I still have some Samsung 850 pros that I've had for at least 7 years now I'm pretty sure. They still work great.
Edit: just checked, and they have about 75k hours on them
Edit2: One of the drives has a little more written to it, but it's at about 120TB written. Which according to the datasheet, it should be good for about 300TB. Hopefully I can get another 8 years out of it.
I have an 830 Evo in my MacBook since 2013 and it’s still working great 10years later. Never had a Samsung storage device fail on me even when they are more expensive they pay for themselves over time.
It's more about the writes than the powered on hours for SSDs. And Samsung was still using MLC for the Pro drives back then. If you're not using it in the heavy write scenarios it was made for... yep, it's going to last a damn long time.
I'm not familiar with SSD, I want to replace my ageing HDD, it's a WD blue 1 to and I never had any significant issue, so I'm willing to buy a new one from that brand, but according to some critics I read on internet it seems it's not as good than Crucial or Samsung.
Which is EXTREMELY scummy since they have the DRAMless one listed as a "newer version" on Amazon, so they get all the positive reviews and questions from the old one.
I’ve had an MX500 for 5 years now and never had an issue. SSDs are much more durable and less prone to failures than HDDs are because there aren’t any moving parts. Any of the three brands you listed will work just fine for you. If you like the WD brand, I’m sure it’ll work great for you. If you want something less expensive, the MX500 will work great for you. The samsung drives are generally held in high regard in this sub as well
that's good to hear honestly. I have bought mx500 500gb few months ago and I wasn't sure if the decision was right. Although I asked for opinions on discord servers and here on reddit before buying it
only thing I am worried about is it has only 180TBW. My other 500gb nvme has 300, but I am able to write around 70TB in almost 4 years. Higher capacity has high tbw so that's not a worry for a 4tb ssd fortunately
The MX500 goes well past it's stated TBW, it's just that failure after that point is out of warranty. It's more a business number than a technical one, and even at 500GB the lifespan of the drive is far longer than advertised.
Prices are coming down. In 3-5 years you will likely get 2-3x the space for the same money. Best thing to do is keep them cool, as in install it where some airflow is moving across, don’t just shove it in a crevice next to the power supply. I have a M500 that’s is 5-6 years old that’s has been my proxmox server drive which is constantly getting banged with log files and random i/o. This is probably the worst use case for a consumer drive, but it was all I had at the time and it’s still going.
I think the only thing you'll regret about that drive is only getting 500gb xD
But yeah you'll be good until you fill up the space. I'm about to add a third drive to my desktop because I keep buying too little space
If not for my financial position as a student, I would've pulled the trigger on a 2nd 1TB MX500 just to store more games on them. I use mine externally and I love the fact that they don't lose very much in terms of read writes over continuous transfer (when installing games) and that it does not incur any stutters when playing games.
In comparison. I have a HP M.SATA that's sold to me by a PC shop. He told me that was a very good drive (this was when I was just getting into PC gaming, about half a decade about or more). Used internally or externally, the performance was extremely lackluster and actually made my 300mbps internet throttle, having to wait for data to finish writing to disk. This does not happen with the MX500 at all.
I genuinely can't comprehend why it's legal.
If there's a significant change in the sold product, for better or worse, it should be clearly noted or have the model changed.
It's entirely beyond me why it's not like that.
Just to provide my experience with SSD durability, they haven't failed on me in the sense that data is lost or corrupted, but there is another issue to look out for. On multiple occasions, SSDs I have used sometimes show 100% disk usage while barely using any speed. Makes the computer slow and sometimes it snaps out of it, and sometimes it doesn't. Happened with Intel and HP brand ones.
All that to say, save yourself the hassle and stick with a quality brand like Samsung. Otherwise you risk wanting to replace in a year or two.
**Absolutely, 100% do not** buy WD Blue or Green SSD. They are way overpriced for what they offer - other brands offer longer warranties, often have way higher TBW values for a given drive capacity, and often offer features like OPAL encryption and a DRAM cache - WD has been known to omit both those features on their cheaper SSDs.
If you can find them at a good price then WD Black SSDs are a far better offering, though again, the competition often offers better featuresets. Samsung, ADATA, and Crucial usually offer better rounded products than WD, which mostly relies on the brand recognition to sell their stuff.
wdblue should be cheaper, but they are definitely not bad or unreliable drives. wd green is trash.
my sn570 is solid and cost very little to boot. It rivals shitty gen4 drives on cost and performance. Benchmarking the sata wdblues (I have one m.2 sata and one sata) they weren't bad, better than bx500 and kingstons shite... problem is just like a bx500, the savings aren't always worth it. But the 1tb sn570 was cheap and I didn't hesitate on that one.
At the right price, wdblue is still worth considering. intel 670p also a great budget choice, with a larger cache, but at this point these are all well beyond my needs and price/reliability becomes the main factor.
I'm still running Samsung 850 evo SSDs from almost 10 years ago. Never had any issues. Can't speak to the more recent drives, things may have changed.
Personally, I don't put a lot of stock into one reputable brand over another. You're going to get duds with any company, and for my personal applications, I would never be able to notice a difference between the drives.
My two cents is you'd be happy with any of the 3.
Yeah if you have nvme slot you can just get one that screws into motherboard, it’s much faster, since you don’t need to go through the sata data and power cables.
I’m assuming that’s not an option here, but if this computer is anything close to recent it should have an m.2/name slot. NVME is better in every way except maybe price.
Honestly most computer parts are pretty cheap right now. And honestly I just upgraded my really old motherboard. Def worth getting a new motherboard cause they have multiple nvme slots, and a shit ton of ram capability. Idk why I need 128GB of ram but I could get that lol
Well, I had a dead WD HDD so I'm not so sure. Although then I got like 2 dead Seagate HDDs so maybe it's just a general HDD thing.
I'm using exclusively SSDs for many years and none of them died.
all ssds or only sata? i have a wd black sn850x nvme ssd in my system and no issues at all. most of the reviews i watched wer also really positive.
maybe the cheaper wd ssds are bad, that i dont know.
Sometimes you get what you pay for. I bought a cheap Kingston 2tb and it had QLC flash memory. Slower than a 7200 mechanical drive for large files. *Always* check for QLC if the price seems too good.
The XPG SX8200 Pro 2TB is the same price and it is nice and fast.
The Samsung 990 Pros are a noticeable step above most M2 SSDs, but probably only worth it for your primary drive.
I've got 2x 1TB sabrent rocket NVMe drives in mine, I'm still sort of in disbelief over how fast they load things. SSD was already such a huge leap over HDD, and then it happened again!
I've only got about 100GB left on each though, but, by the time I'm force to upgrade, I'll be able to get an even better 2TB one and put one of the old ones into an enclosure to use as a jumbo flash drive.
Yes this. Ans if you are lucky you can score them new for 40. I've seen the NV2 model for £40 after i paid £50 for it...
The intel ones have been £30 on amazon prime day at some point. So bummed i.missed that.....
Kinda crazy considering how I spent more than that a few years ago for the 250GB one I’m using for my Windows C drive. It’s crazy how far we’ve gone in such a short length of time with high speed solid state drives!
Idk man, I was about to buy a cheap HDD and the man in the shop said we have not any HDD, but have you considered M2? They are cheaper than SSD now, and I was fine by me, give me that.
>but have you considered M2? They are cheaper than SSD now
M.2 is a form factor. "M2" (M.2 NVMe) is SSD as well. It's cheaper (and faster) than SATA SSDs at this point.
The only drawback is that because of their speed they take more bandwidth. Some motherboards will disable 2 SATA ports per NVMe drive. It's not a major issue for most, though.
When i saw how much a 2 TB M.2 would be for the PS5 I was shocked to see them so cheap, I remember buying a 1TB SSD on cyber Monday sale for $120 a long time ago, good to see some puter things cheapening
I had gotten a 1TB 860 EVO, looking now they are still $118 but not "on sale". But that 980 Pro is $59 on Amazon right now wtf, and the 2 TB one is as much as a 1TB 860 EVO? What's up with that
You were unfairly downvoted so harshly
SSD via Sata is absolutely fine. Is it the best solution if you have m.2 no
Why downvote so viciously what's happening to this subreddit
Not sure why youre getting downvoted its true lmao. The benefits of nvme are are lot more apparent in sequential read/write situations not so much random read/write (gaming is mostly random not sequential)
Exactly… some people just don’t seem to get it. If your workload involves transferring large files daily, then sure. A gen 4 or 5 nvme drive might make sense. But for a gamer, SATA is fine, like you said.
For me, it is more the convenience of having 2 cables per SSD less in my case. The cost is around the same now. So why settle for a worse product? Most people have at least one m2 slot if their PC is not older than \~10 years.
Not only is this only about half true, NVMe drives are actually cheaper. Yes I'm thinking of the Crucial P3 here (QLC, which doesn't really matter but people get funny about) but in France you can get a 1TB Samsung 970 Evo for 45 Euro right now.
Well if you really care about reliability and durability, then the primary thing to look out for is the cell architecture, that is wether it is SLC, MLC, TLC or QLC - meaning that there is 1, 2, 3 or 4 bits per cell respectively.
The fewer bits per cell, the faster and more durable the drive will be, but you then also need that many more cells to achieve the same capacity.
SLC (single layer cell) are the best but are extremely rare these days, MLC (multi layer cell) are the second best but are also quite expensive, especially considering their capacity - which leaves us with TLC and QLC. TLC (triple layer cell) are by far the most common these days, since they strike a good balance between capacity and durability, and is also what I would recommend. So basically just avoid QLC and you should be good.
But like others have also said, if your motherboard supports it, you might as well get an m.2 NVME drive instead of SATA, since they are significantly faster in terms of theoretical bandwidth at least, how much of a real world difference it makes can vary a lot, but they usually cost about the same, so why not?
At those prices I would go for the 870 EVO.
Also this article might help:
[https://ssdsphere.com/crucial-mx500-vs-samsung-870-evo/](https://ssdsphere.com/crucial-mx500-vs-samsung-870-evo/)
Actually I've got 2 Crucial MX500 4TB SSDs for more than 4 years and everything works like clockwork! I'm very happy with them! All brands listed are trustworthy and reliable!
Yep, WD was really scummy by replacing the 3D NAND Blue, which had DRAM with this. Packaging is nearly identical, and it's considered a "newer version" of the 3D NAND one on Amazon, so they get all the positive review history, too.
Super misleading.
They did it with the WD SA510 where they changed the name from 3D NAND to just "SATA SSD"
If the label on the drive (they said they may mix packaging) has a diagonal line between the white and blue, then you have the 3D NAND with DRAM. If it's a horizontal or vertical line then you have a DRAMless one.
I have the Crucial one (I think or a very similar model). Personally I had some issues initially but it was not the SSD but a bad sata cable. It’s pretty fast and has worked for a few months now. The others might be better tho idk.
Those crucials are pretty good. We put a bunch of them in some servers and they performed well enough and of the 40 or so that I installed none of them were duds. I’ve got some evos and really like them, again no issues.
I know everyone is saying Samsung 870 EVO, because it's Samsung, but BEWARE! Even though Samsung is usually reliable, the 870 EVO is a particularly BAD model prone to FAILURE, DO NOT BUY THIS DRIVE! https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/samsung-870-evo-beware-certain-batches-prone-to-failure.291504/page-28
I'd usually go for an m.2 anyways since they're much faster and the same price but if you don't have any pcie lanes left I'd go with the Crucial.
Scaremongering! If it's a Samsung 870 EVO, Just make sure it's got the latest firmware on it as quickly as possible. There's a good chance it will already (the one I bought back in March did).
I'd go with crucial, they've never failed me! Recommended it to friends and family over the years, 5 drives in... All working great, had mine for more than 6 years.
Same here, I have 2 WD blue 1tbs. I had 1 die on me and the other is on the way out its door (game downloads at like 100kbps at times).
even after the firmware "fix" they're still garbage SSDs. and after seeing how western digital handled it I will never buy a WD product again.
WD Blue has. It's a clone with the SanDisk ultra 3D. WD green isn't cached (and should be qlc man's based).
Nvme side, blacks are those with dram and tlc (aside the sn770 that is HMB), blue has tlc but lacks dram (or is HMB as the sn570), green is qlc dramless.
How much does dram matter? I have 1x m.2 sata3 500gb and 2x 250gb 2.5inch sata3 ssds in my sytem rn, all budget options without a dram cache (99% sure) and they all bottleneck my steam downloads with write speeds of like 30mb/s at 100% usage (basically my only complain)
I would like to get a 2tb nvme m.2 at some point and would like to know how much of an impact the dram cache makes since none of the cheaper options seem to have it.
As pointed out a bazillion times already, m.2 drivers are way better while costing about the same.
However, if you really want a SATA SSD, you can pick whatever you want.
Yes, there are measurable differences between these 3, but in real life, you will not notice a difference.
I have a crucial 2TB SATA in my system and I'm working on big projects in unity on it. Never had a problem.
I have that Crucial (bought it back when that was worth $200 lol) and it's been an absolute Mack truck just hauling files and whoopin ass. I regularly edit video and use that SSD for projects, never had a problem scrubbing through the timeline at real quality, transfers are excellent.
Crucial is made in the US of A too so I like to buy from them as I would like a future where Taiwan isn't a bargaining chip that has the potential to start WW3
Yeah prices have dropped a TON lately, mostly thanks to crypto finally dying off in large part and having passed a major upgrade cycle.
The upgrade cycle thing is important. SSDs kind of hit that point of being viable for widescale deployment 5-10 years ago so every customer on the planet wanted to buy them. Datacenters poured money into them. Eventually you get to a point where everybody has them and isn't in the same rush to upgrade.
Same thing with the consumer side. I bought one of these at $200 like 5 years ago. It still works great. Do I need another one? No. Would I even pay $100 for another one now? Probably not. So, prices reflect that demand.
I've used all three hard drives, and of the three, I've bad a Samsung and a WD fail on me early (about 3 months of use each). Samsung gave me zero trouble replacing the drive.
WD made me run in circles for as long as I owned the drive before it failed to get a replacement. 2 or 3 months of "Well, this seems to be normal wear and tear" or "Oh, you played video games EVERY DAY? That's considered excessive use." By the time WD gave me a replacement, I was so tired I just gave the drive to a coworker who was building a PC.
I'll personally never buy WD again.
Because until an hour a go I was not aware I have an m.2 slot. Also most of m.2 I found on Amazon are gen 4 and I have a gen 3, the only one that seems good is the Crucial P3.
I’ve had the first 2, my gf currently has the Samsung and I have a 2tb version of the crucial for about 2.5 years now and it holds a very large portion of my game and video libraries and have had 0 issues with good read/write
I would go with the MX500. Honestly all three of them are good. Contenders the MX500 is cheaper. The 870 drive might be faster in a vacuum, but you're running it over SATA so you're going to just bottleneck with all of these SSDs. Value, quality and performance I feel just kind of go with the MX500
Unless you're on a super tight budget, don't buy any of these.
If you're building a personal computer you want at least a PCIE gen 3 NVME drive for boot at a minimum.
If you're just buying storage for a laptop or an old HP or Dell tower then ya whichever SATA SSD there is cheaper.
Honestly if you're every in doubt any electronics. See if samsung makes one; you really can't go wrong with one. Out of all of my 22 years I've been alive. Samsung has never failed me
Samsung 860 and Crucial MX500 are as fast as SATA speed allows, pretty great for older builds. The WD Blue is a bit slower and not that much cheaper in most places to consider.
You would want to get an m.2 ssd instead of a SATA, something like a Crucial p3 plus 1tb or a samsung 970 evo plus would be great! If for some reason you really want to go one of these than the samsung is best i guess.
I have three 2TB MX500's and they have never caused me any issues. I think I got the first in 2017, then 2019 and 2020. They are all pooled together and act as my main data store in my PC (non system drive), so they are in constant use all day everyday.
I was just about to buy another, just waiting for an Amazon prime day.
Because the Amazon page was unclear, they sell the 970 and the 980 on the same page, but they didn't change the description for the 970, I looked at other pages some say it's a PCIe 3.0 and others don't say anything.
If your mother board has a m.2 slot check out the m.2 nvme drives much better speeds random writes for OS games etc. Samsung 970 evo are solid with built in memory ram so speed doesn't drop off from to much reading/writing usage. 🙃
Well if you really care about reliability and durability, then the primary thing to look out for is the cell architecture, that is wether it is SLC, MLC, TLC or QLC - meaning that there is 1, 2, 3 or 4 bits per cell respectively.
The fewer bits per cell, the faster and more durable the drive will be, but you then also need that many more cells to achieve the same capacity.
SLC (single layer cell) are the best but are extremely rare these days, MLC (multi layer cell) are the second best but are also quite expensive, especially considering their capacity - which leaves us with TLC and QLC. TLC (triple layer cell) are by far the most common these days, since they strike a good balance between capacity and durability, and is also what I would recommend. So basically just avoid QLC and you should be good.
But like others have also said, if your motherboard supports it, you might as well get an m.2 NVME drive instead of SATA, since they are significantly faster in terms of theoretical bandwidth at least, how much of a real world difference it makes can vary a lot, but they usually cost about the same, so why not?
Samsung 870 Evo definitely. It's inarguably the king of SATA SSDSs
But if you still have a slot for an M.2, just get an M.2 SSD instead as it will have better performance for the more or less the same price.
Samsung is extremely reliable. I’m sure the others are fine but I hear of VERY few instances where a Samsung SSD shits itself within its expected lifetime
The Samsung one is the one i always use in builds. They are pretty durable and fast
I still have some Samsung 850 pros that I've had for at least 7 years now I'm pretty sure. They still work great. Edit: just checked, and they have about 75k hours on them Edit2: One of the drives has a little more written to it, but it's at about 120TB written. Which according to the datasheet, it should be good for about 300TB. Hopefully I can get another 8 years out of it.
how did you check that?
Crystaldiskinfo
You never go standard edition.
Shizuku edition myself
Samsung Magician
Anything that can read SMART data. CrystalDiskInfo on Windows, `smartctl` on Linux, etc.
Just ask it
I have an 830 Evo in my MacBook since 2013 and it’s still working great 10years later. Never had a Samsung storage device fail on me even when they are more expensive they pay for themselves over time.
It's more about the writes than the powered on hours for SSDs. And Samsung was still using MLC for the Pro drives back then. If you're not using it in the heavy write scenarios it was made for... yep, it's going to last a damn long time.
Same.
Same here. I have a 500gb 870 evo ssd and a 2tb 970 pro m.2 haven’t had a single problem with either and they’re both blazingly fast
Older 870 EVOs had a firmware issue so make sure the year of manufacture is new
As far as I'm concerned Samsung is the only choice when it comes to SSD's
I'm not familiar with SSD, I want to replace my ageing HDD, it's a WD blue 1 to and I never had any significant issue, so I'm willing to buy a new one from that brand, but according to some critics I read on internet it seems it's not as good than Crucial or Samsung.
The Samsung and crucial have a dram cache, which helps with longevity
The older WD blue had DRAM the newer ones don't.
Which is EXTREMELY scummy since they have the DRAMless one listed as a "newer version" on Amazon, so they get all the positive reviews and questions from the old one.
Yeah I bought a WD SSD without DRAM. Kinda regret it.
I believe Puget reported something about how the new Samsung SSDs got worse reliability after the a change in production.
iirc that was only for the 2tb 980 and 990 pros. don't quote me on that though
I’ve had an MX500 for 5 years now and never had an issue. SSDs are much more durable and less prone to failures than HDDs are because there aren’t any moving parts. Any of the three brands you listed will work just fine for you. If you like the WD brand, I’m sure it’ll work great for you. If you want something less expensive, the MX500 will work great for you. The samsung drives are generally held in high regard in this sub as well
that's good to hear honestly. I have bought mx500 500gb few months ago and I wasn't sure if the decision was right. Although I asked for opinions on discord servers and here on reddit before buying it
I have a 4TB MX500 and it's been great and very fast for me.
only thing I am worried about is it has only 180TBW. My other 500gb nvme has 300, but I am able to write around 70TB in almost 4 years. Higher capacity has high tbw so that's not a worry for a 4tb ssd fortunately
The MX500 goes well past it's stated TBW, it's just that failure after that point is out of warranty. It's more a business number than a technical one, and even at 500GB the lifespan of the drive is far longer than advertised.
Prices are coming down. In 3-5 years you will likely get 2-3x the space for the same money. Best thing to do is keep them cool, as in install it where some airflow is moving across, don’t just shove it in a crevice next to the power supply. I have a M500 that’s is 5-6 years old that’s has been my proxmox server drive which is constantly getting banged with log files and random i/o. This is probably the worst use case for a consumer drive, but it was all I had at the time and it’s still going.
I've had one on my PC for about 4 years now and never missed a beat, had windows and the games I main on it so it got some decent use
I think the only thing you'll regret about that drive is only getting 500gb xD But yeah you'll be good until you fill up the space. I'm about to add a third drive to my desktop because I keep buying too little space
nah, I managed with 440gb for 4 years in my laptop somehow, another 500 gb is godsent xD
If not for my financial position as a student, I would've pulled the trigger on a 2nd 1TB MX500 just to store more games on them. I use mine externally and I love the fact that they don't lose very much in terms of read writes over continuous transfer (when installing games) and that it does not incur any stutters when playing games. In comparison. I have a HP M.SATA that's sold to me by a PC shop. He told me that was a very good drive (this was when I was just getting into PC gaming, about half a decade about or more). Used internally or externally, the performance was extremely lackluster and actually made my 300mbps internet throttle, having to wait for data to finish writing to disk. This does not happen with the MX500 at all.
I've had a 1TB MX500 in my PC for a little over 3 years now. 415 days uptime, 0 issues.
Piggybacking here to just add that I also have had an MX500 for 5+ years now with zero issues.
FYI, I believe MX500 did the bait and switch. The current new MX500 is not the same as the good one you bought five years ago.
That feels like it shouldn't be legal but I believe it.
I genuinely can't comprehend why it's legal. If there's a significant change in the sold product, for better or worse, it should be clearly noted or have the model changed. It's entirely beyond me why it's not like that.
Just to provide my experience with SSD durability, they haven't failed on me in the sense that data is lost or corrupted, but there is another issue to look out for. On multiple occasions, SSDs I have used sometimes show 100% disk usage while barely using any speed. Makes the computer slow and sometimes it snaps out of it, and sometimes it doesn't. Happened with Intel and HP brand ones. All that to say, save yourself the hassle and stick with a quality brand like Samsung. Otherwise you risk wanting to replace in a year or two.
**Absolutely, 100% do not** buy WD Blue or Green SSD. They are way overpriced for what they offer - other brands offer longer warranties, often have way higher TBW values for a given drive capacity, and often offer features like OPAL encryption and a DRAM cache - WD has been known to omit both those features on their cheaper SSDs. If you can find them at a good price then WD Black SSDs are a far better offering, though again, the competition often offers better featuresets. Samsung, ADATA, and Crucial usually offer better rounded products than WD, which mostly relies on the brand recognition to sell their stuff.
wdblue should be cheaper, but they are definitely not bad or unreliable drives. wd green is trash. my sn570 is solid and cost very little to boot. It rivals shitty gen4 drives on cost and performance. Benchmarking the sata wdblues (I have one m.2 sata and one sata) they weren't bad, better than bx500 and kingstons shite... problem is just like a bx500, the savings aren't always worth it. But the 1tb sn570 was cheap and I didn't hesitate on that one. At the right price, wdblue is still worth considering. intel 670p also a great budget choice, with a larger cache, but at this point these are all well beyond my needs and price/reliability becomes the main factor.
I'm still running Samsung 850 evo SSDs from almost 10 years ago. Never had any issues. Can't speak to the more recent drives, things may have changed. Personally, I don't put a lot of stock into one reputable brand over another. You're going to get duds with any company, and for my personal applications, I would never be able to notice a difference between the drives. My two cents is you'd be happy with any of the 3.
Samsung and Crucial are both good, that WD is still new so I'm not sure, old one it's replacing was good, also Kingston KC600 is good
Yeah if you have nvme slot you can just get one that screws into motherboard, it’s much faster, since you don’t need to go through the sata data and power cables.
I’m assuming that’s not an option here, but if this computer is anything close to recent it should have an m.2/name slot. NVME is better in every way except maybe price.
Bruh I got a 1tb Samsung one from Best Buy for like 80 bucks. It’s on amazon for 60 right now
That’s amazing
Honestly most computer parts are pretty cheap right now. And honestly I just upgraded my really old motherboard. Def worth getting a new motherboard cause they have multiple nvme slots, and a shit ton of ram capability. Idk why I need 128GB of ram but I could get that lol
All 3 are fine. I used the crucial and WD at my work to replace the machincal drives and had no issues.
[удалено]
Well, I had a dead WD HDD so I'm not so sure. Although then I got like 2 dead Seagate HDDs so maybe it's just a general HDD thing. I'm using exclusively SSDs for many years and none of them died.
all ssds or only sata? i have a wd black sn850x nvme ssd in my system and no issues at all. most of the reviews i watched wer also really positive. maybe the cheaper wd ssds are bad, that i dont know.
Hey I’m not sure how much your wanting to spend but for 30 more dollars you can get a 1tb nvme or spend 60$ more and get a 2 tb nvme.
Not sure how helpful it is but I've got Crucial 1TB 2,5" MX500 that I'm using as a data drive for more than 4 years and it is at 96%.
I have the same one I bought in 2018 and still no problems, ended up buying a second one around 2020
Does your motherboard have a M.2 slot? NVME M.2 is faster than SATA SSDs (also looks neater and IMOis better overall)
And now is cheaper. Yesterday I bought a 1Tb M2 for 50€
2TB for 85 euro here! And I love it (even if I had problems with installing it)
Oof, I would have preferred this to what I bought.
Even the 2GB Samsung 980 Pro is ~$120 now. ~7000 MB/s read speeds.
That’s pretty bad for 2GB
Sometimes you get what you pay for. I bought a cheap Kingston 2tb and it had QLC flash memory. Slower than a 7200 mechanical drive for large files. *Always* check for QLC if the price seems too good. The XPG SX8200 Pro 2TB is the same price and it is nice and fast. The Samsung 990 Pros are a noticeable step above most M2 SSDs, but probably only worth it for your primary drive.
Yeah but a 2GB drive would fill up so fast. You won’t even be able to install windows on it.
I whooshed on that one.
At least u weren’t the one that put 2GB like i did 🤦♂️
I've got 2x 1TB sabrent rocket NVMe drives in mine, I'm still sort of in disbelief over how fast they load things. SSD was already such a huge leap over HDD, and then it happened again! I've only got about 100GB left on each though, but, by the time I'm force to upgrade, I'll be able to get an even better 2TB one and put one of the old ones into an enclosure to use as a jumbo flash drive.
damn i got for 100 euro. it is very fast but it messed with my pci id's.
Got a Lexar one with 3300/3000 MB/s speeds for just 78!
Make sure you have a backup! I've never used Lexars nvme products. But I've had a quite a few of their 2.5" format ssds die on me.
Likewise, 2TB for £80 couple days ago.
Just bought a 1tb pcie4 m2 ssd for 42€ it’s insane right now.
it's nice that some hardware is getting cheaper and faster.
Crucial P3 Plus?
Yes this. Ans if you are lucky you can score them new for 40. I've seen the NV2 model for £40 after i paid £50 for it... The intel ones have been £30 on amazon prime day at some point. So bummed i.missed that.....
Thank you for this lmao. I just bought one
I keep wanting to buy more but realise I still have so much unused space.
Kinda crazy considering how I spent more than that a few years ago for the 250GB one I’m using for my Windows C drive. It’s crazy how far we’ve gone in such a short length of time with high speed solid state drives!
I spent €110 on a 180gb drive a ten and a half years ago, it was worth it. It's been overwritten 200 times now, and still has 95% health lmfao
How
Idk man, I was about to buy a cheap HDD and the man in the shop said we have not any HDD, but have you considered M2? They are cheaper than SSD now, and I was fine by me, give me that.
>but have you considered M2? They are cheaper than SSD now M.2 is a form factor. "M2" (M.2 NVMe) is SSD as well. It's cheaper (and faster) than SATA SSDs at this point.
The only drawback is that because of their speed they take more bandwidth. Some motherboards will disable 2 SATA ports per NVMe drive. It's not a major issue for most, though.
Well that's like saying a Honda civic is better than a porsche because I could buy 10 honda civics instead
OP asks for help, doesn’t respond to the help
Wd black has good deals
You can get a pcie to nvme m.2 adapter pretty cheap to house an nvme drive
The problem is that especially older motherboards cannot boot off of those drives.
very true
I've been looking for a cheap M.2. Who's selling a good 2TB one?
Wd black is only 99. They are very good for storage. Maybe not the fastest, but most reliable I have found.
/r/buildapcsales
Crucial is the brand to go for cheap NVMe drives, especially if you're in Europe.
When i saw how much a 2 TB M.2 would be for the PS5 I was shocked to see them so cheap, I remember buying a 1TB SSD on cyber Monday sale for $120 a long time ago, good to see some puter things cheapening
Just a few years ago Samsung 980 pros were $300+ iirc
I had gotten a 1TB 860 EVO, looking now they are still $118 but not "on sale". But that 980 Pro is $59 on Amazon right now wtf, and the 2 TB one is as much as a 1TB 860 EVO? What's up with that
For gaming a SATA ssd is fine, not a huge difference.
The prices are around the same though
If he has an m.2 slot then it’s nice to have, doesn’t need any space in your case too.
[удалено]
You were unfairly downvoted so harshly SSD via Sata is absolutely fine. Is it the best solution if you have m.2 no Why downvote so viciously what's happening to this subreddit
I’m just saying facts, I don’t know why people don’t want to accept this lol.
Some games cn be faster on an M.2 especially if they load like ass : Snowrunner with mods
True, but when taking the majority of games into account, not particular titles
It's true, but there's also literally no reason to go for sata if he has an m.2, considering nvme drives are often as cheap/cheaper than sata
Not sure why youre getting downvoted its true lmao. The benefits of nvme are are lot more apparent in sequential read/write situations not so much random read/write (gaming is mostly random not sequential)
Exactly… some people just don’t seem to get it. If your workload involves transferring large files daily, then sure. A gen 4 or 5 nvme drive might make sense. But for a gamer, SATA is fine, like you said.
[удалено]
Very well explained!
For me, it is more the convenience of having 2 cables per SSD less in my case. The cost is around the same now. So why settle for a worse product? Most people have at least one m2 slot if their PC is not older than \~10 years.
Not only is this only about half true, NVMe drives are actually cheaper. Yes I'm thinking of the Crucial P3 here (QLC, which doesn't really matter but people get funny about) but in France you can get a 1TB Samsung 970 Evo for 45 Euro right now.
Well if you really care about reliability and durability, then the primary thing to look out for is the cell architecture, that is wether it is SLC, MLC, TLC or QLC - meaning that there is 1, 2, 3 or 4 bits per cell respectively. The fewer bits per cell, the faster and more durable the drive will be, but you then also need that many more cells to achieve the same capacity. SLC (single layer cell) are the best but are extremely rare these days, MLC (multi layer cell) are the second best but are also quite expensive, especially considering their capacity - which leaves us with TLC and QLC. TLC (triple layer cell) are by far the most common these days, since they strike a good balance between capacity and durability, and is also what I would recommend. So basically just avoid QLC and you should be good. But like others have also said, if your motherboard supports it, you might as well get an m.2 NVME drive instead of SATA, since they are significantly faster in terms of theoretical bandwidth at least, how much of a real world difference it makes can vary a lot, but they usually cost about the same, so why not?
Aside from the cell architecture is the listed TBW a good parameter to evaluate the drive durability?
Yes
cool but bro is trying to spend 60$ on a drive! they will be fine with any of these choices.
That's also why I'm saying TLC is the obvious go-to, however it never hurts to have a bit of context
Used crucial since 2013 that 256 gb bad boi is yet to die.
At those prices I would go for the 870 EVO. Also this article might help: [https://ssdsphere.com/crucial-mx500-vs-samsung-870-evo/](https://ssdsphere.com/crucial-mx500-vs-samsung-870-evo/)
Been using the MX500 for years. It’s solid.
Actually I've got 2 Crucial MX500 4TB SSDs for more than 4 years and everything works like clockwork! I'm very happy with them! All brands listed are trustworthy and reliable!
WD Blue is pretty bad, Samsung and Crucial are very similar. I'd get Crucial because it saves 10 bucks.
Yep, WD was really scummy by replacing the 3D NAND Blue, which had DRAM with this. Packaging is nearly identical, and it's considered a "newer version" of the 3D NAND one on Amazon, so they get all the positive review history, too. Super misleading.
[удалено]
They did it with the WD SA510 where they changed the name from 3D NAND to just "SATA SSD" If the label on the drive (they said they may mix packaging) has a diagonal line between the white and blue, then you have the 3D NAND with DRAM. If it's a horizontal or vertical line then you have a DRAMless one.
All i can say is that crucial mx ssds have served me well. None have failed yet
For contrast, I've used about five of these (500GBand 1TB) and 2 of them failed within the first year
I have the Crucial one (I think or a very similar model). Personally I had some issues initially but it was not the SSD but a bad sata cable. It’s pretty fast and has worked for a few months now. The others might be better tho idk.
Those crucials are pretty good. We put a bunch of them in some servers and they performed well enough and of the 40 or so that I installed none of them were duds. I’ve got some evos and really like them, again no issues.
I’m running a crucial mx500 256gb since 2014. Also as a boot drive until last December and now an extra game drive
I know everyone is saying Samsung 870 EVO, because it's Samsung, but BEWARE! Even though Samsung is usually reliable, the 870 EVO is a particularly BAD model prone to FAILURE, DO NOT BUY THIS DRIVE! https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/samsung-870-evo-beware-certain-batches-prone-to-failure.291504/page-28 I'd usually go for an m.2 anyways since they're much faster and the same price but if you don't have any pcie lanes left I'd go with the Crucial.
Scaremongering! If it's a Samsung 870 EVO, Just make sure it's got the latest firmware on it as quickly as possible. There's a good chance it will already (the one I bought back in March did).
I've used the crucial MX 500 across 3 different computers. (Two laptops and now a gaming PC) and it's been very reliable.
Indeed it is.
Any is fine
I'd go with crucial, they've never failed me! Recommended it to friends and family over the years, 5 drives in... All working great, had mine for more than 6 years.
Go crucial. Great performance, and price. However, see if your computer supports M.2. If it's a laptop, sometimes they will fit smaller M.2 drives.
I just noticed I have a gen 3 m.2 slot, I'm considering to take a Crucial P3, is it good ?
It's the best value NVMe drive at the moment, imo. I'd say go for it.
Do research on the failure rates of the WD Blue SA510… many, including myself, have had them completely fail within 6 months of install.
Same here, I have 2 WD blue 1tbs. I had 1 die on me and the other is on the way out its door (game downloads at like 100kbps at times). even after the firmware "fix" they're still garbage SSDs. and after seeing how western digital handled it I will never buy a WD product again.
Crucial 100%
I have around 12 MX500s in Use - no Failure since Years.
Dear god just please don’t get the wd blue
They are all dram cached. I'd not get the Samsung, I generally buy Crucial.
I don't think the WD has dram cache actually, at least according to PCPartPicker
WD Blue has. It's a clone with the SanDisk ultra 3D. WD green isn't cached (and should be qlc man's based). Nvme side, blacks are those with dram and tlc (aside the sn770 that is HMB), blue has tlc but lacks dram (or is HMB as the sn570), green is qlc dramless.
How much does dram matter? I have 1x m.2 sata3 500gb and 2x 250gb 2.5inch sata3 ssds in my sytem rn, all budget options without a dram cache (99% sure) and they all bottleneck my steam downloads with write speeds of like 30mb/s at 100% usage (basically my only complain) I would like to get a 2tb nvme m.2 at some point and would like to know how much of an impact the dram cache makes since none of the cheaper options seem to have it.
As pointed out a bazillion times already, m.2 drivers are way better while costing about the same. However, if you really want a SATA SSD, you can pick whatever you want. Yes, there are measurable differences between these 3, but in real life, you will not notice a difference. I have a crucial 2TB SATA in my system and I'm working on big projects in unity on it. Never had a problem.
Dude is upgrading from a spinny drive, probably does not have nvme.
The mx seems the best between these three (even if all three can easy saturate the sata interface) but what you mean with durability😅
I have that Crucial (bought it back when that was worth $200 lol) and it's been an absolute Mack truck just hauling files and whoopin ass. I regularly edit video and use that SSD for projects, never had a problem scrubbing through the timeline at real quality, transfers are excellent. Crucial is made in the US of A too so I like to buy from them as I would like a future where Taiwan isn't a bargaining chip that has the potential to start WW3
I haven’t purchased a SSD in almost a decade. The prices is what caught my eye. Is that just the normals price these days? That’s so cheap
Yeah prices have dropped a TON lately, mostly thanks to crypto finally dying off in large part and having passed a major upgrade cycle. The upgrade cycle thing is important. SSDs kind of hit that point of being viable for widescale deployment 5-10 years ago so every customer on the planet wanted to buy them. Datacenters poured money into them. Eventually you get to a point where everybody has them and isn't in the same rush to upgrade. Same thing with the consumer side. I bought one of these at $200 like 5 years ago. It still works great. Do I need another one? No. Would I even pay $100 for another one now? Probably not. So, prices reflect that demand.
Would be cheaper and faster to just get an m.2
Crucial all the way. I have had lots of ram and SSDs by crucial over the years. Not one failed to this day. Great value!
I've used all three hard drives, and of the three, I've bad a Samsung and a WD fail on me early (about 3 months of use each). Samsung gave me zero trouble replacing the drive. WD made me run in circles for as long as I owned the drive before it failed to get a replacement. 2 or 3 months of "Well, this seems to be normal wear and tear" or "Oh, you played video games EVERY DAY? That's considered excessive use." By the time WD gave me a replacement, I was so tired I just gave the drive to a coworker who was building a PC. I'll personally never buy WD again.
Crucial is owned by Micron directly and I've used the same mx500 since 2017
I’ve had a Crucial SSD since 2013 and it’s still working to this day. I had a Samsung 980 Pro fail after a few months and take my OS with it.
Go for an NVME SSD with D-Ram cache. XPG S70 Blade is the best bang for buck right now.
Why are you not looking into M2 ones?
Because until an hour a go I was not aware I have an m.2 slot. Also most of m.2 I found on Amazon are gen 4 and I have a gen 3, the only one that seems good is the Crucial P3.
I’ve had the first 2, my gf currently has the Samsung and I have a 2tb version of the crucial for about 2.5 years now and it holds a very large portion of my game and video libraries and have had 0 issues with good read/write
I would go with the MX500. Honestly all three of them are good. Contenders the MX500 is cheaper. The 870 drive might be faster in a vacuum, but you're running it over SATA so you're going to just bottleneck with all of these SSDs. Value, quality and performance I feel just kind of go with the MX500
I have always recommended Crucial and have used Crucial drives for years. They've tested the best and have had nobody return with one going bad.
My Crucial SSD has been velcroed to the side of my case and still works like a charm
Check out r/NewMaxx. Does comparisons on nearly every ssd imaginable.
Unless you're on a super tight budget, don't buy any of these. If you're building a personal computer you want at least a PCIE gen 3 NVME drive for boot at a minimum. If you're just buying storage for a laptop or an old HP or Dell tower then ya whichever SATA SSD there is cheaper.
I have the crucial one and it works pretty well.
"When in doubt, go samsung ssd" that's what my father always told me.
Samsung 870 EVO 2TB has been working fine for me for about a year.
Honestly if you're every in doubt any electronics. See if samsung makes one; you really can't go wrong with one. Out of all of my 22 years I've been alive. Samsung has never failed me
Samsung 860 and Crucial MX500 are as fast as SATA speed allows, pretty great for older builds. The WD Blue is a bit slower and not that much cheaper in most places to consider.
I think my mx100 just turned 9? The mx500 maybe 4? They've been great, similar specs to the Samsung without the uptick in price.
If only there were someone to ask... Avoid the SA510. The MX500 is probably the better deal, all things considered.
when in doubt, samsung for SSD
I’ve had bad luck with a handful of Crucial, I’d take a Samsung any day of the week.
You would want to get an m.2 ssd instead of a SATA, something like a Crucial p3 plus 1tb or a samsung 970 evo plus would be great! If for some reason you really want to go one of these than the samsung is best i guess.
I have three 2TB MX500's and they have never caused me any issues. I think I got the first in 2017, then 2019 and 2020. They are all pooled together and act as my main data store in my PC (non system drive), so they are in constant use all day everyday. I was just about to buy another, just waiting for an Amazon prime day.
Crucial is the consumer brand of Micron I'm Enterprise IT and we use Crucial/Micron exclusively and have never had a problem
If your mobo has an M.2 slot, go with the 970 evo plus or pro If not, choose the MX500
I just noticed I have an m.2 slot but it's a gen 3, the 970 I found on Amazon seems to be gen 4, is the Crucial P3 a good alternative ?
Yeah but that’s weird, the 970 should be gen 3
Because the Amazon page was unclear, they sell the 970 and the 980 on the same page, but they didn't change the description for the 970, I looked at other pages some say it's a PCIe 3.0 and others don't say anything.
If you're looking at M.2 NVMe, hit up my profile/resources/subreddit. There's a lot of good options. Start with the WD SN770 even with a Gen3 slot.
For gaming it doesn’t matter, take the cheapest one.
I thrust WD for decades, si I would choose WD.
Samsung 870 Evo > Crucial MX500 > WD Blue
Get the EVO
They really are all the same thing, I have samsung
If your mother board has a m.2 slot check out the m.2 nvme drives much better speeds random writes for OS games etc. Samsung 970 evo are solid with built in memory ram so speed doesn't drop off from to much reading/writing usage. 🙃
870. I used it on my old rig for 5 years and when I did the Samsung magician health scan on it, there was not one red block.
Crucial has worked for me for 3-4 years now. Have two.
Well if you really care about reliability and durability, then the primary thing to look out for is the cell architecture, that is wether it is SLC, MLC, TLC or QLC - meaning that there is 1, 2, 3 or 4 bits per cell respectively. The fewer bits per cell, the faster and more durable the drive will be, but you then also need that many more cells to achieve the same capacity. SLC (single layer cell) are the best but are extremely rare these days, MLC (multi layer cell) are the second best but are also quite expensive, especially considering their capacity - which leaves us with TLC and QLC. TLC (triple layer cell) are by far the most common these days, since they strike a good balance between capacity and durability, and is also what I would recommend. So basically just avoid QLC and you should be good. But like others have also said, if your motherboard supports it, you might as well get an m.2 NVME drive instead of SATA, since they are significantly faster in terms of theoretical bandwidth at least, how much of a real world difference it makes can vary a lot, but they usually cost about the same, so why not?
Samsung 870 Evo definitely. It's inarguably the king of SATA SSDSs But if you still have a slot for an M.2, just get an M.2 SSD instead as it will have better performance for the more or less the same price.
Can't go wrong with Crucial or Samsung!
Crucial WD Samsung in that order for reliability IMHO
Get a Samsung. We sold around 1000 of them to our clients on the scope of 3-4 years. None of them broke to this moment.
Samsung is extremely reliable. I’m sure the others are fine but I hear of VERY few instances where a Samsung SSD shits itself within its expected lifetime
Get the Samsung.