I've recently purchased a laptop (Thinkpad X220) that will only accept 7mm 2.5" SSD/HDD & mSATA drive. Coming from a SSD, I don't think the drive from the factory will satisfy me. (It's 250GB 5400rpm HDD) I have been researching a lot yesterday and I was finally able to scope my choices down to these three:
1. Get rid of the HDD and get the C300 256gb and be happy for few years. (There is a way to mod these crucial drives to make it 7mm)
- This will be approximately $380 taxes in.
2. Acquire a used Intel 310 mSATA 80GB drive (~$100) and possibly the 320GB 7200rpm HDD (or keep using the 250GB?) until the prices fall down.
- This will be approximately $160 taxes in.
3. Acquire a brand new Intel G2 X25-M 160GB SSD and wait for a perfect time to upgrade to a bigger drive.
- This will be approximately $225 taxes in.
What would you guys do and why?
Thanks for your help in advance!
- EDIT: Since this is my primary SSD, I would like this drive to be RELIABLE. Speed & other luxury features come after that on my priority list.
Over a year ago I chose a 160GB Intel X25-M G2 drive for my desktop system because at the time it felt like the most robust product. I was more interested in reliability than getting the very best-performing drive, based on the fact that any SSD is way, way faster than any HDD - so the small differences between competing top-tier SSDs weren't an issue.
The drive worked very well for me and I've never had any issues or complaints with it. And a recent report seems to have vindicated my decision by showing that the Intel SSDs have been heads and shoulders more reliable than those from the other vendors.
Based on my experience, if I was in exactly the same situation as you were right now I'd be buying another Intel drive.
For reliability, as sminlal indicated INTEL by far. If memory serve me right about 4 X higher than next closest SSD.
For Performance, (You did indicate Drive connect to a SATA III controller) Vertex-3 or C400 - SKIP the C300. for starter - Very poor GC not to important as long as trim is enabled and PASSED to SSD.
What is you SATA III controller, as Intel's is not out yet so should be a 3rd party such as Marvel??
I would get the Intel 160GB for $225. And BTW that sounds like a really good deal. The rest of us can't get that kind of deal on anything over 120GB.
I have studied the reliability ratings for various drives and the Intel models and the Crucial 300 are the most reliable. Lots of mainstream drives have horrible reliability ratings. Despite the general feeling that an SSD should be more reliable than a mechanical hard drive, they get much poorer ratings from users.
Not that I really care one way or the other, but how did they come up with those fugures though?
Do they know the total drives sold from each mfgr?
I know OCZ has sold more than 1 million so far and over 400 thousand are Sandforce based. With all the Sandforce compatibility issues alone.. it would skew the result and make it appear to be due to the vendors who package the components. Is a perspective and numbers game.
IOW, if Intel would have used the SF controller?.. they may have had increased numbers in that respect as well. Many, including myself were actually hoping that Intel would adopt that bastard son to help straighten out all the issues quicker. lol
Do they know the total drives sold from each mfgr?
For the link I posted, the figures are "based on metrics from a French retailer’s internal sales and repairs database". It's the only independent data I've seen other than anecdotal reports (which I find to be basically useless). While its accuracy is perhaps suspect because we don't know the sales volumes and therefore the degree of confidence in the percentages, it's certainly a lot better than nothing.
My strategy might be crude and certainly not perfect- I study the user feedback on newegg.com for any product I'm interested in. Reviewers can give 1 to 5 "eggs" depending on how well they liked or disliked the product. I will sometimes read the actual reviews from people that gave 1 or 2 eggs and these can be reveailing. Sometimes people complain for things that I think are unreasonable and not really related to the product itself, but other times people actually complain about the failure or poor performance of the product. I've noticed that lots of the current SSD models have high percentages of users giving just 1 or 2 eggs. I read the reviews and there are a lot of complaints about product failures. Now I've noticed with electronic products that if at least 90% of people give 3 or more eggs, it is somewhat rare and probably a very good product. Very few products do better than 90%. I've noticed that a lot of SSD's only do 75% or less. If 1/4 or more of buyers give the product 1 or 2 eggs I start to think that it must be a pretty bad product.
My strategy might be crude and certainly not perfect- I study the user feedback on newegg.com for any product I'm interested in.
That has the potential to be very misleading - people with problems are more motivated to complain than people without problems are to praise. Secondly, a popular product may end up with a higher number of complaints even if it has a smaller percentage of actual problems.