Is this SSD worth it?

[Xarick]

I just ordered a samsung 840 pro 256 for $172.
I am wondering if I really needed to spend that much and if it really will be worth it.
I have a 1TB WD black split into 250 and 750 right now. I was thinking I would transfer the 250 partition over and then turn that into media storage. the 750 is my game drive.

Am I really getting value for my dollar here?

 

[nwo]

Yes! SSDs are absolutely worth it!

The difference between even a budget SSD and a high end HDD are tremendous and extremely noticeable. I have an old and fairly slow, compared to today's SATA III standards, OCZ Vertex II 100GB which is also a refurb btw. My PC hardly ever gets bogged down regardless of how much crap I have on startup or how hardcore my multitasking is.

You could have gone as low as ~$120 for an equivalent Kingston SSD. I don't think that the extra $50 is worth spending on the Samsung, but that's because I like to get the best bang for the buck deals, even if it means having to give up a little bit of performance.

 

[Cerb]

I just ordered a samsung 840 pro 256 for $172.
I am wondering if I really needed to spend that much

No. You could have spent less. Kingston's V300, a perfectly good middle of the road SF-2281 drive, is $134 for 240GB, and Crucial's M500 240GB is $148. That's a good price for the 840 Pro, however.

and if it really will be worth it.

Well, then why'd you spend the money?

Am I really getting value for my dollar here?

Depends on what you consider valuable. Some folk are content to wait until the computer is ready. An SSD will always be wasted money, to them. Some people get pissed off when they have to do that, so it's worth it if it doesn't mean they can't pay the bills. Everyone else will be somewhere in between.

 

[bonehead123]

SSD's are definitely worth the money IMHO, having used them for the past 3 years I can attest to that for sure. Especially in older systems, the difference in speed is really noticeable

But fyi...after formatting that 256GB SSD will NOT have 250Gb free, so you should slim down that partition a little before the transfer.....

Seems that the general rule of thumb is to keep ~10-20% of an SSD's space empty for overhead.....at least if it will be a boot drive anyways

 

[Xarick]

Partition only has 90gb on it. My goal is to also put a few games on it that would benefit from faster drive access like bf4.

 

[DigDog]

i also have a V300 60Gb, but in my opinion, 120Gb is the ideal size for budget:wow factor.

 

[wjgollatz]

You were not specific. You should use the SSD as your OS drive. Reinstall windows on the drive, and install your BF4 on the drive. Then use the remainder of the drive for anything else you need to read or write fast.

Samsung SSD's will give you the option for overprovisioning, so after you format the drive, you will use the Samasung Magician software that comes with it, to unallocate 7-10% of the space after formatting it. SSD's need the overprovisioning for optimal use. Other brands have overprovisioning built in, but you have to leave unused space for them to work.

And yes, it will be worth the time and hassle to reinstall Windows and applications on an SSD drive. They are that good. One can migrate an OS drive to a SSD drive, but I have read in many places, including here, that the best thing is to reinstall the OS. Some issue about drive "alignment." So check into that.

 

[RU482]

money's spent. if your time is worth anything, it will cost you to return it
enjoy what you bought

 

[flexy]

Samsung SSD's will give you the option for overprovisioning, so after you format the drive, you will use the Samasung Magician software that comes with it, to unallocate 7-10% of the space after formatting it. SSD's need the overprovisioning for optimal use. Other brands have overprovisioning built in, but you have to leave unused space for them to work.

I just read on the Samsung page a whitepaper where they say the EVOs already have a certain amount of OP "built-in" and that OP would only be required in such cases where the SSD is really in danger of getting filled up all the way. (Or actually is filled up)

So in other words: If someone (like me) always looks that a certain amount of space, say, 20% or so on the SSD is free, setting OverProvisioning space from within the software won't even be needed since this free space on the SSD is used for it (in addition to the built-in OP)

 

[Cerb]

I just read on the Samsung page a whitepaper where they say the EVOs already have a certain amount of OP "built-in" and that OP would only be required in such cases where the SSD is really in danger of getting filled up all the way. (Or actually is filled up)

All of today's flash is like that: SSDs, thumb drives, SD cards, CF cards, etc.. Over-provisioned capacity is fundamental to making wear-leveling work.

Additional OP is primarily useful for case where TRIM isn't available, or is desired to be turned off (it's a non-queuable command, 95% of the time, so if there isn't idle time for the FS driver to use it, it could cause freezes, especially in Windows), and where, in such a case, write performance needs to stay high, and WA relatively low. But, WA is good enough w/o TRIM, these days (that wasn't always the case, even just 2-3 years ago), on most SSDs, unless you give one the kind of load enterprise drives are made for, so it's mostly performance, and mostly write performance, at that.

Sandforce drives, FI, that can slow down in both reads and writes over time with just TRIM, can stay lightning fast by over-provisioning more (secure erase, then partition less). Not that you should do that v. buying a more consistent drive in the first place, but if you've got one, and feel it dragging over time...

 

[B-Riz]

840 Pro series is one of the best SSDs on the market right now; in terms of performance and consistent performance.

No one has mentioned the 840 Pro uses different memory, it should technically last longer than an EVO, even though the EVO is the newest release from them.

I would take the 840 Pro over the EVO any day. (I have two 128 Pro's in use right now)

 

[evilspoons]

The difference in using your computer with an SSD is huge. It doesn't feel like a lot after you've put it in (except for starting Windows - that's a monumental change in speed), but then you go back to the same system with a hard drive and you go "ugh, how did I ever stand waiting five seconds for this program to open? It should have opened instantly!" and then repeat that a thousand times a day.

 

[Cerb]

840 Pro series is one of the best SSDs on the market right now; in terms of performance and consistent performance.

With factory OP, the Evo beats it in consistency. It offers great minimum performance with a little more space, though.

No one has mentioned the 840 Pro uses different memory, it should technically last longer than an EVO, even though the EVO is the newest release from them.

That's partly because it won't matter much, as a regular desktop drive, and partly because the OP already ordered. TR's endurance test on the 840 250GB showed that it basically doesn't matter, regular use, which we already figured. The performance dropping over time w/ the old 840 was typically much more of a potential concern than wear, for most users. We were leery of TLC, and while I don't think anyone's championing TLC as The Future(tm), Samsung did prove our fears generally unfounded, at least with TLC of sufficient quality, and especially with the SLC-like caching (OCZ's TLC drive that never came to be, OTOH, probably would have caused lots of I-told-you-sos, with bottom-of-the-barrel NAND on board ).

I would take the 840 Pro over the EVO any day. (I have two 128 Pro's in use right now)

Me too, but I'd instead take a 240GB M500 for only a little more than a 128GB 840 Pro over a 128GB 840 Pro; or a 250GB Evo for similar cost. The real-world differences are so very small.

 

[Z15CAM]

$172 - Sish! That's at least $80 cheaper then what we can buy them for in Canada.

 

[B-Riz]

Me too, but I'd instead take a 240GB M500 for only a little more than a 128GB 840 Pro over a 128GB 840 Pro; or a 250GB Evo for similar cost. The real-world differences are so very small.

Big picture, I dunno how much it matters at this point for SSD's.

Either we get them on sale or buy the cheapest and best-est one at the capacity we need at the moment.

FWIW, the first 840 Pro was bought right around release and that system didn't need anything bigger than 128 gigs.

The second was procured at a B&M store that did not have any EVO's in stock, and at $114.99 it was a pretty solid deal, and again, this system didn't really need anything bigger.

Not sure how much it matters in the real world, but the 840 Pro has IOP's (stated by Samsung) higher than the EVO.

Just personal preference, but I would always take the 840 Pro over the EVO if the 840 Pro is only a few dollars more.

 

[MoInSTL]

Not sure how much it matters in the real world, but the 840 Pro has IOP's (stated by Samsung) higher than the EVO.

Just personal preference, but I would always take the 840 Pro over the EVO if the 840 Pro is only a few dollars more.

I have both. I originally had the 128GB 840 Pro in my desktop. Wanted something bigger and picked up the 250GB 840 EVO. Put the Pro in my laptop. Real world usage--I noticed no difference. I could careless about insignificant differences in IOPs. Both are fast. The EVO was on sale and was price matched as well.

Scroll to almost the bottom for the comparison tests.
http://www.storagereview.com/samsung_840_evo_ssd_review

Head to head:
http://ssdboss.com/ssds/Samsung-840-Pro-vs-Samsung-840-EVO The Pro is really only faster in 4K random writes.

 

[bigi]

840 Pro is the one to get. You will see where you money went.

Make sure you connect it to good controller, set up AHCI, the works...

It is really the best mainstream SSD now. $172 is a bargain for it.