Best SSD 2014

Hi,

What is the best SSD out of those generally available like Samsung 840 Evo, Intel 530 etc? I've not bought one since 2010 so I'm completely out of the loop. My C300 is getting old now

 

What do you do with your system?

For actual (heavy) use of the storage subsystem: the 480GB SanDisk Extreme II can't be beat for sustained performance. Especially at the $300 or less sale prices.

For very lightweight usage patterns: the 1TB EVO is the most responsive SSD I've seen so far in the 2.5" format.


Anything else is not worth considering imo to get 'almost' the best for the few (one time) dollars spent over the lifetime of the system in question.

 

I personally want a SSD to be able to do both... I only need a 240/250/256GB one... I can get either of those 2 however, how are the intel SSD's? Are they worth it? Also what is the warranty on the Scandisk and Samsung?

Thanks

 

While you may only need a capacity of ~250GB, today's SSD's just don't work like that. Especially when you want them 'to do both'.

A 1TB EVO with 12GB pseudo SLC nand runs out of steam and falls flat on it's face when transferring ~40GB's of data (not an unreasonable request imo when we have such a high capacity drive available). This is even with ~280GB's of 'unallocated' capacity left untouched. What does falls flat on it's face mean here? Transfers in the KB's range while the pseudo SLC nand is writing to the more permanent, main nand...


You can hope to get a toy capacity SSD to do what you wish - but it will only end up with frustration.

If you want the fastest speeds at all times get a SanDisk Extreme II 480GB and OP it by 30%...

Not even the 1TB EVO can touch it for sustained storage subsystem workloads with the infamous RAPID enabled (and yeah; I played with RAPID for a week - till I was forced to do a reinstall of the O/S once again... the eye-opening part of that experiment was that the EVO without RAPID feels much more snappy than when it was enabled before in the exact same installation/setup).

You still don't mention your workload - but as with any other point in time; you can have snappy (-est) or you can have the highest performance, but as of now, I haven't seen a single drive (HDD or SSD) do both.


As for the warranties, they are irrelevant to me: when I have mine or my client's data on a drive NOBODY gets it ever again (even if I have to eat the cost of the drive and the replacement - which I've done a number of times already in the last few decades).

 

Ok thanks mate. I'm getting the Scandisk

 

Hey tiller,

Will this one work in the M17x R4?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/240GB-San...puting_Solid_State_Drives&hash=item1e8af3fa32


I'm a bit worried as it says it's a 7mm height drive however the M17x has a 9.5mm height caddy...

Sent from my LG-D802 using Tapatalk

 

Yeah, it will work (it's a 2.5" SSD with a z-height of 7mm. Most notebooks can take up to a 9.5mm z-height drive).

However, I would not be buying from ebay - nor do I think that that price is attractive... is it?

Still recommending the 480GB capacity though...

 

This price is like 15 quid cheaper than amazon so yes I will get it from here. However, doesn't the height become a problem etc in the sense connecting to the SATA connector on the motherboard? My old cruical C300 was 9.5mm in height and I've never had issues so that's why I'm worried with this.

 

No, you shouldn't have a problem depending on the 'cage' that is used for the drive.

The drive mounting holes are standard as is the SATA connector size and location, relative to one side of the drive's case.


See:
OCZ Vector Solid State Drive SATA III, 128GB at Memory Express

See:
Corsair Force Series GS SATA III Solid State Drive, 480GB at Memory Express


The first link above shows a 7mm drive and the next one is a 9.5mm drive.

If you study the images, you'll see that the extra height is 'above' the SATA connectors - the distance from the connectors to the bottom edge of the drive is the same.

 

Yup just bought it.. It seems that what you said tallies with a lot of websites... Let's see how it goes now... I need to get a i7-3720/3740/3820/3840qm now... If you can help me find that, would be great

 

You're asking me for help on an i7-3xxx series cpu platform (i.e. an 'old' one)?

Sorry, can't do it.

i7 48xx or 49xx series cpu recommended 'right now' and if you can wait... I'd get the Haswell refresh instead (yeah; new cpu/platforms are always better in my book).

 

Please ignore rototiller's last comment. Take a look on Ebay for the cheapest processors.

 

Lol I can't find anything cheap... Everything is like 200 quid. I need something for like 100...

 

Cheapest being the key word (not cost effective).

And that is why I don't recommend old platform parts: they are obsolete for a reason.

Time and technology slowly but surely keeps marching on. The best we can do is catch up.

 

Same processor, cheaper price. Sounds "cost effective" to me.

 

Cost effective is not just looking at a single part. The total system has to be considered (and the length of service expected from it).

200 Quid for a single part is not a good buy from my point of view... if you need more performance you don't buy a new processor; you buy a new platform (this is a lesson learned from hard experience).

 

+1

If something is worth doing, it's worth doing properly

The converse is also true:

If something is not worth doing properly, then it's not worth doing at all...

I can understand you desire not to have to take out a mortgage to upgrade a laptop, but an approach I've found to work for me is to work on my desire for instant gratification and change to a plan that involves delaying a purchase (delayed gratification) until I've managed to accumulate the funds needed to do it properly and only then to permit gratification to sneak out of its hibernation-cave.

I've burnt my fingers a couple times by giving in to this "desire for instant gratification" and, while the gratification occurred sooner, the remorse was not far behind...

Dave

 

In my opinion, upgrades vary on their worth in proportion to what they give you for the money. For instance, I upgraded the processor of my last notebook, spending $40 to do so. In turn, I got a CPU that was roughly 21% more powerful and which made my system more responsive. I was and still am perfectly happy with that decision, as a new system was at the time out of my budget and the CPU upgrade was inexpensive enough that it justified the price paid (for me). However, I have no plans to ever upgrade the processor in my current system because the improvement would be 9% at most and would cost (currently) between $300-$500 - not at all worth it, as that kind of money could be better saved toward a new system (tiller's point).

Now, SSDs are a more valuable upgrade since they can provide both increased storage and increased performance. But there remain certain economic limits with them as well. For instance, at the moment, it would be financially unsound to purchase a consumer SSD with a price per (advertised) gigabyte of much over 50 cents.