Basically you get what you pay for on cheap SSDs. The only ones worth bothering with are the £400 ones. It's annoying, but things will improve I'm sure.
The 32GB is the faster of the two drives and reviewed here:-
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/1630/9/crucial_32gb_2_5_solid_state_disk_drive/index.html
Shocking performance from an SSD and its scary knowing the 64GB is even slower. Not to be touched with a barge pole and shocked at ocuk for stocking such a poor slow performing product, even more shocking ocuk say its quicker than traditional hdd's yet reviews show it to be slower.
Shop around as the samsung 64GB SSD can be had for £100 delivered and its 2-3x quicker than the crucial drive.
Basically you get what you pay for on cheap SSDs. The only ones worth bothering with are the £400 ones. It's annoying, but things will improve I'm sure.
That's what I wanted to know, thanks.
It's surprising though. A disk drive manufacturer is better at making SSDs than a RAM manufacturer is? Aren't SSDs basically the same stuff that RAM is made of?
How do the sammies compare to OCZ's offerings?
It's surprising though. A disk drive manufacturer is better at making SSDs than a RAM manufacturer is? Aren't SSDs basically the same stuff that RAM is made of?

Samsung are one of, if not the, biggest memory manufacturers in the world![]()
Well I've never heard of Samsung RAM.

Well I've never heard of Samsung RAM.
you haven't been around the pc scene for long, samsung used to make killer ddr ic's.
tccd anyone![]()

I raise you Winbond![]()

mmm timings v bandwidth ....how many volts for your BH-5 @ 300mhz![]()
