Kingston SSDs use the crappy SandForce controller which can only achieve the advertised speeds when it deals with compressed data. That's why on the box of my previous Kingston HyperX 3K SSD it said "These results were achieved with ATTO Disk Benchmark" because it uses compressed data. But in the real world, I was getting around 170MB Read/Write, no where near the advertised speeds. I would never use a Kingston SSD even if you paid me.
upgrading from ANY HDD to even the slowest SSD would be a night and day difference. ANY SSD will blow an HDD out of the water. But when comparing these crappy Kingston SSDs with the high performers such as Samsung840/850 PRO or SandDisk Extreme II / SanDisk Extreme PRO / Crucial M550/Crucial MX100 they would leave the Kingstons in the dust.
you never know how much faster it would be until you try it
Just my 2 cents worth
Benchmarks:
ATTO Disk Benchmark-Windows 8 IRST 11.5.0.1207 (results look fine since it's compressed DATA which most data usually ISN:T compressed so this Benchmark that Kingston uses is meaningless in the real world):
Now, a real world benchmark....... watch how the figures suck so bad in write speeds when data is not compressed
Crystal Disk Mark-Windows 8 IRST 11.5.0.1207
AS SSD Benchmark-Windows 8 IRST 11.5.0.1207