are kingston now 240gb ssd's good?

Yes its good

Imo

It will be good for home usage for sure, but in this price range Crucial BX 100 is a bit better option in my opinion.
But you say its 60$, seems cheaper than on partpicker how come? If its brand new, no background story, then take it.

Not really. They are one ofthe slowest SSDs where they use Async nand.

Hey,
My suggestion is just investigate QUALITY and ensure no issues there (customer feedback etc).

I've used a LOT of systems with varying SSD speeds and frankly I've found that the average person has a difficult time telling the difference in speed between any SSD made in the last several years.

Benchmarks investigate worst-case scenarios but most people never use a system that way. A lot of the code gets buffered into System memory (DDR3/4) and runs from there. An SSD smooths out the slow points like loading Windows and programs not in main memory yet.

I had to send a fast SSD back under Warranty and was surprised that my much slower SSD I used temporarily didn't feel noticeably different (Samsung 840 vs OCZ Vertex 2). Again, for normal usage.

*So basically I'd go with an inexpensive drive as long as the quality seems reliable and not worry about comparing performance. IMO.

The BX is a decent budget SSD, But the 850 Evo is usually only a couple bucks more and has a faster write speed.

The Kingston ssd you are interested in can best be described as a low budget, entry level solid state drive that is popular with users on a very limited budget. It is not a high end ssd but it actually works quite well as long as you think of it as an entry level ssd.

boosted1g is correct. Kingston never actually specified which controller, flash memory, and firmware were used in the drives. Instead Kingston only listed performance specifications. In order to keep the price low Kingston purchased different controllers and flash memory that met the published performance specifications. Numerous technical reviews are published when an ssd is released for sale. The reviews almost always identify the controller and the flash memory. Most reviews include close-up photos of the controller and flash memory. Eventually Kingston changed the flash memory and the firmware. Consumers who based their purchase on the original technical reviews discovered the difference. Then things got worse. One version of the drive also had bad firmware that needed to be fixed. Eventually the problem was solved.

To be fair I need to point out that Kingston is not the only company that changes components. PNY has been known to do it too with their entry level models. There is a third company but I can't recall the name at the moment. It does not just happen with ssd's. It also happens with motherboard ram. Ever wonder what brand and model chips are under those heatspreaders? You won't seen them in published specifications. All you will see are performance specifications. One month the chips may be from SK Hynix and six months later the chips might be from Samsung or some other company. I have yet to see a technical review where the heatspreaders are removed to reveal the memory chips. The first time I read about it was years ago when a consumer removed a heatspreader from an OCZ memory module in order to fit it under a cpu heatsink. The same thing happens with the panels used in monitors. Every single company has an escape clause that clearly states specifications are subject to change at any time for any reason.

I aslo have to be fair about problems and glitches. Over the years just about every single company has experienced ssd issues and glitches that needed to be fixed. The problem is almost always with the firmware rather than the flash memory. This was especially true a few years ago when a lot of companies were using SandForce controllers and firmware. OCZ took the biggest hits. Even Samsung and Intel are not immune to unexpected problems. Luckily it doesn't happen as often as it used.

I normally recommend Samsung solid state drives. They perform very well and have a proven track record. Intel and SansDisk are also worth considering.

I maintain an ssd database listed in a sticky at the very top of this forum section. Here is the link:

http://www.johnnylucky.org/data-storage/ssd-database.html

Scroll down to the type of ssd you are interested and then look for brands and models that might be of interest to you. Follow the links to the technical reviews. The reviews are in English and many other languages.

You'll find that Kingston model in the SATA 3 6Gb/s section of the ssd database. There are some newer reviews published after the firmware issue. Check the date of publication to make sure you are looking at the newest reviews.

FYI, my dad's got an older SSD and I have a Samsung 840 Pro. Both are PC's have similar components otherwise (i7-3770K vs i5-4570K).

I've tested both systems specifically to see if I could notice a real world difference and I just can't. I've done a lot of other testing as well including an old SSD in my same system.

*If you're overwhelmed then just pay a little extra and get a Samsung 850 EVO and be done with it. See pcpartpicker

Hopefully Toshiba has fixed the quality issues as OCZ drives were kinda unreliable.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2856052/grueling-endurance-test-blows-away-ssd-durability-fears.html

Yes, boot and loading times will be substantially faster than a hdd. I was running a 4 drive raid 0 when I finally switched to an SSD. I was unfortunate enough to buy a vertex 2 while it was fast it had major reliability issues couldn't get one to last longer than 6 months. Switched to a Samsung a couple years ago after the 3rd vertex failed and that drive is still working.