M4)


Here is what Tomshardware said:
Quote:
In contrast, the behavior of Samsung's drive doesn't change based on the information it handles, and the 830-series drives are arguably the fastest MLC-based offerings available, generally outpacing Crucial's m4. If you look at retail prices, the 830 costs just as much as the m4, too, making Samsung's SSD the better deal.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ew,3194-3.html



If you want or don't mind a Sandforce drive (I love them)- you can get an even faster SSD of the same size for an even lower price. For the $90 and $120 Price points they recommend a Sandforce controller based drive.


$89-$99 for the 120GB now.


Personally I like the Sandforce drives. I have a Mushkin and many OCZ's that I am very pleased with.


In contrast I dislike my Crucial. I moved it to a PC that gets almost no use.


Even the windows experience score for the Crucial M4 is lower than the sandforce drives of the same size. It just validates what I feel in everyday use. It's a bit slower and I can notice it. I have the exact same PC built with a Vertex3 and not only does it benchmark better- but I can feel it too.


People always bash the Sandforce and promote the M4 like it's a GOD. I whole heartedly disagree. My personal experience is total opposite.


The first Crucial M4 I got a lemon. The swap out was still not up to par. I contrast I have 15+ Sandforce drives with no issues at all.








Call me a fanboy. I like what I like. Sandforce drives have treated me well. Reviews and benchmarks prove the superior speed time and time again. They sell for the lowest prices.


I probably saved on average $20 on each of the Sandforce based drives I have purchased as compared to something else that could be comparable. $20 x 15 SSD drives is a lot of money. If and when one does fail... the replacement is already paid for in the savings I have accumulated by not overspending.


I totally laugh at the suggestions about reliability. To me- it's silly and nonsense. Odds are always in your favor you will get a good product that won't die or fail. Only doomsdayers suggest otherwise. People touting the reliability of one brand over another seems senseless to me. Odds are that even purchasing an SSD from one of the crappiest MFG out there will yield you a perfectly working unit. No one seems to understand you could buy the most reliable brand and the least reliable brand (if it was even possible to calculate accurately) and with bad luck or good luck you could get a mix. I mean- you could get the best brand and have it die, and have the worse brand seem to live on forever working perfectly.


Besides- almost all of the Sandforce drives I have seen come with 3 or 5 year warranty's. With OCZ they just swap it out for you advanced replacement. It leads to higher return numbers, but it's way better to get a new replacement a couple days later than wait for a repair or RMA to process. That's just my .02cents on the subject.



 
#93 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick /forum/post/22092905




I totally laugh at the suggestions about reliability. To me- it's silly and nonsense. Odds are always in your favor you will get a good product that won't die or fail. Only doomsdayers suggest otherwise. People touting the reliability of one brand over another seems senseless to me. Odds are that even purchasing an SSD from one of the crappiest MFG out there will yield you a perfectly working unit.



If you play Russian Roulette with 1 bullet in the gun, odds are good that you will survive pulling the trigger. Even with 2 bullets, you are more likely than not to survive. So, I guess if you are forced to play Russian Roulette, you have no preference whether they give you a gun with 1 bullet or 2 bullets in it?


Me, I'll take the gun with 1 bullet and be glad that my chance of dying is reduced by a factor of two.


Likewise, I'll choose the SSD brand that has 7 times less chance of being returned than OCZ. That would be Crucial. Although I would actually choose Plextor instead of Crucial, since Plextor has even less chance of getting a bad newegg review than does Crucial.

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/862-7/ssd.html
 
#94 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim2100 /forum/post/22093088


I


Likewise, I'll choose the SSD brand that has 7 times less chance of being returned than OCZ. That would be Crucial. Although I would actually choose Plextor instead of Crucial, since Plextor has even less chance of getting a bad newegg review than does Crucial.

OCZ offers advanced replacement for any consumer complaint- and allows retailers to return defective product back to them for full refund.


Crucial on the other hand- does not offer such the same way OCZ does.

So no doubt this would effect the return numbers.



Now according to your theory I have played Russian roulette 15 times with maximum number of bullets and survived. Perhaps I should play a lottery ticket?


I don't think I am that lucky. I just think the odds of getting a good one are in your favor with any product.


Oh... and I only played once with Crucial and I got my brains blown out.


Put aside the fact that the Crucial performs at a lower performance level (important to me) - The only issue I ever had with an SSD was with an M4.


And- Even If your right and I have a chance of getting a bad SSD- the OCZ still comes with 3 year and 5 year warranty- They would just send you another one. Does not seem like it's much risk at all.


I save $600 total buying SSD's from OCZ and Mushkin with Sandforce controllers. On average $20 per drive times 15 SSD's purchased.


I already have the money to purchase 6 more 120GB Vertex3 or Mushkin Enhanced Chronos SSD's @ $99 each with the money I saved. So if one does fail- I am still very happy.


I am actually very happy- because not only are the Sandforce 22xx controller drives recommended at the 100-120$ price point for 120GB/128GB sized segment class- because they are cheaper- But they are also faster and post better benchmark scores in everything with the exception of incompressible data like media files. You don't need speed to play back a media file anyways...


It's the Random I/O's that matter. And for that... Sandforce wins.


You love those Crucials. You love to bash OCZ too... that's cool. I respect your opinion. But your never going to change my mind.


Perhaps if all 15 of my drives failed tomorrow and Crucial had a new product with a faster spec and performance level for a lower cost- I might in time sway away.


But honestly... the OCZ Vertex4 uses the same controller as the Crucial M4 but has some additional proprietary tweaks that allows much higher level of performance. It also comes with a 5 year warranty... so if I chose not to purchase a sandforce drive.. I would probably choose that over Crucial.


Or- the Samsung830 which is better than the Crucial for the same price and does not use Sandforce controller.


Bottom line is there is tons of alternatives to choose from. All are good real world. I just think Crucial M4 is a poor choice from personal experience.


I am not making this up. I have no hidden agenda. I just know what I know.
 
#95 ·
You can type all the nonsense you want, but I notice you did not answer the question. So I assume the answer is that you would indeed choose the gun with one bullet over the gun with two bullets. As would any rational person. Which means that you do understand basic probability, despite your claims that "it's silly and nonsense".


In fact, it is your defense of OCZ that is "silly and nonsense". But as you say, no amount of facts and evidence will change your mind about it. You just have an irrational love of OCZ.
 
#96 ·
Just grabbed a Curcial M4 64gb for $58.49 from buy.com by using ebates for a 2.5% discount.
 
#97 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim2100 /forum/post/22093343


You can type all the nonsense you want, but I notice you did not answer the question. So I assume the answer is that you would indeed choose the gun with one bullet over the gun with two bullets. As would any rational person. Which means that you do understand basic probability, despite your claims that "it's silly and nonsense".


In fact, it is your defense of OCZ that is "silly and nonsense". But as you say, no amount of facts and evidence will change your mind about it. You just have an irrational love of OCZ.

It's not just OCZ. It the entire sandforce line up that gets bashed.


I just buy the OCZ cause they are good prices at the time, and after I had some luck I kept with it.


The other Sandforce drives are all basically the same. There is little difference between on Sandforce controller SSD and another... only the type of memory used (sync, async, toggle etc)


So assuming your looking apples to apples-- any of them are a better choice than Crucial M4.


And- I also said the Samsung830 is a better drive and better choice- and on the performance side of things even the Vertex4. I know you hate OCZ but it uses the same controller as the Crucial M4- yet performs better and comes with a 5 year warranty. What is not to like ?


I think it is you with an irrational hate of OCZ.


So let me agree and admit your welcome to your brand preference.


Excluding OCZ- there is still tons more and better choices than a Crucial M4. The only reason to purchase one would be an extreme low price.


That is why they sell. If you can get another SSD within 10$ of the same price your probably better off doing so.


Sandforce > Crucial M4

Samsung830 > Crucial M4

Other Marvel controller drives > Crucial M4


You get the idea.


Only a super low price should make that drive tempting.
 
#98 ·
Mfusick. I think what you're missing, is that your personal experience is essentially worthless information for anyone else trying to make an informed decision.


Generally speaking, using personal experience to determine the reliability of a mass market electronic item is worthless. However, because most people cannot reconcile differences in their personal experience with the more widely accepted or known information, they fall back on the information that is perceived to be more reliable. So if you think Sandforce is a superior option to other SSD options based on your personal experience, that is understandable. While I wouldn't ever agree with this kind of decision making, it at least has a consistent thought process that leads you there.


But given the avalanche of evidence that Sandforce based SSDs are less reliable than other options, very few people are going to be convinced by your arguments. Other people are just like you. They are going to either go by their personal experiences, or by the general concensus.
 
#99 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rayw69 /forum/post/22093611


Mfusick. I think what you're missing, is that your personal experience is essentially worthless information for anyone else trying to make an informed decision.


Generally speaking, using personal experience to determine the reliability of a mass market electronic item is worthless. However, because most people cannot reconcile differences in their personal experience with the more widely accepted or known information, they fall back on the information that is perceived to be more reliable. So if you think Sandforce is a superior option to other SSD options based on your personal experience, that is understandable. While I wouldn't ever agree with this kind of decision making, it at least has a consistent thought process that leads you there.


But given the avalanche of evidence that Sandforce based SSDs are less reliable than other options, very few people are going to be convinced by your arguments. Other people are just like you. They are going to either go by their personal experiences, or by the general concensus.

I am only so vocal about it because there is tons of people out there like you that think it's not a viable option or even a good option.



It's funny because every major review site I read like the drives and has no issues with them.


If you read Tom's Hardware- it has long recommended Sandforce based drives. OCZ, Mushkin and many more. Ton's of MFG make these..


The best possible performance is with a TOGGLE NAND + Sandforce drive today. Enthusiast eat these up.


Even Intel makes a Sandforce drive as their flagship.


It's pretty common fact that Intel is the leader in SSD reliability and hold the most confidence with consumers- and also enterprise.


Intel took that 2000 series Sandforce you think has issues and did extensive validation and testing on it prior to releasing the new drives.


If you actually believe that today in JUNE of 2012 and a year later after the firmware fix first came out-- the chance of getting a bad drive is high- your indeed the fool.


The same logic you use against me- could be used against you.


My point is that it's popular to bash Sandforce and even OCZ more...


While it's not popular to point out that the Crucial has it's own issues.


It's common fact and widely known that most of the Crucial M4's died around 5000 hour mark. You start getting BSOD errors (blue screen of death)


They came out with a firmware fix for this, and today if you update your firmware- supposedly your ok.


How is that any different than the firmware fix on the Sandforce?


Sandforce SSD's sell like crazy.. and there is millions of them out there. I can't remember the last time I saw a complaint on here about one from an actual user.


I agree with your points your making and all valid.


My personal experience is not a guarantee for anyone else to have the same results.


But- I don't understand how a firmware fix corrects a Crucial and the problem gets swept under the rug... while a year later the Sandforce is still crucified for a near non-existent problem in the first place.


Check this out:


Even from day one the amount of effected Sandforce controller drives was a very , very small amount. It was not common- it was not many. It was a very small amount of the total of them. And the errors were with seemingly certain hardware combinations. Non of the errors were able to be duplicated in the lab in testing at first because it was small amount and certain combos to make it happen. It was not like a huge portion of the drives were ever effected.


The finally figured it out and released a firmware update. The problem basically went away. The problem is there was so many of them out there because they sell so well that the story became internet legend and it became popular to jump on that bandwagon.


Months later even Intel uses the same Sandforce controller- and claims extensive testing and validation on it prior to release.


It's silly to think like you do. It was never likely even in the beginning before the firmware update you would have an issue at all.


Today it's a total non issue.


But- The Crucial issue was widespread on the m4's and effected pretty much all the drives with the original firmware. It was certainly a higher percentage than the Sandforce issue. Crucial releases a firmware and they are a hero.. problem gone. Case closed.


It's funny how it's popular to hate on one and blindly love another...


reality is they are both good. You could have good or bad luck with either one.


Odds are in your favor you would have good luck with either.


but people like you get under my skin because the message you try to deliver is not accurate today and does not apply.


Why do so many sites like Toms Hardware recommend the Sandforce based drives as both best buy and best value- and also as upper level highest performance tier products ?????


Are they lying? Don't they know what you do ?
 
#100 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rayw69 /forum/post/22093611


But given the avalanche of evidence that Sandforce based SSDs are less reliable than other options, very few people are going to be convinced by your arguments. Other people are just like you. They are going to either go by their personal experiences, or by the general concensus.

I think the avalanche of evidence you speak about is actually BS.


Anyone that does 5 seconds of searching reputable sites will see positive review after positive review on Sandforce Based SSD drives.


They will find superior benchmarks on compressible data and I/O's.


They will find the drives appear on the "recommended list" and the "best value" lists at almost all reputable PC review sites.


I could list 5 popular well respected review sites that recommend them as best value and also have done multiple reviews on them all positive.


And if you look you can find Sandforce SSD's for $89 and $99 in 120GB sizes and $50-60 in 60GB sizes.


Given all this avalanche of evidence- it seems almost silly for you to make the assumption and argument your trying to make.


It's not like I am making any of this up. It's all true.


I would think seeing the same drives show up on different reputable review sites as top picks and best buys would be enough for a consumer to make an educated purchase decision. These MFG that make them are big names too... not some fly by night company. Most come with 3 or 5 year warranty.


It's just silly to think a Sandforce Drive would have any issue at all.


Everyone should feel confident in buying one and thinking it should work great as expected for the expected lifecycle. And when people like you claim otherwise because you have a brand preference for something else is rubbish.


Sometimes certain products become a fad- or a it becomes cool or uncool to like or hate on a product. I just hope people see beyond that and as you say "look at the avalanche of evidence"


Most of the people I see bash them are just naysayers. They don't even own one and never did or will. They read something quickly once... and held onto it to repeat like it's from the bible.


LET IT GO ! It's ok. You can buy a Sandforce Drive. Aside from being faster and cheaper... and not wanting that- I can't see a solid reason to do otherwise. It won't self destruct or blow up your house like you think or suggest.


It's funny cause I have never in my life seen a superior performing product with a lower price tag take so much abuse and hate.


I can only attribute it to owners of other non sandforce brands just naturally re-inforcing their own purchase decision and jumping on the bandwagon as naysayers.
 
#101 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by rayw69 /forum/post/22093611


Mfusick. I think what you're missing, is that your personal experience is essentially worthless information for anyone else trying to make an informed decision.


Generally speaking, using personal experience to determine the reliability of a mass market electronic item is worthless. However, because most people cannot reconcile differences in their personal experience with the more widely accepted or known information, they fall back on the information that is perceived to be more reliable. So if you think Sandforce is a superior option to other SSD options based on your personal experience, that is understandable. While I wouldn't ever agree with this kind of decision making, it at least has a consistent thought process that leads you there.

But given the avalanche of evidence that Sandforce based SSDs are less reliable than other options, very few people are going to be convinced by your arguments. Other people are just like you. They are going to either go by their personal experiences, or by the general concensus.

That's a phrase I have seen repeated ad nauseum without a single link or other reliable reference to back it up. Without that, as you say: "...Generally speaking, using personal experience to determine the reliability of a mass market electronic item is worthless..." And what you're trying to pass off as gospel fact is indeed your perception of other peoples' opinions...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top