1 |
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Philip Webb <purslow@××××××××.net> wrote: |
2 |
> 120803 Michael Mol wrote: |
3 |
>> http://www.samsung.com/us/computer/solid-state-drives |
4 |
> |
5 |
> They have just 1 desktop at 128 GB & it costs USD 230 ... ! |
6 |
> I'm grateful to VAH for getting me to check out the OCZs, |
7 |
> but I suspect he's shooting from the hip re Samsung. |
8 |
|
9 |
That's just MSRP, nobody pays that. You can get Samsung 128GB USD$89 |
10 |
on sale typically. Current price on Newegg is USD$99 free shipping (in |
11 |
the US, anyway). If you want one with mounting rails included it might |
12 |
cost a little more. |
13 |
|
14 |
Typically with SSD the biggest problems have been with firmware. The |
15 |
SSDs with the best reputation for reliability are typically Intel and |
16 |
Samsung. Intel costs a lot more than any of the others. |
17 |
|
18 |
Pretty much all of the rest (current-generation) use the same |
19 |
Sandforce controller and so then your big questions to differentiate |
20 |
between them are how frequently they update firmware, if they allow |
21 |
firmware updates to occur in linux (or from a boot disk/ISO), what |
22 |
features are supported that you care about (encryption, compression), |
23 |
over-provisioning, what quality of memory do they use. There were |
24 |
widespread reports of problems when the latest sandforce were first |
25 |
introduced, drives disconnecting randomly, that sort of thing, but I |
26 |
believe those problems have been corrected by firmware updates and you |
27 |
shouldn't have any problems today with any of them, as long as they've |
28 |
released updates. |
29 |
|
30 |
OCZ is a premiere partner of Sandforce, so they usually get the new |
31 |
chips and latest firmware fixes sooner than the other Sandforce-using |
32 |
brands. There are other brands who have a good reputation online for |
33 |
reliability, such as Mushkin, Sandisk, OWC... |
34 |
|
35 |
I personally have a Samsung 128GB for root and Sandisk 240GB for home. |