> Tai mūsų mintys sutampa beveik 100 proc., tik aš nematau jokios REALIOS 
> priežasties, kodėl reiktų privengt MX200 250GB ir būtinai siekt 500GB 
> versijos, jei tokio poreikio SSD dydžiui nėra. Nes vėl pakartosiu, jokio 
> realaus greičio skirtumo nesijaučia. O jei kažko nejauti ir nematai, tai 
> nėra prasmės už tai mokėti pinigus.
> 
> p.s. va, turiu dabar desktope Crucial MX200 250GB ir senuką Crucial M4 
> 256GB, tai paleidus testus, skirtumas ryškiai matosi, o ar tai jaučiasi 
> kraunantis OS ir dirbant? :)

MX200 250 uzpildyk kokiais 60-70% .. ir del mano sv. ramybes patikrink sita:

128GB: Three distinct performance regions are evident in
the figure. The first is the accelerated region, which
persists until 46% logical saturation or 59GB are
written in total. The second is the non-acceleration
region, where data is written in MLC to slow down
the rate of physical saturation. The third region,
starting at 58% logical saturation or 74GB written
in total, occurs when the drive must transform data
written as SLC into MLC mode at the same time that
new data is being written by the host.

http://www.micron.com/~/media/documents/products/technical-marketing-brief/brief_ssd_dynamic_write_accel.pdf?la=en

gal ir nesijaucia.. bet is principo manes nedziugina matyti TOKI drop'a, kai 58% prirasai.
250*0,46=115GB .. 250*0,58=145GB .. negi MX200 250GB orientuotis prilaikyt virs 100GB free?

Without dynamic write acceleration, performance
in a sequential fill from an FOB state would
correspond to consistent region 2 behavior, without
the accelerated region 1 or the reduced region 3.
Subsequent drive fills performed in the same write
address sequence as the first fill would also result in
continuous region 2 behavior

man gale butu geriau padoresnis greitis, nei paturbintas pustusciame..
is kitos puses manes nekaso sie nei DWA prikolai, nei EVO bug'ai .. 
pats gi SSD neturiu :) ... kiekvienas tinginys savo tingejime gali izvelgti privalumu :D..