Intel SSD vs Crucial M4 reliability

In the Best SSD for the money article, the Intel 320 is listed as the option for reliability. After reading the SSD Reliability article, that recommendation seems to be based on Intel's reputation and the fact most enterpise applications are using Intel. Looking at reviews, the Intel 320 seemed to have had a major problem and died early after it's release. Crucial M4 has mostly great reviews.

I will buy a SSD today and it seems like the Crucial M4 128GB might be the one to get. I don't need extra speed and would pay extra for reliability but the Intel 320 with SATA II, compared to the seemingly more refined/tested/faster Crucial M4 seems to be a no brainer.

Is this just a case of "No one ever got fired for buying Intel"? (ie if you go with the best known, more expensive brand, and it fails, it isn't your fault. )
5 answers Last reply
More about intel crucial reliability
  1. Well both drives come from very reliable companies. I've just read soo many good things about the M4, as wll as the 320 (besides the 8MB bug lol).

    If I were to build a system today - I would get the M4. Currently I own an OCZ Vertex 2 and have been happy with it.

    But it's up to you. If you really prefer Intel - go with it. But the Crucial is a pretty solid SSD right now.
  2. You might want to read this article on component return rates. It is a bit dated, perhaps there is a newer version:
  3. The Intel 320 series drives are SATA 2 3Gb/s ssd's.

    The Crucial m4 series drives are SATA 3 6Gb/s ssd's.

    Does your motherboard support SATA 3 6Gb/s?
  4. Yes it does support SATA 3 6Gb/s which is part of the reason I have a hard time with this. I prefer to have the faster drive for cheaper (which are both measurable) instead of reliability reputation based on....??
  5. You might go to some of the manufacturer ssd forums to see what issues are being talked about.

    Here is one from crucial:

    Here is one from Intel:
Ask a new question

Read More

SSD Crucial Intel Storage