POST A COMMENT

27 Comments

Back to Article

  • Runamok81 - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    Looks like we have a shrinking middle-class withh SSDs as well. Does this mean manufactuers should focus on one extreme of the performance/value slider or else risk consumers purchasing leftover stock from last years tech? Reply
  • MrSpadge - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    The problem with budget and middle class SSDs is that the bulk of the cost goes into the flash - which you have to buy anyway. The controller does cost a bit, but you can't save much by making an SSD slower. That's why it's not really worth it for customers to spend a little less for a significantly slower SSD. Exception: Samsung 840/840 Evo. they've still got the excellent controller and at least decent performance, yet they mostly cost significantly less than others. Reply
  • ericbentley - Monday, September 30, 2013 - link

    Samsung 840/840 Evo can afford to use a good controller yet still be budget oriented because they use TLC flash, while the Corsair LS here still uses MLC. While MLC is better in terms of longevity, most people still want the benefits of speed from the controller and MLC vs TLC is a back-burner issue for them

    I'm wondering if Corsair had tried TLC before and had some reason for not using it for a drive like this, seems like a no brainer to me, unless they couldn't secure a large enough supply
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    I think we are starting to get to a similar point as where DRAM is now. For an average user, the difference between a low-end and high-end SSDs is becoming negligible because even the low-end SSDs are pretty good now (e.g. the Force LS). That means the middle-class no longer serves a purpose because the average users will mostly go with the cheaper options and enthusiasts only want the fastest. Reply
  • vol7ron - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    The big thing still out there, that hasn't been answered is lots of flash for cheap. When buying an SSD many customers look for the fastest, since the cost is marginal between what's available. However, the one area of the market that is still "expensive" is in the mass-flash +1TB (or even +512GB). Even with a slower controller/NAND, I think Corsair could slide into this space. Look at Apple and what they're shipping their new Mac with - what's it called? Fusion? - essentially a hybrid drive, rebranded. I'm sure a company that focuses on the best balance of quality vs cost, wouldn't do that if SSD costs were lower. --- There's still the niche market for high capacity flash, the ultimate HDD terminator. Reply
  • Spoony - Sunday, September 29, 2013 - link

    Apple is shipping a 128GB SSD alongside a normal platter drive in 1TB or 2TB configurations. Fusion Drive is just the name for a logical volume manager with block migration. They are not re-branding a hybrid drive like a Momentus XT. It is a custom solution which merges two discrete devices in software. For better or worse.

    I definitely agree with you. 1-2TB SSDs at $0.40/MB rather than the current $0.95/MB would be very compelling. I would buy if it was reliable, even if it wasn't blazing fast.
    Reply
  • Spoony - Sunday, September 29, 2013 - link

    1TB or 3TB configs. Not 2TB. Sorry.

    Also, edit functionality would be convenient.
    Reply
  • Cumulus7 - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    Since you recommend the Samsung EVO over the Crucial M500: aren't yout concerned that the EVO may not last as long as the M500?
    I prefer the M500 at the moment since i expect its NAND to last a lot longer. But i may be wrong...
    Reply
  • fokka - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    of course mlc should theoretically last longer, but that doesn't mean tlc doesn't last more than long enough, as you can read here:

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/7173/samsung-ssd-840...
    Reply
  • MrSpadge - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    I'd choose and recommend the Evo as well, for all typical users. People write much less on average than they fear they might. It's only a different story for power users, servers etc. Reply
  • LtGoonRush - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    Crucial has had a pretty poor record with firmware issues, particularly on the M4. Even given the lower endurance of TLC NAND I think it is a reasonable to expect the Samsung 840 Evo to be a more reliable drive for most users. Reply
  • Bob Todd - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    Other than the admittedly awful SMART Power On Hours bug that was fixed a long time ago, I think you need to back up that statement. Crucial has been one of the go-to SSD makers for a lot of people specifically for the reliability (along with Intel/Samsung). Reply
  • 1Angelreloaded - Tuesday, October 01, 2013 - link

    As long as it lasts 3-5 years, Who cares? by then you should be migrating to newer ones anyways and recycle it as a cache drive. Reply
  • JDG1980 - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    I'd be concerned about reliability with a new, unproven controller - especially when it comes from a company I've never heard of before.
    It sounds like Marvell controllers are inexpensive, but the cost of each company writing its own firmware drives prices up. I'd like to see a Marvell-based SSD with open-source firmware.
    Reply
  • SteelCity1981 - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    I would have liked to have seen the Samsung 840 250gb EVO in rapid mode in this benchmark to see the extra performance increase. Reply
  • red12355 - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    Sort of unrelated, but is there ever going to be an Intel 530 SSD review? It got released a while back but hardly has any reviews.

    I remember there was a 520 review before the SSD was even out.
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    Intel has not approached us about the SSD 530 yet. Let me check with them to see if we can get a review sample. Reply
  • romrunning - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    The colors on these graphs are very hard to distinguish, especially when you hit over-laying "pastel" type of colors. Is it too difficult to get colors that are easier to distinguish? Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    What kind of colors would work the best in your opinion? We are always open to suggestions in order to make our content more user-friendly :) Reply
  • bobbozzo - Thursday, September 26, 2013 - link

    RGB + CMYK might work out.
    Yellow on white is usually hard to see though.
    Also, you'd need one more color as there are 8 drives tested.

    I wonder what Tufte would say...
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, September 26, 2013 - link

    "Yellow on white is usually hard to see though."

    The color used in this review is orange, does it look yellow-ish in your browser?

    "Also, you'd need one more color as there are 8 drives tested."

    Are you suggesting that we should use a different color for each drive? I think that just adds confusion because the drive in review would no longer be differentiated from the others. Or did you mean something else?
    Reply
  • erple2 - Thursday, September 26, 2013 - link

    Rgb plus CMYK is 7 colors. I think that the poster implied that if you used those colors, you'd still need to come up with an eighth color, as you show the performance vs transfer graphs for 8 drives. The other graphs IMO are fine. Reply
  • Urizane - Friday, September 27, 2013 - link

    Off of the top of my head? Try:
    #E02040
    #E08820
    #E0D040
    #70D040
    #60C0B0
    #6090E0
    #9070FF
    #D060C0

    There are 8 colors. They should be just high contrast enough with a white background. You can even throw in a grey and a black line if you need it.
    Reply
  • Phasenoise - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    I would appreciate a second line in the benchmark graphs which explain the controller used by that particular drive at a glance. Reply
  • Hrel - Wednesday, September 25, 2013 - link

    The final paragraph of this article sums up my exact thoughts on this whole topic. Not sure what these businesses are thinking; in terms of what market is there. Perhaps they're just throwing resources at these things, creating and marketing them and hoping they net a profit. On the other hand they probably CAN do that given the margins on NAND memory.

    Wish they'd aggressively price cut to create an actual budget segment for SSD's. $150 gets me a Plextor or Sandisk on amazon with 256GB of storage space and upper level performance. Means you have to get your 256gb drive down to $100 to sell it to me. Good luck.
    Reply
  • katherine0james - Wednesday, October 02, 2013 - link

    my parents in-law recently got an awesome red Lincoln MKS Sedan just by part time work online. site here..... http://CuttR.it/tvtmbce Reply
  • alison_lenihan - Thursday, October 03, 2013 - link

    what Eric said I am shocked that some people can profit $4550 in one month on the computer. see post>>....... CuttR.it/tvtmbce Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now