perceived performance difference between SSD

yannis76 · 28 Mar 2013 at 18:47

Hi,

I was just wandering whether there is any real speed performance between the various SSD.
For example i own an agility3 240gb which according to the reviews is not fast especially compared to Samsung 840 or Intel 520. However would anyonediall notice the difference in everyday use (web, games, office, media and maybe some photo edit)?

McBain · 28 Mar 2013 at 23:48

I moved from an older Kingston SSDNow V100+ to a Samsung 830 purely due to capacity and I would say the boot time was noticeably quicker, maybe 2-3 seconds. I appreciate 2-3 seconds isn't a lot, but when you're into SSD boot times already, it's a fair difference.

Actual real world usage however, I wouldn't say I notice a difference.

trickynickyuk · 29 Mar 2013 at 00:02

Dont think you would notice much difference i have a corsair c300 and an M4 and cant really tell anything between them part from in WEI and thats it

yannis76 · 29 Mar 2013 at 08:16

So, i suppose its only about reliability and price in the end

zakblood · 29 Mar 2013 at 08:22

yep, warranty, price is all that matters, as i use adata ones, and there plenty fast enough for most user, i got 2 256gb versions for the price of one fast samsung, so happy with my choice, unless your benchmarking none would tell the difference between any tbh

sunama · 29 Mar 2013 at 08:45

Yep. Its all about the access times. And all SSDs have almost exactly the same access times.

...unless you routinely transfer/read/write large files, in which case the sustained transfer rate becomes important.

Bear in mind, most users read/write from/to many small files. Few users read/write from/to huge files.

I also believe that this is why many manufacturers are now concentrating on releasing "value" models, which have more capacity, for a lower price - because they realise that eventually users will realise that super fast transfer rates count for little, in the real World.