TechSpot: Kingston SSDNow V+180 64GB SSD Review

Last September we published a budget SSD round-up featuring eight drives priced at or below $150. Kingston's SSDNow V Series was among the models tested, and at just $125 ($1.95 per gigabyte) the 64GB version was an exceptional value. Utilizing Toshiba's TC58NCF618GBT controller, the drive provided surprisingly impressive performance.

Kingston has since expanded their SSD range by adding the SSDNow V100 and SSDNow V+100 Series to the mix. They also released a portable 1.8" line called SSDNow V+180 designed for ultra-mobile devices, such as ultra-thin notebooks, netbooks and tablet PCs. Since the SSDNow V+180 Series is a spin-off of the original SSDNow V+ Series, it features the same Toshiba T6UG1XBG controller. As a result, the same sequential read/write throughput of 230MB/s and 180MB/s still applies, and it comes in the same 64GB, 128GB or 256GB capacities.

 

Solid state drives supporting the 1.8" form factor are nothing new and, in fact, many products we've tested have 1.8" alternatives. We don't consider the 1.8" OCZ Vertex 2 a viable option with its asking price of $240 for 60GB, but at around $25 cheaper than the 64GB SSDNow V+180 Series the Onyx certainly is. We will be keeping a close eye on this match up in our review, so read on to see how Kingston stacks up against the competition.
 

Read: Kingston SSDNow V+180 64GB SSD Review

These articles are brought to you in partnership with TechSpot.

 

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows Phone 7 might get VoIP as part of "Facetime" competitor

Next Story

Surprise! Verizon announces the iPhone

18 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

People have no clue what they're talking about when they claim that they're only going to be interested when 1TB or 2TB are offered. The biggest gain you will get is with what you use EVERY day; your OS! On top of that, even with Vista/7 installed and lots of software and the complete OS, you're hardly come even close to 64GB and I talk from experience. Flash drives are mainly interesting for their speed (yes, I know the other benefits), but why on earth is it so important to have your 1TB/2TB partition that fast, since it's basically filled with nothing but games and movies, does speed really matter so much for that? Sure, any speed increase is great, but why waiting for several years to have flash drives that ARE 1TB/2TB and that ARE as cheap as drives of that similar size? Especially when you know that you will see the biggest gains with the OS AND the applications you use daily? I'm surprised about the number of noobs visiting this site....seriously....sigh

sbdb said,
People have no clue what they're talking about when they claim that they're only going to be interested when 1TB or 2TB are offered. The biggest gain you will get is with what you use EVERY day; your OS! On top of that, even with Vista/7 installed and lots of software and the complete OS, you're hardly come even close to 64GB and I talk from experience. Flash drives are mainly interesting for their speed (yes, I know the other benefits), but why on earth is it so important to have your 1TB/2TB partition that fast, since it's basically filled with nothing but games and movies, does speed really matter so much for that? Sure, any speed increase is great, but why waiting for several years to have flash drives that ARE 1TB/2TB and that ARE as cheap as drives of that similar size? Especially when you know that you will see the biggest gains with the OS AND the applications you use daily? I'm surprised about the number of noobs visiting this site....seriously....sigh

Yes, games can use the speed increase a SSD gives. You have no clue what other users needs may be so why are making assumptions everyone uses a PC exactly the same way you do?

I agree with all the positive posters. I truly like my Intel M SSD 80 GB. I had now for going on a year and half with no problems or crashes. The speed difference is really noticeable when I work on computers without one. For those of you who are always complaining about start up times here is the answer to your problems (my start up into Windows 7 is approximately 12 seconds, and my iMac 24" is around 14 seconds. Two separate machines.

So if you haven't seen one in action I would recommend you check them out. They will be continuing to drop in price. I can remember when the first 1 GB HDD hit the market it cost somewhere between $350.00 and $500.00, so just give it a year or two and they will be main streamed.

Already laptop manufactures are offering them to help speed up laptops and lower the heat problems they may have.

I have one in my laptop and love it.
Better battery life, no heat, no noise, and much faster boot times. Win win win!

When you can get a 2TB drive for less than this I just don't think it's worth it yet. 64GB is nothing, no matter how fast it is. Traditional hard drives these days aren't that slow anyway. I'm very much looking forward to the day that these catch up storage wise and the price comes down to something reasonable, but they aren't there yet.

TRC said,
When you can get a 2TB drive for less than this I just don't think it's worth it yet. 64GB is nothing, no matter how fast it is. Traditional hard drives these days aren't that slow anyway. I'm very much looking forward to the day that these catch up storage wise and the price comes down to something reasonable, but they aren't there yet.

I think 60 is great for an OS an apps and a hand full of data. Then take your 2TB drive and install the games and the rest of your large data.

What do you use these drives for, it's only 64 gigs (I hate changing the drive letters when installing program). I know it's big but still it would be nice if they stop making small ones and start investing on big drives.

Neo003 said,
What do you use these drives for, it's only 64 gigs (I hate changing the drive letters when installing program). I know it's big but still it would be nice if they stop making small ones and start investing on big drives.

You use it as a operating system and program drive. You continue using a traditional drive to store data while enjoying the performance benefits that a SSD provides. I love my 60 GB Agility 2 and it is more than large enough for Windows 7 and my programs with room to spare.

soonerproud said,

You use it as a operating system and program drive. You continue using a traditional drive to store data while enjoying the performance benefits that a SSD provides. I love my 60 GB Agility 2 and it is more than large enough for Windows 7 and my programs with room to spare.

Well, that may work for a lot of people, but I just looked at mine and have 96 Gigs of OS and program files. I have all my documents, music, video, etc on either 800 Gig local drives or on a network file server. People who do a lot of diverse things with a lot of diverse programs use a lot of space with program files.

Neo003 said,
What do you use these drives for, it's only 64 gigs (I hate changing the drive letters when installing program). I know it's big but still it would be nice if they stop making small ones and start investing on big drives.

There are plenty of big SSDs to choose from if you want to lay down a few grand for them.

kirkdickinson said,

Well, that may work for a lot of people, but I just looked at mine and have 96 Gigs of OS and program files. I have all my documents, music, video, etc on either 800 Gig local drives or on a network file server. People who do a lot of diverse things with a lot of diverse programs use a lot of space with program files.

Power users who need a lot of space for programs usually spend more on hardware typically so a 120 GB drive is not out of the question for many of these users. If you could only experience the performance difference between a traditional drive and a SSD, you would be sold and would be willing to save your pennies for a drive large enough to meet your needs.

soonerproud said,

Power users who need a lot of space for programs usually spend more on hardware typically so a 120 GB drive is not out of the question for many of these users. If you could only experience the performance difference between a traditional drive and a SSD, you would be sold and would be willing to save your pennies for a drive large enough to meet your needs.

Or just watch youtube videos and see the performance. I can sit for hours and watch ssd videos on youtube.

kirkdickinson said,
Well, that may work for a lot of people, but I just looked at mine and have 96 Gigs of OS and program files.

Obviously you have no clue how to properly set up such a partition. The whole purpose of an OS partition is that you dedicate as much as possible to the OS ONLY. Even with about 100 apps installed (ad many big ones) I still don't go over 40GB, imagine how small that partition would have looked if I would have installed the whole Adobe suite, Office, video editing software on a different partition... if you have 96(!) GB on your OS partition, then you have no clue what you're doing.

soonerproud said,
Power users who need a lot of space for programs usually spend more on hardware typically so a 120 GB drive is not out of the question for many of these users.

Total nonsense lol I'm an IT guy for over 23 years and I work with a LOT(!) of different software and hardware and on top of that I do a lot of video editing and graphics, I even own a large graphic site for several years now, so it's fair to say that I'm most definitely a power user and NO power user needs more than a 64GB (not even half of that) OS partition!. Anyone who needs more than 120GB has no clue how you set up an OS partition and is basically installing lots of his software on the OS partition, instead of placing it on a different partition or drive. On top of that, if you plan to backup an OS partition, you don't want to deal with 120GB....seriously...

sbdb said,

Total nonsense lol I'm an IT guy for over 23 years and I work with a LOT(!) of different software and hardware and on top of that I do a lot of video editing and graphics, I even own a large graphic site for several years now, so it's fair to say that I'm most definitely a power user and NO power user needs more than a 64GB (not even half of that) OS partition!. Anyone who needs more than 120GB has no clue how you set up an OS partition and is basically installing lots of his software on the OS partition, instead of placing it on a different partition or drive. On top of that, if you plan to backup an OS partition, you don't want to deal with 120GB....seriously...

Just because you are in IT for 23 years does not mean your usage scenario is typical for all end users. My statement was in reply to the person who claimed they needed 96 GB of space and I burst his bubble that a true power user is willing to invest in what they need. That user may be a heavy gamer and if you install enough modern titles, you can use up 100 GB of space easily. Not all power users are in IT.