Silicon Power SP120GBSS3V55S25

Advantages: Fast, reliable, inexpensive, does not really lose in speed if the computer does not know how to Trim (say under Vista or XP), 3-year warranty.

Disadvantages: Not the fastest (but far from the slowest) SSD out of the existing ones, the characteristics vary somewhat from batch to batch.

Comment: My Win7 with all the junk like antivirus, firewall and a dozen or so representatives of assorted software loads in 30-40s and turns off in 10-15s. In general, it is rather strange that this model is not popular. For such a price, the disk has simply gorgeous speed characteristics, second only to market leaders like Plextor, the ability to live under WinXP without any problems, and overall unpretentiousness. The original manufacturer of the disc is Phison and this model is sold under various names. I took Silicon Power because of the combination of low price and 3-year warranty.

Advantages: Really high speed, low price (although I live in a remote region, so I had to overpay a lot, I took it for 3800r, although I don't regret it). I recommend it to everyone!

Disadvantages: With its price and low-end positioning, they simply do not exist!

Comment: Well, the disc is simply gorgeous! This is my first SSD, and it looks like a very successful one. I approached the choice of SSD thoroughly after going through a bunch of options and looking at many reviews on not expensive SSDs, and this model is very interesting. Let's start with the fact that this SSD is not manufactured by Silicon Power, but by Phison, Silicon Power only re-labels and sells. The controller here is Phison, which compares favorably with the Sand Force used in the rest of Silicon Power's products, and many other manufacturers. Latest generation memory chips manufactured by Toshiba using 19nm process technology. And although, due to their cheap positioning, they have a slightly reduced write speed, they are brought to mind by the forces of Phison (and as practice shows, everything is in order with the speed). Apparently Phison employs really talented engineers, since the v55, being at the very bottom of the Silicon Power lineup, and having a cheap filling, is not inferior even to the older models, which are much more expensive. And now personal impressions. After a month of work (now), I measured the speed of switching on and off. The following came out: power-on speed from the start of the download (after the POST procedure and until the desktop appears) - 11 seconds; shutdown (from the moment the Power button is pressed) - 7 sec. CrystalDiskMark3.0.2 benchmark results in mb / s: sequential read 520, write 265; 512kb blocks read 349, write 262; in blocks of 4kb reading 28, writing 60, but after the optimization, the record grew to 106! (more about it later); blocks of 4kb with a queue depth of 32 reading 150, writing 147. Overall, the results are impressive. Before that I also did some optimization: Disable System Restore. Disable data indexing. Disable hibernation.Setting up a power plan. And of course the work of AHCI and TRIM is necessary. After a month of work, I did not find any changes in the speed of work. Complementing the review. Now the market is already selling a version with a controller from Sand Force, which is much worse, so now it's a different SSD

Advantages: I took it for 3000r, fast, reliable, silent, firmware for the controller comes out, an adapter for 3.5 is included.

Disadvantages: Instead of the normal software for updating the firmware, they released a universal one, which does not work, where I did 2 firmware before that, everything was fine. SMART does not work, I have no idea how long ago it happened, I noticed a year later.

Comment: More than 6800 hours of work in 1.5 years in an old laptop (5750g). Didn't do anything, didn't optimize or do other nonsense like disabling the paging file and restoring. Trim work is checked and indexing is disabled. It works smartly, Windows has ceased to strain. Sequential Write 274, Read 466, Rand 4KB Write 44, Read 20.

Advantages: Speed, service life 3 years.

Disadvantages: Didn't find it. The chipset or firmware does not fully support statistics and health monitoring. Only the usage time and speed can be checked.

Comment: I bought it in April 2014 to try what an SSD is. Moved from the dying WD to 750GB. I was stunned by the speed of work, the loading of Windows and all programs. I stored only Windu and all programs on it, background, important and not so much. Another Windows is responsible for games, movies, photos, etc. After 3 years and 4 months, it began to freeze. For the entire time of use, I changed Windows 4 times. And now there are brakes, by the method of exclusion I sin for wear. Although when I bought it, I hoped “if only I worked for a year,” because then I did not find much information about the endurance of ssd.

Advantages: First, its rate of fire. True, according to AIDA64 tests, it turned out to be less than stated, but not much, you can close your eyes. Secondly, the presence of a slide in the kit for the pocket of the flop cutter (although the store said that it is not completed). A trifle, but nice. But in general, a bad device, I have long been using this type of drives for an operating system, however, before that I had an OCZ Apex Series. buzzed for 5 years, died quietly. Visible in the system, but not readable. According to its characteristics, Silicon is ahead of it and noticeably. I will not give tests here, but my impression is very good. It makes no sense to talk about the size and consumption. I use it in a desktop machine, but in principle, its volume is too small for a laptop, and you can't put the second hard there. In short, for my purposes it fits perfectly, you need to install OSes on such disks, and the rest, including the file storage, is better to keep on the second hard, from a terabyte or more.

Disadvantages: not detected. I hope it will last as much as its predecessor.

Comment: In general, I use such a bundle of SSD + HDD already in 4 machines (desktop, of course), the OS boot time is noticeably reduced immediately, the speed of the disk subsystem grows by about 50-70%. Well, the access time 0.1 mSek to any site (!) Is good news. In fact, defragmentation becomes almost unnecessary.

Advantages: Speed ​​and ease, 3.5 "adapter

Comment: -------------------------------------------------- --------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.2 x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World: http://crystalmark.info/ ----- -------------------------------------------------- ---------------- * MB / s = 1,000,000 byte / s [SATA / 300 = 300,000,000 byte / s] Sequential Read: 214.096 MB / s Sequential Write: 137.203 MB / s Random Read 512KB: 210.655 MB / s Random Write 512KB: 140.970 MB / s Random Read 4KB (QD = 1): 26.433 MB / s [6453.3 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD = 1): 60.353 MB / s [14734.7 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD = 32): 32.493 MB / s [7933.0 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD = 32): 86.256 MB / s [21058.5 IOPS] Test: 100 MB [C: 57.3% (63.6 / 111.0 GB)] ( x2) Date: 2016/03/04 23:07:57 OS: Windows 8 Professional [6.2 Build 9200] (x64)

Advantages: Price, speed, quality

Disadvantages: Didn't find

Comment: Great drive. I put one in a working laptop, another one in a working PC. No problem. Sequential Read (Q = 32, T = 1): 534.654 MB / s Sequential Write (Q = 32, T = 1): 385.297 MB / s Random Read 4KiB (Q = 32, T = 1): 178.519 MB / s [ 43583.7 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q = 32, T = 1): 251.258 MB / s [61342.3 IOPS] Sequential Read (T = 1): 492.019 MB / s Sequential Write (T = 1): 384.568 MB / s Random Read 4KiB (Q = 1, T = 1): 27.163 MB / s [6631.6 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q = 1, T = 1): 82.032 MB / s [20027.3 IOPS] Test: 1024 MiB [C: 35.6% ( 39.6 / 111.3 GiB)] (x5) [Interval = 5 sec] OS: Windows 10 Professional [10.0 Build 14393] (x64)

Advantages: 1) Speed ​​for budget SSD 2) Price 3) 3 years manufacturer warranty

Comment: Just fire, not a 3,000 SSD. -------------------------------------------------- --------------------- CrystalDiskMark 5.2.0 x64 (C) 2007-2016 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World: http://crystalmark.info/ ----- -------------------------------------------------- ---------------- * MB / s = 1,000,000 bytes / s [SATA / 600 = 600,000,000 bytes / s] * KB = 1000 bytes, KiB = 1024 bytes Sequential Read (Q = 32, T = 1): 269.290 MB / s Sequential Write (Q = 32, T = 1): 224.499 MB / s Random Read 4KiB (Q = 32, T = 1): 35.057 MB / s [8558.8 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q = 32, T = 1): 109.102 MB / s [26636.2 IOPS] Sequential Read (T = 1): 212.001 MB / s Sequential Write (T = 1): 158.763 MB / s Random Read 4KiB (Q = 1 , T = 1): 16.035 MB / s [3914.8 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q = 1, T = 1): 36.475 MB / s [8905.0 IOPS] Test: 1024 MiB [C: 22.4% (25.1 / 111.8 GiB) ] (x5) [Interval = 5 sec] Date: 2016/10/12 19:45:50 OS: Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)

Advantages: Not expensive, 3 months - normal flight.

Disadvantages: Lack of software for transferring the system. I had to cheat when transferring.

Comment:

Advantages: Price quality.

Disadvantages: Not found.

Comment: There are already 3 disks of this model in the house, the first one was purchased about 3 years ago, they work flawlessly. I can't say anything about the speed on SATA II. Subjectively, the Windows 7 load when switching from a Seagate HDD decreased from 4-5 minutes to 30-40 seconds, the system itself responds faster. Windows 7 score changed from 5.2 for HDD to 7.8 for this SSD.