What's wrong with Sandforce?Because Intel make a big deal of thoroughly testing all their drives and charge more for it. They do have a bulletproof reliability record though.
In any case both of those are Sandforce based SSDs which I would avoid. Get a Marvell or Samsung controller based one instead.
Past reliability problems (mainly from OCZ) and not great performance with incompressible data. The sequential read/writes might seem impressive but what's far more important is the 4K random read/writes.What's wrong with Sandforce?
You know there aren't many alternatives to Sandforce.Past reliability problems (mainly from OCZ) and not great performance with incompressible data. The sequential read/writes might seem impressive but what's far more important is the 4K random read/writes.
In real world usage you will probably never notice the difference but given that the Crucial m4/Samsung 830 are around the same price as Sandforce drives so I'd go for those instead.
By far the most popular drive I see on forums is the Crucial m4. Sure there's a lot more Sandforce models than Marvell/Samsung/Indilinx but that doesn't mean you should go for Sandforce, especially when the "alternative" is superior and more popular. That's like saying there's tons of Android phones out there but there's only one alternative (iPhone) therefore I must go for Android.You know there aren't many alternatives to Sandforce.
slh28 said:Because Intel make a big deal of thoroughly testing all their drives and charge more for it. They do have a bulletproof reliability record though.
Bit of a contradiction don't ya think?Past reliability problems (mainly from OCZ) and not great performance with incompressible data. The sequential read/writes might seem impressive but what's far more important is the 4K random read/writes.