Hectron SSD's?

[dickiefunk]

Hi,

I'm considering upgrading my HDD's to SSD's. I've noticed a new brand was released in May called Hectron :-

http://hectron.us/hectron-x1-240gb-soli ... ive-sata3/

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hectron-240GB- ... B01GPEA1QC

Does anyone know anything about this brand?

My current MOBO has SATAII ports. Will this be compatible with SATAIII SSD's?

Are there any other budget SSD's you could recommend? Ideally I'd like a couple of 500GB SSD's.

Thanks

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

I'm pretty sure that sataIII drives are backwards-compatible, but maybe someone else would confirm

Regarding the brand? I'd honestly front up the extra cash for a 'known' quantity, especially for a music computer. Sticking with Samsung (850 evo, or pro), or Sandisk (ultra II, or above)

If you are looking for 2 drives, to be used in a boot/record type setup, then you might be fine to cut corners on the boot drive. Of course, there is the popular argument that ssd's make this setup pointless, as a single ssd has the bandwidth to handle it all. The arguments agains this are more to do with longevity (writing, and deleting, causes most 'wear'), but a 1tb 850 evo gives a 5-year warranty, and has been stress-tested to write levels many times that of the manufacturers guarantee

I am currently in this position myself, and not sure which way to go. I could try the single 1tb route, and add an extra, smaller record drive later (if needed), or buy the cheaper Sandisk ultra II paired with a Samsung record drive. Given the Sandisk only has a 3-year warrantly it might make less sense

Sorry for muddying the waters

[Kaine]

I'm pretty sure that sataIII drives are backwards-compatible, but maybe someone else would confirm

I've gone into a more in depth response on this for Dickie on another site, but to confirm your response, yeah, it'll work just run at half speed.

I'd agree and also go for something more established, with the new Crucial MX300 taking it for me currently at the budget end.

[dickiefunk]

Thanks Peter. This is my MOBO :-

http://www.gigabyte.com/products/produc ... id=2557#ov

It says in the specs SATA 3Gb/s. I'm not sure what that means?

[Kaine]

That's the SATA II spec.

SATA 3 devices can hit (in theory, not in practice) 6Gb/s, which is double the SATA II rated throughput.

[dickiefunk]

Thanks. I'm basically weighing up if it would be worth upgrading my old Intel Q9650 based PC.
At the moment it's using 4GB 800 MHz DDR2 ram with two Seagate Caviar Black HDD's. Would there be a worthwhile improvement if I upgraded the RAM to 8GB and ran everything in 64 bit with new Crucial MX300 SSD's?

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Thanks. I'm basically weighing up if it would be worth upgrading my old Intel Q9650 based PC.
At the moment it's using 4GB 800 MHz DDR2 ram with two Seagate Caviar Black HDD's. Would there be a worthwhile improvement if I upgraded the RAM to 8GB and ran everything in 64 bit with new Crucial MX300 SSD's?

Upgrading ram depends on your workflow, and how many ram-heavy plugs you use. Either way, these days, going from 4 - 8 is pretty much a no-brainer. Having said that, ssd's can also help as some plugs (sampled instruments, normally) allow for sample-streaming

As for ssd? People are still getting by with 7200 drives, so they're pretty much a luxury item. Having said that, they do make the whole experience much snappier, giving the impression of a much faster system

I bought my specific model of laptop, second-hand, as it was one of the last macbook pro that allowed easy user upgrades. Aside from running a lot more disk-heavy proects, plugs etc., part of me is upgrading to actually reach the full potential of the machine that I have

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

I'd agree and also go for something more established, with the new Crucial MX300 taking it for me currently at the budget end.

I actually read some pretty bad stuff about these drives, which is a shame as 750gig is exactly what I was looking for

[Kaine]

I actually read some pretty bad stuff about these drives, which is a shame as 750gig is exactly what I was looking for

Shoot us some links if you can recall them, I'm honestly all ears on this one. They've not been out long enough to generate run rates, but in all the testing I've seen they beat the Kingston SSD now & Sandisk Ultras by a sizable amount and the burst rate seems to last twice as long as the other cheap drives.

I'm not saying they are up to Samsung or even Intel standards by any means, they simply aren't and sustained read/writes do show that up but we have to remember the price reflects that as well.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

I actually read some pretty bad stuff about these drives, which is a shame as 750gig is exactly what I was looking for

Shoot us some links if you can recall them, I'm honestly all ears on this one. They've not been out long enough to generate run rates, but in all the testing I've seen they beat the Kingston SSD now & Sandisk Ultras by a sizable amount and the burst rate seems to last twice as long as the other cheap drives.

I'm not saying they are up to Samsung or even Intel standards by any means, they simply aren't and sustained read/writes do show that up but we have to remember the price reflects that as well.

When they released it there was such a good price that I almost leapt on it without checking. But I did check, and I didn't read past this one

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/crucial-m ... 577-3.html


Crucial MX300 750GB


Pros: 3D TLC triples the density of existing planar TLC so there will be large price reductions in time with the MX300. Hardware-enabled power fail protection for data at rest is a big plus for those that like their data.

Cons: The MX300 suffers from high latency and heavy disk usage to complete elementary tasks. The 5 seconds of system hang time would be impressive in a slam dunk contest. I didn't want to build that Excel chart now, anyhow.

Verdict: For some the Crucial MX300 Limited Edition 750GB drive will be a massive disappointment. We would rather look at the potential for growth and what is around the corner. We can wait a little longer since the world isn't buying flash at a high enough rate as it is. If Crucial really wants to sell some flash it has the potential to build products that people really want to buy. Let's hope the 750GB capacity size is the starting point for 3D TLC so we can finally live the dream of high capacity flash-based storage.

[Kaine]

Well, I'm not going to argue that the EVO isn't a better drive, it is or at least the 850 is. This is coming in at the same price point as the 750 which rather average as well.

His comparison in this article pins the drive up against various 1TB drives due to it's high price point at the time of writing, price point (over here at least) has been price slashed to more acceptable levels. Looking at it again, the are a few price points where the X400 surpass it, but those are EOL apparently. I need to test the Z410 replacements I think, appears they are shipping now.

The lag wasn't apparent on the 275GB on I tested, think I need to play with the larger ones too at this point as either they've fixed it in later firmwares, or its behavior more apparent on the larger models that I haven't seen, in which case point taken.

*edit*

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7741/c ... dex11.html

I'd also seen this previously that flys in the face of the other review. Their Sandisk testing is even more lackluster. I had the MX down as a best of a bad bunch type, but it appears that everyone is seeing different results.

The takeaway here is buy the Samsung

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Well, I'm not going to argue that the EVO isn't a better drive, it is or at least the 850 is. This is coming in at the same price point as the 750 which rather average as well.

His comparison in this article pins the drive up against various 1TB drives due to it's high price point at the time of writing, price point (over here at least) has been price slashed to more acceptable levels. Looking at it again, the are a few price points where the X400 surpass it, but those are EOL apparently. I need to test the Z410 replacements I think, appears they are shipping now.

The lag wasn't apparent on the 275GB on I tested, think I need to play with the larger ones too at this point as either they've fixed it in later firmwares, or its behavior more apparent on the larger models that I haven't seen, in which case point taken.

*edit*

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7741/c ... dex11.html

I'd also seen this previously that flys in the face of the other review. Their Sandisk testing is even more lackluster. I had the MX down as a best of a bad bunch type, but it appears that everyone is seeing different results.

The takeaway here is buy the Samsung

I'd be interested in what you find from further testing, but I am not willing to take the risk at this point.