This was posted 12 years 6 months 1 day ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Cheapest SSD Ever! OCZ Octane 2.5'' 128G SSD - $89 ONLY @ BudgetPC

82
Cheapest SSD Ever! OCZ Octane 2.5'' 128G SSD - $89 ONLY @ BudgetPC
Go to Deal
Store RepBPC Technology @ BPC Technology on 26/06/2012 - 10:14 budgetpc.com.au (417 clicks)

Cheapest SSD ever ! OCZ Octane 2.5'' 128G SSD - $89 ONLY @ BudgetPC
http://www.budgetpc.com.au/06ossds2-25m-128os2.html

SATA 3Gbps Compatible Interface
512MB Onboard Cache
Indilinx Infused™
TRIM Support
Background Garbage Collection Support
Boot Time Reduction Optimization
AES and Automatic Encryption
SMART Support
Proprietary Indilinx Ndurance™ Technology
Low-Latency Seek Time: 0.06ms Read; 0.09ms Write
Slim 2.5" Design
99.8 (L) x 69.63 (W) x 9.3 mm (H)
Lightweight: 83g
Operating Temp: 0°C ~ 70°C
Ambient Temp: 0°C ~ 55°C
Storage Temp: -45°C ~ +85°C
Low Power Consumption: 2.3W active,1.2W standby
Shock Resistant up to 1500G
RAID Support
MTBF: 1,250,000 hours
3-Year Warranty
Compatible with Windows XP, Vista, 7 (32/64 bit), Linux, Mac OSX

Performance
Max Read: up to 275MB/s
Max Write: up to 175MB/s
Random Write 4KB: 11,000 IOPS
Random Read 4KB: 29,000 IOPS

Computing 128GB Computer Component OCZ SSD

Related Stores

BPC Technology
BPC Technology

closed Comments

  • orbital on 26/06/2012 - 10:20

    and for those playing interstate, shipping is ~$9.95

  • scrimshaw on 26/06/2012 - 10:22
    -1

    9.3mm drive height. Guess this isn't going to fit some notebooks.

    • Store RepBPC Technology @ BPC Technology on 26/06/2012 - 10:32
      -2

      Standard 2.5" HDD dimension: 69.85 mm x 100.2 mm x 9.5 mm
      This is already the slim one and it fits in most notebooks well.

  • Jon187 on 26/06/2012 - 10:28
    +2

    Hard to claim it's the "cheapest SSD ever" when it clearly isn't (assuming of course for the same product):

    http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/72418

    Care to include free post and drop the price to $88 (or less) so that your statement above is no longer misleading or deceptive? If not, a poor choice of words - and words the ACCC might take an interest in.

    • fertiliser on 26/06/2012 - 10:54
      -5

      I walk past a coffee shop every morning with "best coffee" written on their wall. I've had their coffee. It isn't the best. Could you please contact the ACCC on my behalf as you are obviously well versed in these despicable advertising practices.

      • martin_henry on 26/06/2012 - 11:07
        +22

        'Best' is subjective while 'Cheapest' is clearly an objective description.

        • outlander on 26/06/2012 - 12:08
          +2

          What if you're talking build quality?

        • morini on 26/06/2012 - 14:34

          Then you'd have to specify that build quality is the aspect of the product you're referring to, define it properly (build quality and reliability are not at all the same thing) and have the data to back it up. There are many other aspects which are often conflicting eg. build quality, weight, size, cost, performance.

  • mangolassi on 26/06/2012 - 10:28
    +1

    Not the cheapest ever. I got one of these from Centrecom for 89 and free postage last week. Works superb on a Mid-2009 MacBook Pro. But with that $9 shipping might be better to an extra $10 and get the Agility 3 from Centrecom for $99 plus $9 shipping or you can pick up in store.

    http://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/73253

  • sash213 on 26/06/2012 - 10:29

    Not to come across as pedantic but aren't 64GB SSDs cheaper? (This is in response to "Cheapest SSD ever!" - ignoring US prices obviously).

    Also MSY have a Kingston 128GB SSD for $85 so even at the same size
    http://www.staticice.com.au/cgi-bin/search.cgi?q=128gb+ssd&s…

    "Cheapest OCZ 128GB SSD ever!!"??

    Edit: beaten by that much! (birds of a feather)

  • Click_It on 26/06/2012 - 10:29
    +1

    It's SATA2 and one of the slower ones at that. Ideal for older notebooks/systems perhaps but I wouldn't use it for much else. Just my 2c

    • Mikinoz on 26/06/2012 - 12:21

      Its probably a good starter SSD, personally i use mine for benchtesting again spindle hard drives and using normal freely available software it does really well against 7200 rpm drives.

  • koungra on 26/06/2012 - 10:29
    +3

    I would rather spend an extra $10 on a OCZ Agility 3 (SATA3) thanks!

  • shaybisc on 26/06/2012 - 10:32

    What is it in particular that you ozbargainers do that makes SSD's so attractive to you?

    I have no experience with SSD at all, but reading that they wear out quicker than hard disk drives and are prone to catastrophic failure, besides being very expensive, cools my potential interest somewhat.

    • Jon187 on 26/06/2012 - 10:34
      +1

      Try one - you'll never go back to spinning disks as yout OS drive.

      • DrKazanovaKK on 26/06/2012 - 10:38
        +1

        Yep, 10-20 seconds to start Windows with a SSD compared to 2-3 mins with a spinning drive!

        • Cheeper on 26/06/2012 - 11:18
          +7

          That is fast for a hamburger?

        • seijai on 26/06/2012 - 13:31
          +1

          My Asus U31SD using Win7 starts up in about 30 seconds with a spinning drive.

        • shaybisc on 26/06/2012 - 14:46

          I just timed my Windows startup time with a spinning drive- under 1 minute and that includes typing a 12 character password.

        • LeechingLeech on 26/06/2012 - 16:38

          Congrats, have a cookie :D

      • Click_It on 26/06/2012 - 10:43
        +1

        So true, I won't use a computer with a HDD unless I absolutely have to now. I even installed an SSD in my partner's laptop. Such a better solution all round. If you need storage have external arrangements or a fileserver.

        • scrimshaw on 26/06/2012 - 10:51
          +5

          Yeah. I went from my Samsung SpinPoint F3 (which is one of the fastest drives on the market, asides from the WD Black) to a Crucial M4.

          The differences are simply awesome, once you go SSD you never go back.

    • Mikinoz on 26/06/2012 - 10:37

      Its faster, if speed is an issue ie if you are using windows.

      It doesnt appeal to all though not everyone needs it.

    • mangolassi on 26/06/2012 - 10:40

      Its just with the earlier firmware that it screws up the drive. If you get one with a newer firmware or update it it runs flawlessly! I highly recommend you try it if you haven't experience the power of SSD. Simply amazing!

    • atlas on 26/06/2012 - 11:45

      I don't think you can categorically say they wear out faster than mechanical drives, as the typical lifespan of an SSD is estimated to be 10+ years on normal usage.

      Failures seem to be to do with malfunctioning firmware which can also affect mechanical disks.

      On the plus side the speed increase in general usability and operations is the best money you can spend imo.

  • Alzori on 26/06/2012 - 10:38
    +2

    Seems a pretty 'meh' deal considering a 120Gb Sandisk Extreme can be had for $10 more.

    • Noobist45 on 26/06/2012 - 15:39

      Where do you a 120gb Sandisk Extreme for $99 ? ? ?

      MSY, PC Case Gear are $129. Most other stores are the same price or more expensive.

  • Squiglymo on 26/06/2012 - 10:40
    +2

    Read/Write speeds are nothing special compared to other SSD's available. An OCZ Agility 3 is about 500/500 for only 20-30 Dowlahs more.

    • Click_It on 26/06/2012 - 10:46
      +1

      Can be had for only $10 more nowadays. I have 2 Agility SSD's at home and they're great. With the newer firmwares there is no more issues that plagued them earlier on.

      Vertex 3, Sandisk Extreme are even faster again within that same ballpark price.

  • zealmax on 26/06/2012 - 11:26
    +1

    I like SSD for boot drive, but I would never use it for a data drive.

  • Mungulz on 26/06/2012 - 11:28

    Is this a terrible deal for someone with a SATA2 motherboard..??

    • sunnyii on 26/06/2012 - 11:35

      Does motherboard comes with RAID. You can always buy 2 and RAID them to get faster speed.

      Personally I wouldnt prefer these low end SSDs.

      • Mungulz on 26/06/2012 - 11:42

        Don't know, was a cheap motherboard, $60 nearly 2 years ago, AM3. I've just read issues with SATA 3 SSDs being used on SATA 2 interfaces, like performing well below SATA 2 specs, presumably due to dodgy firmware or just not optimised to work on SATA 2.

        • 881jz on 26/06/2012 - 12:15

          these HDDs are SATA 2 not 3

      • netsurfer on 26/06/2012 - 12:05
        +1

        AMD motherboards generally offer more SATA3 ports. If you have a SATA3 port, then this SSD is probably a bad choice.

        For SATA2, it is fine as a cheap SSD (assuming postage is not too high). Unless you go for a non-Sandforce chipset based SATA3 SSDs, you could find the performance on your Sandforce chipset based SSDs running on SATA2 giving you sub-par performance.

  • altomic on 26/06/2012 - 12:06
    -3

    I'm sure in 10 years time that a 128g SSD will be less than $10 therefore the reps claim of

    Cheapest SSD ever !

    is bollocks.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join