POST A COMMENT

29 Comments

Back to Article

  • Samus - Tuesday, April 01, 2014 - link

    I'm just going to throw out there my experience with ADATA SSD's:

    S510: bricked in a year, but was near capacity which could have caused it to lock. however, no other SSD (sandforce or otherwise) has done that to me and this was used in an office PC with very little write activity.

    SP900: Windows 7 BSOD after 5 months. had to secure erase and reinstall, did same thing 2 weeks later.

    ADATA RMA takes forever (3 weeks each time.) The RMA form is erroneous and just getting the RMA number is a lot of back and forth. Proof of purchase, full system specs, lots of questions...the works. They try very hard to make it inconvenient, opposed to Crucial or Intel where the RMA process is "just send the drive to this address." They do mail back a new drive as a replacement, but don't offer to simply unlock a "frozen" drive, and obviously don't offer any sort of data recovery.

    Considering I've never had a Crucial completely fail, or any issues whatsoever with an Intel drive, it's hard to ignore their reliability at the expense of 5-10% performance penalty.
    Reply
  • Gigaplex - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    Why would a parts warranty cover data recovery? That's what backups are for. Reply
  • Flunk - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    I have a 256GB SX300 which is a Sandforce-based mSATA drive. I've had no problems and performance matches the review samples that were sent out.

    So my experience has been fine.
    Reply
  • mikato - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    No storage device manufacturers include data recovery service along with their devices. Data recovery usually costs more than the devices do. Some can refer you to a company that does it, and I know one has their own sub-company that does it, but it's completely separate from the device purchase. I'm curious what you mean by "simply unlock a "frozen" drive".

    By the way, SSD data recovery is usually quite a bit more difficult and more expensive than hard disk data recovery. And it's sometimes not even possible with more SSDs using encryption all the time, whether or not user specifies, and with the keys stored and decoding being done possibly in the part of the SSD that has failed (adios data).

    If you're storing your data on an SSD (not just the OS, programs), you should be aware of the reduced avenues of disaster recovery and be even more careful with backups.
    Reply
  • Samus - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    ssd data recovery is quite simple actually, you just can't use traditional means to do it. Most if not all sad data recovery is accomplished by simply unlocking the drive or repairing the indirection table. Drives lock when they run out of spare area, good writable blocks, or can't trim/operate normally often occurring when they are low on capacity. Indirection table repair is more complex but on a file-by-file basic (lets say you just needed a few documents) it isn't very time consuming if the tech known what they are looking for.

    I've toured ontrack's Chicago lab and seen this all in action, they have a higher success rate with ssd's than HDD's (both over 99%)

    I don't expect OEM's or manufactures to offer data recovery, but when data recover is a matter of plugging a drive in and unlocking it because their firmware is bricking drives, they SHOULD do it for their customers.

    All those "refurbished" SSD's? What do you think those are? They're drives that have simply been unlocked and secure erased. It takes manufactures 30 seconds to do.

    Go research sandforce "frozen" or "locked" and you'll see these controllers are notorious for locking drives (to the point they don't even detect in the BIOS) for various reasons.
    Reply
  • hojnikb - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    I've got s510 and so far so good (except bsods, i'm getting those on all my sandforce drives). As far as RMA is concernd, i've never had any issues. Last time i had to replace my usb drive, because it died on me (probobly bricked controller), they replaced it within days. Reply
  • Sabresiberian - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Despite your negative experiences, I wouldn't use them to determine that ADATA SSDs should be avoided. That being said, if I can get a 5-year warranty instead of a 3-year for very little more money I'll do that (yeah I know they are largely there to lower the worry factor for those that think SSDs might be less reliable, but still, if you need it, it's good to have). I just bought 2 480GB Sandisk Extreme IIs for $300 each - if you keep your eye out such discounts aren't hard to come by. Reply
  • Sabresiberian - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Looking at Newegg reviews, I see that ADATA drives get 3 or 4 stars. Sandisk gets 4 or 5 stars, no 3 stars. Not an absolute sign of quality of course, but over hundreds or thousands of comments from people that have bought these things, it is a factor to consider. Reply
  • iwod - Tuesday, April 01, 2014 - link

    Do Marvell now offer much better default firmware? It was used to be the case Marvell controller were cheaper, not because of its inferior hardware but it provides very simply firmware that wasn't very highly performing. But it seems now the "default" performance behavior are pretty much all the same.

    Which makes me interested in the next round of SSD Controller. Do anyone have update on those from Sandforce, Marvell, etc?
    Reply
  • JDG1980 - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    My understanding was that Marvell didn't provide firmware at all - it's up to the vendor.

    Personally, I'd like to see a Marvell-based SSD with an open source firmware, even if the performance isn't quite as good as the best proprietary solutions.
    Reply
  • Samus - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    Marvell controllers are just simpler than Sandforce (which is a good thing)

    Marvell has eDrive support in their newer controllers, simpler firmware, lower power usage, and no compression technology (making the implementation simple and performance consistent)

    I prefer Marvell and Intel controllers over everyone else's but some newer controllers have looked promising (like OCZ's Barefoot)
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, April 03, 2014 - link

    Marvell only provides the silicon - the firmware development is up to the manufacturer. Reply
  • hojnikb - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    It's interesting to see that lower capacity versions perform better than m500, despite using the same die size flash. Is this because of the updated controller or more aggressive flash programming ? Reply
  • Samus - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    They have the m550 controller but use the m500's NAND technology so the lower capacity drives are in between the m500 and m550 in performance. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, April 03, 2014 - link

    Likely just better optimization at the firmware level. Reply
  • hojnikb - Thursday, April 03, 2014 - link

    So in theory, they could update the m500 and boost it's, if they wanted ? Reply
  • hojnikb - Thursday, April 03, 2014 - link

    *write speed, silly me :)

    (damn no edit option)
    Reply
  • nick2crete - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    Well ,i prefer to deal with Crucial than Adata even overseas where i am .. Reply
  • Hubb1e - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    I just wanted to let the writer and editorial staff know that a good number of people skip right to the end of the article for the normal recap of the article's main points. This is especially true for SSD articles which IMO are getting to be a commodity and aren't all that interesting anymore. I felt that the final words didn't do a good job of recapping where this drive stands in the overall SSD segment, didn't give much in the way of a pro/cons for this drive, and refereed too much to a comparison with a drive that I don't know much about. This seems like a new writer so I wanted to let the staff know about my opinion on this so he can improve his next article for Anandtech. Reply
  • mcnaughty - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    Totally agreed. Skip the waffle, we regular readers know all this already. Give us the numbers, and the interesting differences. Reply
  • Guspaz - Thursday, April 03, 2014 - link

    I agree. I read the whole article more often than not, but on some articles, where I'm pressed for time or don't have the same degree of interest in the subject of the review, I just read the introduction and the final words. As such, getting the gist of the whole article is very important.

    Heck, even when I do read the whole article, it's still important. Sometimes a good summary at the end points out things that I missed, or gives me a better idea how to interpret the results.
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, April 03, 2014 - link

    I've been with AnandTech for three years now, so I'm not exactly new :)

    Since the SP920 is a rebranded M550, I think it's a must to look at the M550 review as well, which is why I referred to it so much. Now that I look it at, a mention of the SP920's position in the market wouldn't have hurt but as I mentioned in the introduction, our M550 review has broad coverage of that along with plenty of other stuff.
    Reply
  • hrrmph - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    Adata claims to have a software toolbox to ease the inconvenience of occasionally needing to do a Secure Erase and other functions. Crucial / Micron doesn't seem to offer that.

    Samsung offers RAM caching software. Neither Adata nor Crucial / Micron seems to offer that.
    Reply
  • hrrmph - Wednesday, April 02, 2014 - link

    I would really appreciate it if the hole in the chart could be filled (the Samsung EVO's ratings with 25% spare area).

    I take it that getting the sample drives from Samsung has been difficult?
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, April 03, 2014 - link

    We do have EVO samples (well, Anand has, I don't) but you can see the EVO's OP behavior in the EVO mSATA review

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/7594/samsung-ssd-840...
    Reply
  • nofly - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Will those PCIe drives mentioned in the article be an upgrade option for older motherboards (like a PCIe card) or will new hardware be required ? Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    Most PCIe SSDs in the near future will likely be just regular PCIe cards. Later we may see transition to 2.5" when/if SATA Express becomes a standard. Reply
  • Alientech - Saturday, April 05, 2014 - link

    The new ST3000DM001-1E6166 drives with the FC4x firmware seems to be using Shingled Magnetic Recording. Which means we need SSD caching all the more. Sure wish every one would pack one with the drive. With HDD write speeds dropping through the floor now, its a must. Even 250MB write speeds of a SSD is a huge improvement. Reply
  • sammarth - Monday, April 28, 2014 - link

    <a href="http://seoexpertzs.wordpress.com">Sammarth... nice thanks for share us Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now