Overclock.net banner

Which SSD?

  • Corsair force 3

    Votes: 2 7.1%
  • Ocz vertex 3

    Votes: 21 75.0%
  • Crucial M4

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Samsung 870

    Votes: 5 17.9%
  • anything but sandforce

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So i'm looking to spend around a hundred dollars for an SSD that I can put my OS on. 60 or 64 gb should be all I need for a boot disk. I have several questions about SSD's

  1. is 60 gb enough for a boot disk?
  2. which of the 3 ssd's that I am looking at is the best? Also, what are the WEI for each one?
  3. Why do people always say the M4 is the best even though it is the slowest of the 3?
thanks in advance
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,388 Posts
  1. is 60 gb enough for a boot disk?
  2. which of the 3 ssd's that I am looking at is the best?
  3. Why do people always say the M4 is the best even though it is the slowest of the 3?

    1. Yes, more than enough
    2. Vertex 3, it has 7.9
    3. They all have their ups and downs, the vertex 3 comes out on top.

    I'm being unbiased since i had to choose from these 3 also.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,051 Posts
I'd probably go with the M4.

1) Sure
2) WEI is useless
3) Sandforce drives compress data. If you are transferring uncompressible data, the M4 will perform to a higher degree. OCZ's customer support is horrendous, and the Force 3 uses asynchronous flash.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,928 Posts
had this choice on Sat and went with the Vertex 3. why?

well, the M4 just had that 5200 hour bug and i didn't feel comfortable buying the drive so soon after such a bug. it also didn't have a mounting plate and would have cost $100. the Corsair would've cost $85 and had a mounting plate. the vertex 3 had a mounting plate and was $85, with a $20 rebate, so it was almost $1/gb - seemed reasonable to me (all my prices include a 10% off code i had).,

i can report further when the SSD comes. i guess most will say go for the M4 or the OCZ though

as for your 1st question, yes 60 gigs is enough for an OS and a few programs - have windows 7 and Office 2007 installed on my OS partition (50 gigs) with ~4-16 gigs left over depending on the size of my desktop/download folders
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Now im confused... is there anybody who can show me a benchmark or who has owned both?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
924 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle982 View Post

So i'm looking to spend around a hundred dollars for an SSD that I can put my OS on. 60 or 64 gb should be all I need for a boot disk. I have several questions about SSD's
  1. is 60 gb enough for a boot disk?
  2. which of the 3 ssd's that I am looking at is the best? Also, what are the WEI for each one?
  3. Why do people always say the M4 is the best even though it is the slowest of the 3?
thanks in advance
To answer your questions:
1. PLENTY big. I have the 64gb M4 and it holds my Windows files, all my programs, BF3, Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light, and I have 13GB free.
2. I like the Crucial M4. It was basically a "plug and play" device and with all the problems I've read about other SSD's having, this one has been problem free so far. I don't know what WEI stands for so I can't comment on that.
3. Speeds. I think we are splitting hairs here. It's doubtful that the speed difference would be noticeable. If you've never had an SSD as a boot drive it doesn't matter the advertised speeds. All you will notice is that it is RIDICULOUSLY faster than a trad. spin drive when it comes to booting. I'd GLADLY give up that small amount of speed for reliability.
Read this:
http://www.overclock.net/products/crucial-64gb-m4/reviews/4475

EDIT: Regarding an extra mounting plate as mentioned above - A mounting plate is totally unneeded. If you really have to have your SSD sitting on some kind of shelf in your case you could probably fabricate something from parts purchased at your local hardware store for a couple of dollars.
WEI: Ah... Windows Experience Index. Yeah, useless. FWIW my M4 scores 7.9
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,371 Posts
http://www.overclock.net/t/1119008/crucial-m4-128gb-vs-vertex-3-max-iops-120gb-benchtesting

In this fellow OCNer's testing, the M4 was the winner.

I would definitely get the M4. Why? because it's fast and reliable.

Sure, it has the 5000 hour bug. BUT think about it, this means that the M4 can reach 5000 hours of working time, and the bug has been fixed with a patch that only takes 2 minutes.
The Sandforce drives (OCZ drives in particular)

http://www.overclock.net/t/1200869/ocz-agility-2-dead-moving-on#post_16213847

Here's a very recent thread about his/her OCZ drive failing.
You will not notice the speed difference, which will probably be 3 seconds to 5 seconds at most in real-life situations, but what you will notice is reliability. You will notice the BSODs, the RMAs, which is why I always place reliability of HDD/SSDs at the top. And right now, Intel is the best in terms of reliability with Crucial right behind it.

WEI: If it even matters... 7.9 ( Full marks)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,388 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle982 View Post

Now im confused... is there anybody who can show me a benchmark or who has owned both?
Dude as an operating system boot disk..... you will not be able to tell the difference between either of them.
So a benchmark is won't really determine much in this case.

You wont be transferring data.. You wont be copying data.. and even if you were it would probably be to a HDD which will cap your rates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sloppyjoe123 View Post

http://www.overclock.net/t/1119008/crucial-m4-128gb-vs-vertex-3-max-iops-120gb-benchtesting
In this fellow OCNer's testing, the M4 was the winner.
I would definitely get the M4. Why? because it's fast and reliable.
Sure, it has the 5000 hour bug. BUT think about it, this means that the M4 can reach 5000 hours of working time, and the bug has been fixed with a patch that only takes 2 minutes.
The Sandforce drives (OCZ drives in particular)
http://www.overclock.net/t/1200869/ocz-agility-2-dead-moving-on#post_16213847
Here's a very recent thread about his/her OCZ drive failing.
You will not notice the speed difference, which will probably be 3 seconds to 5 seconds at most in real-life situations, but what you will notice is reliability. You will notice the BSODs, the RMAs, which is why I always place reliability of HDD/SSDs at the top. And right now, Intel is the best in terms of reliability with Crucial right behind it.
WEI: If it even matters... 7.9 ( Full marks)
Don't cherry pick threads !!
teaching.gif


I can cherry pick too....

http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Solid-State-Drives-SSD/M4-256GB-is-failing/td-p/77840
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Solid-State-Drives-SSD/64GB-Crucial-2-5-m4-on-T61-fails-to-boot/td-p/71511
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Solid-State-Drives-SSD/Disk-boot-failure-with-Crucial-M4-128Gb-installed/td-p/64869
http://forums.pureoverclock.com/showthread.php?15398-Crucial-M4-SSD-s-failing-on-an-hourly-basis-after-hitting-5200-hours-of-use.

But i don't because its misleading !!!!

Just because one or two people had problems with their drives, doesnt mean its a universal issue.
I've had not a single hiccup with my OCZ Vertex 3.
Stop providing him with benchmarks that don.t mean anything to an OS boot drive.

To the OP, Pick the cheapest of the 3 in my opinion.
 

·
Retired but not dead!
Joined
·
7,435 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle982 View Post

Now im confused... is there anybody who can show me a benchmark or who has owned both?
LOL, look at my signature. I ran benchmarks with the m4 vs the top of the line Vertex 3 max iops.

I find it utterly hilarious that someone was worried about the 5200 hour bug and went with a Vertex 3 drive that's been bugged since release.

The Vertex 3 max iops that I have is used as a Steam only drive because I don't feel I can depend on it for the OS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,270 Posts
is 60 gb enough for a boot disk?
which of the 3 ssd's that I am looking at is the best? Also, what are the WEI for each one?
Why do people always say the M4 is the best even though it is the slowest of the 3?

1. Yes, but not much room for games after you load apps on, aside from that it's totally appropriate.
2. All of the drives you listed have a 7.9
3. The M4 is loved because for a long time the Sandforce 2281 that's in other drives (like the OCZ) had controller issues; they should be all resolved now though. The SF2281 uses data compression to achieve high speeds, so how fast your drive goes is based on what kind of data you're moving. Non-compressible data goes at about 300-400mbps, while the most compressible data can speed up to 550ish. I have no beef with the SF2281 as a boot drive because windows is mostly compressible, so you really get the best speed that drive can offer. The M4 has faster random read/writes, which is the most important stat on an SSD, and it doesn't use compression, it's just fast no matter what you're doing, although the peak is a bit lower. And again, up until recently the SF2281 based drives were a crapshoot as far as reliability.

Imo, if you're getting a boot drive that you won't be putting games (non compressible data) on, go with an SF2281 drive. I would just go with whatever is the best deal between the Force 3 or Vertex 3.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
524 Posts
1. In terms of real world performance, there is zero noticeable difference between the 3 drives. I'm currently using a M4, Intel x25-M G2, and Samsung 470 in different PC's as a boot disk and even between the SATA II and SATA III SSD's, no real world performance difference.

2. What is your priority? Reliability or best benchmarks for epeen?

All my SSD PC's contain research data, so I value reliability. For that reason, I'd never use OCZ simply because their customer support is worse than useless.

With an OCZ drive, you'll spend far less time AND money just getting a new SSD vs getting a broken one fixed (Real experience here, got a vertex 3 launch day for work. Worst decision I ever made and I've officially blacklisted OCZ). If you're gonna go SF, at least go Corsair.

SF in general is also a very small company with lackluster Quality Assurance. Hence, why they were looking for a big company to purchase them for the longest time (they're now owned by LSI).

For these reason's I go with Intel, Samsung and Crucial. Bear in mind while almost all Gen 3 SSD's have had issues, ONLY SF drives have issues that resulted in data loss.

If you just want the epeen factor then yes, SF is the fastest.

3. That said, all above options currently work fine with no outstanding issues, so you could just go for the cheapest if you really want.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,120 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denim-187 View Post

Dude as an operating system boot disk..... you will not be able to tell the difference between either of them.
So a benchmark is won't really determine much in this case.
You wont be transferring data.. You wont be copying data.. and even if you were it would probably be to a HDD which will cap your rates.
Don't cherry pick threads !!
teaching.gif

I can cherry pick too....
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Solid-State-Drives-SSD/M4-256GB-is-failing/td-p/77840
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Solid-State-Drives-SSD/64GB-Crucial-2-5-m4-on-T61-fails-to-boot/td-p/71511
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Solid-State-Drives-SSD/Disk-boot-failure-with-Crucial-M4-128Gb-installed/td-p/64869
http://forums.pureoverclock.com/showthread.php?15398-Crucial-M4-SSD-s-failing-on-an-hourly-basis-after-hitting-5200-hours-of-use.
But i don't because its misleading !!!!
Just because one or two people had problems with their drives, doesnt mean its a universal issue.
I've had not a single hiccup with my OCZ Vertex 3.
Stop providing him with benchmarks that don.t mean anything to an OS boot drive.
To the OP, Pick the cheapest of the 3 in my opinion.
^this guy is in another thread rma-ing his vertex2 which died
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denim-187 View Post

Doing an RMA for my bricked Vertex 2.... Look what i come across.
Quote:
Questions Regarding Rebates:
Where can I check the status of my rebate?
How long does it take to receive a rebate payment?
My rebate payment expired, what can I do?
I never received my rebate amount (lost in the mail) or the amount is different than the listed promotion. What should I do?
I printed out my rebate form, do I have to register online before I mail it in?
I didn't print out the correct rebate form, so now I have the wrong date range
Can I get two of the same products during one rebate period?
I haven't received my product from the reseller and the deadline for submission is soon. What should I do?
I have another rebate related question or need help filing a submission, who can I contact?
I'm having trouble with a product, how do I begin the RMA Process?
OCZ uses the ticket system to ensure our customers are assisted in the order recieved. Please create a ticket here for troubleshooting or to set up an RMA: http://www.ocztechnology.com/NewTicket.html
Visit our support forums for expert advice: http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/
Once you have created a support ticket, you can use the following numbers to follow up with our staff. Additional technical contact information: http://www.ocztechnology.com/contact/
IMPORTANT NOTICE: All OCZ Warranties are void for products within or destined to Cuba, Iran, Sudan, Syria or North Korea. OCZ cannot provide technical support or replacements for those products.
lachen.gif

Wow......
 

·
Breaker of Video Cards
Joined
·
1,186 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle982 View Post

So i'm looking to spend around a hundred dollars for an SSD that I can put my OS on. 60 or 64 gb should be all I need for a boot disk. I have several questions about SSD's
  1. is 60 gb enough for a boot disk?
  2. which of the 3 ssd's that I am looking at is the best? Also, what are the WEI for each one?
  3. Why do people always say the M4 is the best even though it is the slowest of the 3?
thanks in advance
1- 60(or 64Gb) is more than enough for a boot disk + other random programs as well
smile.gif

2- The M4 64Gb I have gets a WEI score of 7.9 (highest I think?)
3- I have only owned Crucial SSD's, first one was a C300 and it was pretty good (never had issues with the controllers or installation of it) and I then upgraded to the M4 64Gb and same story. Great speeds over the C300 and once again no issues with the controllers or issues with it at all to be honest. I feel like I see a lot of threads pop up about issues with OCZ or hiccups with other brands, but I've never had a hiccup with my Crucial SSD's. Hope this helps!
 

·
Storage Nut
Joined
·
21,138 Posts
What is a Samsung 870?
rolleyes.gif


Anyways Sandforce = POS

Look at the M4 or Samsung 830 @64GB. Get the cheaper of the two or what ever is a better deal.

Also, consider the "slower" Intel 320 if you can get it cheap ($80 for 80GB) like it was on sale before for. It is a good drive for many from what I have seen, though in benches it is "slower" than the other SSDs.

If you have any questions to my reasoning just ask.

Samsung and Micron/Crucial and Intel are top tier companies in my book. They actually fix issues with their products promptly and have great CS and products.

Yes the M4 had a few issues, but the new firmware fixes it easy. It took only a few weeks to fix...

Yes the Samsung 830 had a issue when updating the firmware, but they are/did release a new one a few days later that fixes that.

I still see Sandforce drives giving people issues even after the update that "fixed" everything. And that took over 6 months to get out. LOL

Oh and that force 3 is the same as the Agility 3 basically = slow compared to the Vertex 3 and Force GT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denim-187 View Post

Just because one or two people had problems with their drives, doesnt mean its a universal issue.
I've had not a single hiccup with my OCZ Vertex 3.
Stop providing him with benchmarks that don.t mean anything to an OS boot drive.
To the OP, Pick the cheapest of the 3 in my opinion.
Are you ok in the head? What do you mean not universal? LOL It has affected many people. Many more than the issues of other SSDs. Atleast the M4s don't randomly brick themselves.
lachen.gif


And benches mean nothing for an OS drive? Ok what ever you say. I suggest you get a older Gen 1 SSD and see how much you like it then.
lachen.gif
 

·
Retired but not dead!
Joined
·
7,435 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denim-187 View Post

Just because one or two people had problems with their drives, doesnt mean its a universal issue.
I've had not a single hiccup with my OCZ Vertex 3.
Stop providing him with benchmarks that don.t mean anything to an OS boot drive.
To the OP, Pick the cheapest of the 3 in my opinion.
Please stop underestimating the severity of the Sandforce 2281 bug. It was a hell of a lot more than just a few users. Every single 2281 drive out there contains the bug and should be updated to latest firmware. Make no mistake, there were hundreds, if not thousands of users with the issue. You

Benchmarks don't mean anything to a boot drive? Surely you can't be serious with that remark? The as-ssd benchmark gives you 4k reads and drive access times. Drive access times is what gives your ssd the snappy instant load feeling. My m4 eats my Vertex 3 in that regard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,388 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Webster View Post

Are you ok in the head? What do you mean not universal? LOL It has affected many people. Many more than the issues of other SSDs. Atleast the M4s don't randomly brick themselves.
lachen.gif

And benches mean nothing for an OS drive? Ok what ever you say. I suggest you get a older Gen 1 SSD and see how much you like it then.
lachen.gif
Gen 1? R u ok in the head? He's talking about 3 of the latest generation SSD's...
kookoo.gif

On your bike son.....
bike.gif


OT:
He wants a quick OS drive, and everyones in here being patriotic about their own brand. All 3 of those SSD's will suffice for an OS drive, so don't get technical with the benchmark statistics because at the end of the day... they're not going to matter full stop
teaching.gif


Old OCZ firmware sandforce was bricking it self.... heres to what i call "history"
 

·
Storage Nut
Joined
·
21,138 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denim-187 View Post

Gen 1? R u ok in the head? He's talking about 3 of the latest generation SSD's...
kookoo.gif

On your bike son.....
bike.gif
Hehe, so benchmarks do matter eh?
rolleyes.gif


I would like a bike, but they are too dangerous to ride where I live
happysmiley.gif

Quote:
OT:
He wants a quick OS drive, and everyones in here being patriotic about their own brand. All 3 of those SSD's will suffice for an OS drive, so don't get technical with the benchmark statistics because at the end of the day... they're not going to matter full stop
teaching.gif


Old OCZ firmware sandforce was bricking it self.... heres to what i call "history"
cheers.gif


Yes I know all will suffice, but why not get a drive that has the least issues to worry about? I have seen to many people with issues with their new Sandforce SSDs with the newest firmware still have issues. OCZ has crap CS, and other brands are just plain better.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top