Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question
Solved

I need a good low cost SSD

Tags:
  • SSD
  • Storage
  • Games
  • Hard Drives
Last response: in Storage
April 26, 2014 9:50:37 PM

I am thinking of upgrading my HDD to an SSD for my OS and some games.I would need at least a 128gb for my win 7 64 bit OS and some games. I'd like to put my music on there but that alone is 56 gb. I am looking for the lowest price but something that will last and works good. I am not sure which drives have asynchronous NAND or not and why I should go for that. I am building another PC and that will have a 256 gb Samsung pro series SSD in it. My current computer will be a standby/visitor computer for others who might come over and maybe play some games and what not on it. I got all excited when I found a 120 gb SSD for about 59.99 from Kingston and another from (I think) Crucial. But the Kingston reviews said something about asynchronous NAND. I am not sure if that would be important or not in this upgrade.
Suggestions please!

Bruce

More about : good low cost ssd

April 27, 2014 6:11:22 AM

Well, I can't really answer your questions perfectly, but if you're looking for a good performance and kind of cheap SSD's, I'm suggesting you to check on Samsung 840 EVO, the performance is not really far from the 840 Pro and it has 250GB version which cost around US$130 if you have a good bargain, I'm using this one and it's really good. For the information it has 1TB version as well for around US$430 also for a good bargain.
m
1
l
April 27, 2014 10:16:10 AM

Unfortunately my budget is around $60 and the 120 GB EVO costs about $81 minimum. Yeah that's only $20 but it does make a difference. I will see if I can stretch it though. I was hoping to get some sort of review on the more inexpensive models I mentioned.

What are the drawbacks of using the less expensive Kingston and Crucial SSD's?
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

April 27, 2014 5:43:44 PM

There's no significant drawbacks if you want to use both of that less expensive SSD's, the only difference with the EVO is you get a better random read/write speed which is 100% unnoticeable in every day use unless you did some benchmark test, even the controller quality is almost the same, just that Samsung has made all of their SSD's components by themselves (If I'm not mistaken) so it makes their SSD's is much more reliable (I's prefer saved some for theirs).

My brother has been using Crucial M500 for his build and it's running pretty good, so I think it'll not be showing any major difference, go for which one you can afford.
Share
April 27, 2014 6:55:11 PM

Cool thanks!
m
0
l
a b G Storage
April 27, 2014 8:55:49 PM

I really like SanDisk's SSD's as well. I've owned both SanDisk and Samsung and I notice that the Samsung is a bit faster but regardless you will enjoy much improved performance with most any ssd.
m
0
l
April 27, 2014 9:48:57 PM

Also note that I doubt it really matters which SSD I get as far as speed goes. The system it is being installed in only has SATA 1.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
April 27, 2014 10:15:38 PM

Good point. For longevity reasons just make sure that older cpu treats the ssd as an ssd; ie no defrag like it would an hdd. If you have win7 or 8 and run wei you will be fine. However, it's good to know what settings help your ssd so I recommend following an optimization guide like this:


http://www.overclock.net/t/1156654/seans-windows-7-inst...

It's a bit detailed in terms of actual system setup but you can always learn something new when you review the basics and see what another person thinks of. You may want to skip to the middle section for actual tips and such for actual ssd optimization but it is a very well put together guide overall.
m
0
l