Can't decide, 128gb Crucial M4 or Samsung 830

[Lang15]

I'm pulling my hair out.. I can't decide between these two. I've been reading reviews for a few weeks now, they both seem like the best choices in terms of reliability and speed. I know Crucial just released the 0309 firmware to address the 5000+ hours bug, but I read today that Samsung just released a new firmware yesterday to address some issues. I use my computer for general use and heavy gaming, but I like stuff to be as fast as possible.

Help me decide I'm so mixed up!

I checked newegg this morning and the Crucial was selling for $20 less than the Samsung.

Crucial m4 128gb ($179.99)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148442

Samsung 830 128gb ($199.99)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147134

 

[Coup27]

It's very difficult to split the two. Here are two sets of CDM scores, first is Crucial 128GB, second is my Samsung 128GB:

What the Samsung does have over the Crucial is an SSD toolbox application. The most important feature of this is it will allow you to manually run TRIM and garbage collection to restore your SSD to maximum potential. Word is enough idle time will do the same job but my system gets enough idle time but this process definately makes a difference and takes 3 minutes.

 

[groberts101]

either way you go there will be almost identical for user perception in usage.

Personally I would go for the Corsair Performance Pro which will beat them both at that capacity point.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233226

basically the same drive as the M4 with tweaked firmware and toggle nand. Just missed the sale at $189 but still worth the extra few bucks over the other, IMO.

 

[Coup27]

Roberts have you been able to locate a set of CDM scores for that drive?

 

[tweakboy]

Get the Crucial 128GB thx gl

 

[plion]

I'm also in the same boat. If groberts101 is right about it being an improved m4 than its the best deal for me since theres a $30 rebate at tigerdirect -$20 amex promo.

 

[Jocelyn84]

First post outside of the F/S section (I'm a regular over at [H]), but I at least wanted to let you know about better deals for the SSDs you're looking at.

Performance Pro 128gb can still be had for $189.99 or $179.99 (See below) after $30 rebate at Tiger Direct
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1601871&CatId=5300
You can get an additional $10 off using you Visa card (Doesn't show up until payment goes through)
http://usa.visa.com/personal/discou...igerDirect.com_7_F11&offerId=35039&pageId=197

Also, you can get a Crucial m4 128gb for $174.95 or $164.95 (See below) from Buy.com
http://www.buy.com/prod/crucial-m4-...d-state-drive-ssd-with-desktop/225162131.html
You have to use a new account, but you can get $10 off a Buy.com purchase using the following link
http://www.buy.com/retail/coupon.asp?prid=82955137&&

I'd personally go with whichever of the three is cheapest and the m4 wins. I own an m4 256gb, but I would have bought the Samsung or Corsair over the m4, had they been cheaper.

Edit: Ahh plion even better deal with the Amex promo.

 

[Obsoleet]

I've pondered and pondered this question. M4 or 830.
I say 830.

Samsung has a better reliability track record, the 830 is a fast Samsung drive, has a SSD toolbox and is all-Samsung. The M4 uses a Marvell controller. Nothing wrong with that, but there's something to be said about a company originating ALL the parts, total control, total unprecedented knowledge over what they're working with.

Whatever you do, don't deviate from the M4 or 830 based on price. Keeping your data is a fairly critical component, in the SSD market I'd go with the most reliable you can find. Between these 2 choices, Samsung is the winner.

 

[RhoXS]

I just went with the Samsung 128 Gb 830. Speed is nice and I certainly want the fastest BUT never at the expense of reliability and stability. Not even a slight compromise in this regard is acceptable to me. I perceive the Samsung and Intel products as having the highest probability of a problem free experience.

I also lost confidenve in the other smaller brands like OCZ after the labeling debacle a year or so ago. By staying with the really big players (like Samsung & Intel) I feel more comfortable although size of a business is certainly not a perfect indicator for how ethical their business practices are.

 

[sequoia464]

Roberts have you been able to locate a set of CDM scores for that drive?

is this what you are looking for?

SSDReviews ..
http://thessdreview.com/our-reviews...ssd-review-marvell-controller-with-a-punch/3/

If I needed another SSD this is probably what I would get. Check out the AS SSD score - also on that page.

 

[Coup27]

is this what you are looking for?

SSDReviews ..
http://thessdreview.com/our-reviews...ssd-review-marvell-controller-with-a-punch/3/

If I needed another SSD this is probably what I would get. Check out the AS SSD score - also on that page.

Those benchmarks are definitely good, but if we found an 830 256GB I don't think there would be much in it IMO.

 

[bryanW1995]

Whichever is cheaper, they are both excellent.

 

[groberts101]

Those benchmarks are definitely good, but if we found an 830 256GB I don't think there would be much in it IMO.

but then you'd be comparing a 256GB model to a 128GB. There's no doubt about the fact that toggle nand kicks ass from whatever controller it runs off of.

very cool of Jocelyn to share that info with others. :thumbsup:

 

[Coup27]

but then you'd be comparing a 256GB model to a 128GB. There's no doubt about the fact that toggle nand kicks ass from whatever controller it runs off of.

?

The scores on the link are from a 256GB Corsair, mine are from a 128GB Samsung. That's why I said if we could find CDM scores for a 256GB Samsung IMO I don't think there wouldn't be much in it.

 

[groberts101]

?

The scores on the link are from a 256GB Corsair, mine are from a 128GB Samsung. That's why I said if we could find CDM scores for a 256GB Samsung IMO I don't think there wouldn't be much in it.

uh oh.. you caught me again.. Tha's what happens when you don't click on links and go off memory at my age. lol

I was thinking it was the 128GB version like so. I still find it slightly odd how close the 128GB version is to the larger model in everything but the sequential writes.

 

[Obsoleet]

I just went with the Samsung 128 Gb 830. Speed is nice and I certainly want the fastest BUT never at the expense of reliability and stability. Not even a slight compromise in this regard is acceptable to me. I perceive the Samsung and Intel products as having the highest probability of a problem free experience.

I also lost confidenve in the other smaller brands like OCZ after the labeling debacle a year or so ago. By staying with the really big players (like Samsung & Intel) I feel more comfortable although size of a business is certainly not a perfect indicator for how ethical their business practices are.

Great choice.

Although the M4s are great drives, they've had more problems than most Samsung drives.
Also, I'd have to say Samsung has a better track record than Intel as well.

For reliability, Samsung is probably the industry's best. They sell the most due to their Apple connection, and are the only OEM provider between Intel, Crucial and themselves.
So they sell even MORE stuff than Intel does due to having a retail and OEM presence.

I use Intel, love them. But if buying today, it'd be Samsung hands down. Sure they aren't at the top of all the meaningless charts, but they are smoking fast and beat everyone at reliability. They only negative to Samsung has been their speed which is now rectified with the 830.

The market will have to be reevaluated with the Intel 520 launch but for now, and even if the 520 is superior in all regards, the Samsung will remain #2 or #1.

 

[Coup27]

uh oh.. you caught me again.. Tha's what happens when you don't click on links and go off memory at my age. lol

I was thinking it was the 128GB version like so. I still find it slightly odd how close the 128GB version is to the larger model in everything but the sequential writes.

lol, I'm not keeping score, promise.

Looking at those scores, there really isn't anything in it between the two. If we were playing top trumps then I think the 830 actually comes out on top.

 

[Lang15]

I ended up ordering the crucial 128gb m4. Lots of people seem very happy with their m4's and I think either option would be just fine.

 

[Helicobacter]

My buddy from a different forum just sent me a message saying that the read/write speed of the Samsung 830 gets much worse over time. He sourced: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?271063-SSD-Write-Endurance-25nm-Vs-34nm/page138
New:

Afterwards:

 

[jwilliams4200]

Bad example. That is the original firmware, and also Christopher has been hammering the 830 with a load designed to wear it out as fast as possible.

There may still be firmware bugs that cause performance degradation, even in the latest 830 firmware. Or maybe not. But the example you cited is not good evidence either way.

 

[Coup27]

I've had an 830 for a couple of months now and subjected it to "normal usage". My system has idle time now and again and I also run the SSD TRIM and garbage collection tool once a month.

My speeds are the same as they were when I first got it. My speeds from new are also a fair amount higher than the "new" screenshot above.

 

[Helicobacter]

Bad example. That is the original firmware, and also Christopher has been hammering the 830 with a load designed to wear it out as fast as possible.

There may still be firmware bugs that cause performance degradation, even in the latest 830 firmware. Or maybe not. But the example you cited is not good evidence either way.

To summarize my recent conversation with my buddy:
Chris has since updated to the second firmware and (after secure erase) observed similar heavy performance drops as well as high WA. This could be indicative of a larger problem.

The M4 has not had that kind of degradation - after more load that Crucial covers (of course, to 830's credit it does idle GC and has had no breathing break). And even the legendary Samsung 470 did not reach the cumulative load of the M4.

 

[jwilliams4200]

To summarize my recent conversation with my buddy:
Chris has since updated to the second firmware and (after secure erase) observed similar heavy performance drops as well as high WA. This could be indicative of a larger problem.

Christopher upgraded to the new firmware after the 830 was already run well past MWI exhaustion. This is not typical usage. As I said, bad example. Not good evidence for a problem with the 830 that any user would experience.

 

[santilmo]

I am having the same dilemma now... Though I am looking at the 256GB versions to have more headroom...

Is it true that SSDs degrade much faster if you load it up around 50% or more of the capacity?

 

[krnmastersgt]

I am having the same dilemma now... Though I am looking at the 256GB versions to have more headroom...

Is it true that SSDs degrade much faster if you load it up around 50% or more of the capacity?

Way to necro the thread.

As for your second question it's true (pertains more to smaller capacity drives) on the basis that you only get lets say 5,000 writes to every sector of an SSD. If you load up lets say a 100 GB SSD to 50% with permanent objects, that leaves you 50 GB left to play with. For that reason the sectors responsible for those 50 GB will experience much more writing as the other 50 GB is stuck with stagnant information. Imagine even more so that you load the drive up to 95 GB with information that will not change, you only leave the drive 5 GB of space which you will write/delete from far more frequently, which will prematurely kill part of the drive. The drive might just lock any more writing once the cell degradation reaches this point or just not work at all since it detects something wrong with some of the cells.