Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 37

Thread: Kingston SSDNow V300 120GB SATA 3.0 SSD

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,474

    Default Kingston SSDNow V300 120GB SATA 3.0 SSD

    Phoronix: Kingston SSDNow V300 120GB SATA 3.0 SSD

    For those in the market for a solid-state drive, the Kingston SSDNow V300 series offers a 120GB Serial ATA 3.0 SSD for less than $90 USD. How well does this SSD work on Linux? We have benchmarks at Phoronix done under Ubuntu and compared to a range of HDD and SSDs.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19713

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    570

    Default

    "...and that's all that it matters", i might add to your final line about it

    Thx Michael, i was trying to get some info about performance of that SSD under Linux and now i got

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,936

    Default

    It is cheap and a lot faster than a mechanical hard disk drive.

    But if you want performance, its the Samsung 840 series.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    It is cheap and a lot faster than a mechanical hard disk drive.

    But if you want performance, its the Samsung 840 series.
    which is also under $90 USD. I've been runnin 3x120gb samsung 840 evo with 16gb / partition, and 72gb partition for zfs with lz4 compression, and the performance has been damn good. and one of the ssd's can die. i also tried doing raid 10 with zfs by creating two partitions for zfs, (as it doesn't have native support for raid 10 like behaviour on 3 drives), but after further testing, adn the realisation that hardly anything in linux does high queue depth asynchronous random reads i figured that raidz would be "fast enough", and it does seem to be..., and give more storage.

    it's hard to benchmark though as the 120gb evo's only have 3gb of turbowrite then go down to 130mb/sec. in "real world usage" for me, with infiniband it seems to keep up copying files over infiniband network from another system with ssd, but that's probably a combination of turbowrite and buffer caches. there's still a bit of read latency going on i think, but i don't notice it, i notice more that i7-4770 (server) is faster than i7-3770 (client).

    i normally recommend samsung 840 evo 250gb for medium usage, and samsung 840 evo 120gb for light usage. i assume most people don't really care for 1300mb/sec+ read speeds. but curiously when i was playing with different file systems before using it, i noticed that btrfs couldn't keep up with lzo compression capping out at around ~ 1000mb/sec whereas zfs is capping out at around 2600mb/sec.
    Last edited by mercutio; 01-21-2014 at 04:41 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    113

    Default

    My eyes glaze over now when reading SSD reviews now, they're pretty much all the same at around ~500mb/s read. There's some variance, but nothing that's going to make much difference to real-world performance.

    The difference between a HDD and an SSD is massive. The difference between a bad SSD and a good SSD is slight (when it comes to recent releases).

    Things will only get interesting again once the SATA spec is upgraded, SATA 3 is really crippling progress. That or PCIe SSDs come down in price, or some other interface becomes viable. Whomever does the SATA spec really dropped the ball between versions 2 and 3. At the time, the change from 1 to 2 was fairly redundant. 2 to 3 seemed redundant, but boy did they really misjudge the headroom they needed. A doubling of throughput turned out to be woefully short of requirements.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    342

    Default

    @mercutio: looks like Samsung does not recommend/support running 840EVOs in RAID, yeah, lol

    Regarding Kingston V300 read this post by Maxgadgetguy: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answer....html#11492819
    So like buyers beware, I had a China made 120Gb one given as a gift to a friend ( also forced him to upgrade the whole system as we though SATA2 was the issue ) and the store clerk did not even asked my friend why he was returning it, just nodded and asked for a little bit more money for a Kingston HyperX 3K 120Gb that works as expected. I also got 2 more HyperX 3K 120Gb for a RAID0 on a SATA2 system and they get 500MB/s as expected.

  7. #7

    Default

    I happen to have a Samsung 840 review in the coming days.... Just arrived today for another Phoromatic / PTS test system.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,406

    Default

    That's nice. One thing I would really like to see when it comes to SSD benchmarking, however, is systemd-analyze. And also bcache. Those should see some very interesting results.

    I have a new SSD myself, a Toshiba Q Series Pro 128 GB, but I'm yet to install it to my system (need a mount for laptop-sized drives in a PC first). I'm looking forward to see how it performs.

    Also, hah, "SSDNow" reminds me of "3DNow!", which I find rather silly.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,406

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    I happen to have a Samsung 840 review in the coming days.... Just arrived today for another Phoromatic / PTS test system.
    That's very nice to hear. That's one of the SSD models I was considering as well, but unfortunately the store was out of stock...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kaprikawn View Post
    The difference between a bad SSD and a good SSD is slight (when it comes to recent releases).
    Most SSDs are garbage
    http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/1...flash-ssd-data

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •