Plextor M5S Now Available

by Kristian Vättö on 7/27/2012 3:03 PM EST


Back to Article

  • ImSpartacus - Friday, July 27, 2012 - link

    The difference between an average SSD and a hard drive is the world, but the difference between high end SSDs and their more normal brethren is comparably minute.

    With SSDs like OCZ's 256GB Vertex 4 selling for $210, why should a typical power user spend ~$50 more for higher end SSDs?
  • ImSpartacus - Friday, July 27, 2012 - link

    Nevermind, my comment isn't quite as relevant now that the 128GB M5S is going for $100 (after rebate). Let's hope for a matching ~$200 price tag for the 256GB version. Reply
  • JNo - Saturday, July 28, 2012 - link

    This. Especially when the difference for consumers will be intangible (i.e. imperceivable except in benchmarks). Reply
  • Zak - Saturday, July 28, 2012 - link

    Warranty is often the deciding factor for me. I simply refuse to buy any HD or SSD with less than 3 years of warranty. I had some really bad luck with SSDs, hard drives, motherboards and power supplies in the recent years so now I look carefully for items with better warranty. Reply
  • Beenthere - Friday, July 27, 2012 - link

    For those who haven't done their homework, you should be aware that SSD tech per Anand is "immature tech" and as a result still has compatibility and reliability issues.

    Unless you enjoy being an unpaid beta tester... you might want to wait 6 months or so to see how many firmware updates are required to fix SSD issues with any new SSD release. If data security is unimportant and BSOD and RMAs don't bother you, jump in the water and see how many sharks you have for company. *LOL*
  • bill.rookard - Saturday, July 28, 2012 - link

    I have to agree up to a point. I have a Centos 6 system running on a 1u webserver outfitted exclusively with SSDs'. Two twin 128Gb drives for mirrored data (the sites), and one 64Gb drive for the OS.

    The OS drive is a Crucial M4 - and it's had several firmware updates - the main and most notable problem was with the SMART reporting - after 5100 hours of 'power on' time, the drive would stop responding until it was rebooted. EVERY HOUR. Needless to say, on a webserver, that's just NOT an option to allow to continue.

    Lo and behold, one day, server stopped responding, file system errors started cropping up, all kinds of garbage. Had to fix the damage, then take the server offline until I could update the firmware. Meanwhile (and interestingly enough) the other two drives (Kingston V+ series and a Samsung) have no issues at all in spite of the fact they were cheaper...
  • MrSpadge - Saturday, July 28, 2012 - link

    You should have said: "SSD tech per Anand is "immature tech" and as a result CAN HAVE compatibility and reliability issues." Reply
  • HisDivineOrder - Saturday, July 28, 2012 - link

    Use a Samsung 830 SSD. How many firmware updates have they had? How many widespread problems have you seen with those?

    The problem is not with the SSD's. The problem is with the QA of the companies that have made SSD's up till now. Sandforce and OCZ/Indilinx have given the whole product class a bad name.

    Crucial just helped do its part in that. Once the "big" companies that are focused on reliability enter the picture (Intel, Samsung), this criticism about SSD's being immature hardware falls away.
  • semulw2485 - Saturday, July 28, 2012 - link

    as Ricky replied I am impressed that any one can earn $9997 in a few weeks on the computer. did you see this link LazyPay10 dot com Reply
  • ashetosvlakas - Sunday, July 29, 2012 - link

    As a reply to the above spam I want to add my spam, sorry for this.

    Can some administrator enable my forum account "ashetosvlakas" cause I cannot post any replies or create any threads.

    I have already sent this request twice in the forums but I am not sure if my request has indeed gone through.


Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now