840 EVO vs 840 Pro

Hi, I recently purchased a Clevo w230st without a hard-drive and am looking for a large, high performance ssd to use as my daily driver. I am tossing up between a 512gb 840 pro $490 or a 750gb 840 evo estimated at around $530. How much slower is the evo to the pro?, would buying the 1tb version be worth it (it seems to be faster than the 750)? and how reliable is the new flash technology?, thanks

 

I see a little improvement with the 840 pro over lesser SSD's, but only when dealing with large writes, which isn't very often for most users. A majority of the time you wouldn't notice one being faster than the other.

The evo is new, but samsung has a good track record of reliabilty with SSDs.

 

thanks, guess ill go with the evo then

 

EVO and PRO is similar in speed on everyday tasks with the PRO being slightly faster.
PRO have MLC NAND, EVO have TLC NAND. Difference is that MLC have higher life expectancy. But, TLC will outlast all of the other components in your notebook anyway so its a moot point.

EVO have today support for RAPID through Samsung wonderful Magician software, that let you use 1GB of your RAM as cache for insane speeds way faster than any SSD out there
PRO is said to get RAPID support later, but nobody knows when.

EVO and PRO share the same controller, but EVO have the controller running at faster clock speed, so thats something.

You cant go wrong no matter what you choose. Samsung SSDs is the best you can get

Im extremely happy with PRO. The snappiest SSD I have ever owned

 

Cloudfire, the PRO and EVO lines are not similar at all. (Curious as to what other SSD's you've owned)?

For one, the EVO goes to below USB 2.0 speeds when pushed hard (the Pro doesn't get hit that hard).

See:
AnandTech | Samsung SSD 840 EVO Review: 120GB, 250GB, 500GB, 750GB & 1TB Models Tested

The software (RAPID) that you seem to be in love with is not a solution for real work (that actually pushes the storage subsystem).

The best SSD right now is the SanDisk Extreme II.

From the same link:

 

And here is tiller again with his workload that doesnt apply to OP or any of the normal SSD users.
Im not having this discussion with you again tiller. Isnt it time you start giving people advice based on normal SSD use?

As for the review you link to:
A) Samsung use the EXACT same architecture on PRO and EVO.
B) it is the same controller, based on Cortex R4, but is clocked higher than the Pro controller
C) the difference is TLC and MLC

And if you read the conclusion from the Anandtech review

I have owned X25M G2 and M4 earlier, and PRO beats them both in snappiness

 

What workload are you talking about? I sure didn't mention one. Try to read for comprehension, okay?

No, it is not EXACT: the TLC nand is simply inferior when performance is the goal.

Even the quote you have shows how little you understand the things you read. A lot of ifs in that statement and mainstream SSD is not the same as what the OP is asking for: a HIGH PERFORMANCE SSD - not your latest software enabled benchmark 'king'.

 

You are posting your usual BS as always.. You linked to QD32 workloads (like you did on our earlier discussions) which very rarely apply, you totally disregard that both Samsung EVO and PRO is the top performers on light and heavy workload (which matters).

I have a real world tests of EVO where it even beats the PRO.

You keep talking down on RAPID because it doesnt give boost to real work ("push the subsystem"), which again is one of your misguided and moot points because it doesnt apply to most users again.

So lets summarize: EVO Is a high performance SSD which you obviosuly should have known if you read the reviews or even have seen the specs. It also have RAPID which puts it above the competition.

Why dont you go seek out a forum that is about servers, industry workloads and such? That way you could write about QD32 and putting massive workloads on the SSDs, all your heart desire

 

When an M4 is just as quick as a Samsung 840 Pro - that is not a top performer. The EVO is below the 840 Pro, no matter what the 'scores' say...

When software makes a better solution than the right hardware, let me know (hasn't happened yet).

When you have it straight that TLC requires tricks and workarounds to seem better than MLC - I'll stop posting.

I'm not talking about servers or industrial workloads - you are.

Try to stay focused on the discussion at hand - you still haven't answered what and how many SSD's you own(ed).

 

"Try stay focused on the discussion at hand"
Hahaha that says the guy who always destroy on topic discussions with his rant about how great Intel drives is and how much consumer SSDs suck at industry workloads.

I dont know how many times people have tried telling you this, but you keep going on like a broken record.

Anyway im out. it is useless to have a discussion with you.

OP: sorry about the discussion in this thread. Just read my first reply in this post.
Pick either EVO or PRO. Doesnt matter, both are very good drives. And both will get RAPID

 

Glad you're gone. But next time try to leave without recommending second hand solutions (especially ones you have not obviously tried, nor have experience with other SSD's to compare to - as evidenced by your continued refusal to answer a simple question).

Giving people complete information is not destroying a topic... sorry you feel that way.

I'm sure the OP has noted the quality of advice you give and will act accordingly.


...

 

840 Pro. I'm biased as I've just bought a 512GB Pro

Really it all cones down to what is more suitable for you. The absolute best performance and endurance/longevity (Pro) or the highest capacity for the best price and still fast performance (EVO).

 

What is the actual release date for the EVO?

 

Supposed to be towards the end of the month but won't be surprised if released earlier.

 

If I can chip in, I'd also go with the Pro over the EVO (basically the same as a non-Pro). If you're doing more than just installing software and daily writes (documents and whatnot), I'd stick to MLC NAND.

 

Games are really the most intensive thing I do, so I'm not particular about getting the max performance out of my hard drive. As long as it is better than the stock 7200 rpm hdd, I'd rather go for bang/buck.

 

After looking through the real world results from the 750GB Samsung EVO, I think I`d pick it instead of the 512GB PRO. EVO is no doubt one of the very quickest SSDs out there



















Samsung 840 EVO 750GB SSD Review - Real world tests | Myce.com

 

Can't see any of those pictures (hotlinking not allowed).

 

What about now?

 

What I find the most telling is the Sustained Performance Test:

See:
Samsung 840 EVO 750GB SSD Review - Speed degradation after heavy use | Myce.com


(Second last graph, bottom of page).


The M4 at only 256GB is still above all other SSD's except for the OCZ Vector. Good showing Crucial!!!


The tricks required (such as pseudo SLC nand, higher clocked, 3 Core processors, etc.) to make TLC nand noteworthy are still not enough to definitively show across the board improvement even on 2.5 year old SSD technology.

Still, this is one graph/benchmark and I do recognize the improvements made elsewhere - especially in the capacity front.

The other takeaway point I see jumping out at me is that the larger capacities are 'required' with the new SSD's - if equal performance or above previous generations is required.

Interesting that the 512GB capacity wasn't tested - is the 750GB TLC and above the only one worth considering?

 

Yep, we can see them now.

 

The "sweetspot" for these new EVO's is 512GB and upwards.

120GB:
540MB/410MB (seq Read/Write).
94k/35k (4k Read/Write)

250GB:
540MB/520MB
97k/66k

500GB/750GB:
540MB/520MB
98k/90k

750GB EVO cost $530 (500GB $370) while 512GB PRO cost $460

For $70 more you get 238GB more. Looking at the real world results I posted earlier, I'd pick the 750GB EVO. Even have more room to lock in to use for over provisioning to ensure the SSD operates properly.

 

Cloudfire, you keep coming back with stat's when I want real world results!

I think that the smaller pseudo SLC nand in the smaller capacities will give real world results closer to the 256GB EVO than the 750GB EVO, but would like to see that in the same tests to be sure.

 

After reading the tomshardware review ( Samsung 840 EVO SSD: Tested At 120, 250, 500, And 1000 GB - The Evolution Of Samsung As An SSD Giant) it is clear why the EVO can be a good choice.

The 840 EVO models actually do come close in speed to the 840 Pro models for basic tasks. The EVO sacrifices a small amount of memory and uses it as MLC as a cache. Again, small tasks, such as opening pictures and writing in a notepad document, will basically be as snappy as with the 840 Pro, but if you are doing large transfers then speeds will decline to normal TLC levels once the cache fills up. The 750GB+ models do so well because the MLC cache is larger.

Also, you cannot really complain about software improving this model. First, RAPID can be used on the 840 Pro as well, though the feature has not been implemented in the current version. Second, emulating the TLC as MLC, assuming from what I read in that detailed review, is almost like a hardware transformation. Probably not as good as true MLC memory, but I wouldn't say it is a sucky software gimmick. The EVO is more complicated and not consistently at the top of the pack, but it is definitely a good buy and comes close to the Pro in most situations.

I am actually choosing between the two right now. I am looking at the 512 GB Pro and the 750 GB EVO. I know I would be fine with the faster 512 GB, but that extra 150 GB sounds so good for the long term.

 

I'm really confused on which one to buy. I want to buy the 840 pro for everything, but also want to buy the EVO for capacity (1TB). I really need the 1TB as I've a lot of VMWare Images to use

 

Get the Evo. I've got an 1TB EVO on order. I do a lot of VM testing on my laptop/workstation. I've tried the 500gb 840, the 512gb 840 pro, 256gb 830, 360gb ocz vertex 2, and about a half dozen other SSD's ranging from 240gb to 512gb. Honestly they all perform about the same. I can run 4 or 5 VM's concurrently without any issue. any more than that and it sometimes slows down a bit.

This is all on a Latitude E6220 with an I7-2620M dual core with 16GB ram.

SSD's mostly only show a difference under benchmarking. Under normal everyday use, unless you use multiple identical machines with different SSD's right next to each other and pay close attention, you're not going to notice much difference between them.

I'm speaking from experience working in IT for nearly 20 years, managing 4 datacenters at the moment with nearly 1 petabyte of storage from SSD's to 7.2krpm SAS drives. and my coworkers (4 of them) managing around 4000 desktop/laptop/workstations with various drives including all makes/models/sizes of SSD's dating back to the original 16GB SLC Sandisk units that came in Dell laptops 8 or 9 years ago.

We did a bet/experiment at the office one time, Two of the guys who supports client systems (desktop/laptop/workstations) claim that various brand/model SSD are faster in everyday use vs other brands and that it is noticeable. We took 8 identical machines, 8 different SSD's, loaded identical images on them. put them side by side, and asked the four guys in client system support to try to identify which system had which SSD and which system was faster.
They were not allowed to look at device manager or any other means to show the model of SSD. Not a single one of them could tell the difference the 8 SSD's even when they are run side by side (they weren't allowed to run benchmarks, only run typical office use apps).
Needless to say I walked away from the bet/experiment $500 richer.

 

Thanks thenew3, Just ordered the EVO 1TB should receive it tomorrow

 

Stunning post with useful info. Thx.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4

 

The main reason you would want the 840 pro is the added durability of MLC and better sustained performance i.e. you are really hammering away at the drive with some kind of database where performance and uptime is paramount. The Evo can match or exceed the 840 pro in terms of burst performance (which 90% of people do) thanks to the SLC cache but the sustained performance is only slightly better or worse than the regular 840. What I would describe the design of the 840 EVO is...Intelligent, its very well priced and optimized for what most consumers do. Just treat it like 2 separate drives in one package, a large TLC drive with an inbuilt SLC drive as a cache.