Has enough time passed to trust 850 EVO?

[hojnikb]

To further clarify, the point is that having twice the cell size does not make endurance similar, even though you have twice as many voltage states (MLC 4, TLC 8). We can conclude it doesn't work like that.

It seems that a huge cell (850 EVO, 24 times larger than 16nm MX100) is needed to achieve endurance parity. This convinces me that TLC is a very problematic technology indeed.

Nobody was claiming that.

Also, as far as endurance goes; we dont have any real hard data on the endurance of 16nm mlc or ~40nm tlc. So you can't just say you need 24 times bigger cells to achieve similar endurance.

 

[bradley]

Samsung is actually fairly shady for such a large corporation.

For example, in the year 2015, we are still seeing faulty cheap capacitors in Samsung's monitor/television line. They will do anything to save a fraction of a penny and are mostly on my avoid list.

Although I do admit owning the Samsung Galaxy Tab S 10.5 and find everything about it - especially the AMOLED screen - brilliant.

I am glad to have avoided TLC and still find VNAND suspect. My data is worth more than Samsung's rockbottom pricing and will continue buying old discarded SLC and MLC drives.

AFAIK there are no issues with the 850 EVO. I just built a system with a Haswell Refresh 3.6 Ghz i3, H97 board, 8GB of RAM and a 250GB 850 EVO and the speed increase over the system in my sig was amazing. Booting is half the time of my rig which I thought was already quick.

I think I'll be finding a way to upgrade my rig with one soon!

With an UEFI BIOS in ultra boot mode, my computer boots so lightning fast I can't even get back into the bios.... and I have tons of peripherals. lol