| ||Thread Tools|
|13th July 2010, 17:39||#1|
Join Date: May 2002
Crucial's RealSSD C300 128Gb Revisited
I dropped the C300 from my list of even potential recommendations while Crucial worked on a fix. Meanwhile SandForce’s partners had been shipping drives, with relatively few problems. To make matters worse? The majority of SandForce drives that shipped while Crucial suffered used release candidate firmware. Mass production firmware wasn’t distributed until later. And SandForce did nothing to stop it.
The moral of this story is that entering the storage market is still new territory for everyone. Company size, whether small or large, doesn’t dictate whether you’ll face a failure from a new product. The only guarantee you have is the experience of others who’ve used the drives in configurations similar to your own.
Which brings me to todays topic. I’ve been testing Crucial’s fixed firmware and so far things look good. The situation has improved enough to warrant another look at the C300, including its more affordable 128GB version. And that’s exactly what we’ll do today.
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Crucial RealSSD C300 64GB review||jmke||WebNews||0||7th July 2010 14:13|
|Crucial 128GB C300 RealSSD SATA 6Gb/s Solid State Drive Review||jmke||WebNews||0||30th June 2010 14:29|
|Crucial's RealSSD C300 solid-state drive||jmke||WebNews||0||14th June 2010 20:59|
|Crucial RealSSD C300 128GB Solid State Drive||jmke||WebNews||0||21st May 2010 16:09|
|Crucial RealSSD C300 256GB SATA 3Gbps Performance Analysis||jmke||WebNews||0||23rd February 2010 10:25|