3ogdy, enough with the FUD already, that stuff stopped being relevant years ago, related as it was to SF-based products (later tech like the Vertex4 was way better) and a management setup which no longer exists. And are you unaware of the 5x Arc 100 test-to-destruction challenge on
kitguru? For a model that has a 22TB warranty, the first of the five units failed after more than 14x as much as the warranty limit had been written, while the final unit failed after a whopping 695TB had been written, more than 31x the warranty limit, staggeringly beyond its rated lifespan.
Recently I asked OCZ if they could do an RMA for an original 512GB Vector which I won on eBay as a used item (I was honest) and had been in use for about a year since then in a pro system I built for someone (heavy use as an AE cache), but alas it failed in August. They did an RMA without hesitation, hence why I had a Vector 180 480GB to test. You think other vendors would RMA a disclosed-as-used older model in this way? I highly doubt it, especially not Samsung.
Irony being though, for someone like Chooby56, I'd still recommend the 850 Pro instead (it's cheaper), but I'd be happy to use a Vector 180 if a bargain came my way. As it is, I bagged a stack of Arc 100 120GB units for a good price over the summer, ideal for use in pro systems as a dedicated Windows paging file drive.
OCZ's problem atm is simply pricing. The Arc 100 isn't competitve with the 850 EVO, while the Vector 180 isn't competitive with the 850 Pro. Hence why my most recent new SSD purchases were two 850 EVO 500GB units for digital camera data storage/backup, and a 250GB 850 EVO for a PC I'm building (117/63 UKP resp. on Amazon), but the pricing issue vs. the 850 EVO/Pro affects the attractiveness of all the other vendors, not just OCZ.
Ian.
I really do not want to buy any parts for this thing right now.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram