bit-tech.net

Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB SSD Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 35

Reply
Showerhead 7th July 2010, 11:16 Quote
This is why i've always thought to hold off an SSd until SATA6 drives become available. Still far too expensive for me though and i'm sure will see faster coming along when the rest of the manufacturers convert their drives to SATA6.
Baz 7th July 2010, 11:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Showerhead
This is why i've always thought to hold off an SSd until SATA6 drives become available. Still far too expensive for me though and i'm sure will see faster coming along when the rest of the manufacturers convert their drives to SATA6.

No doubt. All sorts of rumours flying around about SandForce and Indilinx's SATA 6Gbps controllers, but it's unlikely we'll see them until Q4 at the earliest.
[PUNK] crompers 7th July 2010, 11:36 Quote
people looking at lower GB versions of these drives should bear in mind that write performance is directly linked to the capacity. so that the 64GB versions only acheive 75Mb/s write speeds, although the stellar read performance remains.
lacuna 7th July 2010, 11:41 Quote
I do wonder when I will read one of these SSD reviews with actual consideration towards buying one. It seems like it will take years before they become affordable
yakyb 7th July 2010, 11:45 Quote
whilst many of us do spend quite a pretty penny on hardware the majority of us still feel that these drives are too expensive i will be happy when i can pick up 60GB for anything below £90

although the corsair reactor is getting close
memeroot 7th July 2010, 12:00 Quote
sorry but my time honestly isnt worth that much... also would you not get better performance by upgrading your memory to 20 gig?
Ph4ZeD 7th July 2010, 12:08 Quote
I suspect we'll see a real shift in the market when Intel's new drives come out.
bomberh 7th July 2010, 12:46 Quote
I have one of these and they are fantastic. I know they are expensive, but well worth it. I am afraid that I only have the 3 GB connection, so I can't at the moment take advantage of the 6 GB connection speed, but it is still as fast as hell.

When I first got it I update the firmware and made sure Windows 7 was using TRIM with it and away I went. Great drive, if you can afford it.
Spraduke 7th July 2010, 13:07 Quote
Why 7 for value when you clearly state its better value for money than its smaller counterparts. Its not as cheap as the corsair reactor for example but its damn fast!
amacieli 7th July 2010, 13:15 Quote
128 GB RAM cache according to the subtitle on the picture. I want one!!
Kalcifer 7th July 2010, 14:07 Quote
I bought this SSD a few months ago, really loving this review :-)
The Brick 7th July 2010, 14:14 Quote
How would this fare on an average on-board 3gbps port? Would it still be considerably faster than the others? I'm mostly interested in loading times. I'm using a Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P, and the C300 is about the cheapest 256gb drive right now. Without the extra controller, that is. Would the 620 be worth it for loading times? (Booting, games, programs).
Scootiep 7th July 2010, 14:33 Quote
"the C300 the fastest drive we’ve ever used for loading games or applications." I'm curious, has Bit-Tech never reviewed a PCIe drive such as the OCZ Z-Drives? I'd be interested to see how quick load times would get with one of them to compare it to the fastest SATA SSD's.

Good review but I must say, using "While..." in the opening sentence for three consecutive conclusion paragraphs is just wrong. So, so wrong.
jschmidt1340 7th July 2010, 14:47 Quote
It looks like this is the first drive to really kick Intel's butt. Although it makes perfect sense that, in order to get maximum performance. you need SATA6, but what does SATA3 performance look like with this drive? Is it any faster than the Intel? Since most people still have SATA3 in their machines, testing should be done accordingly. I would really like to put this drive in my laptop, but if it is no faster on SATA3 than the Intel, the Intel is much cheaper...
fingerbob69 7th July 2010, 15:05 Quote
Good grief! One of these costs more than a whole PC ...eg Bit-tech's own Affordable All-rounder. At these prices just what is the point of an ssd ...other than the dubious benefit of shading a couple of seconds of os load times?
WarMadMax 7th July 2010, 15:27 Quote
Went with the 64GB C300 personally direct from crucial and quidco on top for 9% back ;)

Great article though, made me go and order a Highpoint 620 as my board is sata II only.
the 64GB version has the same read speeds (350+MBps on sata3, 270Mbps~ on sata2) but limited to 75MBps~ writes.


not noticed huge gains on it so far but only installed on monday :)
robots 7th July 2010, 16:05 Quote
SSD's aren't really that fast to begin with, relative to normal hard disks anyway. The Stalker chart demonstrating exactly what I mean. Waiting 20 seconds instead of 30 seconds is pretty much useless to me. I am still having to twiddle my thumbs either way, and even 20 seconds is a significant wait. An extra 10 seconds on top of that is barely even noticeable.

Where I think these current crop of SSD's are useful though, is just general windows usage. The computer boots faster, and if Windows is on it, pretty much everything you do within Windows, happens almost instantly. Whether that's loading your browser, loading up Paint, clicking the start menu, loading the control panel or windows explorer, etc.. So I think they are nice for that. I am looking forward to there being far more exciting gains in the distant future though. I want to see the 30 second load time on a F3 become 4 seconds on a SSD.

We are getting there though, bit by bit.
pizzanbeer 7th July 2010, 16:38 Quote
I want one now...
mrbens 7th July 2010, 20:06 Quote
Only problem (apart from the obvious price) would be for those of us with side windows showing off our OCD tidied PC internals.

Having the card sticking over my graphics card with visable sata cables coming out of it would look ugly when everything else is tucked away with just the glowing liquid cooling on show. :D
tonschk 7th July 2010, 20:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzanbeer
I want one now...


Me too ;)


.
erratum1 7th July 2010, 22:59 Quote
Way too expensive for a drive, they will come down but god knows when.
dark_avenger 8th July 2010, 02:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by memeroot
sorry but my time honestly isnt worth that much... also would you not get better performance by upgrading your memory to 20 gig?

You would see no benefit from having 20GB of RAM unless you are doing ridiculous amounts of multitasking/rendering.

Until you have used a PC with a SSD it's hard to explain the difference, but once you have used one there is no going back.
Makaveli 8th July 2010, 02:41 Quote
I agree with this last post 100%.

Took the SSD route in Dec... and never going back!!

Also glad I picked up the 160GB G2 over the 120GB vertex.
tonschk 8th July 2010, 08:19 Quote
Probably I will put my hand in one of those SSD at the end of this year

.
yakyb 8th July 2010, 12:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonschk
Probably I will put my hand in one of those SSD at the end of this year

.

Im thinking the same to be honest

i have always maintained £1-£2 per at 60GB would be when i genuinely consider them and i think by my Bday we will be near that point
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums