Last Day: SanDisk Extreme II Internal SSD (480GB) $252

The title says it all, except get it here: SanDisk Extreme II Internal SSD (480GB) SDSSDXP-480G-G25 B&H

The two pack is also on sale @ $504

 

right now its the fastest ssd maybe, but wait for sandisk extreme pro which will be coming out with 10 years warranty.

 

A 960GB SE Pro is due out too.

 

thought 840 pro was fastest btw

 

On an empty drive, it's benchmarks are very good. But it's real world performance (steady-state) is behind EVO.

 

not true. empty non steady state test are done by most reviewers so they show highest score but in reality they are terrible. samsung evo had to use a huge amount of SLC cache to cover that up and samsung knows this, which is why they mix TLC and SLC like TLC flash in their evo.

rapid mode is to get people to throw in money so they can develop more fab and be more ahead, in truth their software sucks, so I'd like to think their firmware might suck too.


in steady state, sandisk extreme II and Toshiba Q pro probably best for consumer SSDs, by a huge margin. in raid somehow intel 730 comes out on top

 

So my 840EVO is junk?

I am looking for a 500GB SSD. What should I be looking at?

 

i said 840 pro not 840 -_- tweak town reviews show it faster overall I IIRC

 

Check TweakTown again with a newer review. When they started testing in "steady state" their opinion changed. They call the Pro a "benchmark baby" it does well in empty drive benchmarks (burst performance) but in a used state or steady state the Pro was no longer the speed king.

Look here:
Crucial M550 1TB SSD Review - Benchmarks - PCMark 8 2.0 Advanced Tests

They stopped showing Pro results in their RAID0 reports it was so bad. A single SEII beat Pro in RAID0
Look here:
SanDisk Extreme II 240GB 6-Drive SSD RAID Report - Secondary Volume Benchmarks - PCMark 8 Extended

 

No, not junk, especially if your usage is light - average. Heavy usage. SEII 480GB is the top choice for a few more days and on sale. The new SanDisk Extreme Pro should do even better. The EVO does well in a light usage scenario. It needs time to recover and the average consumer gives it that time with their workflow. The SEII does not need time to recover and keeps on rolling in heavy usage workflows.

Of the EVOs, the 1TB would be the one to get, if possible, as it has the largest faux-SLC layer in the EVO line. The larger SLC layer, the longer it will go before slowing down when it gets to it's TLC NAND. The Extreme II also has an SLC layer they call nCache. It's underlying MLC NAND as opposed to EVO's TLC. MLC is superior to TLC.

 

evo would be bad without SLC. samsung is going to continue making TLC SSDs with SLC like TLC cache. that way they make most profit with lower end flash.

 

Not that I disagree with the results, but I need to point out this part:

 

Sure, for most consumers. That was kind of my answer about the EVO not being junk, given recovery time, in the next post. But the Pro is a different story, recovery time does not keep it from being near the bottom in the 240-256GB class, in those results. For the SE II you could say "all consumers" as it doesn't need recovery time. TweakTown's RAID reports are very good because they show both light and heavy usage scenarios, with single drive results for the brand being tested included. Drives do behave differently. TweakTown believes that their readership is more enthusiast than average consumer, so their "winners" are based on heavy usage. The reader can use the results that fit their workflow.

 

are the 500+GB ones effected too or is it just the 256? I never look at reviews of under 500GB drives because they tend to suck. Also i did forget the new m550 are pretty fast too now right? or is that only for the 256GB and below?

 

840 pro is fast on light, extremely light work load. browsing internet loading few games etc. if you have something similar to any medium writes such as MSE or virus scan then it'll probably suck trying to do something right after a virus scan.

840 evo 500gb ones are the same design of the lower end one it just uses more SLC like TLC flash to cache it thats why it looks faster. in the end, all the info is stored on TLC level, latency and slowness of everything else come from that level which has to be read to SLC then through the controller.

probably 90% of the benchmark results were affected by overclocked flash, controller and the SLC cached layer where real latency and speed of the mcuh slower TLC will never be shown to anyone other than themselves who made the device.

 

TweakTown would have to go back to old drives to get the new steady state results. I don't know if the 512GB Pro is available. They may plug them in but I would expect similar results to the 256GB Pro. The only difference between them is the amount of NAND. If I could expect slightly better results not night and day better, which is what it needs to be, I wouldn't over pay for this as it won't be close to the SEII in performance and it's much less expensive. Today on Amazon 512GB Pro $370 480GB SEII $280. Throw away $90 and get less performance, where do I NOT sign up.

The M550 is very fast given recovery time, lots of it. That is 256GB and up. I would wait for the new Crucial MX100 results. It is the M500 replacement with better performance and low price. If it's results are close to the M550 it would be the choice of the two.

 

wait for sandisk extreme pro, or samsung 850 pro. im going for hyper S II SLC though

 

early numbers are out for sandisk extreme Pro Early Numbers - SanDisk Extreme Pro and Crucial MX100. now only sammy 850 pro and Hyper S II to be revealed.

 

With the early numbers of the Crucial MX100 and it's price, it makes buying an M550 a difficult sell. The Extreme Pro increased performance over the great SEII.and lowered latency. The new high performance king.... for now.

 

well i will say the 840 500GB ran great when i fist got it but either my usage is getting more intense (doubtful) or the older the drive gets the worse that steady state gets. I transferred like 30-40GB form my sandisk extreme usb drive and sandisk extrme pro SD card and i was trying to access some photos to view on the SSD and it totally eat cow pies hard core style. After it was only transferring the USB drive and that was a mere 20MBps (which is way way way to slow in my eyes given the drive should be way faster than that with the files that were on it) It even froze at one point -_- I really think the it getting worse :/ but at the time it was the only affordable SSD in the 500 range. m500 wasn't even out yet :/ and i get this at 270 so i can't complain. But yea that steady use is killing me since it is getting worse....at least i think. I also only have 11.6TB if writes with 9750 hours for a total of ~29+ GB per day....which is growing. I think that is from the hibernates i do.

is that not out yet...it is listed on amazon? Supposedly the 512Gb is ~224

 

try going for sandisk extreme II, its only 8-10% slower than sandisk extreme pro and quite cheap.

 

just the mx100 is 225 vs 290 -_- worth a 30% mark up?

 

You could probably wait for a sale. After this deal from B&H, Amazon briefly went down to $229 for the SEII 480GB. The choice of SEII in this size class is choosing the second highest performance drive at a lower price. Not bad at all.

From the early numbers in unityole's link, the MX100 512GB is a solid choice for value and a lighter workflow gives it the recovery time it needs to perform at it's peak. Something like leaving the computer on is a good idea to get the maximum performance from the MX100.