Marvell-Based SSDs From Corsair, Crucial, OCZ, And Plextor: Tested

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Shoulda tossed in a V4 128gb for entertainment value...ah well. 😛
 
[citation][nom]hellfire24[/nom]crucial FTW![/citation]
hmm , my M4 has 10x more BSOD than my vertex 3... Each i boot my pc and work with it i prepare myself for a BSOD with my M4...
 
[citation][nom]uruquiora[/nom]hmm , my M4 has 10x more BSOD than my vertex 3... Each i boot my pc and work with it i prepare myself for a BSOD with my M4...[/citation]

That is what we in the I.T industry like to call: "Faulty Hardware".
If you considered that normal all this time, I have some bad news for you..
 
With the price of SSDs coming down, Toms should start introducing 256 GB + drives into its reviews. It's nice to have the 64 & 128 GB reviews, but for power builders the 256 GB is becoming mainstream.
 
Any tests planned on the Sandisk Extreme models. They were a Tom's recommend buy but I still haven't seen any benchmarks on Tom's.
 
I've only installed 6-7 SSDs, with mixed results. Two with Sadforce controllers died within months or weeks (the RMA of one is yet to be tested). Given that the slowest SSD beats the pants off the fastest magnetic HDD, I have quickly reached the conclusion that reliability has to be the #1 criterion for SSDs, and I'm not sure Sandforce is there yet.
 
[citation][nom]uruquiora[/nom]hmm , my M4 has 10x more BSOD than my vertex 3... Each i boot my pc and work with it i prepare myself for a BSOD with my M4...[/citation]

You must be joking... The list of forum thread complaining about SF controller instability is endless. The M4 actually has a very solid reputation. I've been running 2 128GB M4 in 2 different PC for the last 8 months. Not a single BSOD. They still both benchmark the same speed as day 1. Actually, the M4 was and might very well still be the best choice for balance between price, performance and reliability in the whole SSD market. In my book, there are only 3 manufacturers really worth mentioning when it comes to SSD: Crucial, Intel and Samsung.

Your unit is simply defective. That can happen to any manufacturer. RMA it and be happy.
 
When are you going to update your SSD charts? Some of the SSD's on the 2011 chart don't even exist anymore, and it's missing all the cool new drives released in the past couple of months.
 
[citation][nom]daysyang[/nom]^ agree... my M4 has been nothing but awesome.[/citation]

So has mine, but at $70 I am thinking I might ditch my Intel 320 for a Plextor M3. I've always been a fan of Plextor drives and it's good to know that the move to SSD hasn't changed their quality at all. Tempting, tempting...
 
Nice review. I just picked up another Crucial M4 today on Buy.com for $110 USD to my door.

Thanks for the great content!
 
[citation][nom]rohitbaran[/nom]I wonder if there are any reliability stats on SSDs available. They are fast for sure, but how about reliability scores, based off drive performance over a year or so?[/citation]

I couldn't agree more. Having a fast drive means nothing if it dies or corrupts your data.
 
Where are you guys seeing the 64GB M3 for $70? I have yet to find it anywhere for under $100. In fact, the best price I can find from reputable E-tailer is $120. I'd snap one up in a second as dedicated Intel SRT cache drive.
 
Your missing more Marvells !!! The OCZ Vertex 4 is actually based on a Marvell chip with OCZ firmware (rebadged as Indilinx). Intel have also used the Marvell controller in some of their SSD's.
What about performance per $/GB ?
Write endurance ?
 
Toms should put more emphasis on testing reliability of SSDs and different controllers. For average consumers the difference on speed performance is negligible. It's 2ms or whatever improvement on loading up web browser VS weeks of downtime spending on fixing crashes, RMA, reinstall OS....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom