Originally Posted by rayw69
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 ?