Kingston SSDNow V+ 64GB
Introduction
Published: 4th December 2009 | Source: Kingston | Price: £133.40 |

The problem then lies in that to purchase a high-performing, sensible capacity drive needs a large outlay of cash, something most of us either haven't got to hand or would prefer to spend on something that has a more obviously visible improvement such as a graphics card or a beefier processor.
Most Recent Comments
All we really need now is for another company to undercut Kingston by £20 and the cycle of sanity can continue.
I do agree that the pricing of this is 'good' in comparison with it's fellow suspects, but on the whole, whilst also considering the traditional drive it's reviewed against, I strongly disagree with the 9 rating in the price category. I personally think ssds should start with a '5' rating handicap on general principle.
What does bother me is whilst it boots an OS nicely faster by some 10-15s usually, the files in consideration against the game loading are not a fair template for comparison. What I took from it is that forgiving 10-15s, the traditional harddrive is an awesome purchase, whilst ssds are what they are.
If a traditional harddrive comes out with a 128mb (or even 64mb) cache, the ssd drive will look pretty poor. This ofc will only happen with those manufacturers who don't make ssds.
Otherwise the HD5970 should get 1 because you can get a X1950 for £20. Logical fallacy.
Whereas the F1 can do what HDD's were designed for alot more than all but 1 (that I know of) single SSD can. And that's to store more pr0n, I mean data.
HDDs are not priced comparably to SSDs, nor even are they in competition with them. The sole feature is that they both store data. Thusly HDDs are not taken into account when scoring the price.
Maybe the F1 can do what HDDs are designed to do. But in case you didn't notice this is an SSD review.
It's not an analogy. It's pointing out that your argument is invalid.
HDDs are not priced comparably to SSDs, nor even are they in competition with them. The sole feature is that they both store data. Thusly HDDs are not taken into account when scoring the price.
Maybe the F1 can do what HDDs are designed to do. But in case you didn't notice this is an SSD review.
U need to look up what it means butt.
And u need to rethink - thinking that SSDs are not in competition with HDDs. They each have more than just the unique feature to store data.
If u also didn't notice, the F1 is used as a comparison more-or-less through-out the review.
Infact, what the fudge was the point in posting what u just posted ?
Good review all the same :)

I don't think it is... The reviewed drive is the V+... That is the V and it looks slower...