Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Crucial M4 or Kingston V+200 - need help in choosing

Last response: in Storage
Share
August 9, 2012 11:46:03 AM

Hi,

I'm finally buying an SSD. I was considering Samsung 830 Series 64gb or Crucial M4 64gb. After reading a lot of reviews I decided to go for the M4.

But now I have a great offer for a brand new Kingston V+200 SVP200S3 120Gb (http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1874/1/) in almost the same price as for the M4.

I'm a little bit worried about the Sandforce controller, but it's bad reputation is caused by OCZ which couldn't handle it very well at the beginning. Now I hear that Sandforce SF-2281 is actually pretty good.

I'm wondering if I'm going to feel the difference in random 4k read/write speeds. Kingston has 20,000/44,000 IOPS and Crucial has the opposite 40,000/20,000 IOPS.

Having in mind that I still have Sata 2 will it make a big difference?

The SSD will be for OS and some programs only.
a c 190 G Storage
August 9, 2012 11:50:54 AM

Crucial M4 has a good track record,and great reviews.
a b G Storage
August 9, 2012 1:58:50 PM

If these drives are your only choice I would go with the M4, but I can also suggest the Samsung 830 works great in my computer.
Related resources
August 9, 2012 2:33:38 PM

Well I'm considering only these two brands - Samsung is my second choice for 64gb drive. But is crucial THAT better? I mean I don't care about some little differences in benchmarks - I wonder if there would be any noticable difference in system performance.
August 9, 2012 3:07:28 PM

No no - I mean between Crucial and Kingston V+200 (is m4 that better in system performance)
August 9, 2012 3:11:01 PM

Ok, nevermind my last post. I won't argue with Yoda again.
a b G Storage
August 9, 2012 3:28:06 PM

rogigor said:
Hi,

I'm finally buying an SSD. I was considering Samsung 830 Series 64gb or Crucial M4 64gb. After reading a lot of reviews I decided to go for the M4.

But now I have a great offer for a brand new Kingston V+200 SVP200S3 120Gb (http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1874/1/) in almost the same price as for the M4.

I'm a little bit worried about the Sandforce controller, but it's bad reputation is caused by OCZ which couldn't handle it very well at the beginning. Now I hear that Sandforce SF-2281 is actually pretty good.

I'm wondering if I'm going to feel the difference in random 4k read/write speeds. Kingston has 20,000/44,000 IOPS and Crucial has the opposite 40,000/20,000 IOPS.

Having in mind that I still have Sata 2 will it make a big difference?

The SSD will be for OS and some programs only.



A bargain isn't what you pay, it's what you get. You made the right choice originally when you were looking for the BEST product. Now you're reconsidering buying the cheapest product. Decide what you really want.
August 9, 2012 3:34:30 PM

I still want the best product. I was just wondering if there is that big difference that I will notice between those two. But you're right. I'll stick to the famous and awesome M4.
August 9, 2012 3:54:18 PM

Yes it was :) 

One last question. The charts show crucial m4 128 which, as far as I know, has higher write speed - 64gb version has 90mb/s and 128 has 175mb/s. Read speeds are the same.

Does the lower write speed has a big impact on os performance ?
a c 353 G Storage
August 9, 2012 4:39:43 PM

1) I recommend the M4 or the 830, which ever is cheapest at time of purchase
2) 4K random reads is slightly more Important that the writes - But over all not a big differece.
3) In all honesty, On a SATA II interface in day-to-day usage not as big a differnce in performance as suggested by Benchmark (will Notice a greater effect when you move to sata III) - But in terms of reliability/least user problems, the M4 and 830 are a much better choice. personnally, I ONLY recommend SF22xx based SSDs when A) used as a Storage drive and B) when woking with LARGE file structures that are readily compressable.

While many indicate using a 64 gig SSD I recomend a min size of 80 gigs with a recommended size of 120/128 gigs for an OS + program.
A 64 gig is REALLY on upto 54 gigs usable space. One, you lose 4 gigs based on the way "bits" are counted, so formated size will be 60 gigs. Then You Lose 6 gigs as you must leave ar LEAST 10% (recommend 15%) of he drive FREE so that wearleveling, Garbage Colotion and TRIM can work there magic.
I'm Not a gamer so On my 5 Setems windows + programs take about 35 gigs, Now if a gamer you must throw in the size of games you want installed on the SSD.
a b G Storage
August 9, 2012 4:42:50 PM

rogigor said:
Yes it was :) 

One last question. The charts show crucial m4 128 which, as far as I know, has higher write speed - 64gb version has 90mb/s and 128 has 175mb/s. Read speeds are the same.

Does the lower write speed has a big impact on os performance ?



You are buying an SSD for the wrong reason if you're simply wanting to be amazed at the extra speed. Unless you manage huge files daily the only time you will notice any difference is on boot up and program launch. After a few days you won't even notice that anymore. The real benefit of an SSD is reliability, ruggedness, low heat and low power consumption. If those characteristics don't interest you save your money.
a c 353 G Storage
August 9, 2012 5:00:48 PM

Concur on "ruggedness" as bumping it during a write is NOT going to clobder it and a moderate drop should not distroy it - HDD are toast in these cases normally. But then this is more an issue with laptops (that get dropped of the belt in airport check in lines - Like Mine was, Luckely the HDD DID servive the drop test LOL

Reliability - 50/50. Agree with the Current crop of LOW end Drives such as the WD gree/blue drives and many of the Seagate drives. But have a feeling that the "Good" HDDs will out last most SSDs. IE I have some 20 year old HDD that are still in use. While claims are out on How long SSDs Should last - That has Yet to be established as they have not been out long enough - BUT a Good SSD and a HDD should last beyound it's "usefull" years (in terms of performance/interface). In 5 years, I would expect that a SSD will Be (incomparision) as slow as a HDD when compared to new technology.
On Power - Generally Yes, BUT not always, ie I recommend the M4 for laptops over the 830 because of this. The 830 may equal some 2.5" laptops HDDs on power consumption during Writes (some SSDs draw 5 or 6 Watts duing a write).
August 9, 2012 5:27:07 PM

RetiredChief said:
While many indicate using a 64 gig SSD I recomend a min size of 80 gigs with a recommended size of 120/128 gigs for an OS + program.
A 64 gig is REALLY on upto 54 gigs usable space. One, you lose 4 gigs based on the way "bits" are counted, so formated size will be 60 gigs. Then You Lose 6 gigs as you must leave ar LEAST 10% (recommend 15%) of he drive FREE so that wearleveling, Garbage Colotion and TRIM can work there magic.
I'm Not a gamer so On my 5 Setems windows + programs take about 35 gigs, Now if a gamer you must throw in the size of games you want installed on the SSD.


Well I do consider myself as a gamer but I am not going to use the SSD for games. It'll be a drive just for windows and 64gigs should do the work, since now I have 50gb partition for OS and still got 8gigs free left (and haven't done a format for 2 years)


ram1009 said:
You are buying an SSD for the wrong reason if you're simply wanting to be amazed at the extra speed. Unless you manage huge files daily the only time you will notice any difference is on boot up and program launch. After a few days you won't even notice that anymore. The real benefit of an SSD is reliability, ruggedness, low heat and low power consumption. If those characteristics don't interest you save your money.


I'm not buying an ssd to be amazed with the extra speeds and I don't manage huge files on a daily basis. Actually, as you mentioned, I'm buying the drive for booting, programs launching speed, low heat and silence. I'm just tired of waiting a dozen or so secconds after each boot for system to be fully operational, waiting a couple of secconds for my browser to load etc. So I know that I'm going to be satisfied with the upgrade.
August 9, 2012 8:25:55 PM

I have a crucial M4 256gb and i couldn't be happier with the purchase, yes it was expensive, but TOTALLY worth it.
a c 353 G Storage
August 9, 2012 9:32:40 PM

Have 13 SSDs. Five Systrems with SSDs as a Boot + OS drive (3 of the systems have daul SSds).
Would never go back to a HDD as an OS drive - Hate the extra boot time, it can be really annoying, IF IF only once a day.

PS SSD probably will NOT help on broose load as that is more at the mercy of your Internet provider speed.
August 9, 2012 11:26:40 PM

RetiredChief said:

PS SSD probably will NOT help on broose load as that is more at the mercy of your Internet provider speed.


I meant browser itself, not pages loading....
August 10, 2012 12:13:25 AM

Yes we are. I'll go for the M4 as I decided before. Thanks a lot guys, and especially, thx verbalizer for the charts :) 
August 10, 2012 11:38:48 AM

One last offtop question - having in mind that I have 4gb of Ram, should I move pagefile to hdd, leave it as it is or downsize it to 1gb ?

Or maybe you have some tested article how to optimize W7 for ssd? I mean I've seen a lot of them out there, but maybe you have followed one particular yourself ?
!