The choice of TLC memory comes with pros and cons. The cells used to form this drive’s memory can hold three bits of data each, which increases density – so the same amount of silicon has more space for storage. Drivers Sony Vaio Windows 7 32 Bits more.

That helps bring the cost down, but it also hampers performance, as electricity has more distance to travel inside each of those cells. Elsewhere the Ultra II is more conventional. The memory used is built on a 19nm manufacturing process and using horizontal layers, rather than the 40nm vertical layers chosen by Samsung for its 3D V-NAND system. SanDisk’s drive comes with a feature called nCache, which uses 10GB of the 240GB drive’s space in an SLC-style caching mode. It’s a neat feature that will improve response times when dealing with frequently-accessed files. It’s reminiscent of Samsung’s Rapid Mode, but SanDisk hasn’t found room in this drive for any encryption. We usually talk about endurance ratings when discussing an SSD’s specification, but SanDisk doesn’t publish these for the Ultra II.

That shouldn’t be a problem for most home or gaming PCs, which don’t put huge demands on SSDs when it comes to writing data, but those after a drive for intensive work should look elsewhere. SanDisk Ultra II 240GB – Performance TLC memory isn’t the fastest, and the Ultra II’s lack of raw pace was exposed in our AS SSD benchmarks. In the sequential read test the Ultra II managed 505MBps – a. We'd also like to send you special offers and news just by email from other carefully selected companies we think you might like. Your personal details will not be shared with those companies - we send the emails and you can unsubscribe at any time. Please tick here if you are happy to receive these messages. And mid-range result that’s not as good as the MX100’s 519MBps pace.

Will SanDisk's SSD Plus or Z410 be the first? SanDisk SSD Plus and Z410 SATA III SSD Review. Crucial BX300 240GB SATA III SSD Review. The SanDisk Ultra II offers 240GB of space for a cool £100. Is this the best budget SSD?

The SanDisk beat the MX100 with a file write speed of 473MBps, but that result wasn’t enough to lift it beyond mid-table – and it wasn’t enough to beat the Samsung 850 Evo, either. The situation wasn’t much better when handling smaller files. The SanDisk’s 4K read and write speeds of 30MBps and 72MBps both fell behind the MX100, and in the 4K-64 benchmark it trade blows with its cheaper rival – faster when reading, but slower when writing. None of these scores could match Samsung’s Evo, which remained convincingly ahead throughout these tests. Scores miles ahead of anything the Crucial could manage. That lead was maintained across the rest of our tests, too: when reading files the SanDisk’s peak of 558MBps snuck ahead of the MX100’s top score of 552MBps, but when writing the Ultra’s top pace of 507MBps was much better than the Crucial’s 346MBps result.

The SanDisk’s read peak was better than the Samsung Evo, too, although the Samsung fought back with a top write result of 530MBps. The good form didn’t continue in the IOMeter tests. In the all-in-one benchmark the Ultra II’s result of 1843 I/Os proved sluggish – around 600 points behind the Crucial, and several times slower than top SSDs from Samsung.

Download Go Launcher Ex For Nokia Xl. The SanDisk’s raw speed of 70MBps was similarly poor – slower than both drives – and its average response time lagged behind, too. Samsung’s Evo, meanwhile, beat both drives: its top all-in-one score was 5,270 I/Os, and it topped out at 202MB/s. Other things to consider The Ultra II includes a three-year warranty, which is about what we now expect from affordable SSDs – that deal matches what’s on offer from the MX100. That said, it’s two years short of the Samsung 850 Evo’s coverage. We no longer expect plenty of accessories inside SSD boxes, but that hasn’t stopped SanDisk including a 9.5mm spacer with the Ultra II.

It’s a handy bit of kit that enables this 7mm drive to fit into spaces designed for 9.5mm hardware, which means it could be easier to fit the Ultra II inside older PCs and laptops without the SSD rattling around. Three other capacities of Ultra II are available. The 120GB is the cheapest at just £55, but that’s 46p per gigabyte – a little higher than the 240GB version we’ve reviewed.

The 480GB version costs £155 or 32p per gigabyte, and the mammoth 960GB model is £342, which works out at 36p per gigabyte. Should I Buy the SanDisk Ultra II 240GB? The 240GB option costs a reasonable £100, which makes it one of the cheaper SSDs we’ve seen recently. The modest price and TLC architecture means mid-table performance, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing – in AS SSD the Ultra II traded blows with the Crucial MX100, and the SanDisk secured a convincing victory over its rival in the comprehensive Atto suite.