Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Mushkin vs. Intel SSD ?

Last response: in Storage
Share
May 29, 2012 8:02:39 PM

Mushkin vs. Intel SSD ?

I've never had an SSD before and it's time for me to sus out which SSD is best for me and my new build. I'm looking for speed, of course, but, even more importantly reliability and long life-span.

This SSD is just for programs so, I figure all I really needed was a 120g, which is more than enough. I was going to use a regular HD for the rest. Wondering if this is the best set-up for what I need it for?

I was planning on the Intel 520, 120G "Cherryville" but, in the new: Best SSDs For The Money: May 2012
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-...

Mushkin prices have really dropped and I'm still unclear which is the better SSD. Those low Mushkin prices could change soon too.

I will be getting an Ivy CPU: i7 3770 and most likely the Gigabyte z77 UD5 and I've been under the impression that only Intel SSD's take advantage of the SSD cache thingy?

We use Adobe CS, Word, Photo Shop, Office, XSite Pro and more almost everyday. We have to build our own websites create our own product description videos and HD documentary DVD's and do fairly large uploads to our manufacturer.

Here's my new build thread for more info:

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/333702-31-bridge-work...

More about : mushkin intel ssd

May 29, 2012 8:20:37 PM

Mushkin makes the best SSD out there, in my opinion. I hear that Intel makes good ones too, but I have no personal experience with them. If I were to buy right now, it would be from the Mushkin Chronos line.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 124 G Storage
May 29, 2012 10:45:50 PM

For benchmark, Mushkin Chronos is lower than intel because it use Asynchronous NAND. But for real world you can't see the big difference between them. I have Mushkin Chronos (not the DX which use Toggle NAND) and intel 320 too, now i have M4 that replaced the Mushkin. I have good luck w/ those SSD.
m
0
l
Related resources
May 30, 2012 9:07:43 PM

Intel Smart Response Technology:

"GIGABYTE 7 series motherboards are equipped with the much anticipated Intel® Smart Response Technology, allowing users to experience system performance similar to SSD only systems. Intel® Smart Response technology works by using intelligent block-based caching of frequently used applications to improve system performance and responsiveness. In fact, 7 series motherboards with Intel® Smart Response Technology are able to deliver 4x performance of HDD-only systems. "

http://www.gigabyte.com/microsite/306/images/ez-setup.h...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWBI7EMOhYQ

Will Mushkin work with Intel's "Smart Response Technology" on a Gigabyte z77 board? I thought I read not long ago that only Intel would work for that feature or perhaps I'm confusing it with a different feature??
m
0
l
a b G Storage
May 30, 2012 9:14:12 PM

If you get a 120GB drive and load your programs there as you originally suggested, there's no need to use SRT. SRT is good if you only have a 60GB-ish SSD and want to cache your HDD's most used files.

Suppose you could partition it and use part for the cache but probably not buying yourself a lot of performance there.

The Mushkins are getting good press, for what that's worth. Them, Intel, Samsung are all good choices.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 9:24:30 PM

I got the Mushkin 120GB(non DX) a few weeks ago. The 1st one was DOA, but NewEgg paid both ways for the RMA. This one flies. I don't regret getting it one bit.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 283 G Storage
May 30, 2012 9:30:51 PM

If you are going to purchase a SATA 3 6Gb/s 64GB or larger solid state drive, then Intel Smart Response Technology (ssd caching) is not necessary. According to Intel you would be better off and experience better performance if you installed Windows 7 and your software applications on the ssd instead of the hard disk drive. It makes more sense to to get the full benefit of the ssd instead of using it as a cache for a hard disk drive.

When Intel devloped SRT, they envisioned using a small 10GB to 20GB ssd as a cache for one hard disk drive. It was meant for individuals who could not afford a larger capacity ssd.

Since you work with photographs and video you will want a solid state drive that works well with "incompressible data" as opposed to "compressible data".

That pretty much leaves out solid state drives that use SandForce controllers. The SandForce controllers were designed to work well with compressible data.

Your two best bets are Intel and Samsung solid state drives. In real world performance both of them work very well with photo and video software applications.

Don't forget that photo and video work is cpu and memory intensive.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 9:34:30 PM

I would definitely recommend a Mushkin SSD. While I have yet to own one personally, I have been researching them for a few months, and from a price to capacity/quality/performance ration standpoint, their deluxe line is definitely in the top 3. I read everywhere that Intel makes a great product with a long warranty, but they are also charging ~$50 extra when compared to similar drives. As was noted in an earlier post, The Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe line uses Toggle NAND memory, while the standard Mushkin Enhanced Chronos line uses slower Asynchronous Memory.

Specifically, I would recommend the 240GB Mushkin MKNSSDCR240GB-DX model. It sells for $230 right now on Newegg. That is under $1 per GB, which is a great deal. Given the fact that it looks like you will have some pretty space intensive programs installed and are looking at the $1500 range for total PC cost, I think the added space will benefit you greatly. Additionally, it includes a 3.5" adapter bracket for installation into a desktop computer. You would be spending $185 for the 120GB Intel 520 SSD that includes an adapter bracket.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
May 30, 2012 9:36:58 PM

cuecuemore said:
Mushkin makes the best SSD out there, in my opinion. I hear that Intel makes good ones too, but I have no personal experience with them. If I were to buy right now, it would be from the Mushkin Chronos line.


some clarification is needed. Mushkin chronos DELUXE is what should be recommended. it uses toggle Nand which is better and top of the line.

cin19 said:
For benchmark, Mushkin Chronos is lower than intel because it use Asynchronous NAND. But for real world you can't see the big difference between them. I have Mushkin Chronos (not the DX which use Toggle NAND) and intel 320 too, now i have M4 that replaced the Mushkin. I have good luck w/ those SSD.


again just so that people are not confused, mushkin makes basically two types of drives: chronos and chronos deluxe. they also make castillo or something like that but im not talking about those. Out of the two types the chronos is cheaper and slower and older gen. the chronos deluxe uses the best flash memory money can buy and is a top tier drive.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 353 G Storage
May 30, 2012 9:45:37 PM

Johnny
You said "That pretty much leaves out solid state drives that use SandForce controllers"
Intel 520 uses the SF22xx controller (tailored to intel), 510 uses marvel controller.

But for reliability (which is far more important than synthetic benchmarks, concur with Johnny on Intel -> Samsung -> Curcial M4. Personnally I buy whichever is cheapest, which generally leaves Intel Sata III out. I do Have a Intel G1 and a G2. Of the newer SATA IIIs, I have a pair of 128 Gig M4s and a Pair Of Samsung 128 gig 830s
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 9:47:17 PM

JohnnyLucky said:
Since you work with photographs and video you will want a solid state drive that works well with "incompressible data" as opposed to "compressible data".

That pretty much leaves out solid state drives that use SandForce controllers. The SandForce controllers were designed to work well with compressible data.

Your two best bets are Intel and Samsung solid state drives. In real world performance both of them work very well with photo and video software applications.

Don't forget that photo and video work is cpu and memory intensive.

I agree, but only if you are planning on storing all your data (pictures, videos, music, etc.) on the solid state drive. In that case, you would also need a much larger capacity drive. Prices go up really fast once you get past the 240-256GB capacity mark.

Your best bet is most likely to install all your programs on a solid state drive and have an HDD for use as a data storage drive.

It is also probably important to note, for emphasis, that any solid state drive will give you greatly improved performance in the way of load times and file transfers when compared to an HDD. The real world observed difference between different solid state drives (whether the difference be in memory type or controller) will be minimal by comparison.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 283 G Storage
May 30, 2012 9:53:43 PM

From the Tom's Hardware article the OP linked to:

"when it comes to SandForce-based SSDs, they only achieve their peak performance when you're moving around compressible bits of data."

Both the Mushkin Chronos and the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe use a SandForce controller. That pretty much rules out both for professional photo and video work.

m
0
l
May 30, 2012 10:10:16 PM

cbrunnem said:
some clarification is needed. Mushkin chronos DELUXE is what should be recommended. it uses toggle Nand which is better and top of the line.

Yes, sorry I left that out.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 10:53:19 PM

Hey all, thanks for all the help here. I'm still learning about SSD's and the posts here have been quite helpful in that regard. Now, I've realized that I don't need to worry about the "Intel Smart Response Technology" since I'll be using a 120g SSD to reap the benefits while keeping prices low. Plus, I'll still use a regular HDD for data storage until larger SSD prices come down even further in the future.

Btw, I'll be using the Windows 7 OS.

JohnnyLucky said:
From the Tom's Hardware article the OP linked to:

"when it comes to SandForce-based SSDs, they only achieve their peak performance when you're moving around compressible bits of data."

Both the Mushkin Chronos and the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe use a SandForce controller. That pretty much rules out both for professional photo and video work.

It appears Mushkin may not be the best choice regarding working with HD video, photos etc or will the Mushkin chronos DELUXE be just fine regardless? Will I be fine so long as I get the deluxe with the toggle Nand rather than the Asynchronous NAND? Would Intel or anything else be any better on professional photo and video work?

Best SSDs For The Money: May 2012
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-...
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 283 G Storage
May 30, 2012 10:58:36 PM

josejones - In all honesty you'll be okay with the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe. There's usually not that much performnce difference during ordinary everyday use. There might be a very slight difference when it comes to photo and video processes that involve rendering, encoding, or transcoding. You probably won't notice the difference unless you run synthetic benchmarks which are designed to grossly exaggerate minor differences in performance.

Chief - Correcto Mundo! I was in a hurry and didn't provide a more detailed explanation, especially about the 520 from an enterprise/business perspective.

Isiah - just a little more info - Typical solution for professional photo and video work is one ssd for applications, one ssd used as a scratch disk, and hard disk drive(s) for storage. In the event of a budget crunch priority goes to high performance cpu and memory first.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 11:03:25 PM

josejones said:
Hey all, thanks for all the help here. I'm still learning about SSD's and the posts here have been quite helpful in that regard. Now, I've realized that I don't need to worry about the "Intel Smart Response Technology" since I'll be using a 120g SSD to reap the benefits while keeping prices low. Plus, I'll still use a regular HDD for data storage until larger SSD prices come down even further in the future.

Btw, I'll be using the Windows 7 OS.


It appears Mushkin may not be the best choice regarding working with HD video, photos etc or will the Mushkin chronos DELUXE be just fine regardless? Will I be fine so long as I get the deluxe with the toggle Nand rather than the Asynchronous NAND? Would Intel or anything else be any better on professional photo and video work?

Best SSDs For The Money: May 2012
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-recommendation-...

If you are using the HDD for storage then there will be no difference.

The difference comes when writing incompressible data. If you don't store the data on the SSD then you never write it to the SSD. Therefore there is no difference. Additionally, what little difference there would be if you used the SSD for storage would be minimal compared to the performance difference between an SSD and HDD. If you wanted the absolute best performance possible in an SSD (and you are using it for mass data storage) then you would probably want to grab a Samsung 830 Series SSD. That said, the key in that case would be to get as large of an SSD as possible, regardless of controller. A 120GB Samsung 830 SSD does you no good if it is filled to the brim with pictures and videos, the 240 GB Mushkin drive would be better for you in that case.
m
0
l
May 30, 2012 11:06:40 PM

JohnnyLucky said:
Isiah - just a little more info - Typical solution for professional photo and video work is one ssd for applications, one ssd used a scratch disk, and hard disk drive(s) for storage. In the event of a budget crunch priority goes to high performance cpu and memory first.

*low whistle* That is one pricey PC! I'm not sure that type of setup will be feasible here. OP stated in another thread that his budget is ~$1000.

That is something I didn't know, so good info JohnnyLucky.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 283 G Storage
May 31, 2012 12:00:00 AM

Isiah - May not be that bad. A 128GB ssd is considered to be the sweet spot right now. That should hold Windows 7 plus applications and utilities with room to spare. Sale prices are dropping down to $99.00. The scratch disk does not need to be that large. A 64GB ssd would do. Sale prices for those have been down to $59.00. Just a matter of being patient and checking prices daily.

Easiest place to find daily ssd deals in the United States is over at Logic Buy. Here is the link:

http://www.logicbuy.com/categorydeals/computers/hard-dr...

They check quite a few online vendors including Newegg and Amazon. Brands, models, and prices change daily.

Time for a break.
m
0
l
May 31, 2012 10:49:08 PM

Isaiah4110 said:
If you are using the HDD for storage then there will be no difference.

The difference comes when writing incompressible data. If you don't store the data on the SSD then you never write it to the SSD. Therefore there is no difference. Additionally, what little difference there would be if you used the SSD for storage would be minimal compared to the performance difference between an SSD and HDD. If you wanted the absolute best performance possible in an SSD (and you are using it for mass data storage) then you would probably want to grab a Samsung 830 Series SSD. That said, the key in that case would be to get as large of an SSD as possible, regardless of controller. A 120GB Samsung 830 SSD does you no good if it is filled to the brim with pictures and videos, the 240 GB Mushkin drive would be better for you in that case.

Ut oh, I was under the impression that I'd notice a huge performance increase by having an SSD for the OS and programs and use a HDD for storage and data? There seriously would be no performance increase? Crapola! :o 

I was going to hold out for a year or two before I buy an SSD bigger than 240g - partly for $$$ but also because I was hoping to get the newer SATA Express = 16Gb/s SSD. http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/03/08/ssds-f...

We could use a 500g or 1T SSD but, the prices are not reality right now.
m
0
l
June 1, 2012 4:02:59 PM

josejones said:
Ut oh, I was under the impression that I'd notice a huge performance increase by having an SSD for the OS and programs and use a HDD for storage and data? There seriously would be no performance increase? Crapola! :o 

I was going to hold out for a year or two before I buy an SSD bigger than 240g - partly for $$$ but also because I was hoping to get the newer SATA Express = 16Gb/s SSD. http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/03/08/ssds-f...

We could use a 500g or 1T SSD but, the prices are not reality right now.

Don't forget, if you want to wait for a faster SATA interface in a Solid State Drive, you will also need to have a faster SATA Controller in your system. In other words, if you build a Sandybridge or Ivybridge computer now with a standard HDD, you won't be able to buy a high capacity "SATA 4" SSD in 12-24 months and get its maximum performance by simply plugging it into your existing motherboard. You would also need to either replace the motherboard with one that has the faster connection or buy a SATA 4 controller card that would plug into one of your expansion slots.


As a side note, I don't know if you have already made your purchases, but I gave you a system build recommendation a couple days ago on your other thread.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 114 G Storage
June 1, 2012 4:10:29 PM

Muskin Chromos Deluxe has premium 3Xnm Toshiba Toggle Mode Flash. The Chronos and Intel do not.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4328/mushkin_chronos_d...

Quote:
Other than a few really oddball entries, SF-2281 'consumer' SSDs come in three flash flavors. Starting on the low end, you have IMFT 25nm asynchronous flash, a budget flash used in the Agility 3, Force 3, Chronos (non-Deluxe model) and a few other drives that in our testing perform at around the same level as last year's SF-1200 controlled drives when filled to 50 percent capacity. A majority of drives use IMFT 25nm synchronous flash; Vertex 3, Force GT, S511 and so on.

Synchronous flash, also called ONFi 2.x is really the first step for enthusiasts, especially now that prices have really dropped. The final flash type used is 3Xnm Toggle Mode flash from Toshiba, a form of ONFi 2.x without the JEDEC classification. 25nm IMFT is rated for around 5K P/E cycles and 3Xnm Toshiba Toggle Mode flash is rated for around twice as many. Even though we are talking about writing a lot of data for a very long time, the 3Xnm flash will still last even longer.....

To sum it all up with a bow on top, you get amazing performance, extremely long service life and a hassle free low price point on a drive that literally has very little competition in the marketplace.


As for the Photo / video performance .... look here:

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4328/mushkin_chronos_d...

HDD1 - Windows Defender
HDD2 - Gaming
HDD3 - Windows Photo Gallery
HDD4 - Vista Startup
HDD5 - Windows Movie Maker
HDD6 - Windows Media Center
HDD7 - Windows Media Player
HDD8 - Application Loading

The Deluxe rules the roost yet again .... doesn't hurt that its cost is only premium performance unit below the $1 per GB barrier
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 114 G Storage
June 1, 2012 4:14:27 PM

josejones said:
Will Mushkin work with Intel's "Smart Response Technology" on a Gigabyte z77 board? I thought I read not long ago that only Intel would work for that feature or perhaps I'm confusing it with a different feature??


Smart Response Technology is useless in this application:

http://www.ukgamingcomputers.co.uk/difference-between-h...

Quote:
Finally, another feature of a Z68 chipset is known as SSD caching which is where it allows the use of a small (say 10 or 20 GB) Solid state hard drive to act as a cache for a larger ‘traditional’ hard disk. If you are already planning the use of a Solid State drive this feature is redundant.



m
0
l
June 3, 2012 4:55:02 PM

Isaiah4110 said:
If you are using the HDD for storage then there will be no difference.

The difference comes when writing incompressible data. If you don't store the data on the SSD then you never write it to the SSD. Therefore there is no difference. Additionally, what little difference there would be if you used the SSD for storage would be minimal compared to the performance difference between an SSD and HDD. If you wanted the absolute best performance possible in an SSD (and you are using it for mass data storage) then you would probably want to grab a Samsung 830 Series SSD. That said, the key in that case would be to get as large of an SSD as possible, regardless of controller. A 120GB Samsung 830 SSD does you no good if it is filled to the brim with pictures and videos, the 240 GB Mushkin drive would be better for you in that case.

I was under the impression that I'd notice a huge performance increase by having an SSD for the OS and programs while using a HDD for storage and data? There seriously would be no performance increase? How are all those people using them who're claiming such performance increases?
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 353 G Storage
June 3, 2012 5:31:07 PM

Hard to mix apples and oranges.
The SSD will load any program and associated files that are on the SSD Very fast compared to if they are on a HDD. If you have a given program on the SSD and your Generated file for that application on the HDD. The program loads at the speed of the SSD, but pulling in your generated file for the HDD will be at the speed of the HDD. In many cases caching an HDD does not improve performance a lot, as It caches most used files, if the files are constantantly changing, becomes hare to "quess" which files to cache.

What I do is My systems are setup with two SSDs and a HDD. 1st SSD (128 Gig) is the OS + Program drive, The 2nd SSD is for currently working projects for the applications one SSD1. The HDD is for storage, ie completed projects, and my data that is not used very often. An example, unless I'm editing a DVD movie file, it is on the HDD (playback of a Movie is No different than being on a SSD vs HDD). The many excell spreed sheets that I load up on a daily basis are on the 2nd SSD, ones that I may only call up once a week are on the HDD.

All comes down to Price vs performance.

And Yes I do prefer 2 SSDs vs a single larger one.
A single larger one (say 256 gig) is Faster than it's smaller sibling (128 Gig). But you can not do a simutanoues read/write to a single SSD.
m
0
l
June 9, 2012 9:40:24 PM

So, is it even really worth it to get an SSD at all?

Here's what I'm considering for my new build:

MB: Gigabyte z77
CPU: Ivy Bridge i7 3770
RAM: Mushkin 16g
SSD: Mushkin 120g
HD: 1 Tera
PSU: Coolermaster 650w
Case: Antec 302
OS: Windows 7 Prof, 64-bit
m
0
l
June 12, 2012 3:39:22 PM

josejones said:
So, is it even really worth it to get an SSD at all?

Here's what I'm considering for my new build:

MB: Gigabyte z77
CPU: Ivy Bridge i7 3770
RAM: Mushkin 16g
SSD: Mushkin 120g
HD: 1 Tera
PSU: Coolermaster 650w
Case: Antec 302
OS: Windows 7 Prof, 64-bit

The difference between that setup and that setup without the SSD will be in your OS and program load times. I can't say I've experienced it myself yet, but I hear the difference there is a decent one.

At the same time, we are talking about a difference of around 30 seconds (if I remember right from the TH benchmarks) in startup times. SSDs cut the OS load time to around 15 seconds, so you can expect something similar in loading your other programs. I doubt we are talking about something like a change from a 3 minute load to a 20 second load, but I suppose that is possible if the program is large enough.

Bottom line in my experience: Computers feel 'slow' when I'm waiting on something to load. SSDs shorten that time, so I plan on putting one in my next build. It is worth the cost to me. You just have to make a similar analysis and decision for yourself.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
June 12, 2012 9:03:59 PM

josejones said:
So, is it even really worth it to get an SSD at all?

Here's what I'm considering for my new build:

MB: Gigabyte z77
CPU: Ivy Bridge i7 3770
RAM: Mushkin 16g
SSD: Mushkin 120g
HD: 1 Tera
PSU: Coolermaster 650w
Case: Antec 302
OS: Windows 7 Prof, 64-bit


i guarantee that you will not get regret getting a ssd. i can restart my computer in 20 seconds and thats really nice when installing stuff.
m
0
l
June 14, 2012 9:26:47 PM

I see, so I should still get the SSD - at least it would have my operating system and all my programs on there, which would be speedy in opening programs and quick boot-up and re-start times - which are very important to me. Anything that speeds up boot-up & re-start and opening programs or anything else is a benefit to me as a small business because time is money. It's not just about a minute or two - it's about all those minutes adding up at the end of the day that might add up to an hour or two.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
June 14, 2012 9:43:57 PM

josejones said:
I see, so I should still get the SSD - at least it would have my operating system and all my programs on there, which would be speedy in opening programs and quick boot-up and re-start times - which are very important to me. Anything that speeds up boot-up & re-start and opening programs or anything else is a benefit to me as a small business because time is money. It's not just about a minute or two - it's about all those minutes adding up at the end of the day that might add up to an hour or two.

]
you will not regret it trust me.

also im always the first into a map in bf3 so thats a plus.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
June 15, 2012 4:38:25 PM

Please just get a current SATAIII SSD and carry on. Waiting is futile. Any SSD, especially a newer one, will destroy a HDD.

As far as capacities, here is a clip from Tom's new article today on hybrid drives:
"Bottom line: SSDs are expected to remain a premium technology until they're eventually phased out. They'll never match the cost per gigabyte of hard drives, and they'll never catch the growing capacities of hard drives. Very low access times make SSDs ideal for installing an operating system and performance-sensitive applications. But their high cost makes them unsuitable for user data, like music and movie libraries."
m
0
l
June 26, 2012 6:16:15 PM

josejones said:
The Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe MX 120g is down to $114 right now
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

The Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe 240GB is $199
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

What is the difference between the "MX" version and non "MX" version? Are the "MX" versions newer or an upgrade?

The "MX" line is Mushkin's most recently created line of SSDs. Last time I checked, they only make a 120GB version. Here is how the Mushkin lineup breaks down:

Mushkin Enhanced Chronos: This is Mushkin's least expensive line. It uses Asynchronous (the slowest type of) NAND Flash memory chips.

Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe MX: As noted above, this is Mushkins newest line of SSDs. It utilizes the faster Synchronous NAND Flash memory chips. These models are designated by a -MX at the end of the model name.

Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe: This is Mushkin's most expensive line of SSDs. It has been around longer than the MX line and uses the fastest type of flash memory chips (Toggle NAND). SSDs in this line are designated by a -DX at the end of the model name.


I'm not sure why Mushkin has kept the price of their 120GB -DX model so high, but, since they have, the 240GB -DX model is absolutely the best buy for any Mushkin SSD right now.
m
0
l
June 26, 2012 9:26:05 PM

^ Thanks for those details. I was unaware.

So, the DX model is faster than the MX model. The DX models are more expensive because they use the "fastest type of flash memory chips (Toggle NAND)."

Is the reliability and life-span about the same or no?
m
0
l
June 27, 2012 5:48:33 PM

I would have to do some research on that again, but if I remember correctly the only difference is the speed.
m
0
l
June 28, 2012 1:11:39 AM

Well crapola, I wonder why there are so many 1 star reviews at Newegg for the Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe 240g?

What's up with that? One person comments:

"You may want to wait until the SF-2281 controller is fixed before buying."

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=20-226-...

What's the warranty on these?

m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 283 G Storage
June 28, 2012 1:33:04 AM

I maintain the ssd database listed in the sticky at the very top of this forum section.

Here is the link to the ssd database:

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

Scroll down to the Mushkin section where you will find 4 current SATA III 6Gb/s models. Follow the links to the technical reviews for the model you are interested in.

Note - A lot of advertising uses the word "Enhanced". There is also some advertising that does not use the word "Enhanced". If you click on the links to the Mushkin product pages you will see that Mushkin does not use the word "Enhanced". Since Mushkin did not use it on their own web site I didn't use it either.
m
0
l
June 28, 2012 3:42:26 PM

josejones said:
Well crapola, I wonder why there are so many 1 star reviews at Newegg for the Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe 240g?

What's up with that? One person comments:

"You may want to wait until the SF-2281 controller is fixed before buying."

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=20-226-...

What's the warranty on these?

To answer your last question first: The drive comes with a 3 year manufacturer warranty. I've also been told Mushkin (or at least their customer service center) is operated out of Colorado.

Check out the most recent 5 Egg rating (dated 5/15/12 and quoted below):

Quote:
Pros: Guys, this is the real deal! This is the same as Vertex 3 MaxIOPS, contains 32 nm Toggle mode Nand from Toshiba and it gets similar performance to the Vertex 3 MaxIOPS, all that for half the price of the Vertex!!!! Check-out the latest review from xbitlabs.

I got mine when it was 260$. Now I'm looking to buy another one to make a RAID array.

Cons: Sandforce controllers have some issues with certain hardware.

Other Thoughts: Be sure to put the latest firmware for the SSD when you get it. It's 5.02. You can install it later, the firmware updater allows you to update the firmware even if you are running the OS from the SSD.

That review is from a guy who had already owned the drive for a while (over a month, which is longer than most who reported problems). What caught my eye is the section I underlined. Here's why: I read each of the 1 egg reviews, and I noticed many of them had one thing in common; they were installing the drive into a pre-existing, store bought system (translation: old internal hardware) or were custom built with old hardware, specifically the motherboard. The Sandforce 22xx (usually 2281) is used in the majority of current model SSDs, and is Sandforce's latest controller. Given that the SSD controller is the part of the SSD that actually interfaces with the motherboard (and therefore the rest of the system), I could see it not working well with older hardware because that hardware might not be able to handle something so advanced. I also noticed that the vast majority of those 1 star reviews came in April and May of this year. There were only three 1 Egg reviews from March or earlier.

Whenever I see a large number of 1 Egg/Star product reviews on a website, I always try to determine the context in which they were written. I have been doing professional IT work in an office setting for over 5 years, so I can honestly say I believe myself to have a very high level of tech experience. Many of those reviewers claim the highest level of tech experience, but I have a hard time believing that with how they were written. They sound to me more like they were written by an average consumer who got the drive and threw up their hands at the first sign of difficulty then went off to write an angry review. When I read a negative review that obviously comes from a level-headed frame of mind and includes information about how and why the product they purchased was the actual problem, then I'm inclined to give that review a lot more weight. When I see a bunch of "angry" reviews like this, I tend to look at them as more of something to note or possibly research a little more before buying, but they won't often keep me from purchasing that product.

The other important thing I noticed about those reviews is that there were a lot of responses from the manufacturer, even when the person already said they were working on an RMA with the company. That right there is a huge redeeming factor for me. It tells me that this manufacturer actually stands by their product and truly wants to provide good customer service.


I'll close with one more tidbit about myself: I don't (yet) personally own any computers running solid state drives at this moment. So I am not claiming to have any first-hand experience with this, or any other model of SSD. I wish I did, and I have been making plans for the past 6 months to build a current computer. As a result, I have been doing a lot of research and staying up to date on changes in current PC components. I can say with relative confidence that my research points to this Mushkin line and the Samsung 830 series as the top of the line SSDs in quality and performance. Right behind them (I believe) would come the Crucial m4 Series (great quality but uses Asynchronous memory if I remember right) and the Patriot Wildfire line (Uses Toggle NAND memory, but I haven't read a lot either way regarding their dependability). When I do get the money to build, I am hoping to be able to use one of these Mushkin drives myself. So take everything I say with a grain of salt, knowing that I don't yet have any first-hand experience installing or troubleshooting a Solid State Drive.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 353 G Storage
June 28, 2012 6:05:02 PM

^ Personally, I never look at "tech Knowledge" as it is very subjective - ie compared to whom. And in what area, IT, Electronics, boiling water. Building a Computer has boiled down to putting together a Kit and does not imply the "Builder" has a High level of understanding the electronics. Unfortunately, I'd probably rate many ETs as only somewhat knowledgeable, and a few that I've met as LOW.

While you are correct about some of the 1&2 reviews are the Individual, and NOT the product - Being generous on the word "some" If I take SSD A with say 100 reviews and compare to SSD B with a 100 reviews, It safe to say that The percentage of Individual caused problems should be close to the same. If SSD A has 20% 1/2 ratings and SSD B has only 10%, then Mostly SSD B would be the better bet. Hard to factor in but If SSD A has a Much Lower price that will attract less Knowledgeable Buyer, hence higher percentage of 1/2 ratings. Generally there is a reason for large price differences. IE compare the price of the Agility III vs say Samsung 830.

As to performance, many base performance on ATTO Bench mark - Totally worthless as a Judge of real life performance. There is Not enough performance difference between most of the upper end SSDs to warrant using performance as a main criteria - should be reliability.
m
1
l
June 28, 2012 7:50:15 PM

Three excellent posts in a row, what is this forum coming to? :) 
m
1
l
June 29, 2012 3:22:49 PM

Yeah, thanks for all the helpful information.

So, if reliability and long life-span are most important to me, as far as Mushkin goes, I should get the Mushkin DX SSD rather than the cheaper MX version.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
June 29, 2012 7:07:24 PM

josejones said:
Yeah, thanks for all the helpful information.

So, if reliability and long life-span are most important to me, as far as Mushkin goes, I should get the Mushkin DX SSD rather than the cheaper MX version.


yeah get the DX and the 240 gb version of it as well. thats what id get.
m
0
l
June 29, 2012 10:44:00 PM

^

Erh, from what I understand thus far, the DX version is the better SSD to get.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
June 30, 2012 12:01:07 AM

edited to reflect that. brain fart. the DX is what i have and its great. ive had it for 4 months and it still boots in 15 seconds.
m
0
l
June 30, 2012 3:50:11 PM

^ Thanks for that.

15 second boot up times? Wow, I look forward to that since the system we're replacing is from 2004 and takes like 3 minutes to boot up. It takes quite a while to load programs too. The new i7 system will be 20 times or %2,000 faster in performance than our 2004 AMD system -

New Ivy Build in July
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/350913-31-build-july
m
0
l
July 7, 2012 4:05:37 PM

I'm about to begin ordering for this build so, I need some last minute thoughts on this Mushkin SSD, is the DX version really that much better than the MX - it's just soooo much more expensive? If so, I might just get the 240g but it almost doubles the cost:

$114 MX 120g: "Mushkins newest line of SSDs. It utilizes the faster Synchronous NAND Flash"
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

$185 DX 120g: "been around longer than the MX line and uses the fastest type of flash memory chips (Toggle NAND)"
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

$199 DX 240g
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

I really need to cut back on some costs though but, I don't want to regret it later.
m
0
l
July 8, 2012 3:34:46 PM

Isaiah4110 said:
If you are using the HDD for storage then there will be no difference.

The difference comes when writing incompressible data. If you don't store the data on the SSD then you never write it to the SSD. Therefore there is no difference. Additionally, what little difference there would be if you used the SSD for storage would be minimal compared to the performance difference between an SSD and HDD. If you wanted the absolute best performance possible in an SSD (and you are using it for mass data storage) then you would probably want to grab a Samsung 830 Series SSD. That said, the key in that case would be to get as large of an SSD as possible, regardless of controller. A 120GB Samsung 830 SSD does you no good if it is filled to the brim with pictures and videos, the 240 GB Mushkin drive would be better for you in that case.

I'm in a bit of a pickle with my new Ivy Bridge i7 build and could use some thoughts from those who actually have SSD's. I'm trying to cut some costs and the only way I can see doing that is to cut the SSD and stick with a HD - at least for now. I'm considering a PCIe 3.0 SSD card in the future.

My choices are:

a) Get a 120g SSD and have to re-use our already 2 year old (warranty is over) Caviar Blue 500g 16 cache SATA 3
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

b) Lose the SSD for now and go with a new Caviar Black 1T Sata 3 (6g/ps) 64 cache with a 5 year warranty
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

c) Go over budget and get both the SSD and the new 1T HD. Is the Caviar Black really worth the extra money - it does come with a 5 year warranty?

d) Wait for improved and cheaper SSD's in the near future or wait for a PCIe 3.0 SSD card at 12 or 16 g/ps?
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/280390-32-sata-satae

What would you do?

If I wait on an SSD now and get one say at Xmas time will it make more work for me by having to re-format the HD - or will it be as easy as just adding the new SSD? What all would be involved?
m
0
l
a b G Storage
July 8, 2012 4:06:20 PM

"A" assuming you're not already filling up the 500. OS + most-used programs on the SSD and all media on the HDD. It's absolutely worth the cost. Even a "slow" SATA2 SSD like mine is so much faster than a HDD.
m
0
l
July 9, 2012 10:53:49 PM

I went ahead and got the 240g Mushkin DX 'cause it was only a few bucks more than the 120g DX. I hope it's really that much better than the MX version.
m
0
l
a b G Storage
July 9, 2012 11:07:00 PM

josejones said:
I went ahead and got the 240g Mushkin DX 'cause it was only a few bucks more than the 120g DX. I hope it's really that much better than the MX version.


you will not regret it
m
0
l
!