Sorry, this offer has expired. Set up a deal alert and get notified of future deals like this. Add a Deal Alert

Expired Hot Deals

Sorry, this offer has expired.
Set up a deal alert and get notified of future deals like this.
Set up a Deal Alert
Amazon.ca

Kingston Digital A400 SSD 120GB $34.99 / 240GB $47.99/480GB $88.00

  • Last Updated:
  • Oct 14th, 2018 5:58 pm
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 25, 2003
17147 posts
5655 upvotes
Markham

[Amazon.ca] Kingston Digital A400 SSD 120GB $34.99 / 240GB $47.99/480GB $88.00

Edit: Price updated:

https://www.amazon.ca/Kingston-Digital- ... B01N6JQS8C

Kingston Digital A400 SSD
(Make sure to pick the one sold by Amazon)

120GB $34.99
240GB $47.99
480GB $88.00

Kingston’s A400 Solid-State Drive

Kingston’s A400 solid-state drive dramatically improves the responsiveness of your existing system with incredible boot, loading and transfer times compared to mechanical hard drives. Powered by a latest gen controller for read and write speeds up to 500MB/s and 450MB/s¹, this SSD is 10x faster than a traditional hard drive1 for higher performance, ultra-responsive multi-tasking and an overall faster system.

SPECIFICATIONS >
Form factor 2.5" >Interface SATA Rev. 3.0 (6Gb/s) – with backwards compatibility to SATA Rev. 2.0 (3Gb/s) >
Capacities2 120GB, 240GB, 480GB, 960GB >
Controller 2Ch3 >NAND TLC >
Baseline Performance1 Data Transfer (ATTO) 120GB — up to 500MB/s Read and 320MB/s Write 240GB — up to 500MB/s Read and 350MB/s Write 480GB — up to 500MB/s Read and 450MB/s Write 960GB — up to 500MB/s Read and 450MB/s Write >
Power Consumption 0.195W Idle / 0.279W Avg / 0.642W (MAX) Read / 1.535W (MAX) Write >
Storage temperature -40°C~85°C >Operating temperature 0°C~70°C >
Dimensions 100.0mm x 69.9mm x 7.0mm >
Weight 41g >Vibration operating 2.17G Peak (7–800Hz) >
Vibration non-operating 20G Peak (10–2000Hz) >
Life expectancy 1 million hours MTBF >
Warranty/support4 Limited 3-year warranty with free technical support
Last edited by Keigotw on Oct 14th, 2018 6:00 pm, edited 13 times in total.
48TB Node 304 / i5-3570 / Server 2016 Essentials
12TB HP Mediasmart EX 495 (E8400, 3.0GHZ, 4GB Mushkin), with Server 2016 Essentials
16TB Qnap TS-459 Pro
40 replies
Deal Expert
User avatar
Mar 25, 2003
17147 posts
5655 upvotes
Markham
ericl619 wrote: is this their budget ssd line?
yes
48TB Node 304 / i5-3570 / Server 2016 Essentials
12TB HP Mediasmart EX 495 (E8400, 3.0GHZ, 4GB Mushkin), with Server 2016 Essentials
16TB Qnap TS-459 Pro
Member
Sep 27, 2017
210 posts
491 upvotes
"This is a terrible drive, not worth it, its gonna fail in six months... there are so many better drives for more money.. this doesn't have MLC NAND" -That One Dumb RFDer.
Deal Addict
Nov 10, 2016
2086 posts
1077 upvotes
BC
bought the 240gb for my 5 yr old hp laptop (49.99) and 120gb for my optiplex desktop (29.99) both from mike's computer couple weeks ago... they are both in-store prices..
for my usage, these drives are enough..
Jr. Member
Jun 15, 2015
162 posts
121 upvotes
Victoria, BC
Ya I have an OCZ Agility 120GB from 2011 still kicking at 98% healthy. I have a OCZ Vertex 3 480GB still kicking since 2013 with 99% health. Both were/are budget SSD's. Never had one fail..knock on wood lol

Also if you are still rocking an older board(Z97) or earlier then you can't use more than sata3 speed anyhow...so win win. You can get 2 480GB for only 180 bucks. While annoying dealing with 2 more drives...that's a good deal for 960GB.
Member
Jan 13, 2009
397 posts
486 upvotes
FYI, the 480GB $89.99 is for Prime members only.
Member
Mar 30, 2005
244 posts
69 upvotes
Wow the SSD pricing war is really heating up.
Deal Addict
Nov 21, 2007
3433 posts
1386 upvotes
Scarborough
BooYakaShaMaNikka wrote: "This is a terrible drive, not worth it, its gonna fail in six months... there are so many better drives for more money.. this doesn't have MLC NAND" -That One Dumb RFDer.
LOL, aren't you a fast learner.
GwenScout wrote: ....
Also if you are still rocking an older board(Z97) or earlier then you can't use more than sata3 speed anyhow...so win win. You can get 2 480GB for only 180 bucks. While annoying dealing with 2 more drives...that's a good deal for 960GB.
I would still buy "quality" for quite likely the ssd would outlast your tolerance for the old rig. By then re-use.
Deal Addict
Jun 14, 2011
1801 posts
1266 upvotes
Samwfive wrote: I would still buy "quality" for quite likely the ssd would outlast your tolerance for the old rig. By then re-use.
Paying 2-3x more for a drive thats 40% faster, but wont actually be noticeable on your current system seems pretty silly. It'd be like buying a 1080gt for a Celeron system because "in a few years when you replace your CPU, you can still use the GPU!"... Sure, but in a few years the 1080ti(or a MX500) is going to sell for maybe less than 1/3rd what you paid today... Plus theres the issue of all the wear and tear put on the drive in the mean time.

Kingston, Adata, Sandisk, etc... are reputable brands and their entry level stuff is totally acceptable, especially if the alternative is a 7200rpm drive. Going to a A400 from a 7200rpm mechanical drive is something like 10x faster, that big of a performance boost is easy to justify. Getting another 1.5x faster for 2-3x the cost is harder to swallow.
Deal Addict
Mar 12, 2016
1915 posts
4828 upvotes
I will never understand people who talk about reliability. If you do work like rendering etc, chances are you will need more than the tiny 480gb, and you will need higher speeds as well, so you wont even be looking at this thread. For the people who dont do sensitive work and are reading this, you won't burn out your SSD, and reliability doesnt vary much across brands at that level of load.
Deal Addict
Nov 21, 2007
3433 posts
1386 upvotes
Scarborough
Scott86 wrote: Paying 2-3x more for a drive thats 40% faster, but wont actually be noticeable on your current system seems pretty silly. It'd be like buying a 1080gt for a Celeron system because "in a few years when you replace your CPU, you can still use the GPU!"... Sure, but in a few years the 1080ti(or a MX500) is going to sell for maybe less than 1/3rd what you paid today... Plus theres the issue of all the wear and tear put on the drive in the mean time.

Kingston, Adata, Sandisk, etc... are reputable brands and their entry level stuff is totally acceptable, especially if the alternative is a 7200rpm drive. Going to a A400 from a 7200rpm mechanical drive is something like 10x faster, that big of a performance boost is easy to justify. Getting another 1.5x faster for 2-3x the cost is harder to swallow.
Using your logic, I shouldn't buy 1080ti and opt for 970ti(? don't know much about gpu). Then soon in near future I saved up for 8700K cpu...but then I'm stuck with a potato...

Where is this "1.5x faster for 2-3x the cost.." coming from?

A400 ------- $36/54/90
BX300 ------ $44/63/103
860 evo ---- $xx/85/120 (bestbuy)
Member
Jun 30, 2016
225 posts
152 upvotes
Etobicoke, ON
Daamn, bought 120G for 48$ a couple months ago. The 240G is only 53.x$ now. Loving the low low prices on SSDs.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Mar 5, 2003
1538 posts
39 upvotes
Peterborough, ON
So which is the better budget SSD?

Kingston A500 or Crucial BX500?

If it comes with a good warranty, I’m not too concerned since I do frequent back ups. But I want the faster budget SSD.

I’m sure either one is light years ahead of the 5400 hhd that’s in my Mac mini.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Apr 10, 2011
12742 posts
25705 upvotes
Montreal
kloan wrote: So which is the better budget SSD? Kingston A400 or Crucial BX500? If it comes with a good warranty, I’m not too concerned since I do frequent back ups. But I want the faster budget SSD. I’m sure either one is light years ahead of the 5400 hhd that’s in my Mac mini.

Go for the Top Brand: Crucial BX500 120 GB $38 Amazon.ca Edit: it's now back in stock.

Or for about $6 further up the price scale, there’s the better, faster Crucial BX300 120 GB (with MLC memory cells) still available: $44 Third party seller on Amazon.ca

I have compiled in the table below some results from ssd.userBenchMark.com

Those results are an average based on thousands of real life samples from thousands of different systems that are not at the best they could be, just like YOUR system at home. The more samples, the more the statistically abnormal results are diluted in the average.

Those average results show that the Crucial BX500 and the BX300 are faster SSDs than the Kingston A400 120 GB.

That being said, the results on ssd.userBenchMark.com, though useful to give a general idea while comparing SSDs, should be taken with a grain of salt and not as an absolute, especially when the sample is small.

I also include the MAXIMUM results from ssd.userBenchMark.com

The results for the Kingston A400 120 GB are particularly bad with a sustained writing speed never exceeding 153 MBps in a sample of 13,850! The other maximum results of the Kingston A400 120 GB are among the lowest of the bunch.

Do yourself a favor and spend at least $3 + tax more on the BX500. You are worth it!

Click on the image to enlarge.

Slow.png
Last edited by Temporel on Sep 25th, 2018 8:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)