I've finally decided to get an ssd & had my heart set on the 120gb kingston hyperX ssd & just as i was about to purchase it i thought i'll have a look at the benchmarks betweeen that & the samsung 120gb EVO. In the benchmarks the samsung seemed alot better yet i thought the kingston wouldd be better cause...
Samsung 120gb EVO Capacity: 120GB • Sequential Read: 540MB/s • Sequential Write: 410MB/s • Random Read (QD32, 4KB): 94,000 IOPS • Random Write (QD32, 4KB): 35,000 IOPS • Random Read (QD1, 4KB): 10,000 IOPS • Random Write (QD1, 4KB): 33,000 IOPS
Kingston hyperX 120gb Capacity: 120GB - Controller: SandForce SF-2281 - Maximum Read: 555MB/sec - Maximum Write: 510MB/sec - Max I/O Per Second (IOPS): 95000 IOPS (4KB File, READ) - NAND Flash: Multi-Level Cell (MLC) - Interface: SATA-III / 6Gbps (Backwards compatible with SATA-II / 3Gbps) - TRIM Support (Requires Windows 7)
So my quetion is which is better/fastest as the kingston has better read/write speeds? Yet benchmarks say samsung is the better?
Last replyBest Answer
More aboutunsure ssd buy
Whatever is cheapest honestly you wont see a difference real world outside of benchmarks.
Ditto to what Snipergod87 said, I know samsung make really good quality SSDs so I say go with them. If you have a little extra money I would advise shooting for a 256GB drive, you can grab the Crucial MX100 for a little over $100.
You would see zero difference in actual performance. I have the Hyperx 3k, 22 months old. Performs flawlessly. If I were buying today, I'd almost certainly get the 840 EVO.