Is the Kingston HyperX 3K worth it?

Hello guys,

I want to have my OS run off an SSD.. and pretty much only the OS, a 60 or 90gb ssd would be perfectly fine for me. In pretty much every build video Logan uses a kingston hyperx 3k (aka this) and he talks about the high IOPS. Newegg lists this as performance:

Max Sequential Read   Up to 555 MB/s

Max Sequential Write   Up to 510 MB/s

4KB Random Read      Up to 85,000 IOPS

4KB Random Write      Up to 74,000 IOPS


Now these IOPS are ridiculously high. But it costs $100 here in Canada. On the flipside there is an OCZ Agility 3. The performance data is as follows:

Sustained Sequential Read    up to 525 MB/s (SATA 6Gbps)

Sustained Sequential Write    up to 475 MB/s (SATA 6Gbps)

4KB Random Read    Up to 10,000 IOPS

4KB Random Write    Up to 80,000 IOPS

The main difference is the 4k random read as you can see... My question is: is this difference noticeable in a) normal OS stuff like web browsing or coding in eclipse and b) full load games

I could save around $30 by going with a non kingston hyperx 3k ssd. But if the difference is huge i'd gladly dump it in.


Appreciate your comments.

Logan, comb the microphone hair!

Hyperx 3k is worth the extra 30 more. It's a proven reilable drive, and a great value. I love mine. 

It just so happens I have an OCz Agility III SSD (60GB). I ran AS SSD just for you, but just so you know, it's fairly full. It's not representative of the drives potential (I've noticed some slow down), but could be an indication of how it will perform with some normal usage. Windows is on a 40GB partition with 10GB of free space. The other 20GB is an EXT4 partition for Linux Mint.



With that said, I'd spend a few bucks more on the HyperX. SandForce drives tend to slowdown as they fill up, so the 90GB HyperX will definately be better for write tasks. As for the read, will Windows used to boot before the animation could complete, but it slowed down and idk what happened.

thanks guys! I'll go witht he hyperx 3k