You might reconsider after the Kingston SSD V300 fiasco ...
Basically, Kingston shipped the original V300 with synchronous NAND and performance was good/very good for a budget SSD and better than the V200 in the reviews. After the initial batch of SSDs were shipped and out for a month or so and reviewed, Kingston then switched the V300 manufacturing to asynchronous NAND and the performance tanked in some scenarios (incompressible data). Your basic "bait and switch."
The switch from synchronous to asynchronous NAND likely wouldn't have really mattered much if the performance had stayed about the same across the board -- but it didn't. The V300's performance tanks badly with incompressible data. Sure, it's much faster than a HDD (Kingston's defense), but there are much better performing budget SSD's out there for the money.