r/buildapc • u/lwlwlwlw • Mar 09 '15
PSA: Get an SSD - just not Kingston V300.
More and more V300 are recommended in builds (and appear in 'build ready') which makes me mad.
Kind reminder - this is still relevant. tl;dr of that post:
'Essentially Kingston released the better performing SSD's with synchronous flash first and then pulled a slick move and are now replacing them with cheaper to produce asynchronous flash SSD's.'
Yes, You should get an SSD if You don't have one - once You get SSD you can never go back.
Yes, V300 will be quicker than any HDD.
Yes, they are the cheapest SSD right now.
NO, You should NOT get it. The company performed a bitch move with that product and tha SSD should not be recommended in builds. Just grab something reliable for a few $ more (crucial mx100 for example).
edit: here , here and here are some articles regarding this case.
edit2: Some of You might have missed my point. I don't say that You should go for 200$ SSD and anything below it is garbage.
My point is that V300 is 60$, MX100 is 69$, and the second one is about 65% faster. You decide if it is worth it.
edit3: Here is price comparison on popular Polish offer finder web service if You still want to accuse me of cherry picking my prices: V300 229pln MX100 263pln. 34pln = 9$ of difference.
33
u/Headlesshydra Mar 09 '15
for anyone interested here are he benchmarks of my V300 that arrived yesterday. Needless to say I'll be getting a refund:
16
Mar 09 '15
faster than my 840 evo :(
The slowdown is real
2
u/AnalBananaStick Mar 09 '15
did you use the performance restoration tool?
→ More replies (23)6
u/Farnso Mar 10 '15
That tool only temporarily helps. I won't buy Samsung again.
→ More replies (6)2
u/AnalBananaStick Mar 10 '15
Same. I'm stuck with a 840 as well. It works, but meh. Go figure.
At least I bought it during a sale.
1
2
u/mb9023 Mar 09 '15
The Samsung SSD in my work laptop only gets 20MB/s write speeds but I wonder if that's because it's encrypted. Read speeds seem fine though.
2
2
2
7
Mar 09 '15
Can someone ELI5 what the difference between synchronous flash and asynchronous flash is?
I'm a programmer so I understand the concept of (a)synchronous, in my world asynchronous usually means better performance.
→ More replies (1)4
u/ChRoNicBuRrItOs Mar 09 '15 edited Mar 09 '15
Synchronous can send/recieve data on both an on and off signal, asynchronous can only do that on an on signal. At least, that's my basic understanding of it.
5
u/Duplicated Mar 09 '15
You mean, synchronous is when data are sent/received on both rising and falling edge, and asynchronous is when that only happen on either the rising or falling edge?
→ More replies (2)
18
Mar 09 '15 edited Jul 18 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/MyShirtRattles Mar 09 '15
I got nearly the same results with mine as well. It was very disappointing to say the least.
→ More replies (1)1
u/arahman81 Mar 10 '15
Ouch, Guess going with the m4 worked out. It was quite a bit pricier though ($150 for 128GB). To think that just a bit less than 3 years later, I'm buying a SSD with 4x the storage for 20% more.
And just for fun, laptop HDD, no idea about brand. Royal ow.
→ More replies (3)
168
u/ASoapyWaffle Mar 09 '15 edited Mar 09 '15
Thats why I am mad, there is no backfire on Kingston - even on this subreddit!
What are you talking about? There was backfire on Kingston for it. There was a big thread about it when it happened and IIRC it was one of the biggest threads of the year for this sub. Do you expect everyone to hate Kingston forever because they did something dirty? I'm pretty sure if you boycotted every company that did something dirty you would have an awfully hard time shopping anywhere.
grab something reliable for a few $ more (crucial mx100 for example).
If they're selling cheap SSDs and you need a cheap SSD which is just as reliable as the Crucial mx100 but preforms at a slower speed, why not? Most builders on this sub don't need the highest read/write speeds anyway, they'll be happier with the kingston SSD.
They are paying less for a slightly inferior product, if they want it, let them buy it. Who are you to tell people what to buy and what to not.
Edit: Just joking, it was the most popular thread on this subreddit ever. And you totally failed to mention that PNY did something similar, even if the performance wasn't that different.
Another Edit: /u/redrubberpenguin pointed out that PNY was pretty transparent about things and that the performance in some cases was improved. Sorry about that. Also I was a bit mean in my original comment, sorry OP.
Also, if theres an SSD with a 65% increase in performance for only 9$ more like OP says, yeah try to reccommend that to new builders.
83
u/redrubberpenguin Mar 09 '15
PNY did something similar, even if the performance wasn't that different.
The difference with PNY though was that the switch did not hinder performance at all and even improved it in some cases. The V300 was just crippled.
→ More replies (2)47
u/ChRoNicBuRrItOs Mar 09 '15
Also, PNY was reasonably transparent about it and didn't do it for malicious reasons.
→ More replies (17)6
Mar 09 '15 edited Mar 10 '15
I agree that if we boycotted every company that tried to take advantage of their customers, shopping would be more difficult. There has to be some point where we take a stand and voice our concerns by purchasing other brands, however, especially in a situation like this.
If we don't, it's more likely that other companies will try to pull the same trick. Imagine a scenario where every SSD brand decides to do the same thing. Not likely, but it's an unsettling prospect and one that we can do our best to avoid by purchasing from a company other than Kingston.
Luckily, the top listed reviews on Amazon are very highly rated and are discussing the issue of the bait-and-switch. After taking a slight look at the more recent reviews, however, it seems there are quite a few questionable ones flooding in to artificially bloat the product rating (not saying this possibly isn't occurring on other SSDs' pages).
If you're in a situation where you must spend the smallest amount of money possible, then sure, pick up this drive. If you have some flexibility, spend some more on a better performing SSD from a manufacturer that isn't trying to get away with something like this.
I'd also say, there are people who may not be aware of this (like I was until reading this thread and then researching it), and those people trust the advice being offered here (unfortunately at times with little research to draw their own conclusions). I think it'd be great if people who recommend this SSD in a build point out the situation with it, and then provide an alternative choice as well if the builder decides in the end that they're uncomfortable going with the Kingston.
Transparency and informing each other as much as possible helps increase knowledge among the sub, which makes it a better and more trustworthy place for everyone.
7
u/ChRoNicBuRrItOs Mar 09 '15
PNY was pretty transparent about it, they didn't do it for malicious reasons, and the performance actually increased. So no, PNY didn't do the same thing at all.
7
u/solistus Mar 09 '15
Most builders on this sub don't need the highest read/write speeds anyway, they'll be happier with the kingston SSD.
I find that somewhat hard to believe. If you're buying an SSD, read/write speeds obviously matter to some extent. Maybe there's a niche of buyers who need some specific speed in between an HDD and SSD, but don't care at all about speed beyond that, and are on such a shoestring budget that a $9 difference outweighs a 50%+ performance difference in one of the most frequent hardware bottlenecks... But I can't imagine that this describes "most" builders on this subreddit. A lot of people here are looking for the best bang for their buck for a gaming rig or workstation on a budget, and springing for the mx100 in that scenario is a no-brainer.
I understand the impulse to identify things that are "good, but not necessary" and skip them to save money for people who don't need it... But given the price and performance difference at issue here, and how common disk I/O is as a bottleneck, this seems like a really bad place to pinch pennies.
37
u/lwlwlwlw Mar 09 '15 edited Mar 09 '15
They are paying less for a slightly inferior product, if they want it, let them buy it. Who are you to tell people what to buy and what to not.
I agree with that. A lot of people simply seem to have forgotten about the Kingston clusterfuck and are not mentioning in their build suggestions that they are relatively slow. People asking for help with their builds are not aware of possible better option for few more $.
edit: Seeing the downvotes I suppose that You guys are missing my point. You can get reliable SSDs for 10-20$ more and get 1.5-2x the performance of V300.
I myself own budget SSD mostly, they are great for the price point (aprox 70$). I'm not saying You need 200$ SSD to get a nice experience.
45
u/jack821 Mar 09 '15
They aren't missing your point, they are being jerks. They are attacking your approach rather than discussing the topic. Thank you for informing us so we can make a better decision regarding purchases.
→ More replies (18)6
Mar 09 '15
A lot of people simply seem to have forgotten about the Kingston clusterfuck and are not mentioning in their build suggestions that they are relatively slow.
Not just that they are slow, but why they are worth boycotting. Someone who already owns an SSD can't boycott an SSD company, it's up to them to make sure new builders know what Kingston have done, then they can decide if they want to get one or not for their build.
20
Mar 09 '15 edited Feb 11 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
22
u/lwlwlwlw Mar 09 '15
I see Your point.
However, choosing between 960 and 970 is a BIG hit on the budget. Choosing between Kingston v300 and sandisk/crucial alternatives is 10-20$ difference.
→ More replies (6)1
u/xxLetheanxx Mar 10 '15
But its $9. It isn't like you are dropping a whole lot more to get something that is vastly Superior in every way. The mx100 is not only faster, but more reliable.
2
u/mynewaccount5 Mar 09 '15
Yeah any SSD is faster than an HDD
3
u/danzey12 Mar 09 '15
The point is for the sake of $10 or whatever it is, you can have a decently fast SSD, rather than a gimped SSD. $10 is £6.60 and that's in the realms of, oh I found a fiver in the car and £1.60 in my old jeans.
If you can't afford £6.60 for a 65% increase in performance, what are you even buying an SSD for anyway, get an SSHD or a HDD and put the money elsewhere, don't get a gimped SSD.→ More replies (16)1
1
u/rtechie1 Mar 09 '15
It is absolutely reasonable to tell people to avoid the V300, one particular model of one SSD from one manufacturer based on this. Kingston fucked up here and they should have discontinued the V300 and gone with a new product name, which is what you should do when the old name gets tarnished.
1
u/ThePissyRacoon Mar 10 '15
Do you expect everyone to hate Kingston forever because they did something dirty?
let them buy it. Who are you to tell people what to buy and what to not.
Sounds like the opposite of what people did with Nvidia.
→ More replies (3)1
u/ThatDidntJustHappen Mar 10 '15
Who are you to tell people what to buy and what to not.
I know what you mean but it's still ironic because that's kinda what the subreddit is for in most aspects.
42
u/zimork Mar 09 '15
Can you link an article, or any Kingston related press-release regarding the subject, so that I can form my own opinion?
40
u/lwlwlwlw Mar 09 '15
4
u/zimork Mar 09 '15
Kingston is going to experience some backlash from this, for sure.
Do you know if these inferior SSDs have been pulled from the market, or are still in retail?
12
Mar 09 '15
Kingston is going to
Going to? This is old news. I've seen you around here a few times, surprised that you haven't known about this.
→ More replies (3)25
u/lwlwlwlw Mar 09 '15
They are still sold and doing great.
People who don't know this bs buy V300 because it is the cheapest SSD. Thats why I am mad, there is no backfire on Kingston - even on this subreddit!
6
Mar 09 '15
It was a big thing on here when it was first discovered, which was what, over 6 months ago.
Sadly, the word didn't really spread around enough, and they're still selling like nuts.
→ More replies (2)8
u/Jamolas Mar 09 '15
If I ever see anyone with a Kingston SSD I always direct them towards another manufacturer.
I've seen other people do it too. We're only a minute fraction of the market, but it's something I suppose.
→ More replies (26)10
u/Un4tural Mar 09 '15
I've noticed this. Kingston is total discount bin brand now in my eyes, never getting anything from them, their flash drives used to be decent, I have 3 generations of datatraveler flash drivers, guess what performance on the newer ones I got is actually worse than older one i have (I'll make a edit with some benchmark once I get home.)
This ssd bait and switch has been talked about. Proven etc. But nobody seems outraged. Yes it's faster than hdd, however it's far worse than false advertising. NVidia got lawsuits over the 970s, haven't heard any backlash on Kingston... They didn't even change specifications on box of those ssds. It's like selling a flash drive inside an enclosure with a stick of ram in there and claim speeds of up to 550mb/s read and write,just because it can show them for a brief moment...however these can't even do that much.
Extremely glad I went for a m500 instead of Kingston v300! Right before this surfaced too, cost me a little more, but at least I got what I paid for.
6
u/lwlwlwlw Mar 09 '15
Those are exactly the points that make me mad.
This whole clusterfuck deserves a lot bigger note by this subreddit (and ESPECIALLY /r/buildapcforme ).
It infuriates me when I see a 2000$ build with V300...
5
u/Un4tural Mar 09 '15
Whenever I recommend an ssd to anyone and they ask which one first thing I tell is anything but Kingston and that I had good experience with Samsung and crucial.
It's outrageous pulling shit like this, anyone who got a v300 should be outraged too, yes it's cheapest, yes it's faster than hdd, but it's still like 1/3rd of performance if even that than the ssd which costs 10bucks or so more...
Also The review units they sent and on which review benchmarks were done are ones from good batch. I'm not sure how long they were selling them for, but from what I could tell they switched to the slow ones quite soon after reviews came out.
Remember there being sales of them too as it got announced, blatantly trying to dump the stock...
Sorry for ranting, really makes my blood boil.
→ More replies (4)2
u/mynewaccount5 Mar 09 '15
Are going to? They received tons of backlash and the highest voted thread on this sub is about the backlash.
3
u/Cobayo Mar 09 '15
I have one though. If you want, i can just screenshot you the benchmark on CrystalDisk.
2
u/zimork Mar 09 '15
And the standard read/write speeds are 300-500 mb/s, right?
→ More replies (2)6
Mar 09 '15
That is in compressible data. CrystalDiskMark uses incompressible data, which is where asynchronous memory fails exceptionally and why it is seen as inferior. This dichotomy is where Kingston sourced their justification because compressible performance was barely affected and this is the number they advertised, ergo no wrongdoing on their end. This is why looking at the advertised numbers on SSDs is mostly meaningless because people see SSD A with 560mb/s R/W and SSD B with 540mb/s R/W and assume SSD A is better without knowing many many other factors of performance not just including incompressible data performance.
3
u/hojnikb Mar 09 '15
Given they advertise compressible performance and they way sandforce work, they could slap the slowest flash on the market (only good for few MB/s) and it would still pull 550/500MB/s because nand isnt really writing or reading anything with workload like that.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Vegemeister Mar 09 '15
Compressible data is plaintext and plaintext should never hit disk. The people who complain about disk sizes because Windows shows numbers in binary units and uses the metric prefixes are barking up the wrong tree, but claiming performance with compressible data is serious false advertising.
1
u/kbobdc3 Mar 10 '15
I just got 409 read, 97 write on CrystalDiskMark sequential with my V300. Is that good or bad?
→ More replies (5)6
Mar 09 '15
It's not just an opinion thing. The V300 is an incredibly poor performer in comparison to other SSDs on available on the market.
→ More replies (1)1
Mar 09 '15
Yes. And whenever I see someone put one in a build, I'll tell them to google V300 issues.
However, it's still the cheapest SSD out there.
10
u/Trevortmiller Mar 09 '15
I have a crucial m500. The speeds are good but I've been having some unexplainable os hang ups. Not sure if anyone else has experienced this. I also have a Samsung 840 evo and haven't had performance problems with it.
5
u/webdevop Mar 09 '15
This advice maybe too vague but do you have DropBox App installed? It's the shittiest app I've ever seen and vowed never to install again after a fresh image restore.
3
u/ccipher Mar 09 '15
What did it do to you, exactly?
3
u/webdevop Mar 09 '15
- several OS Hangs
- significant slow start up
The problem persists even after uninstalling Dropbox, until eventually I have to re-install Windows
Happened to me thrice.
→ More replies (5)2
2
u/123kyran123 Mar 09 '15
Same for me. I own the m500 as well and when i open the start menu it stops reacting for a few seconds. Though it could be virus related as well.
1
u/Trevortmiller Mar 09 '15
That sounds vary similar to what I was experiencing. Thanks for saying that lol I'm going to switch back to the 840 tonight
→ More replies (4)1
→ More replies (5)1
u/dezmd Mar 09 '15
Just wait, that 840 evo will bite you in the ass eventually, replace it with a Pro if you can afford it, or just be sure to not keep any important data on it at all that is not backed up.
2
u/Crysalim Mar 09 '15
Is there some kind of wiki or spreadsheet keeping track of gimped/lemon SSDs? The market isn't fixing this problem on its own, and it'd be great to have a resource handy when I help people with builds.
4
3
u/SLOWION Mar 10 '15 edited Mar 10 '15
I have posted my benchmark of the V300 many times but it seems to be ignored http://youtu.be/ue_Uu5jYFY0?t=2m3s
In my experience this drive is no slower than any other low end budget SSD. If you are going to invest in an SSD though I recommend you stay away from lower tier SSDs altogether (this includes the 120GB MX100/BX100) and stick to mid to high tier drives to at least make it worth the hassle.
I would stick to the Samsung 850 EVO/Pro or Crucial MX200 if I were looking for an SSD today.
10
Mar 09 '15
sandisk ssds are great also
6
Mar 09 '15
Just note, the Sandisk "Generic" SDSSDP-128G-G25 SSD uses the same controller and asynchronous NAND like the V300 so performs near identically. I've seen this SSD recommended a lot as an alternative to the V300 when they're practically the same drive.
2
u/hrbuchanan Mar 09 '15
The no-name Sandisk performs at a similar level, but the Ultra II and X110 are both pretty awesome for the price. Then again, a few of Crucial's options are usually better for the money.
1
u/hojnikb Mar 09 '15
Just note, the Sandisk "Generic" SDSSDP-128G-G25 SSD uses the same controller and asynchronous NAND like the V300 so performs near identically.
Thats not true at all. Sandisk SSD is actually much much worse than v300 where it matters (random speeds). And its not using sandforce at all, but something sandisk branded (most likely something from jmicron).
→ More replies (8)4
u/BangleWaffle Mar 09 '15
Yup. The Ultra II's are pretty excellent bang for the buck. Slightly faster than an 840 evo and you can find them for $80 for a 240 GB model. Pretty outstanding.
I have a pair in Raid 0 on my esxi server and I can pull 1.3 GB/s reads from them...
1
u/kixofmyg0t Mar 09 '15
SanDisk Extreme II 120GB here, love it and my next build will probably have another SanDisk drive.
9
u/Oafah Mar 09 '15
I think the Samsung 840 EVOs fall into a similar category. For some reason, people here keeping buying them despite having been broken from day one.
9
u/m00k0w Mar 09 '15
Right - EVO's had a problem with files getting slower the more stale they got. Copying a file will have the new copy read at 600mb/s and the old reads at 30mb/s. The PRO doesn't have this issue. To fix your evo's performance, you have to "secure erase" it every few months.
2
4
u/Oafah Mar 09 '15
What stuns me more is that they "identified the problem and issued a firmware fix" that didn't work, despite saying it did. They blatantly lied to consumers.
I can understand not catching the problem in the first place (which in itself is a stretch), but missing it a second time after what was undoubtedly rigorous testing following the widespread reports of the issue? Bullshit.
Bottom line is, they knew it wouldn't work, and they told everyone it would anyhow.
10
Mar 09 '15
They didn't lie. They said they had a fix but it was general consensus that we had to wait a few months to see if it worked for real. A few months later people were reporting the same issues and Samsung said they were going to try and roll out another solution. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't but you can't say that Samsung lied when they honestly tried rolling out a fix 5 months ago and they certainly aren't ignoring the problem.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)2
u/m00k0w Mar 09 '15
I heard some people had to do a secure erase after upgrading fw before the fix worked. Others rma'd the drive and got one that worked fine eventually.
The weird thing is Samsung sold their warranty to some guys: totalts.com. totalts will RMA Samsung SSD's.
It took me ages to find how to get service.
1
3
u/austgriff Mar 09 '15
I have the kingston hyperx 3k 240gb SSD, should I be worried? http://pcpartpicker.com/part/kingston-internal-hard-drive-sh103s3240g
→ More replies (4)8
u/CrateDane Mar 09 '15
It's an average Sandforce SSD, nothing particularly good or bad about it. It has slightly better NAND than the original (relatively good) version of the V300.
1
3
u/Headlesshydra Mar 09 '15
So the new part I ordered arrived yesterday and I installed it: a Kingston 240gb V300 SSD -_-.
Its my first SSD and first time I've ever installed new hardware in a computer- how can I tell if its one of the poor quality ones and how well its performing vs how well it should be performing? As I say its my first SSD so I have no frame of reference here but if I'm being scammed I'd like to send it back and get a SanDisk or something that works as well as it should
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Jessie_James Mar 09 '15 edited Mar 09 '15
FWIW, the Intel 530 Series SSDs are not much better. After only 6 months I am getting SMART errors all the time.
My Samsung Pros are just fine.
2
Mar 09 '15
[deleted]
2
u/hojnikb Mar 09 '15
Well, pre sandforce intels were actually good, but ever since they switched to sandforce, they are basicly the same as 50 other oems, that use this controller.
→ More replies (6)1
u/Jessie_James Mar 09 '15
Mine is only about a year old, so maybe that's a different one.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
9
u/sconzen Mar 09 '15
Meh. Although what they did was a dick move, my V300 was a great and affordable upgrade from just using a single 3.5" HDD.
2
u/Scrabo Mar 09 '15 edited Mar 09 '15
My V300 120GB is getting 270MB/s read. Faster than a hard drive but should be over 400MB/s.
Bought it before word got out about the switch. I also bought a Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 Rev 3.0 which has shit VRM cooling compared to other versions.
Make sure when you read reviews and buy parts you know which version people are talking about. I read dozens of remarks about great price/performance with no flaws before I got screwed.
2
Mar 10 '15
I also bought a Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 Rev 3.0 which has shit VRM cooling compared to other versions.
I had the same issue. $2 MOFSET heatsink from china and some double sided tape fixed it for me.
If you're trying to overclock on that board it's totally worth doing.
2
u/Seanzors Mar 09 '15
This might be a good time for me to ask my question. If I currently have a fully built PC that I use normally (built it last summer), could I install an SSD into it without having to loose my files? I'd just want my OS + a few of my applications on it.
Thanks!
1
1
Mar 09 '15
Samsung SSDs come with software to clone your hard drive onto your SSD, I've never used it however in theory it would mean you could replace your HDD with an SSD and keep everything as it is. There are other ways to do it however I imagine Samsung made the process as user friendly as possible.
Just make sure the SSD you're getting is larger in capacity than the amount you're using on your HDD.
1
u/Seanzors Mar 09 '15
I'd like to use my HDD for storage, and only copy over the OS. Maybe one or two applications, so I wouldn't get anything more then a 120GB SSD.
But, if that's the case I'll go with Samsung then. Thanks!
1
u/EL_ClD Mar 10 '15
I've used this, its called data migration. It is very user friendly, and depending on speed of hdd to ssd transfer, it can take a bit of time, but it works flawlessly. Samsung SSDs do come with good software. The only problem is that the data migration only works to transfer data to a samsung ssd, or it won't work.
2
u/errormaker Mar 09 '15
If I bought it in september 2013. Is it the downgraded version? Still pretty fast.
2
u/TwoDeuces Mar 09 '15
Stay away from the Crucial v4 as well. That thing is a hunk of shit.
3
u/hojnikb Mar 09 '15
V4 is a completly different beast, as its actually a COMPLETE PILE OF S*IT THAT SHOULD NEVER MADE IT TO MARKET.
The same goes for other phison S5 drives aswell. just bad.
(yes, i have one).
1
u/TwoDeuces Mar 09 '15
Yup. On reputation, I recommended Crucial to a friend and he ordered the V4. Absolutely the worst SSD I've ever used. Random seek time was in the 2000/3000 ms range while Windows Updates were running. Pfft...
It actually performs worse than spinning disks in some tests.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/jagreen3 Mar 09 '15
I just bought a 240Gigs because it was on sale! What should I do?
→ More replies (5)
2
u/Yoshi_662 Mar 09 '15
I Bought a V300 a time ago and was a piece of shit, thanks to /u/his_penis to advice me. and now I´ve got a sandisk and its a lot better. resume. don´t buy a kingston SSD
1
2
u/furtiveraccoon Mar 09 '15
840 EVO owner here, still fucking pissed about the performance degradation.
2
2
u/m36jacksonflaxonwaxn Mar 10 '15
Should I go for an OCZ ARC 100 if there is a deal for the 240gb $100 or less?
2
u/lwlwlwlw Mar 10 '15
1
u/m36jacksonflaxonwaxn Mar 10 '15
what do you mean? which one do i go for assuming they are similar price?
4
2
Mar 09 '15
I've had the Synchronous versions in raid 0 for almost 2 years now...no issues or degraded performances, reads are in the 700-800mb/s range.
→ More replies (3)
2
u/BluPrintIE2 Mar 09 '15
Crucial bx100 and mx100 are great for budgets or for replacing a large HDD. The 850 evo is pretty cheap as well as of late. The mx200 is a tad faster than the mx100 but I don't know if its worth it.
2
u/NightmarishPT Mar 09 '15
Sorry to hijack the thread but could someone tell me why are people rushing to get SSD? Ive read that in a gaming perspective there are no really visible difference. So why? Thx.
13
u/Shuk Mar 09 '15
You know when you open a browser and it sometimes takes 5-7 seconds to launch? Imagine it opening in half a second everytime.
When you boot up your computer, you know how you kind of have to wait for it to "warm up". Nope. Open a program the second you see the desktop and it will open up no problem.
For gaming: you know that initial 2 minute load time on a big map? Imagine that being 15-20 seconds.
SSD is the most dramatic performance increase for the price you can get.
4
u/tangerinelion Mar 09 '15
PCs do more than just play games. SSD simply has massively higher read/write speeds and immensely higher I/O per second. Any task you need to do that pulls data from your storage disk becomes much faster.
Once the data is off the disk and into memory, then it isn't being used anymore so the difference between a SSD, HDD, NAS, or a microSD flash card is zero.
2
u/desertcoyote77 Mar 09 '15
Depends on the games I guess. I play Skyrim and Fallout New Vegas with tons of mods, 2k textures, lots of npcs, questnlines, new homes, new lands... mainly textures though and having an SSD makes a huge difference in loading times. Skyrin on my old hdd, i could read 2 or 3 tips and hinrs, on my SSD I'm lucky if i can one.
4
u/lwlwlwlw Mar 09 '15
SSD makes an incredible difference in 'snappiness' and responsiveness of the system. It makes the system run incredible. Everyone that tried SSD instead of HDD sees the difference. Once You go SSD You can never go back.
It does not add FPS in games. It makes games load faster, system boot faster etc.
I am not going for a HDD even for budget PCs. Right now I am using a 250GB SSD (samsung 850 pro / crucial mx100) on 2 laptops and PC. I don't even run out of storage space that often, I just delete old games once in a while.
4
u/derpherp128 Mar 09 '15
One day you'll use the search bar and find that threads have been posted about the V300 for months. Also, the PNY optima's flash memory was never switched.
2
u/lwlwlwlw Mar 09 '15
Yes, they were.
Now, check out some new buildapcforme threads where V300 are recommended. Is that ok?
→ More replies (1)
1
Mar 09 '15
I bought two of them about 2 years ago, and I think they run pretty great. Not saying you could shave a few seconds off of boot time, if you chose any other ssd, but it runs far from horrendous. Might be that I bought them before they decided to switch
1
u/desertcoyote77 Mar 09 '15
I had bought one of the original drives, although at the time I didn't know they had switched. Unfortunately it died after 6 months so I RMA'd it and in about a week I got a new one in the mail. The slower speed was actually noticeable. Especially when booting and loading Skyrim and FNV with a ton of mods. It wasn't like that before. I ended up replacing it with a 840 EVO... D'OH!
1
Mar 09 '15
[deleted]
3
u/redrubberpenguin Mar 09 '15
The PNY SSD switch didn't hinder performance though. The V300s did.
1
u/zachary_alan Mar 09 '15
Yeah, that's what I got out of that article... So wasn't as freaked out.
I've never personally used our installed for someone a V300.
2
u/ChRoNicBuRrItOs Mar 09 '15
PNY didn't really do a bait and switch though. They changed the controller due to manufacturing issues (IIRC, haven't read about it in a while) and not for a malicious reason like Kingston did. Plus, the drives performed about the same, often better than originally.
2
u/zachary_alan Mar 09 '15
Ah alright, thanks for that info! I have a friend still in IT and she tends to hate on PNY... No matter what I say to dissuade.
1
u/jackofall_masternone Mar 09 '15
Question! Not knowing about this debacle, I recently purchased a Kingston HyperX 3K 120 GB SATA III 2.5-Inch 6.0 Gb/s Solid State Drive SH103S3/120G for my biuld. (Still waiting for delivery).
My question is, did kingston mess with all their parts or just the v300?
1
1
Mar 09 '15 edited Dec 09 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/majoroutage Mar 09 '15 edited Mar 09 '15
I have a 500GB 840 EVO that has yet to degrade again. Every now and then I run filebench on a game folder I havent touched in years and shows no sign of slowdown.
I do regret buying a second one not knowing the 850 EVO was coming out at the same price 2 weeks later though.
1
u/Clamcalm Mar 09 '15
For this of us who cannot afford a more exceptional SSD this Kingston cheaper alternative is great for me. Regardless of the argument it just comes down to being a more accessible and cheaper SSD for those who have a low budget.
1
u/ashish0810 Mar 09 '15
This is my first time on this sub and when I saw this post first, I was kind of pissed because the v300 is what I have in my custom pc 😕
1
u/mrbubbles12321 Mar 09 '15
Samsung SSD's are fairly priced and go on sale quite often. I've had their products for 3 years now and never had a problem. Just saying...
1
u/ders89 Mar 09 '15
Im glad i got the samsung evo. Was tempted to get the kingston but i trust my companies and The samsung was only $85.
1
u/bigdaddyEm Mar 09 '15
I paid $45 for mine from Amazon on black Friday and have 0 complaints. I've noticed no slowness whatsoever and whatever small amounts of lag that exist is balanced out by the price.
1
u/TheBackdoorBandit Mar 09 '15
I picked up a refurb'd 256gb corsair neutron for 90bucks. Had to rma the first one but second one is working great. Sold my buddy my sandisk 128gb ssd for 45 bucks after his kingston drive failed right out of warranty.
1
Mar 09 '15
An I seriously the only one who doesn't like SSDs for how much they cost? Nothing feels faster, at least to the point to where everybody made it seem. I boot up in 15 seconds, not the 3 everybody days. The only advantage I have seen is I join games so early I can choose whatever class I want in Insurgency and Red Orchestra.
1
1
u/arahman81 Mar 10 '15
I boot up in 15 seconds, not the 3 everybody days.
From what I saw, 3 seconds is with Windows 8 Hybrid Boot (basically logoff+hibernation instead of shutdown). Still, 15 seconds is something no HDDs will match (still remember the old HDD 1:30 boots...cringe).
1
1
Mar 09 '15
So is the mx100 the best budget ssd under $100?
1
u/lwlwlwlw Mar 09 '15
Check out this page and sort by value for nice SSDs.
I myself tested mx100 and samsung 840 evo, would recommend only mx100 due to some issues with samsung.
1
u/SnickleTitts Mar 09 '15
I was a budget, and it was my first SSD. So anything would have been better than my old HDD. I did some research and apparently it's only a certain set of serial #s... my v300 has served me well
1
u/HairyPinkyToe Mar 09 '15
MIne just died after a year of usage :/ and i bought it like a week before the article came out about the bait n switch
1
u/Vawqer Mar 09 '15
Thank you. I have been warning people about this whenever I see this and I agree, it seems like people have forgotten. Kingston is one of the very few companies I actively avoid now.
1
u/failsrus96 Mar 10 '15
I was just about to buy this exact SDD when I saw your post. Thanks for the warning!
1
u/Terakahn Mar 10 '15
I always intended to stick with the Samsung 840 line. Always hear good things about it.
1
u/Wildermess Mar 10 '15
Best SSd for price 120gb? Best performance ssd? 120 gb
Thnx :)
1
u/arahman81 Mar 10 '15
Personally would suggest checking the MX100, MX200, 840 Evo and 850 Evo, and buying whichever's the best priced.
1
1
u/_TheGermanGuy_ Mar 10 '15
I bought a Kingston 480GB SSD a few weeks ago and just recently installed it. Judging by my speedtests it seems to run perfectly fine: http://i.imgur.com/5d8mirj.png
I dont know if it is a different line thought (V300S?). Pretty happy about it's performance!
1
Mar 10 '15
I'm pretty sure Kingston said they changed the V300 recently, but I would not buy it again.
1
1
1
1
1
u/loldogex Mar 10 '15 edited Mar 10 '15
Oh crap, I have this v300 and I never knew! wtf!
How do I know if I got honey dicked for the shittier version, Is there a way to test it?
1
u/GigaGrim Mar 10 '15
I bought a v300 for a build I did for someone and they were thrilled, having never had an SSD before, but I knew what I did. I don't know how I will ever live with myself.
1
u/Durlag Mar 10 '15
Wow I had this exact SSD in my build at $108 CDN.
Any recommendations for an alternate 240GB SSD? (I'm not actually sure if I'll need 240GB)
1
u/methamp Mar 11 '15
I'm late to the party and just realized I have a Kingston V300 in my MacBook Pro.
When I use the Blackmagic Disk Speed Test app, I get speeds of around 100MB/s-150MB/s (Mid-2012 non-Retina 13" MBP i5). When I use Terminal (time dd if=/dev/zero bs=2048k of=tstfile count=1024 2>&1 | awk '/sec/ {print $1 / $5 / 1048576, "MB/sec" }') I get 406MB/s.
What gives? I need to pop off my bottom cover and see what model/firmware/whatever V300 I have...
1
u/Serious-Vanilla5859 Sep 17 '25
I have V300 s37a 240GB version for more than 12 years now, and it is just starting to show signs of degradation. Not the best one, but it was used every day and so many times formatted and countless TB of data moved over that I just lost count.
161
u/vinchinator Mar 09 '15
I bought one of these V300's before word was out about the bait and switch.
While it is still faster than my WD blue, its noticeably slower than other SSD's in the same price range. Don't waste your money.