Cheapest and best 512GB SSD?

[riahc3]

Im looking for the cheapest (this comes first) and best (this comes second) SSD sized at 512GB (or above, although at the lowest price range I doubt there is anything out there).

Thank you.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Mx100

 

[riahc3]

Mx100

CT512MX100SSD1

188,95€

Nothing lower?

 

[Essence_of_War]

Im looking for the cheapest (this comes first) and best (this comes second) SSD sized at 512GB (or above, although at the lowest price range I doubt there is anything out there).

Thank you.

You might be able to find a cheaper 480-512GB SSD, but the MX100 is probably the only one I would consider buying.

In the US, I found a PNY Optima for slightly cheaper ($180 AR), but I think I'd rather have the MX100.

 

[gmaster456]

No sense in buying the cheapest if it isn't reliable. You can forget about the cost savings if you have to replace it in a year and you'd wish you'd spent that extra $20-30

 

[Phynaz]

Cheapest and best are mutually exclusive.

Is this for the exchange server you're building at work?

 

[CakeMonster]

More capacity will also give you more reliability with regards to wear levels (not that its a big worry anyway but I always find it impossible to convince people about that once they hear about SSDs to begin with).

Samsung 840 EVOs are quite cheap and might allow you to step up one level in capacity.

 

[Berryracer]

The best SSD for 512GB is the Samsung 840 PRO. I have both a Pro and 2 EVOs, the Pro is a bit faster and more reliable with a 5 year warranty also

I got mine for $390 USD

 

[Elixer]

The best SSD for 512GB is the Samsung 840 PRO. I have both a Pro and 2 EVOs, the Pro is a bit faster and more reliable with a 5 year warranty also

I got mine for $390 USD

Sorry, but just because they have a 5 year warranty, doesn't mean much, since they send you back a refurbished unit.

If the workload on the SSD will be minimal, then, it doesn't make sense to pay for something other than the Crucial.

If you have a heavy workload, then, it makes more sense to get the Sammy 850.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

The best SSD for 512GB is the Samsung 840 PRO. I have both a Pro and 2 EVOs, the Pro is a bit faster and more reliable with a 5 year warranty also

I got mine for $390 USD

I've got a Pro, an EVO and an MX100, and I could mildly agree with Elixer's last remarks.

Ignoring the handful of MB/s in benchmarks, that leaves the frills. I'm in love with my PRO and EVO for the RAPID caching feature, but that's just software. Samsung made a strategic investment in the frill, and it works pretty well.

But you could just as easily buy a Crucial MX100 and then spend the $30 for Romex PrimoCache. And the PrimoCache would cache HDDs as well as SDDs. Its license would apply to all HDDs and SSDs in the PC where installed, while you can only cache one Sammy drive with RAPID even for having two or more in the same box.

 

[Reaper_Tech]

Yea MX100 is the solid go to choice for cost to performance!

 

[Charlie98]

Sorry, but just because they have a 5 year warranty, doesn't mean much, since they send you back a refurbished unit.

Yup.

I have both a Pro and 2 EVOs, the Pro is a bit faster and more reliable with a 5 year warranty also

How are the EVOs less reliable than the Pro?

 

[Berryracer]

How are the EVOs less reliable than the Pro?

because they use TLC NAND vs MLC and they offer a 3 year warranty for the EVO vs 5 years for the PRO

 

[Blain]

Cheapest and best are mutually exclusive.

"Cheapest" has a pretty solid definition.
The definition of "Best" however is more elusive. It all depends on reader bias.
One reader may define "Best" as the absolute highest quality product produced at any price.
Another reader may define "Best" as the highest quality product she could purchase in $xxx-$xxx price range.
Yet another reader may view "Best" as the cheapest product produced.

My bias leans towards highest quality at any price.

 

[Charlie98]

because they use TLC NAND vs MLC and they offer a 3 year warranty for the EVO vs 5 years for the PRO

You can make an argument about the quality of components or performance, etc, and you would have a valid point, but that does not make them more or less reliable. I have 5 SSDs including a crappy OCZ Agility3... the 'most reliable' 840Pro is the only one that has gone belly up. By definition, at least in my instance, my 840Pro is the least reliable. Every SSD is 100% reliable... until it starts to have problems.

 

[BrightCandle]

I really do think that durability is a non issue. SSDs are failing because the NAND runs out of writes, they are failing because one of the chips, often the controller or the board itself suffers issues. You regularly don't find any clusters on the drive have been reallocated until vast amounts of data have been written, there is simply something else going on to cause the failures. The enormous differences in failure rates also follow manufacturers are particular models far more than they do NAND.

The problem is also until a drive has been out for a while you don't know how it fairs compared to the others. The manufacturer MTBF's are effectively useless around return rates and you don't know whether you are getting a Lemon (OCZ had so many models with issues) or an awesome drive (Intel's have been enormously reliable, all of them). There is a lot of luck involved in getting one that will last.

 

[Topweasel]

The answer is incredably simple. If your looking for the cheapest 500GB drive from a manufacturer known for it's reliability it's the MX100. If you want the cheapest drive from a trusted manufacturer known for their performance than you get the 840 Evo. I am not a big fan of the opportunity for uncommitted information that you can deal with when talking about the Evo, so for my suggestion would be the MX100.

But since we are talking about price first the MX100 should be a no brainer.

 

[aigomorla]

The answer is incredably simple. If your looking for the cheapest 500GB drive from a manufacturer known for it's reliability it's the MX100. If you want the cheapest drive from a trusted manufacturer known for their performance than you get the 840 Evo. I am not a big fan of the opportunity for uncommitted information that you can deal with when talking about the Evo, so for my suggestion would be the MX100.

But since we are talking about price first the MX100 should be a no brainer.

how is samsung more "trusted" then crucial / intel partnership? :\

The only thing the MX100 doesn't have is the track record due to it being a new drive.

However id trust a Original Intel SSD over a Samsung SSD ANY day of the week/month/year.
However those arent cheap... but i have a a X-25E which will probably outlast ANY SSD samsung makes including the new 3d nands due to the X-25E being a SLC drive.

 

[Topweasel]

how is samsung more "trusted" then crucial / intel partnership? :\

The only thing the MX100 doesn't have is the track record due to it being a new drive.

However id trust a Original Intel SSD over a Samsung SSD ANY day of the week/month/year.
However those arent cheap... but i have a a X-25E which will probably outlast ANY SSD samsung makes including the new 3d nands due to the X-25E being a SLC drive.

That's not what I meant and you know that. Also reccomending Intel at this point would be horrible specially comparing it to any SLC drive. It's like you skimmed the thread and read "samsung" and "trusted" and took offense to it.

Samsung, Micron, Intel, and Liteon are considered trusted suppliers and would be tier 1 choices for most people. Liteon really only sells to OEM's so you scratch them off. Intel's products are almost always at the top of pricing on a given size so you can write that off. That leaves Samsung and Micron. The Samsung is the fastest drive of the two (and really its faster than just about any comparative consumer drive). But the MX100 is cheaper than just about any other drive in its range.

Now that said you are right the MX100 doesn't have the history to back it up. But Micron does plus its the same controller as the M550 and honestly only a slightly spiffed up controller compared to the M4 and M500 ones. So what you have is a drive you can project with a history of reliable drives, from C300-M550 that have been nearly problem free, that this one is going to be nearly the same.

As for Intel their not even that great compared to Samsung. The Intel drive during the PB testing cut out with less information written than the Samsung drives. It did so by cutting out as soon as it hit an internal limit on data instead of letting the drive die natural due to writes.

As for your 25-E SLC helps it but so does the much older process. But I would watch out. The 3D nand stuff is probably going to rip past your drive. Between going back proccess and having drastically more data to support and current tech in controllers for wear leveling. We could be talking about Exabytes worth of data that could be written to these drives, certainly several hundred Petabytes.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I would get the MX100 if I was to get a good and cheap 512GB.

 

[KentState]

I would recommend the MX100 at this point as well.

 

[aigomorla]

That's not what I meant and you know that. Also reccomending Intel at this point would be horrible specially comparing it to any SLC drive. It's like you skimmed the thread and read "samsung" and "trusted" and took offense to it. .

Oh sorry your right i did skim your post and mistook your comment.

:biggrin:

agree with you on the slc being horribly overpriced.
i wouldnt of gotten it if it wasnt free

 

[Charlie98]

Samsung, Micron, Intel, and Liteon are considered trusted suppliers and would be tier 1 choices for most people. Liteon really only sells to OEM's so you scratch them off.

Does not Liteon = Plextor? I would consider Plextor in the top tier, but much like Intel, they are priced too high to be competitive with Samsung and Micron/Crucial.

 

[StinkyPinky]

I really think this running out of writes thing is blown way out of proportion. Out of interest I had a look at my fathers SSD which is some old 90GB OCZ from circa 2010. According to SSD life it is still 91%. And he's a moderate user. This is over 4 years.

I would think even a heavy user would need to use it for over a decade before it became an issue. How many people plan to have the same SSD in 15 years?

 

[Topweasel]

Does not Liteon = Plextor? I would consider Plextor in the top tier, but much like Intel, they are priced too high to be competitive with Samsung and Micron/Crucial.

I thought of putting Plextor in but they are really a boutique supplier. They don't really do OEM sales and their sample size is so much smaller than anyone else. I'd put them tier 2 with Corsair and Mushkin and a few others.