Kingston 120GB A400 vs Integral 120GB P Series 5

[terrence81]

Which one would be better - more reliable. Does anyone has any experience with these?

Kingston 120GB A400

Integral 120GB P Series 5

[Bonebreaker777]

The reliability could objectively determined only after a prolonged period, but I have the Integral SSDs in an array of devices - media players, office PCs, laptops I was asked to speed up by upgrading to SSDs. All of them are still working without issues and the performance of these SSDs is surprisingly good.

Only thing I could say to Kingston as I only bought one of them (in a different device, bought 1x to compare performance against Integral and PNY budget SSDs) that Kingston is an established brand.

[DanceswithUnix]

If you can scrape together the extra £7.50, get a 250GB drive as the 120GB drives are really poor value atm.

Samsung and Intel seem to have the best reputation for reliability. Otherwise I'm not sure it matters much.

I recently went for a Kingston drive. I try and buy from companies that actually make flash chips so they have better supply chain control and understanding of what they are using. Kingston don't directly make the chips, but they do have a relationship with Toshiba.

Had they been in stock, I would have bought a Crucial drive (part of the Micron group). Had I really cared about the data on the machine, I would spend a bit more to buy a Samsung drive.

[Bonebreaker777]

If you can scrape together the extra £7.50, get a 250GB drive as the 120GB drives are really poor value atm.

Samsung and Intel seem to have the best reputation for reliability. Otherwise I'm not sure it matters much.

I recently went for a Kingston drive. I try and buy from companies that actually make flash chips so they have better supply chain control and understanding of what they are using. Kingston don't directly make the chips, but they do have a relationship with Toshiba.

Had they been in stock, I would have bought a Crucial drive (part of the Micron group). Had I really cared about the data on the machine, I would spend a bit more to buy a Samsung drive.

To reinforce the suggestion here, in my personal computer where I do care about data, I have a Crucial too

[DanceswithUnix]

To reinforce the suggestion here, in my personal computer where I do care about data, I have a Crucial too

lol, my main PC has two SSDs in it. I work in Linux, so that is on a Samsung 860. My games are on a Windows drive that is a Crucial MX500.

But the last drive I bought is for a cheap box I threw together to use at the office. If it dies it will be inconvenient, but not the end of the world, that's the Kingston because the Crucial was out of stock at Amazon and the Samsung cost too much.

At the current pricing, does anyone buy spinning disks any more?

[Bonebreaker777]

At the current pricing, does anyone buy spinning disks any more?

I'm just about to for my NAS. The current drives done over 32k hours. I think they deserve to be sold on

[Spreadie]

I picked up a few 120GB P series drives a few months back, to add to the couple I already had - they were on special at ~£10 each.

No issues so far - they're perfectly serviceable - one is on my test rig, one in the wife's laptop, another in my server and I have a couple more as spares.

[DanceswithUnix]

I recently bought a 480GB Kingston SSD because I needed one in a hurry and the Crucial drives were on something like a 1 week lead time at Amazon when I wanted it next day. It hasn't been a quality experience, but I think it has ended up OK.

The PC I built (mainly using bits sat around the garage) kept locking up and crashing, which it turns out is down to me getting lazy with upgrading the SSD firmware. That's something I always used to do, but have stopped worrying so much recently as I haven't seen problems for years. This was a Linux machine and Kingston only support Windows so I had to pull the drive and put it in an old Windows PC to check it and upgrade (hence I had not bothered on first build).

At £50 it's quite the bargain, but run the updater before you use it. Under Linux it would sit there with the disk activity light lit up for maybe 10 seconds at a time. Sometimes longer, sometimes long enough to make the OS give up, remount partitions read-only and leave a corrupt filesystem journal, meaning the error doesn't get to the logs if you reboot. The machine has been on soak test for nearly a day now though, and still seems nicely responsive so fingers crossed.

[ddr4000]

Would these low budget SSDs be noticeably slower for let's say loading times in games and on occasion moving 20GB+ files, or is the difference in fact very little?