The brand does not necessarily matter, most SSDs are using chips internally from just a few companies, but what they rate the drives at and if they are honest about it is important. but my Seagate drive which is 2TB, has the endurance advantage from that size, but also is $100 more than other 2TB drives, that are often rated at, say, 600TBW. So my 120GB Intel drives have the lowest endurance rating, about half that of the 250GB identical intel drives. # of NAND chips (and by extension, bigger capacity drives)
Meanwhile my Seagate ironwolf pro drive that has an endurance rating of ~2800TBW just dropped to 99% after the same 5 months of 24/7 power, but with often torrents, big (200GB) writes, and was a video NVR for a few weeks. Thats just a boot drive, not doing a ton of big writes, but theres lots of log fines and temp files (which I've recently moved to RAM to make these things die a little slower). they went from 50% to 20% life left in the course of 5 months. Step 2: In the following window, type the. Then, right click at command prompt and select Run as administrator. It is easy to use the CHKDSK command: Step 1: Search cmd or command prompt in the search bar. I've got 2 cheap old Intel SSDs in raid1, they have a 70TBW rating or something like that ridiculously low. CHKDSK is the command to check the disk health on Windows, including the disk status, the capacity and the file information.
Still, this particular Kingston SSD 120GB has really good value on name alone.Take a look at the endurance / TBW rating on drives. display health status correctly of new Kingston A400 series SSDs (may reported 0 on the beginning of lifetime) improved NVMe M.2 SSD detection on Windows 7. However, with such a small storage capacity, you might want to consider going bigger. Even if it doesn’t perform as well as the ADATA SU800, it has far better build quality, consistent performance, and brand recognition than the Silicon Power A55. The bottom line is this: this particular Kingston SSD 120GB, the UV500, still has better read write performance than most traditional hard drives, and will be an excellent addition to your desktop PC. There’s way better choices at this price range of $45 to $50. Comparing prices, you’d be spending about 39 cents per GB for the UV500 120GB, but only 20 cents per GB if you went with the MX500 SSD that holds 250GB, its smallest size. For $4 more, you can double storage capacity with the Crucial MX500 SSD, and you get better performance with an equally familiar brand. With that said, you can get better prices elsewhere, and 120GB isn’t exactly a whole lot of space. That alone could sell you on its quality, not to mention a five-year warranty sweetens the deal. There’s no denying that this Kingston UV500 performs well for its price and has good value.
For smaller form factors, the UV500 has an mSATA version and an M.2 version, provided your laptop or desktop PC can accept M.2 and mSATA drives. It gives it highly durable protection.Īlong two of the sides there are two threaded holes for mounting, four altogether, as well as four on the “bottom” of the SSD. With a metal chassis and smokey grey coloring, it’s nice to see SATA SSDs that shy away from plastic cases and matte black finish. “The Kingston SSD 120GB, specifically the 2.5-inch form factor, has a very appealing design. Random writes performed up to 18,000 IOPS. In our case, we used Crystal Disk Info (aka.
You can easily determine the health of an M.2 SSD using free utilities. However, its big brothers-the 240GB version and above-are much faster, in terms of write speeds, at 500MB/s than the 120GB version. If you want to see how we easily transitioned from one M.2 SSD to a new M.2 SSD on a PC with just a single M.2 slot running Windows 11 and did not lose a single bit of data, watch our video. Its sequential write speeds also hit its advertised 320MB/s, but is far lower than its contemporaries in the same bracket, like the Samsung 860 EVO 1TB with its 520 write speeds. For faster random reads, check out the Crucial mx500 2tb review. Random reads performed up to 79,000 IOPS. Its sequential read speeds often peak at its advertised 520MB/s, sometimes exceeding that, but testing shoes it’s more comfortable and consistent around 500 to 510MB/s.
The Kingston UV500 doesn’t quite perform as well as other SSDs in its bracket, but it’s certainly more consistent than, say, the Silicon Power A55.