I think most SSDs on the market are now overpriced and lesser than the previous generation SSDs that they are 'replacing'.
Other than perhaps the Intel 510, the factory Toshiba is the best SSD longevity wise, as it will outlast all of the other drives on this vote.
Too many people are putting too much emphasis on statistical speed. I am yet to see any test that shows noticeable speed differences between the factory Toshiba SSD and the Vertex3/OWC6.0 in real-world tasks. If you can load MS Word in 3 seconds with the factory SSD, and then can load it in 1.3 seconds with the 6.0 SSDs, have you saved enough time to stop for a coffee and doughnut? Hell, even the older Intel X-25, which is a dinosaur speed wise, is still fast...and it is a helluva lot better drive than the Vertex or OWC SSDs quality wise. How many programs and data files are going to run significantly faster than 200-300mbs to make the actual load and computation times worth the extra money for the inferior flash memory?
And still, the issue that no maker has addressed (SEE bottom of this for a potential correction as this may have been addressed) is that the 20-some nm flash memory does not last nearly as long as the 34nm flash memory...furthermore, 20-some nm memory should be CHEAPER to produce, making the SSD cheaper. Why are we paying more for a hard drive that will fail sooner? Okay, so 2xnm flash will last about 60% as long as 34nm...well that is still a long time. With that said, the lesser life and cheaper production costs means that we will at least get SSDs that are cheaper and faster, right? WRONG.
Perhaps my biggest issue is that companies have silently switched their memory over to the cheaper 20-some nm, and instead of posting this have simply listed their memory type as "Premium NAND", "High Speed MLC NAND" and crap like that. They used to say "34nm MLC NAND"...they no longer specify anything memory type/size wise; this only further questions how inferior their current flash memory may be or is to what they previously used. Furthermore, you may be surprised once you see the speed differences of 34nm versus 2xnm. They aren't very impressive...at all.
Crucial
Crucial now lists their drive's memory as "high-speed synchronous MLC NAND". Now, Crucial's spec sheet says:
"Latest and greatest.
Designed for client computing, the Crucial m4 SSD delivers faster boot and application load times for mobile and desktop users alike. Low power, lightweight, and durable, it empowers high-speed synchronous MLC NAND, advanced controller technology, optimized NAND management, and the second-generation SATA 6Gb/s interface. Together, that technology dramatically improves data transfers for bandwidth-demanding applications."
http://www.crucial.com/store/partspecs.aspx?IMODULE=CT128M4SSD2
OCZ
I'm not a Vertex fan, but it is nice than they are one of the companies that have at least identified that differences in 34nm and 25nm flash memory does exist, and subsequently have posted specs on both of them. I assume they will soon make it 25nm only given this seems to be what other manufacturers are just doing without even alerting customers.
The Vertex 2 is now available with 25nm flash memory...
http://www.ocztechnology.com/res/manuals/OCZ_Vertex2_25nm_Product_sheet.pdf
AND, the Vertex 2 25nm is SLOWER than the 34nm Vertex 2
http://www.ocztechnology.com/res/manuals/OCZ_Vertex2_34nm_Product_sheet.pdf
Once again, at least they publish this.
OWC
I LOVED my 34nm Mercury Extreme Pro and feel that it was one of the best SSDs made. I did not want the 6.0 due to the memory used so I was going to purchase a large SATAII/3.0 model. It's changed. Notice that the sizes of OWC's SATAII Mercury Extreme Pro is now SMALLER than it was before. They no longer use 34nm flash memory on their drives anymore. They now use
"Tier 1/Grade A 2X-nm Multi-Level Cell (MLC) NAND Flash Memory"
A few months ago, a test and opinion was made on OCZ's choice of flash memory, but now they don't even tell you what type of memory they are using themselves...Awesome! Also, their listing for the drive, tests, comparisons, and specs have all been left the same. Do you think that the updated drive now runs at the EXACT same speed as its 34nm counterpart? I am a little skeptical that this drive will run the exact specs given that every other 2x nm SSD runs at a considerably different speed than their 34nm counters. They never announced this change... Even if it runs the exact same speed and lasts just as long, not disclosing information on their own flash memory is IMO frustrating.
Edit: Ultimately, I am curious as to why makers have stopped disclosing this information.
So if you get a MBP, you can go from a standard HDD to a 120 SSD, that uses 34nm flash memory, for 100 bucks....you would be crazy not to.
EDIT: I may be completely wrong:
Your NANDs will lose their charge before you reach the 3000 write cycles that 25nm flash offers.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4159/ocz-vertex-3-pro-preview-the-first-sf2500-ssd/2
I've read literature on this but if that is the case, this is a mute point.
EDIT EDIT: Also See
http://www.techspot.com/news/42434-ocz-moves-to-25nm-nand-flash-customers-are-not-happy.html
EDIT3:
OWC's 25nm drive was not reported to run as quickly as the 34nm one
http://macperformanceguide.com/Reviews-SSD-OWC-Mercury_Extreme-115GB.html