Sandisk ultra ii vs Sandrisk Extreme pro vs crucial mx100

Hello everyone,

I need some advice.

I'm looking forward to giving a new breath to my now aging Thinkpad Edge 15 with a 7200rpm hdd, while waiting for the new thinkpads to be release

In the mean time, due to budget constraints, I've nailed down those 3 ssds:

Capacity : 240/256GB

- Sandisk Ultra ii

- Crucial Mx100

- Sandisk Extreme Pro ( due to 10yr warranty)

I've read that there were problems on the 840 EVO so I've decided to rule it out of my list.


Now, I'd like to know which of those 3 is the most reliable? I don't think that speeds really do matter ( as I come from an HDD).
It's more about which tehcnology is better, that used by Sandisk or the one used by Crucial?

If you've got more suggestions, I'd also like to hear them!
Thanks!

 

Looking here:

See:
Hard Drives - AV / Surveillance & Desktop Drives at Memory Express


There is a $10 increase to go to the MX100 over the Ultra but a $30 additional to go to the SanDisk Extreme Pro.


I agree that the EVO is out of the question (all TLC nand, imo) but if you want the most bang for the buck, the MX100 is what I would be looking at.

The (too old) Ultra II is also not worth considering at that price. Too many advances made with todays SSD's.

Especially as performance is not an issue for you, spending $30 more for the Pro is just for the additional warranty. Simply not important in a ~$150 product. Sure, it's technically faster. but unless the capacity gets to 512GB or more, that performance will only be 'potential' and not available for any real world uses.


And, if I'm not mistaken, the TP model you have only supports SATA2 speeds - which will throttle any high performance SSD you put in it anyway.

I recommend to take this opportunity to install the latest O/S (Win8.1x64) on your new SSD to take advantage of as much of the new hardware as possible and, get you ready to fully exploit the capabilities of your new system the minute you receive it.

Don't need to buy the O/S - just use it in trial mode for up to the next 3 months.

See:
How to run Windows 8.1 for free for 90 days - CNET


Good luck.

 

Thank you very much for your reply.

I'll take your advice into consideration!

 

My next SSDs will be SanDisk Extreme PRO. I'm done with Samsung after their horrible warranty:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/sol...arranty-samsung-ssds-dubai-3.html#post9840475

The reason I chose the SanDisk Extreme PRO is because performance wise, it's the closest to the 850 PRO:

AnandTech | Bench - SSD

 

I'd suggest you get the Extreme Pro.. I have the Extreme II and the Pro version is just with slightly better firmware and more warranty.. I wouldn't get the Ultra II as its old and the MX100 is a budget SSD... Extreme Pro will be massively futureproofed and you'll be able to use it in your new laptop too so might as well make the investment..

 

The Ultra II is actually fairly new. It's Sandisk's TLC based value drive.

 

The actual model is new, yes. But I am basing 'old' on the TLC design that first appeared with Samsung 840 TLC around October 2012.

Not inspiring and lower performance than the MX100 too.


See:
AnandTech | SanDisk Ultra II (240GB) SSD Review

 

I would never buy another TLC drive after horrible experiences with two 1TB 840 EVOs. Luckily the mSATA 840 EVO never showed any of those issue or slow downs

 

Ferris23, did you do the firmware update on your mSATA EVO?

 

I did, but even before doing it, never had a single performance drop even on old files, whereas with the 2.5 840 EVO 1TB I had it did suffer from that performance drop, it was so bad to the point if I would open up my software folder which basically just has the EXE setup files of all my programs, the icons would load in slow motion man..... it was that horrible.....

the EVO fix didn't help much, only temporarily, but the issue came back again....never with the mSATA verison of the EVO 840 though

 

Thank you all for your replies. I'm might just wait a bit longer for end-of-year sales or even till jan 2015 for prices to drop then.

I've seen that the service times on the mx100 are much worse than the other ssds.
Will that be felt in any real-world applications ( considering i've got only SATA 2 supported on my laptop as well ) ? or is it only a benchmark - ssd enthusiast issue?

 

You won't notice a difference with the MX100 on SATA II.. It will be fine.. However, I'd get the Extreme Pro for future proofing..

 

TomJGX, while I would normally agree with you... There is no future proofing with a 240/256GB SSD at the end of 2014...


If we were talking of even the 480/512GB capacity, then yes. 100% go for the better drive.

All these smaller capacities are good for is to put in an external enclosure and use as a USB key after their capacity as an O/S drive is outgrown.

 

For someone like me, it is.. I would love to have more SSD space but with my budget, its enough... Honestly, just need it for a responsive OS... I can handle games on HDD...

 

TomJGX,

Agreed. If you have the possibility of 'any' additional 'on board' storage capacity on a given notebook (even with a HDD), then even 240/256GB can be made to work.

I am talking about the scenarios where only one drive slot/bay is available... then, 240/256GB seems like a form of torture (especially if OP'ing at 30% or so).

 

Fair enough.. I have to agree with you on that.. My laptops will always have 2 bays so 256GB is ok for me..

 

one other advantage of the extreme pro for laptops is the Pd. in idle mode the Pd is crazy low. This, and the software utilities make this puppy as "future proof" as one can expect, given that no one will care about any of these details 5 years from now. the 10 year warranty, to me, is more about Sandisk confidence in their own drive, as opposed to a statement of how long I will use it, or how long the device will be relevant in the industry.

 

What does Pd in idle mean?

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk

 

Power Down in idle feature.

 

power dissipation, i.e. power consumption. on that note I reviewed the available numbers again, instead of just reading hardware reviews, and have to back away from my statement and claim some degree o confusion on this topic. .

Comparing the Sandisk extreme pro 480GB to the MX100 500GB. If "slumber" is the same as "idle" then these two drives are equivalent, at 100mW


On a related topic, Samsung's 850 EVO, in 1TG size, claims 50mW "idle". If that correlates with Sandisk's "slumber" of 100mW, then Samsung in fact has the lower power consumption at idle. I'm assuming that the SSD spends more time idling, compared to reading and writing...

 

Samsung has a habbit of messing with numbers.. I wouldn't take their claims with a grain of salt... Whichever way, you can't go wrong with either the Sandisk or the Samsung although with my hate for Samdung's products, I'm not even going anywhere near it..