Kingston SSDNow V+ 64GB

Synthetics continued

  
Benchmarks continued..
 
Crystal Disk Mark
 
The final synthetic we're going to look at is Crystal Disk Mark 2.2. Unlike our previous benchmarks this can run multiple data sets of a user-defined size. To ensure that the SSDNow V+ was put under the best possible strain five runs using 500MB data were run.
 
Firstly the sequential tests. Once again these show a fantastic level of read performance, although not as high as the tests on the previous page, and equally impressive writing performance. It's common that the read performances of drives are around the manufacturers claims, because people like the massive number than the read can produce. But it's rare to see a company consistently underestimate their writing performance. As the small size of the drive means it is best suited as an Operating System drive rather than data storage, write speed is equally important.

 
As we move down the scale towards the 512K test, it is clear that we are starting to reach the tipping point of SSD technology. They are always much faster than standard HDDs, but once you reach the smaller file sizes they start to slow down.
 
 
Finally the very small 4K size test results. These are much slower than any of the tests on the previous page led us to expect, and repeated runs and tweaking didn't improve matters. The speed of both the Kingston drive on test today and the Samsung drive being compared were much lower than anticipated, and so these results are more for completions sake as no other testing gave such an anomalous result.
 
 
Excluding the anomalous Crystal Mark 4K result, it's obvious that despite the smaller price tag than its contemporaries, the Kingston SSDNow V+ hasn't cut any corners or lacks for any ability.
 
Hopefully these speeds will translate to actual usage.
«Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next»

Most Recent Comments

03-12-2009, 21:30:51

tinytomlogan
Von Blade takes a look at the Kingston SSDNow V+ 64GB to see if the low price means a drop in performance.

Continue Reading

03-12-2009, 23:45:26

sprento
Very nice review mate, after reading;

"Luckily you aren't the type who want the quick answer otherwise you'd have skipped on to the conclusion", I decided to continue reading as I am the kind of person referred to that skips on !

I do agree that an SSD is the best performance upgrade for a PC, however the price is still way too high and unfortunately it doesn't look like it will be dropping soon. That said, I know I will have one/three soon ! Good job.

04-12-2009, 04:33:19

GavX
damn tempting for Red October Mk2... really want something a bit bigger, but 130 for a fast as hell drive is tempting, and I imagine 64gb is enough for Windows 7 and a handful of games... damn you, I want this now!

Still, those write speeds are very impressive, anyone know how much the 128Gb model costs?

07-12-2009, 06:14:27

Mr. Smith
Nice review VB of a decent budget drive, it would deffo make a nice boot drive

I'm managing to resist buying anything until the new year becasue I think once the sata3 ssd's arrive the sata2 tech should drop in price.

07-12-2009, 08:54:36

GavX
going on play.com for 120... is that the same drive?

http://www.play.com/PC/PCs/-/2358/1625/-/11924385/Kingston-SSDNow-V-Series-64GB-SSD-2-5-Internal-SATA-Hard-Drive-With-Desktop-Accessory-Kit/Product.html?searchtype=genre#

Cause if it is I might just buy one, or get Santa to get me one

07-12-2009, 10:33:45

Mr. Smith
Quote:
Originally Posted by name='GavX'
going on play.com for 120... is that the same drive?

http://www.play.com/PC/PCs/-/2358/1625/-/11924385/Kingston-SSDNow-V-Series-64GB-SSD-2-5-Internal-SATA-Hard-Drive-With-Desktop-Accessory-Kit/Product.html?searchtype=genre#

Cause if it is I might just buy one, or get Santa to get me one
I don't think it is... The reviewed drive is the V+... That is the V and it looks slower...

07-12-2009, 16:59:18

GavX
Where are you seeing it for 130?

09-12-2009, 23:50:09

Rastalovich
Great review.

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.

14-12-2009, 11:24:13

VonBlade
All scores for pricing within reviews are taken against similar products.

Otherwise the HD5970 should get 1 because you can get a X1950 for 20. Logical fallacy.

14-12-2009, 11:37:29

Rastalovich
That an@logy has never worked for me. I can't think of anything relevant to today that the X1950 could do better than the HD5970. Mode promote to an external tv whilst using mpclassic perhaps as the drivers are old enough and u could use an unupd8d xp.

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.

14-12-2009, 14:00:23

VonBlade
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.

14-12-2009, 14:14:08

Rastalovich
Quote:
Originally Posted by name='VonBlade'
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 ?

14-12-2009, 14:21:36

FarFarAway
It is very difficult to justify a price tag like that on what is essentially a 64gb hard drive. Sure it's priced well compared to the competition, but the competition is priced at laughable levels.

Good review all the same

14-12-2009, 14:32:12

Ham
Anyone seen one in stock at any reputable re/e-tailer?

07-01-2010, 16:56:42

Apans
me want!
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.