Automotive Deals HPCC Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it Pink Floyd Fire TV Stick Health, Household and Grocery Back to School Handmade school supplies Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis Water Sports

Format: Personal Computers|Change
Price:$42.99+ Free shipping with Amazon Prime
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

The manufacturer commented on the review below
on December 16, 2013
Kingston seems to have pulled a Samsung and entered this device into the infamous hardware lottery. if you have version 5.05 of this device, then you are good to go and will achieve all rated speeds, power consumption, etc for it. This version of the device is manufactured in Taiwan.

As of version 5.06, it is a total crapshoot if you will get a good drive manufactured in Taiwan or one from their other manufacturing sites in China. The mainland Chinese versions to put it nicely, don't even come close to the rated read/write speeds for this particular device, with write speeds falling from the advertised rate to a max of 240 mb/s on SATA III (device is officially rated at over 500 mb/s write speeds and the 5.05 version regularly achieves 540 mb/s).

There are similar warnings and whatnot about this issue about the drive on other sites, with some customers going so far as accusing Kingston of bait-n-switch after submitting the 5.05 to all of the review sites where it was benchmarked and scored numerous high marks and then almost immediately (within two months) releasing the 5.06 into the retail market.
103103 comments| 1,198 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
The manufacturer commented on the review below
on January 24, 2014
I purchase this drive recently from another seller and wanted to state my findings so far so you can fairly compare this drive to others. If you are upgrading from a 7200rpm Hard Drive, this will probably perform faster, but I would look to other drives if you want this for your OS drive or need true SSD performance. The price is attractive per GB right now, but for a bit more, you might find a much better drive that will perform well long into the future.

I've used ATTO and Crystal and other performance utilities on this and other SSD drives I have. What I found was that this drive far under-performs every other SSD drive I have (about half as fast as my 128GB SSD that is almost 2 years old now) except with the ATTO benchmark Kingston requires. Why does Kingston require it? Probably because it uses highly compressible data and they have built the firmware/drive/controller combo to perform well with that one tool. Unfortunately, the real world doesn't use highly compressible data all the time nor does your operating system perform its functions just like ATTO. Most pictures, games, and other software already compress data and that will not perform well on this drive (as other perf utils show). I'll add a screen shot of my Crystal Benchmark performance (something I've always found consistent) for your personal comparison.
review image
66 comments| 187 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
The manufacturer commented on the review below
on December 22, 2013
*update 1/12/14* Firmware is not the issue, Kingston switched to asynchronous NAND

Seems I found the real culprit after speaking with several SSD experts on various tech forums, get ready for a class action lawsuit Kingston. Here's the scam, Kingston switched to cheap asynchronous memory chips that don't run in parallel after the first few months of production.

That means single channel bandwidth instead of multiple channels like earlier v300 SSD's. Instead of running at 200mhz, its running at 66mhz. This effects read and write speeds enormously.

Kingston hid this fact by using solvent on the original labeling of the memory chips, then printed their own logo on top. Kingston does not manufacture any memory themselves. When SSD was shipped out for review it used quality Toshiba 19nm NAND but Kingston used solvent on chips labels and printed their own. This was odd, but the reason for it soon became obvious. After only a few months they switched to inferior quality chips with the same Kingston label.

NO OTHER SSD MANUFACTURER ERASES ORIGINAL NAND LABEL AND PRINTS THEIR OWN ON TOP!

This is FRAUD in my opinion and Kingston could very well be seeing a class action lawsuit coming there way for this stunt. Other SSD makers have tried this crap in the past and got busted. They were forced to RMA all the drives back to synchronous memory chips which cost much more.

Kingston switched to cheaper quality NAND without saying a word. Firmware for Sandforce SSD's cannot cause you to lose 70 percent of read and write speeds. Lesson learned, never buy anything from Kingston again, they are criminals.
2525 comments| 904 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
The manufacturer commented on the review below
on December 25, 2013
This is my first review.
I was pretty excited to get this drive because I saw it in “good” price and for all the positive reviews, however, I did a little research and I found that this drive is SLOW, because Kingston advertise that is about 450 megabytes per second both read and write but it does at approximately 170-130. I’ll summarize the info for you.
There are 3 types of firmware with this drive, the one I got has the firmware 5.0.6, which is the main problem because it slows down the drive for any reason. The other two are previous 5.0.5 firmware’s (they don’t have the problem), you can find which firmware the drive has by looking at the sticker in front of the drive, the one I got is 506ABBF0, or 5.0.6, you can also see it if you download the toolbox program from Kingston website.
However, by now there is no possibility to downgrade to the previous 5.0.5 firmware, or upgrade to the already release 5.0.7 that might correct the problem. The thing is that maybe all of this was planned. First Kingston sell this drive with the 5.0.5 firmware and quality components that reaches incredible speed and everybody rate it with positive reviews, but once it has gain a high reputation Kingston now produces a low quality cheap NAND flash inside of it, several people complains that maybe the problem is far beyond the firmware, maybe is the crappy quality products inside of this drive and therefore the firmware upgrade will never come, because the problem might be the product itself.
I use different benchmark programs (like crystal disk mark, as ssd or atto) and all the speeds and writes in sequential mode are around the 170-130, not even close to the 450 mb that Kingston advertise.
Save your money and instead go for a Samsung or San Disk drive, I read that they do what they say about the writing and reading speeds. I’m from Mexico and I bought this drive online at amazon, I don’t know if I can return it, and if I can ¿how? Should I have to pay for the shipping cost? Now I know why the drive was “on sale”, Amazon wants to get rid of it.
If you don’t believe my story and you think “It will not happen to me” first I encouraged you to just google: 506ABBF0 firmware.
I regret about purchasing this drive, I WILL NEVER BUY KINGSTON PRODUCTS AGAIN.
By the way, amazon shipping service are great, I receive the drive just in a few days after I place the order, shame that I just got a lemon drive.
1010 comments| 398 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
The manufacturer commented on the review below
on June 17, 2014
These drives are no longer good! Kingston switched the NAND controllers from async to non-async, making the drives significantly slower. The new versions only get 180MB/s read while the old versions could get 450MB/s +. Simply google for "Kingston V300 bait and switch" to see countless other people disappointed by these drives.

The ATTO benchmark that Kingston uses is unrepresentative of a workload consisting of incompressible data (like audio or video editing).
Relying on a benchmark like that is like Ford saying their new engine with with two fewer cylinders will perform the same as their old one, but only on flat ground.

Referring to their benchmark sheet, scroll down and see the read/write rates at the bottom:
[...]

The older 120S drives clearly blow the 120As out of the water. Even WITH compressible data, the write/read speeds are not comparable to the pre-sandforce controller drives. Running a command that writes PURE ZEROS (highly compressible), I achieved write speeds of only 178mb/s (dd if=/dev/zero bs=1024k of=/Volumes/SSD/testfile count=2048).

The only reason this isn't illegal under consumer protection is because Kingston rates these drives using the ATTO benchmark, and "technically" they all meet spec. I have contacted Kingston customer support and I've requested a full refund.
22 comments| 30 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 3, 2014
AnandTech finally came out with an updated review of the V300 today. Google 'An Update to Kingston SSDNow V300: A Switch to Slower Micron NAND' to find it.
1212 comments| 270 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
The manufacturer commented on the review below
on January 5, 2014
The drive I received was made in taiwan not china and shipped with the 5.21 firmware, but it still read the slow read/ write speeds, 170/130 mb/s
66 comments| 113 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
The manufacturer commented on the review below
on January 26, 2014
170MB/S reading 130MB/S writing. It should read at 450MB/S and write at 170 MB/S. Works nothing like it advertised. Very disappointed.NEVER KINGSTON AGAIN!
22 comments| 63 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 11, 2013
If I bought this drive a year ago it would have been a great purchase. That was when all the reviews for these drives were written on most tech sites and all the benchmarks came out.

Fast forward a year and I order 2 of these drives and I receive less than half of the reported benchmark speeds. I used 2 different computers, both had SATA in ACHI with TRIM enabled, SATA III ports.

Kingston's response of course is that the benchmarks are measured using ATTO Disk Benchmark which uses uncompressed data which gives higher benchmarks.

However I have seen multiple reviews done a year ago that used both CrystalDiskMark and AS SSD Benchmark and both of those tools had sequential read speeds of ~450 MB/s. CDM can be run using compressed and uncompressed data but both scores for this drive a year ago were at least 450 MB/s. All my results for my two copies of this drive are ~170 MB/s.

I'm not the only one either. Google this drive, all the reviews people give of this drive getting good benchmarks are the 5.0.5 version of this drive. Everyone I've seen who has the new 5.0.6 version are all slow. I'm not sure if its the firmware or the fact that Kingston is taking advantage of the early good reviews and just now using cheaper parts to save money.

The worst part of this entire experience is that I wasted Black Friday to purchase these drives. Now all my other options are at least 20% more expensive so I'm just completely out of luck.

This drive is marginally faster than a standard HDD for way more money. Kingston is scamming everyone
1414 comments| 255 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
The manufacturer commented on the review below
on March 11, 2014
Kingston SV300S37A/60 actual write speed is about 1/5 the advertised performance (constitutes FRAUD) of 450MB/s read/write.

***In response to Kingston's comment to user complaints "Blackmagic disk speed only uses incompressible data as it's benchmark workload which would show you a worse case scenario". This means other Manufacturer's "worse case scenario" has proven exceedingly better than Kingston's "worse case scenario"***

Here is a sample comparison of one of my mid-range SSD drives with test speeds on a Mac running Blackmagic Disk Speed Test:
Kingston SV300S37A Write= 87 MB/s Read= 262 MB/s
Crucial M500 Write= 415 MB/s Read= 480 MB/s

Desktop copy:
Kingston SV300S37A duplicating a 10GB file= 2:25 mins
Crucial M500 duplicating a 10GB file= 0:44 mins
Western Digital 1TB platter drive duplicating a 10GB file= 3:07 mins

I ran additional Blackmagic Disk Speed tests and noticed:
Write speed for the Kingston SV300S37A/60 is much slower than my USB 3.0 PNY flash, thumb drive.
Write speed is a lot slower than my 2.5" external 5400 rpm USB 3.0 WD MyPassport Ultra, platter drive.

Pros: the Kingston drive has faster read speeds than an internal 5400 rpm platter drive.

Cons: the Kingston drive is a lot slower at writing than a 5400 rpm platter HD and my USB 3.0 thumb drive, it's also very heavy making it a poor choice for notebooks.

I spoke to a Kingston Technician (1-800-435-0640) he said the 450 MB/s R/W speed is based on "compressible data"? So there is only a speed benefit if the files can be compressed. So you can't keep any MP3s, movies, photos, PDFs etc on your Kingston drive because they are not compressible. I'm looking at the Kingston packaging and nowhere is this restriction indicated when touting "10x faster than a standard 7200 rpm HD". He refused to acknowledge the fact that my mid-range SSD is copying a file in a fraction of the time compared to the Kingston. This is disingenuous because Kingston doesn't allow the comparison that other SSD or platter drives can perform many times faster regardless of "compressible data". Other SSD drive manufacturers such as Sandisk provide realistic performance ratings for example:
SanDisk Ultra Plus 64GB SSD is rated at Read= 520MB/s Write= 155MB/s.

I used to recommended Kingston products because, in the past, they produced quality products. Why did this change? I would not recommend the Kingston line of SSDs because of the significant lack of performance and value.

***Update: I returned the Kingston 64 GB SSD to Best Buy and bought a Sandisk SDSSDP-128G-G25 128GB SSD for $33 more.
22 comments| 47 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Questions? Get fast answers from reviewers

Please make sure that you've entered a valid question. You can edit your question or post anyway.
Please enter a question.
See all 645 answered questions


Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.