SSD now or wait

Cooners · 4 Feb 2011 at 20:29

Hi

I have decided it's time to jump on the band wagon and get an SSD, don't really want to spend much more than £100 so was looking at either the C300 or the OCZ Vertex 2E 60GB, however I've seen people saying wait for the new drives, now considering the fact my MB only has SATAII and I don't have any space for a SATAIII controller card is it worth waiting for the new ones.
Also are the new drives likly to be more expensive as I hear they might be cheaper from one source and more expensive from another?

Many Thanks.

Tute · 4 Feb 2011 at 20:35

It's so hard to say as a lot will be on a new, cheaper process, bringing lower prices in that respect.

But then, you know how early adopters get treated. You might well find the manufacturing savings wiped out.

I'd probably get a C300 in your situation.

Thekwango · 4 Feb 2011 at 20:51

i'm in a similar position to the OP, been himming and haaing for over a month now about getting an SSD. but think it might as well be worth waiting too see what the C400 brings to the table price wise, who knows it might even bring the price of the C300's down a bit

Tonester007 · 4 Feb 2011 at 20:55

£100 would buy a small SSD, but have you thought about a Hybrid drive?
E.g. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=HD-233-SE

You'd get near-SSD performance and a lot more space (500Gb instead of 60Gb).

zebedeee · 4 Feb 2011 at 20:59

Cooners said:
Hi

I have decided it's time to jump on the band wagon and get an SSD, don't really want to spend much more than £100 so was looking at either the C300 or the OCZ Vertex 2E 60GB, however I've seen people saying wait for the new drives, now considering the fact my MB only has SATAII and I don't have any space for a SATAIII controller card is it worth waiting for the new ones.
Also are the new drives likly to be more expensive as I hear they might be cheaper from one source and more expensive from another?

Many Thanks.

maybe you have been told to wait for the new drives to be released so the sata II are made cheaper, not so you can get 1

Cooners · 4 Feb 2011 at 21:13

zebedeee said:
maybe you have been told to wait for the new drives to be released so the sata II are made cheaper, not so you can get 1

Thats a good point, never thought of that.

Thekwango · 4 Feb 2011 at 21:19

anymore word on release dates for the C400 series? or is it still just Q1 2011?

Tute · 4 Feb 2011 at 23:24

Thekwango said:
anymore word on release dates for the C400 series? or is it still just Q1 2011?

Intel Emcrest drives at the end of the month if you value quality over speed.

Thekwango · 4 Feb 2011 at 23:43

Tute said:
Intel Emcrest drives at the end of the month if you value quality over speed.

hell no, its all about the speed baby!! only joking, hadn't even been aware that intel were releasing their new ssd's so soon. i'll have to have a look.

cheers for the heads up

strumpusplunket · 5 Feb 2011 at 00:03

Tute said:
Intel Emcrest drives at the end of the month if you value quality over speed.

A bit curious here - how do you rate quality of an SSD apart from speed? Are you talking about longevity of the NAND memory (this has always been a major issue in my decision about whether or not to upgrade to an SSD).

Predicament · 5 Feb 2011 at 00:03

DP (not double penetration) excuse me.

Predicament · 5 Feb 2011 at 00:04

Do you think Emcrest will be availabe in 60 Gb?

zebedeee · 5 Feb 2011 at 00:07

quality is pretty much rated upon the stability of the drive, whether or not it fails at reading or writing (files been found corrupted a lot or not) and life span before it dies, the write speed/read speeds are then taken into account

Tute · 5 Feb 2011 at 00:43

strumpusplunket said:
A bit curious here - how do you rate quality of an SSD apart from speed? Are you talking about longevity of the NAND memory (this has always been a major issue in my decision about whether or not to upgrade to an SSD).

Well generally the Intels are slower than the Sandforce based drives but you have a much less chance of problems developing with them.

I also believe the first Samsung SSDs were quite good in terms of reliability, as Apple were using them in their Macbooks. And to be frank, if Samsung had gotten that wrong, Apple would have hung them out to dry royally.

Predicament said:
Do you think Emcrest will be availabe in 60 Gb?

I believe 120GB and 250GB, although I hope that's wrong and there will be bigger capacities than that.

Spyhop · 5 Feb 2011 at 02:16

Blargh - please just release a 300GB at a reasonable price, Intel. Doesn't have to be super fast. Speed isn't the issue with current drives.

Zarf · 5 Feb 2011 at 06:36

I'd wait for the 2*nm drives to arrive, not a significant performance difference to the current generations on SATAII systems, but they should be better £/GB ... or at least allow you to pick up a current generation at bargain bin prices.

Outside of laptops size isn't a big deal. Everything that really benefits from an SSD will comfortably fit on a 64GB drive, mass media is perfectly fine on an inexpensive mechanical drive. Games aren't a great justification for more space - don't get me wrong, it's nice to cut your loading times in half, but they hog a lot of space and most of the time you spend in game they provide no advantage.