SSDNow UV400

[LienusLateTips]

I have a general sense of SSDs, and know that UV400 is inferior compared to something like the WD Blue or 850 EVO, but it's selling for $90 CAD, while others sell for $109+. Good deal?

https://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX62287

[Sakkura]

Performance is pretty low, but then it's also a pretty low price. I would say it's a decent value, but not an exceptional sale.

[LienusLateTips]

@Droidbot

 

 

 

 

 

Just now, Sakkura said:

Performance is pretty low, but then it's also a pretty low price. I would say it's a decent value, but not an exceptional sale.

It's $30-40 less than everything else

 

[Jurrunio]

https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/products/internal-hard-drive/#t=0&S=120000,10000000&sort=price&page=1

 

There are many more options. How would you forget PCPP though? Maybe there's a reason to use memoryexpress?

[LienusLateTips]

Just now, Jurrunio said:

https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/products/internal-hard-drive/#t=0&S=120000,10000000&sort=price&page=1

 

There are many more options. How would you forget PCPP though? Maybe there's a reason to use memoryexpress?

I used PCPP and it's the cheapest 240-275GB SSD

not 120GB

[LienusLateTips]

2 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/products/internal-hard-drive/#t=0&S=120000,10000000&sort=price&page=1

 

There are many more options. How would you forget PCPP though? Maybe there's a reason to use memoryexpress?

https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/products/internal-hard-drive/#t=0&S=240000,275000&sort=price&page=1&X=0,12000

[Jurrunio]

6 minutes ago, JDE said:

I used PCPP and it's the cheapest 240-275GB SSD

not 120GB

oops

 

According to userbenchmark though, the UV400 isnt just inferior to WD Blues and Samsung ones, but slower than everything else in the list. Sure it's the cheapest, but I dont consider it the best buy. Also, dont forget Kingston have the bad past on using more expensive parts in SSDs to create good looking reviews at first, then use slower and cheaper parts to produce the same models to trick customers.

[LienusLateTips]

12 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

oops

 

According to userbenchmark though, the UV400 isnt just inferior to WD Blues and Samsung ones, but slower than everything else in the list. Sure it's the cheapest, but I dont consider it the best buy. Also, dont forget Kingston have the bad past on using more expensive parts in SSDs to create good looking reviews at first, then use slower and cheaper parts to produce the same models to trick customers.

Ya, but is it a good deal?

[Sakkura]

40 minutes ago, JDE said:

@Droidbot

 

 

 

 

 

It's $30-40 less than everything else

 

$18 less than the Crucial BX300, which is a really solid SSD. Either of those is a viable choice at their price point, but personally I would lean towards the BX300.

[Jurrunio]

14 minutes ago, JDE said:

Ya, but is it a good deal?

For those with the tightest of budgets, yes.

[Droidbot]

5 hours ago, Jurrunio said:

oops

 

According to userbenchmark though, the UV400 isnt just inferior to WD Blues and Samsung ones, but slower than everything else in the list. Sure it's the cheapest, but I dont consider it the best buy. Also, dont forget Kingston have the bad past on using more expensive parts in SSDs to create good looking reviews at first, then use slower and cheaper parts to produce the same models to trick customers.

The problem with crowdsourcing data to use for benchmarks like this is that not all SSDs are the same, while Samsung use predictable Samsung flash and Samsung controllers, drives like the UV400 change their bill of materials all the time, so what is true for one month's UV400s could possibly not be true for the next month's UV400s. 

 

Userbench's SSD bench is pretty naff anyway compared to AnandTech's real world benches and others. 

 

@JDE I'd say go for it, it's still going to be night and day compared to a HDD. But for a power user you're gonna tell the difference compared to a good SSD. 

[Jurrunio]

1 hour ago, Droidbot said:

drives like the UV400 change their bill of materials all the time, so what is true for one month's UV400s could possibly not be true for the next month's UV400s. 

 

Userbench's SSD bench is pretty naff anyway compared to AnandTech's real world benches and others. 

That's what caused problems to customers of Kingston because Kingston got caught red-handed using worse parts after reviewers do their reviews. Userbench might not be accurate, but at least it's constantly updated, unlike those done by reviewers like AnandTech.

[LienusLateTips]

2 hours ago, Droidbot said:

@JDE I'd say go for it, it's still going to be night and day compared to a HDD. But for a power user you're gonna tell the difference compared to a good SSD. 

All I have to compare to is a SP550 and hard drives, I think I'll be fine

 

[Droidbot]

1 hour ago, Jurrunio said:

That's what caused problems to customers of Kingston because Kingston got caught red-handed using worse parts after reviewers do their reviews. Userbench might not be accurate, but at least it's constantly updated, unlike those done by reviewers like AnandTech.

Fair point but most of the time it looks generally instead on newer benches specifically, and it's hard to tell how long the SSD has been used for or batch nos etc.