|
In case anyone needs more recommendations not to go with OCZ, my Vertex4 just bit the dust after only 10 months of use. (I bought it months before I saw this thread.)
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:49 |
|
|
DaNzA posted:When people say Sandisk Extreme they meant Sandisk Extreme II right? not the ol version that came out a while ago? Or there's not much difference between them? No, the old version. It's tried and true and possibly the best Sandforce drive anyone made. The new one might be great, but we don't have any historical reliability data on it yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
redeyes posted:Agreed, RAID-0 SSDs+ TRIM = ?? Ivy Bridge and Haswell pass through. Sandy Bridge on P67/H67/Z68 will pass through with hacked drivers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:Ivy Bridge and Haswell pass through. Sandy Bridge on P67/H67/Z68 will pass through with hacked drivers. Which hacked drivers? I thought using the latest RST would do the trick
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 01:17
|
|
|
dud root posted:Which hacked drivers? I thought using the latest RST would do the trick Intel only supports RAID 0 TRIM passthrough on 7-series and 8-series motherboards because of market segmentation bullshit. P67 can do it, of course, because the SATA controller is the same between 6-series and 7-series, but Intel doesn't support it or make it work in the drivers without user-side shenanigans (specifically, flashing a modified SATA OpROM to expose different features to the RST driver). Here's the AnandTech threading detailing the hoops you have to jump through.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 02:08
|
|
|
Schpyder posted:No, the old version. It's tried and true and possibly the best Sandforce drive anyone made. The new one might be great, but we don't have any historical reliability data on it yet. The Extreme II destroys the I in performance based on my workstation. Maybe not destroys but 'is faster'.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 15:53
|
|
|
I didn't know where to put this but my laptop ate an 8-month old Mushkin Chronos Deluxe yesterday (stopped being recognizable when plugged in), and Mushkin has already approved me for an RMA. I don't even know how to feel about a company that has lightning fast customer service, it's such a novelty!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
redeyes posted:The Extreme II destroys the I in performance based on my workstation. Maybe not destroys but 'is faster'.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
The other thing is, the Extreme I has also been sold for a fantastic price for most of this year. Still available for under $180 for the 240gb if you look around. The Extreme II is a lot faster, and maybe it will be just as reliable, but it's back to almost $1/GB levels so for the moment it's not that interesting. There's lots of competition at that price. For average desktop use cases the difference between an average SSD and a fast SSD will be hard if not impossible to detect, unlike the jump to any SSD from spinning disk HDs. So for most people an Extreme II or other fast SSD is kinda wasting $50 plus. I'd gladly take an Extreme I 240 off your hands if anyone wants an Extreme II.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2013 23:32
|
|
|
Anandtech's Samsung 840 EVO review is up, it looks like they tested all capacities: 120, 250, 500, 750, and 1000GB.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Anandtech's Samsung 840 EVO review is up, it looks like they tested all capacities: 120, 250, 500, 750, and 1000GB. Sounds like the drive to beat when it comes to high capacity SSDs. Samsung is killing it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 21:16
|
|
|
A 1TB SSD with great performance and price? So long wallet, I won't be needing you anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Anandtech's Samsung 840 EVO review is up, it looks like they tested all capacities: 120, 250, 500, 750, and 1000GB.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
If the Sandisk Extreme weren't such a proven platform w/r/t reliability, I'd return this $330 sucker to Amazon right now and pick up a 500GB Samsung 840 EVO instead, like, tomorrow. But I don't like gambling on reliability (even if it's a pretty safe bet) with other peoples' money, as it were. God drat, though. So long as you don't fill it up, it runs like a bat outta hell. That RAPID testing... 
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:I'm struggling to keep 10% free space on my 120GB Kingston HyperX even though it's OS/applications only. Looks like a 250GB 840 EVO might be in my future. I think the EVO will not be a great bet below 500gb, a sandforce like the Extreme I will beat it. They're also not pricing the 250gb nearly as competitively as the big ones. e: neeeeevermind -- They didn't do them in Bench 2013 so I kinda skipped lightly over the rest.  I guess it's pretty much even with the Intel 335 240, which should be similar in performance to the Extreme I. So if 840 EVOs show up on the market below MSRP they'll be a good candidate for best drive. Klyith fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Jul 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
Klyith posted:Anand didn't bench the 250 version  
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
Well, the 500+ GB models look alright performance-wise, but the word "weird" kept popping into my head when looking at the performance between the different models. Sometimes the 750 is faster, sometimes the 1TB, sometimes the 500, even the 250 at a couple of spots. Also, the sub-1TB models got outperformed by the 500GB vanilla 840 in that 2013 "Destroyer" consistency test, but I have no idea what kind of difference that makes for real usage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 05:10
|
|
|
Where are they meant to slot in price wise? 840 < Evo < 840 Pro ?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 06:47
|
|
|
dud root posted:Where are they meant to slot in price wise? 840 < Evo < 840 Pro ? For now. As yields improve on 19nm and smaller NAND, we'll see the EVO come down in price to meet and eventually surpass the regular 840.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:For now. As yields improve on 19nm and smaller NAND, we'll see the EVO come down in price to meet and eventually surpass the regular 840. Is the 1000GB EVO a genuine 1000GB or is it a RAID setup?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 13:36
|
|
|
Guni posted:Is the 1000GB EVO a genuine 1000GB or is it a RAID setup? Yup. The EVO and Crucial M500 have 8x128Gb NAND, so they can use 8 of them to make a 1GB drive and not rely on combining two drives.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 13:57
|
|
|
Intel SSD 530. It's a 520 with 20nm NAND instead of 25nm. Yawn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
Agreed posted:If the Sandisk Extreme weren't such a proven platform w/r/t reliability, I'd return this $330 sucker to Amazon right now and pick up a 500GB Samsung 840 EVO instead, like, tomorrow. But I don't like gambling on reliability (even if it's a pretty safe bet) with other peoples' money, as it were. I consider the Samsung controllers far more reliable than Sandforce. Just look at reviews on newegg and amazon.. nearly perfect. Of course this is a new controller, but so far Samsung has had a fantastic track record. I would not hesitate to buy an EVO.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 19:19
|
|
|
OK, so, I've read the OP, and I'm still a little confused. This is for my mid-2012 MacBook Pro 13". Based on the recommendation in the OP, I'm looking at the Mushkin drives at newegg.com. There appear to be several nearly identical options in the 240GB range, and another four in the 480GB range. They don't even list the same specs from product to product. And I don't know the difference between SATA II, SATA III, and SATA III MLC. That's the only meaningful difference I can pluck from these descriptions. The OP did say to favor the "Deluxe" version over the non-deluxe, despite the extra cost. But the "Deluxe" version is the least expensive one. OH GOD WHAT DO I BUY.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 19:35
|
|
|
Lincoln posted:OK, so, I've read the OP, and I'm still a little confused. This is for my mid-2012 MacBook Pro 13". One of those drives is a Callisto and not a Chronos - it's an older drive that uses the SF-1200 controller instead of the SF-2281. Avoid it. The other differences are some of those drives are 7mm. That's the thickness of the drive, and some laptops require a 7mm drive-but not your MacBook Pro, you can use the 9.5mm thick drives. MLC is the type of memory the drive uses. Almost all consumer drives use MLC, aside from some Samsungs that use TLC. SLC is more expensive and used in server or enterprise drives. SATA II and III are the drive interfaces. Anything recent is going to be SATA III which is twice as fast in peak speeds as SATA II. You wouldn't notice unless it was a benchmark, but you can use a SATA II drive in a SATA III computer/motherboard and you can use a SATA III drive in a SATA II motherboard/computer. You'll just be limited to the slower interface. But a Chronos and your Macbook are both SATA III so don't worry about it. Also, the last drive is only 180GB. TL/DR buy this drive
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
Lincoln posted:OK, so, I've read the OP, and I'm still a little confused. This is for my mid-2012 MacBook Pro 13". redeyes posted:I consider the Samsung controllers far more reliable than Sandforce. Just look at reviews on newegg and amazon.. nearly perfect. Of course this is a new controller, but so far Samsung has had a fantastic track record. I would not hesitate to buy an EVO. Alereon fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Jul 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
Oh man you guys are awesome. A thousand thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 20:23
|
|
|
Alereon posted:Buy the SanDisk Extreme 240GB or Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe 480GB. Here's how the Mushkin name breaks down: "Mushkin Enhanced" (brand) "Chronos" (model, Callisto is the obsolete SATA300 version), "Deluxe" (memory type, Deluxe is faster Toggle NAND, regular is Asynchronous) "-7" (7mm thick for thin laptops, no -7 means normal 9mm thickness). From a quick Google your laptop uses normal 9mm thickness drives, the SanDisk Extreme is very similar to the Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe, but drives from flash memory manufacturers like SanDisk tend to be more reliable. Come on, that bug never made it to production drives. It was a beta firmware in review units. Even Intel has a worse track record.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:Come on, that bug never made it to production drives. It was a beta firmware in review units. Even Intel has a worse track record. I totally agree. As much as in general I think some of Samsung's products have been a bit cheap and nasty, their recent efforts in the PC sector have been great. There's no doubting that Samsung SSDs are quite simply a reliable choice. The 830 is my favourite, though, being on a larger process and not really appreciably slower. With the known reliability and larger process node, it also has the potential for ridiculously long life. vv Of course, I see the basic point: any totally new product needs to prove itself first HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Jul 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
My bad on the Samsung 840 firmware bug being pre-production only, since it was happening after launch I thought it affected the initial production units too. I think you guys are missing my point though, I'm not saying that Samsung is bad or worse than others or that people shouldn't buy their drives, I'm saying that radically new products are risky and if people are going to buy them they should be aware of that risk. We applied the same standard to Intel and SanDisk, and it's not like the 840 EVO is a tweak of an existing product, it's a major redesign.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
I'm going to be building a new computer soon, and I figured I should treat myself to a SSD. It's almost certainly going to have Ubuntu, if that matters, and it's going to be my sole drive for at least a while. I'm getting all the parts off Amazon, I've got Prime. If there's something I should wait on, I can order the rest of the parts and use an old drive in the meantime. So far I've got a Samsung 840 Pro 250GB sitting in my cart. Is it worth the 80 dollars over the Samsung 840 not Pro? I don't see the Evo on Amazon, and not a good idea to grab something so new? The current pricing (which seems to be changing, along with seller, every few days) works out to $0.88/GB Pro and $0.66/GB Not Pro. I can't imagine I'm going to need 500 GB worth of space. Anything I'm going to need to worry about? This is going to be my first SSD.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
The 840 Pro is pretty much the best drive out there. Get it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:So far I've got a Samsung 840 Pro 250GB sitting in my cart. Is it worth the 80 dollars over the Samsung 840 not Pro?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 01:58
|
|
|
Thank you! The performance stats don't seem to be very different between the 250 and the 500 non-Pro? http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/678?vs=792 And the 250 is currently $.02 cheaper per gig. I figure I'll save a bit of money now and get a 250 now, and then another 250 at some later date. Assuming it's not a dud, the lifetime is going to be several years, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 02:56
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:The performance stats don't seem to be very different between the 250 and the 500 non-Pro?http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/678?vs=792 quote:And the 250 is currently $.02 cheaper per gig. I figure I'll save a bit of money now and get a 250 now, and then another 250 at some later date. quote:Assuming it's not a dud, the lifetime is going to be several years, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
My Sandisk Extreme 240gb is now in my main PC. It was previously getting these results in a fairly old laptop. The benchmark now looks like this. Does this look normal?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
Looks like it went from a middlin' SATA2 interface to a solid SATA3 interface. Yes that is the expected performance level of the drive for that benchmark.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
That's this drive? Judging from the OP that's a pretty solid drive, yes? Looking to pick one up here soon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 01:24
|
|
|
big mean giraffe posted:That's this drive? Judging from the OP that's a pretty solid drive, yes? Looking to pick one up here soon. Yeah. in terms of "proven tech" one of the best. And fast as hell, as you can see. It's probably the best of the bunch of Sandforce controller-based drives and they use great flash. I'm sticking three of the 240GB models in a RAID-0 for my upcoming build, and have a 480GB model for the OS/apps directory. All hail the new state. It's pretty solid. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:49 |
|
|
I assume I need to buy a 2.5" to 3.5" converter, or does one come in the box?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2013 01:35
|
|