Will I regret this? Crucial vs Samsung

I ordered a Samsung 840 Pro (next day delivery) but the order didn't verify properly and they don't deliver Saturdays so seeing as I'm impatient I went ahead and ordered the Crucial M4 for £50 less and will cancel the previous order tomorrow.

Will I regret this? I'm coming from HDD 5400rpm. Would it be a huge difference in speed between M4 and 840 Pro? For normal everyday stuff like booting up, loading games, copying files etc.

 

The Samsung is faster but system response/feel will be about the same. Either one is a huge boost even over 7200rpm (even 15k server drives). Also both are stable drives. Not like some of the earlier ones I had.

 

Nah, you won't regret it. The M4 is a solid SSD.

 

In normal use (ie, not benchmarking), you won't notice a difference. Both are solid SSDs, as mentioned by other posters.

 

Normal use, no. Copying files, if you have a SATA 3 laptop, it a considerable difference (think 2x difference).

 

Aww don't say that! I do a lot of that when copying Steam games over to external HDD. Or would that be limited by the external HDD?

Well in any case, at least it beats the HDD. I could at least multitask on it right? Right now, if the laptop doe a virus scan or installing a Steam game everything else becomes so unresponsive, it's so aggravating - which is what spurred me into this purchase.

 

External drive is limit even USB 3.0 enclosure with ssd I pull about 200/125.

 

Both are solid SSD units.

So you won't notice much if any difference.

If however the size is 512GB, then the nod may well go to the M4 SSD.

IMHO that £50 is far far far better off being in your own pocket.

Out of honest curiosity, how long does a cold boot take with your current HDD/laptop?

FWIW my boot with a very new Lenovo T530 (~4 weeks of real use so far, 7200 rpm HDD, with an ever growing bunch of bloatware) is now about 120 seconds until the "cpu meter" gadget shows up in the upper right corner of the screen, which is when most of the boot is done and I can start to actually use the laptop.

With a fresh install of Win7/64_Pro I expect that will change to about 15 seconds as then, for a brief moment, I'll have zero bloatware on the computer.

Even with bloatware, I expect the boot with a 512GB M4 SSD to remain at well under 30-to-60 seconds, with a single 400GB NTFS boot partition and 112GB unallocated for better long term performance and wear leveling.

 

Gahh why did Amazon have to suddenly get stock in? They were out of stock this morning on the 840 Pro. Now, it's suddenly back in stock! (I got the 840 Pro from Ballicom International which is why they don't deliver Saturdays).

But I've been told on another forum that the M4 may have issues with UEFI BIOS's. Is this true?

Because I could return the M4 still sealed tomorrow (later today - it's 1AM here ) and get the 840 Pro by Saturday (tomorrow).

@othersongs - boot time is pretty good on Windows 8 but it's the time that it takes to actually load everything up once logged in that grates. That can take 2-3 minutes all in all until everything becomes responsive. And I have most startup programs disabled at launch.

 

There's no point in returning it. You honestly won't notice a difference. And notice there are almost 1,400 reviews for the M4 and it's 4.7 out of 5 stars - that's impressive.

I had four 840 Pro's and had issues with them. The only plus compared to other SSD's is power consumption, and I couldn't RAID them because the controllers were all incompatible. Sure, the 840 Pro is faster, but not noticeably. Unless you're moving files from SSD to SSD, you won't notice it.

But it's up to you.

 

Put a real stopwatch on it and then report back with the nearest second result.

And if Win8 has a "cpu meter" gadget similar to that of Win7, then activate it and make that your boot timing checkpoint.

 

OK so no difference in actual everyday use other than benchmarks and maybe some advanced stuff, and it's cheaper? You are very close to convincing me to stay with the M4

Decisions, decisions...

 

It doesn't so I used a 'sticky note' instead. Times below. I must admit, it surprised me, it always seems longer than it apparently is. It feels like 2-3 mins but apparently it isn't.

Windows 8 full restart - sticky note appears at 1 min 8 secs (all icons in tray loaded ~10 seconds after this)
Windows 8 boot from shutdown - sticky note appears at 49 secs (all icons in tray loaded ~10 seconds after this)

EDIT: oops sorry for double post, bit too eager to reply there!

 

If you are ordering from Amazon, you have time to make a return, even if the package is open. I returned SSD's stating they were not as advertised in accordance with speed. You can test the M4 for a week or two and decide then if you want to return it. I'm sure you'll love it and won't feel like returning it.

Give it a chance, that's all I'm saying. It's the most widely used SSD on the market, it will be fine.

 

What size SSD did you get and what is the expected %filled ratio?

If you have the 256GB M4 - I too will vote to keeping it - assuming that you over-provision it by 30% - if you plan on filling it past 70%, I would recommend the M4 512GB version or (possibly) even better; the new M500 if you can wait (expected in February) with at least 480GB or 960GB capacity (for maximum performance).

Here is a review of the 840 Pro vs. the M4 (although the capacity is not equivalent: 256GB 840 Pro vs. 128GB M4):


See:
Samsung 840 Pro SSD 256 GB Review | techPowerUp

 

I've never had to return anything before on Amazon. Sounds good. I probably will keep it to be honest. There's always going to be better newer SSD on the horizon anyway just like any computer part.

256GB. I would take the 512GB but it's more than I am willing to pay. I haven't heard anything about the M500 in terms of a UK release so I assume UK will get delayed release compared to America.

 

Misinformation is the slayer of truth.

But understanding what is real truth can be a mind stretch!

Go into the BIOS of whatever your laptop is and actually check it!!

BUT do NOT change any of it!!!

Just look.

Odds are HUGE that it is NOT using a pure UEFI setup.

FWIW my own very new Lenovo T530 uses what I can best describe (without rebooting the laptop as that's what I'm using to type this) as a mixed legacy (aka MBR) and UEFI setup, with legacy 1st.

AFAIK for using a SSD the main thing you need set in your BIOS, is SATA set to AHCI mode and not to compatibility mode.

For all the mention/talk about UEFI, odds are you don't presently use it, and likely should stay away from it in the near term future with your current laptop.

And BTW, what exactly is your laptop name and model number???

 

OK it's using legacy mode so I'll keep it that way.

Laptop specs are in sig. It's a Samsung Series 5 NP550P5C-S03UK.

 

If the storage mode is set to 'legacy' - you need to change it to AHCI - otherwise, a lot of the performance you're expecting will go out the window - not to mention TRIM will not work either...

 

@tilleroftheearth - done!

Do I need overprovisioning? Was that only for the first generation of SSDs? Is it necessary on a TRIM enabled SSD? If so, how much?

 

Do you need it? I'm not sure of your specific workload...

But these are still first generation SSD's (in my view) and yes - they need it like a fish needs water - and TRIM is a supplementary vitamin pill - the 'meal' is in the 'spare-area'.

Do I recommend it? YES. at least 30% left as 'unallocated' of the total/actual MB's available to the user (after a format).

In the case of the M4 256GB model:

256 x 1000 x 1000 x 1000 = 256,000,000,000

256,000,000,000 / 1024 /1024 / 1024 = ~238GB

238 x 0.7 = 166GB available for user data



So, with the above info, I would be doing a custom install (Win8x64 preferred, of course) and creating a partition of a maximum of 169,988 MB's - this will leave the (minimum) 30% 'unallocated' space desired.


With Windows 8 it will also create a 350MB hidden/boot partition - don't touch this one.



Good luck.

 

Internet browsing, music, Steam games and other PC games, MS Word & Powerpoint.

Honestly that's about it.

Well OK if it is that important. But 169GB seems sooooo tiny coming from 1TB which was half filled (mainly Steam and other PC games).

 

That is why the 512GB M4 was recommended.

(And even then you only get to play with ~333GB).

 

That's not true. I see 479GB from my 512GB SSD.

And when I had 256GB drives, I could utilize 238GB. Of course this is before the operating system, drivers, programs, etc. But after adding that, I still had 209GB usable on my 256GB.

 

Couldn't afford the 512GB, as much as I'd like to. It's over £140 more

(I lie - I could afford it but I can't justify it when I'm a university student in my final year and have no idea when I'll be able to get a job. Bills to pay, mouths to feed etc)

 

J.Dre, we're talking after leaving ~30% 'unallocated' for maximum sustained performance over time.


Cakefish, is it worth returning the 'too small' SSD then? The final year means that by the time you're finished - the M500 960GB may well be on your shores and you'll be in a much better position to acquire it.


Sometimes, (true) upgrading is a matter of what and when too...



Good luck (tough decisions).

 

Oh, okay. IMO, that is a waste of space. The drives are covered under warranty. If it fails, get a new one.

 

I think I will do this. I can always reclaim the unallocated space back if absolutely needed, right?

 

Tiller, don't SSDs already have about 7% of unallocated space which aren' shown to people? In this case if you want to create 30% of unallocated space then in fact you need to cut just 24.5%, right?
Anyway I think that guy should do small jumps and only in this case he will be able to feel the difference and decide if he needs it or not. At first whole size of SSD. In a month or so decrease size for overprovisioning 20% for example and decide if he needs it.
As about what SSD to buy... The difference between them is as huge as it is possible between SSDs talking about the one which are recommended nowadays. But it can not be compared to the difference from HDD to Crucial SSD. As i have already said to feel the difference between both ssds you need at first to get used to SSD in general.

 

Depends how important getting the advertised speeds is to you over the lifecycle of the SSD - in my case; the speeds fall off appreciably even while installing Windows 7/8 x64.

While it does also help with the reliability of the drive - I am not interested in warranties of storage devices (the warranty is my wallet and the closest hammer I can use to destroy any possibility of the data being recovered by anyone else).

So, in effect (I'm) paying for 150% of the capacity I use - but the sustained performance difference is easily worth it.

With Windows 7/8 you can simply go and 'extend' the drive to as much as you need.

I ignore that fact James D.

If the advertised speeds are with the included over-provisioning or already accounted for 'spare-area' - then (if) I want to preserve that speed I have found that at least 30% additional is required for my workloads.

Eg.
If the Intel 800GB DC S3700 was used in my workstations - the additional spare-area I would leave as unallocated would not change, percentage-wise - even though the drive comes with 1024GB of nand on board.

 

I've cloned SSD's from HDD's, I've installed operating systems on SSD's, and over the last three years, I've not once seen a decrease in write/read speeds or performance - at least not enough where you notice it. After cloning, I have seen advertised speeds, and I've also seen 10-20 MB/s decreases. Nothing dramatic enough to justify what you are suggesting.

I'm not saying it won't help, but it's completely unnecessary. There is already a default space dedicated for sustaining the life of the drive that we can't see in disk utility programs.

It's a waste of space, and the OP is coming from 1TB to 256GB. You are suggesting he give up a lot, even more than he has to.

 

And I'll guess that you're talking about benchmark 'scores'. Which are mostly meaningless in actual workloads.


I'm talking about sustained productivity - that takes a dive and well worth the 'unnecessary' offering of some capacity to the SSD gods to keep the speeds above HDD levels (or else; what is the point of getting an SSD).

 

The first time I installed windows on the Samsung I didn't manually overprovision (never have) and did the 2nd install by 10%. Absolutely no difference in performance. Generally I always keep my most used applications on an SSD and have a 2nd drive for other things (actually I have two more external in my laptop bag). I don't have everything installed yet but I'm using 55GB out of 238GB with hibernation turned on set to 50% of 16GB. The most I'll put is maybe 100GB.

 

Sooo cloned disk. Booted up fine. Whenever I try to do a clean reinstall (reset in Windows 8) it blue screens me. 0x000007e or something like that - instant as soon as it restarts

Checked firmware. It was 040H - apparently released in December 2012 so really recent. What's up?

I definitely have ACHI enabled in BIOS.

 

Getting clone working can be a PITA the last time I finally did get it to work and it wasn't aligned properly.

 

I've solved the issue after a lot of time messing around with various recovery options (which involved accidentally overwriting Windows 8 with Windows 7 from the Samsung recovery partition and having to redownload it again).

Performance is great. Boots in under 10 seconds. Games which took ages to load such as Total War Shogun 2 take under half the time. Can't complain with that!

There is one thing though. I ran benchmarks (AS SSD & Crystaldiskmark) which gave the 4K Read speed as only 18mb/sec when I've seen other benchmark results from same drive with 24mb/sec - 30% better. Only the 4K speeds are affected. TRIM is definitely enabled & so is write caching. Latest firmware & Intel chipset driver. I tried the guide on disabling power saving features for Intel 5 chipsets (even though I have series 7) on this forum but that didn't solve it. I know I said performance is great but if there's the possibility it can go a third faster I should try to sort it.

 

Give it some time to trim, or do a manual trim, you fiddle with it alot tonight already . And don't do 5GB Crystaldiskmark.

 

@cakefish, you should use latest IRST drivers.

 

Don't worry about over provisioning. If you're paranoid, over provision by 10% (~ 25GB) and be done with it, but in all honesty there is no reason to unless you do TONS of SSD to SSD *WRITING*, like hundreds of GB a day. Read performance is barely affected if at all. And write performance will return if you find it slightly degraded. Just turn off any auto sleep or hibernate, log off your account and let it sit overnight. It will heal itself (GC) and be good as new in the morning. I haven't had to do that though with either my Crucial M4 or Samsung 830 drives at all. The SSD GC routines are more than sufficient for your average user.

And copying to/from and external HDD won't affect performance at all, the HDD is too slow (likely ~ 100MB/sec max) to be any concern for SSD performance issues.

 

Though your comment is clearly not directed at me, I'm NOT paranoid!!!

And I'm old enough to know that I'm NOT paranoid!

You're a very high post count NBR poster. Out of honest curiosity are you a moderator?

Anyhow, I gather your take on the whole over provisioning thing is for "normal" home computer users to do a max of 10% unallocated on a SSD?

So kindly give us all a clue and state: 1) how long you've used SSD units for and 2) how much you've recently over provisioned.

Thanks very much in advance.

 

No, I'm not a moderator, I just post a lot.

I don't over-provision AT ALL. I've been using SSD's since the Intel X25-M G2 release (circa 2009?). 80GB I think was my first, and still use it extensively. It's been in a several machines and secure erased at least 7 or 8 times. Just what I do when I do a clean Windows install. Here's all the SSD's I own and their use:

Intel 330 180GB 2.5" - WHS 2011 ~ 2 months
Crucial M4 512GB 2.5" - Sager NP9150 ~ 6 months
Crucial M4 256GB mSATA - Sager NP9150 ~ 6 months
Samsung 830 256GB 2.5" - Sager NP6110 ~ 9 months
Kingston V100+ 90GB 2.5" - HTPC ~ 1 year
Kingston V100+ 90GB 2.5" - Desktop ~ 1.5 years
OCZ Vertex 2 60GB 2.5" (2 of them) - Kids' netbooks ~ 2 years
Intel X25-M G2 80GB 2.5" - Various Desktop builds ~ 3 years
Intel X25-M G2 120GB 2.5" - Used for test systems ~ 2 years

My Sager laptops get the most use, and my usage is pretty much web browsing, gaming, virtual machines, basic photo and video editing with some FRAPS recording too, and general Office tasks.

tilleroftheearth is an extreme user and he's right that you should over-provision to maintain your write performance, but only if you do a lot of writes. Like process video all day most days. But for use normal Joe's the GC routine is more than adequate to keep performance nominal.

 

OK.

Wow, a Tiller antichrist.

That's quite a list. Thanks for that!!

If I ever go to a true high end laptop (hot running cpu and gpu), is when I'd be most inclined to order from one of the specialty laptop builders. In order to get better cooling with the laptop. Sager seems to be one of the specialty laptop builder favorites, but I'm still not sure why. If you can provide a clue on why Sager is popular with the specialty laptop builders for special builds, I'd appreciate your comments. TIA.

Anyhow for true heavy lifting or heavy gaming, a desktop PC still looks to me like by far the best solution.

But I'm a laptop newbie.

My new Lenovo T530/i5 and refurb X220/i5 do get me off the ground.

Tiller gets my vote, as do you. But extreme is an edgy descriptive.

Thanks very much for your input as I've yet to setup my SSD devices on my T530 and X220. I was thinking 20% unallocated, but may now go as low as 10% unallocated. Still reading/thinking on this.

Still futzing around with some miscellaneous stuff, like utility packages, for another week or two before I do SSD setup on my T530.

FWIW since my factory T530 setup doesn't matter to me (as I intend to do a fresh install of Win7), I had installed my current Avanquest System Suite Utilities on it. Boot time had gotten up to 120 seconds and was seriously troubling that it took so long. Since it clearly never updated properly and was a month from coming up for renewal, I uninstalled it.

Presto boot time (still with a HDD and 3 partition Lenovo setup) dropped from 120 seconds to ~ 85 seconds.

Meaning I still want to try some other utility packages and now with this throw away T530 setup I can revisit Norton as well as Glary and others.

Meaning that you can't trust any on-line reviews. You must reach your own decisions based on your own experience.

 

Sager which is built off a Clevo chassis, are popular because of their best cost for performance. They aren't 100% perfect by any means, something is typically lacking, like in the case of the NP9150 the audio system is not real great. The keyboard has ghosting too, which means certain key combinations won't register (like W+E+S for example) which can be somewhat problematic in games. Plus it's a good alternative to the much flashier and more expensive Alienware. Built quality is pretty good and cooling is great, and pretty much all components are easily accessible. I can change the thermal paste on my CPU in less than 10 minutes and most of that is just cleaning off the old goop.

And I'm not discounting tilleroftheearth at all. I respect all his input. He's got sound advice, but from the perspective of someone that uses their SSD's hard with lots of writes on a daily basis which doesn't equate to most users. It's like someone telling you you should buy a full size pickup truck with a large diesel engine and 5th wheel when they pull a horse trailer all the time, and you just want something to throw plywood and 2x4's in the back of your truck with an occasional trip to Home Depot. Sure the larger truck will manage the task, but the smaller truck will suffice too, and even pull a trailer on occasion if needed.