The SSD Review The Worlds Dedicated SSD Education and Review Resource | 
Crucial v4 Solid State Drive Improves Performance of Mainstream Computers at an Affordable Price
Boise, ID, and Glasgow, UK, 31 July, 2012 “ Crucial, a leading global brand of memory and storage upgrades, today introduced the Crucial® v4 Solid State Drive (SSD), designed to deliver substantial yet affordable performance gains for mainstream SATA 2 (3Gb/s) systems, the primary performance capability of computers purchased before 2011. Available in 32GB, 64GB, 128GB, and 256GB capacities with MSRPs of $49.99, $69.99, $99.99, and $189.99 respectively, the Crucial v4 SSD can be purchased now through select global channel partners, or direct through www.crucial.com.
The Crucial v4 SSD offers read speeds up to 230MB/s and write speeds up to 190MB/s, enabling faster startup times, faster application downloads, faster transfer data speeds, and increased reliability compared to traditional hard drives. The v4 SSD joins the m4 SSD and Adrenaline Solid State Cache Solution to round out the award-winning Crucial SSD portfolio.
The Crucial v4 SSD boils down to two things: performance and value, said Robert Wheadon, senior worldwide product manager, Crucial. Most consumers realize that SSDs help their computers start quicker and run faster, and are a more durable alternative to hard drives, but many dont realize that most SSDs outperform the data transfer capabilities of their SATA 2 machines. With the Crucial v4 SSD, weve come up with a product thats designed to bring the most value out of a SATA 2 system without paying for extra performance that cant be used.
Leveraging the industry-leading memory, design, and manufacturing capability of Micron Technology, Inc., the Crucial v4 SSD is backed by a three-year limited warranty, and is compatible with both PC and Mac® systems.
Crucial Adapts Phison Controller in New v4 SSD SATA 2 Family
Pages: 1 2
I wish manufactures would stop promoting linear transfer speeds as the method of drive comparison because in reality the IOPS are what make the difference. To prove it, I have ran a Virtual Machine over eSata and USB 2.0 and there are almost no differences in application start times and system respoonsiveness.
The highest numbers sell SSDs period. Even start times and system responsiveness are mediocre indicators of performance as they are so susceptible to affect from the OS and other hardware. In my opinion, some manufacturers have it right by making both compressible and incompressible data results transparent.
”
Even start times and system responsiveness are mediocre indicators of performance ”
A users judges performance on start times and responsiveness, this “is” the indicator for the user. Then from that angle, the promotion of an SSD should be on IOPS, not linear transfer.
But a side point would be that the criteria of performance is always from some perspective, for example if the SSD were a paper weight then I would judge weight as a performance indicator. In this case, computer responsivness and snappiness are what is important so this makes IOPs the performance indicator.
The difficulty with this theory is that typical user experience, including start times, is based on disk access alone and all SSDs are in the area of .01-.02ms making it virtually impossible to measure. We don’t evaluate start times as a comparable factor because we can get any SSD to boot to screen in 7-8 seconds.