Sandisk 128gb ssd 84euro

supersparkz

Saw this on dabs if any use to anyone.
Showing up as 84.52.

http://www.dabs.ie/products/sandisk-128gb-ssd-sata-6gb-s-2-5--solid-state-drive-870X.html?utm_source=ie%20email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email271112&utm_content=e800

May be good for someone. Just got one myself lately for over a hundred and they are a very cool and worthwhile upgrade;).

DamoRed

Thanks, it's showing up even cheaper, at €76.86

bogman

Would this fit your average laptop, say an Inspiron 6000?

glic83

DamoRed wrote: »

Thanks, it's showing up even cheaper, at €76.86

When the Vat is added its 84 euro then

SickBoy

glic83 wrote: »

When the Vat is added its 84 euro then

I think the price quoted in the 2nd post is right, what brings it to 84 is the shipping which is 7 odd.

SickBoy

bogman wrote: »

Would this fit your average laptop, say an Inspiron 6000?

it's a SATA drive, I think the 6000 is IDE :-(

dodzy

bogman wrote: »

Would this fit your average laptop, say an Inspiron 6000?

Think that's a pretty old laptop, with an IDE HDD interface. If so, no real point. I'm sure the experts will be along to confirm, eitherway.

EDIT: Sickboy "in like Flynn"

Yep - 6000 is definitely IDE - I had one before.

erie

Just another option :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B006EKJCWM : £69.41 (off 72% £248.10) + VAT with Super Free Shipping = £71.14 (€89.42 charged on my Credit Card today), bought it yesterday.

Amazon : SanDisk SDSSDX-120G-G25 120GB Extreme SATA III 6Gb/s 2.5in Internal Solid State Drive
- Sequential Read (up to) : 550 MB/s
- Sequential Write (up to) : 510 MB/s

Compare with DABS : model SDSSDP-128G-G25
- Sequential Read (up to) : 490 MB/s
- Sequential Write (up to) : 350 MB/s

Amazon 8GB smaller with more horsepower.

Just another option...

The SanDisk has a SandForce controller so I'd be wary of it's reliability.

Notch000

stupuid question but do these slot into the large SD reader type slots in the side of the laptop ??
And if so do you need to reconfigure anything to get these working and speed things up ?? or do you just use them like a usb stick ??

Notch000

Notch000 wrote: »

stupuid question but do these slot into the large SD reader type slots in the side of the laptop ??
And if so do you need to reconfigure anything to get these working and speed things up ?? or do you just use them like a usb stick ??

No, they replace your hard disk. So you need to install your operating system on it.

BostonB

bogman wrote: »

Would this fit your average laptop, say an Inspiron 6000?

I wouldn't bother on a laptop that old.

-( i )- Wicker

That same SSD is £59.99 (€74) on amazon with free delivery, though not in stock at the moment:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/SanDisk-128GB-Solid-State-Drive/dp/B007ZW2LY4/ref=sr_1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1354188205&sr=1-1
(see amazon.co.uk under 'more buying choices')

Run_to_da_hills

Karsini wrote: »

Yep - 6000 is definitely IDE - I had one before.

Yes definitely, my niece has one and the drive was replaced.

The follow up model 6400 Inspiron which looks identical has SATA interface.

BostonB wrote: »

I wouldn't bother on a laptop that old.

I am currently using the 6400 with SSD and 2GB ram. It will boot up much faster and preform many operations just as quick as some of the new models that are on the shelves

BostonB

A 6400 maybe its a Core2Duo. Have one myself especially good with Windows 8.

But a 6000? Its 7yrs old and a Pentium M.

Run_to_da_hills

BostonB wrote: »

A 6400 maybe its a Core2Duo. Have one myself especially good with Windows 8.

I am an XP Die hard.

Have the 6400 in Core2Duo.

BostonB wrote: »

But a 6000? Its 7yrs old and a Pentium M.

They also made these in Celeron.

zom

Karsini wrote: »

The SanDisk has a SandForce controller so I'd be wary of it's reliability.

Bought few of 64GB version recently for old XP machines upgrade and realize that PC's are Sata1, twice slower than these disks can perform:P. As these PC's work as client machines in network environment, I don't mind reliability (no important data saved to them). But still feel pity because of the speed.

ozmo

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I am an XP Die hard.

Have the 6400 in Core2Duo.
They also made these in Celeron.

Just a note for anyone running XP - with Win7 etc its automatic if you start with a clean install - but with XP (or a Win7 imaged from a HDD), they align themselves to sectors that would be found on a regular hdd - taking two SSD sector reads to read just one sector.

I got a bit More performance from SSD when I did the manual alignment trick.

google for "xp ssd alignment" for the tools to do it.

zom

ozmo wrote: »

Just a note for anyone running XP - with Win7 etc its automatic if you start with a clean install - but with XP (or a Win7 imaged from a HDD), they align themselves to sectors that would be found on a regular hdd - taking two SSD sector reads to read just one sector.

Solution - build partitions and format it under vista/Win7/Win8 (it works even if connected by usb) and then install XP.

SickBoy

Anyone get this yet? Wondering what the performance is like...

BostonB

ozmo wrote: »

... (or a Win7 imaged from a HDD)...

How so?

BostonB

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

...
They also made these in Celeron.

I'm assuming that would be even worse?

ozmo

BostonB wrote: »

How so?

The sectors on a ssd start at a different position on the drive.
The aligning happens when the hdd partions are created (not during format). So if copying a whole mechanical harddrive partition 1:1 could bring across the wrong alignment offset also (depending on the imaging method you used) - I checked mine using the "diskpar" tool in the info below....or there is probably some nicer gui tool someone can suggest.


http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?48309-Partition-alignment-importance-under-Windows-XP-(32-bit-and-64-bit)-why-it-helps-with-stuttering-and-increases-drive-working-life

BostonB

Cheers. My head would melt if I tried to read that at the moment. One for later reading.

I was kinda wondering why a Win7 imaged from a HDD rather than one from DVD has the problem?

DamoRed

Despite my initial interest in this, I ended up at Amazon getting This Crucial SSD with a transfer kit which eased the crossover no end. The transfer kit was worth the extra few euro, as otherwise, I'd have to do endless farting about without it. The price came to €98 including free delivery and it was ordered on Friday and came yesterday. I transferred the Mac OS and system files yesterday and switched over the drives today.

Photoshop up and running in about 5 seconds! :eek: Result!

ozmo

ozmo wrote: »

The sectors on a ssd start at a different position on the drive.
The aligning happens when the hdd partions are created (not during format). So if copying a whole mechanical harddrive partition 1:1 could bring across the wrong alignment offset also (depending on the imaging method you used) - I checked mine using the "diskpar" tool in the info below....or there is probably some nicer gui tool someone can suggest.


http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?48309-Partition-alignment-importance-under-Windows-XP-(32-bit-and-64-bit)-why-it-helps-with-stuttering-and-increases-drive-working-life

SSDs and modern hard disks have 4kb sectors but still report 512 byte sectors to the OS for compatibility reasons. This means that for the drive to read and write efficiently, the partitions need to be aligned on sector numbers that are divisible by 8. XP and earlier operating systems don't as they start the first partition on sector 63. This would result in the SSD having to do a read/modify/write operation on two physical sectors instead of one, reducing drive performance and potentially reducing the drive's life. Vista and later systems place the first partition on sector 2048 to alleviate this problem.

Some WD 3.5" hard disks have a jumper which shifts the physical drive geometry up by one sector. So when XP places its boot sector on 63, it's actually putting it on 64. That works for a single partition system at least, but if you remove the jumper then the drive is unreadable.

erie

Got it yesterday, installed on my Sony Vaio SZ4 (2006) without any problem and run lighting fast.

supersparkz

erie wrote: »

Got it yesterday, installed on my Sony Vaio SZ4 (2006) without any problem and run lighting fast.

Your battery will last longer too with less power consumption and run cooler.