UPDATE 29/11/2011 ** SSD Testing Line Up - Vertex 3, Force 3, M4 and HyperX 120/128GB Tested! + ADAT

The M4 does seem to perform much better than the figures suggest, but its write speeds are slow - and the 64GB is twice as slow. +1 for a similar review of 60/64GB models.

Would this 'weakness' make the M4 less suitable for use as a cache drive (with Z68/RST)?
 
Just ordered my first SSD the Crucial RealSSD M4 128GB :) wasn't so much that the performance drew me to it, the shall we say, 'BSOD issues' with sandforce scared me away :D anyone have any thoughts on which controller would be the best to use on my p8p67 pro? intel 6Gbps or marvell 6Gbps?
 
Last edited:
if the laptop takes 2 and a half inch drives then yes, just slot it in and your good to go.

Take a look here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfLhjBEiR8E

Easy.

EDIT: LOL at this.

The HDD in this video is a SSD. Thats the new technology. This SSD have no spinning, it's like a big fast USB-Stick. So you don't here it (cause it haves on spinning), it's super shortweight and when the SSD crush on the floor, nothing hapend, the SDD don't get damaged as easy as a normal HDD!
 
Very illuminating!! Thanks for this. I was otherwise convinced of the superiority of Sandforce, as suggested by some review sites.

As a result I was considering the Corsair Force GT - how does this fit in? Presumably similar to the Vertex 3, but could we have some data on that?
 
Trofeo said:
Just ordered my first SSD the Crucial RealSSD M4 128GB :) wasn't so much that the performance drew me to it, the shall we say, 'BSOD issues' with sandforce scared me away :D anyone have any thoughts on which controller would be the best to use on my p8p67 pro? intel 6Gbps or marvell 6Gbps?
Click to expand...

Intel, for sure. Don't use Marvell motherboard controllers, ever, same for JMicron, they're awful.
 
Guys i bought the 256GB m4 when it was £283 and i have yet to flash and stuff but theres been one thing niggling me and rarely mentioned here which is SSD alignment.

The 256GB m4 is an 8k drive i am told and the 128GB is 4k a like the vertex series.Is this due to higher density NAND?

Now apparantly u need to align to 8k to get the best performance? I cant make head from tales on this subject as i dont know much about how windows goes about alignment.

So guys do you align your SSD and how would one go about 8k alignment?
 
Hi there

First of all I want to say well done to Andrew Moore and Bicepo for doing this, as this is what seperates us (OcUK) from competitors by running such test, afterall we are also computer enthusiest too. So well done to those guys for doing this. :)

Certainly goes to show in real world test the Crucial M4 is a hard drive to beat, but I've always said so, the new firmware just makes sure of it and for the price, well great value for money.

Those asking about Intel, we will happily run the same benchmarks if you so wish and we shall even list them again, but they are simply poor value for money, Intel really need to re-adjust their pricing to be competitive with Crucial, as like Andrew Moore says it is essentially the same drive as both are Marvel based.
 
Gibbo said:
Hi there

First of all I want to say well done to Andrew Moore and Bicepo for doing this, as this is what seperates us (OcUK) from competitors by running such test, afterall we are also computer enthusiest too. So well done to those guys for doing this. :)

Certainly goes to show in real world test the Crucial M4 is a hard drive to beat, but I've always said so, the new firmware just makes sure of it and for the price, well great value for money.

Those asking about Intel, we will happily run the same benchmarks if you so wish and we shall even list them again, but they are simply poor value for money, Intel really need to re-adjust their pricing to be competitive with Crucial, as like Andrew Moore says it is essentially the same drive as both are Marvel based.
Click to expand...

Having ordered potentially your last Elmcrest on Sunday (considering it's no longer on your webpage :) ), I must say that, whilst the Intel was hugely over-priced - I didn't mind too much, as this was a gift to help guarantee stability of my rig, I have one thing for sure. Reliability.

The test is great to show speeds etc... but it would be interesting to see manufacturer's fail rates.

I remember reading an article on AnandTech about failure rates:
Intel - 0.59%
Corsair - 2.17%
Crucial - 2.25%
Kingston - 2.39%
OCZ - 2.93%

Personally, having now had two Corsair drives fail on me, I've decided along with parents, that for Uni, when you want a reliable rig, the best bet is Intel. As they're stringent QC checks seem much more efficient than other companies...

I know the AnandTech data was based on a report which looked at French e-tailers return rates... Would be interesting to see OCUK's statistics on which manufacturers return drive percentages?

As Andrew has said, there's not too much difference between the M4 and Elmcrests, however the M4 is faster (with the latest firmware), but personally I'd take the reliability :)

Saying that I don't think the M4's have had particularly bad fail rates... but meh...

kd
 
King Damager said:
Having ordered potentially your last Elmcrest on Sunday (considering it's no longer on your webpage :) ), I must say that, whilst the Intel was hugely over-priced - I didn't mind too much, as this was a gift to help guarantee stability of my rig, I have one thing for sure. Reliability.

The test is great to show speeds etc... but it would be interesting to see manufacturer's fail rates.

I remember reading an article on AnandTech about failure rates:
Intel - 0.59%
Corsair - 2.17%
Crucial - 2.25%
Kingston - 2.39%
OCZ - 2.93%

Personally, having now had two Corsair drives fail on me, I've decided along with parents, that for Uni, when you want a reliable rig, the best bet is Intel. As they're stringent QC checks seem much more efficient than other companies...

I know the AnandTech data was based on a report which looked at French e-tailers return rates... Would be interesting to see OCUK's statistics on which manufacturers return drive percentages?

As Andrew has said, there's not too much difference between the M4 and Elmcrests, however the M4 is faster (with the latest firmware), but personally I'd take the reliability :)

Saying that I don't think the M4's have had particularly bad fail rates... but meh...

kd
Click to expand...


As a whole that could very well be right but intel and crucial have a neck and neck return rate with both only seeing 1 drive returned as actually "faulty". Given that the intels have sld "hundreds" and the Crucials more like "thousands" ;) I would say the M4 is the more reliable. Certainly more so than the M225 and C300 of previous gens.

Since moving to the M4s myself I must say I have never been happier with a purchase ever!!
 
Looks like I should get an M4 then! :)

My OCZ 30GB Agility stopped working after 2 and a bit years. Was great as a boot drive while it lasted and really missing the snappiness of Windows without it...
 
I can recommend the M4. I went with an Agility 3 and the firmware problems with it caused frequent BSODs (sometimes several times a day). Returned it and got an M4 instead and it's great, drive is fast and I haven't had a problem since.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom