All your choices are on the pricier side.

May be you can consider Kingston HyperX, there's ongoing experiment with a lucky unit still kicking after years of abuse.
http://www.lowyat.net/2014/12/two-ssds-sur...-worth-of-data/

Another thing to note is Samsung's Pro line > EVO line (inb4 youdontsay).

For asking price of 850 evo, I still too paranoid to believe in the durability of TLC (with 3D NAND) and will opt for conventional MLC SSD which should have a similar durability as of TLC (with 3D NAND).

This post has been edited by Human10: Feb 5 2015, 01:22 AM

err.. u hav any suggestion for less pricier?

wow! 1000 years data? but seems nobody using kingston ssd..

are u saying that 850 evo stil not "matured" enuf?

SLC > MLC > TLC

But samsung is charging premium on its TLC for which they manage to make TLC with durability on par with MLC (they claimed).

I certainly not willing to be paying premium to be white rat, LOL...

BTW, Kingston divide their SSD into 3 line - normal, HyperX Fury and HyperX 3k.

Your budget should be able to afford their best offer, HyperX 3k.

This post has been edited by Human10: Feb 5 2015, 01:49 AM

i will pick m6s. it's not the best drive of the three in terms of endurance (intel 730) and speed (850 evo) but it almost has the best of both worlds imo. (good mlc nand; decent controller; ram cache software)

intel 730 is essentially an enterprise-grade consumer ssd. like any other enterprise offerings, it's about relative endurance, rather than speed. 850 evo, well it's expensive.

i'm sorry i don't have charts to show you. it's better you check out benchmark charts from review sites. just know that reviews and performance charts are just for reference. for general use, imo they don't really matter.

about endurance, yes tlc is the lowest. however with the right use cases, i think it still work fine. a decent system setup today involves a ssd is used as a boot/app/game drive. hdd is used for data downloads and storage. this is the simplest yet better combo, leveraging on their respective strengths, not weaknesses. if you wanna use ssd solely for storage, you should pick enterprise ssds, not consumer grade.

i always suspect bad drives that involved even mlc nand might not be flash-related but other components in the ssd.

less people use doesn't mean it is not good (like corsair neutron gtx). unlike v300, hyperx 3k is a premium offering from kingston. if you looked at its total bytes written (tbw) within the 3-year warranty of a 240gb, it's about 3 drives written per day (dwpd). that means you can install and uninstall bf4 on the ssd for 9 times a day continuously for 3 years. (i know the right minds don't do that hehe)

How about transcend ssd370 256gb? Anandtech give a good review on it.

and again, thanx for very informative and understandable reply.

however, i do know the performance of ssd(in terms of read n write) will increase as the capacity increase, am i right?

so if i buy cheap 500GB(around rm700 for kingston v300 and transcend 370) is it worth?

i owned transcend 340 256GB and 370 512GB for almost a year.. WORTH MY EVERY LITTLE PENNY!

y don't u take plextor m6pro instead of m6s?

right. that's the case in general, but there are few exceptions. the sweet spot to have small enough space (cheaper) yet have the similar speed of larger capacity drives is 240-256gb range. however, larger capacity drivers are relatively cheaper in terms of price/GB.

instead of going for performance drives, getting larger mainstream ssds are worth the money for general use imo. transcend ssd 370 should be fine. at least you have more space for stuff and you don't need to frequently uninstall them to free up space for new ones. (i.e. less write/erase cycles for your ssd)

really?? waaa...really2 tempting.... seems very cheap compare to other brand for 500gb


the price too expensive..~.~ however, is it m6pro very good?


yeah.. 500gb ssd can install more than 2 games already..haha...
however, is it i need to do partition for 500gb ssd or better leave 1 partition only?

btw,i noticed almost all ssd hav less write speed compare to read speed. higher write speed is hard to achieve rght? my intel 330 120gb only hav 130mb/s

yes

usually 1-partition layout is fine. afaik there is no performance slowdown or gain. i have 2x 960gb crucial m500 with the same layout.

no it's not that it's hard to achieve. consumer/client ssd is usually optimized for mixed work loads, e.g. as boot/app/game drive that requires more reads than writes. 130MB/s is acceptable, but it's really not that good because it's a ssd (that write speed is like for hdd). imo it should be at least 250MB/s.

i just noticed your rig specs in the signature. you have a decent rig (with 2x sata 3), so it's better to invest something more worthy.

by the way plextor ssds are decent. they're not the fastest, but one of the reliable ones.

wow...960gb x2? raid 1? sell 1 to me lorrr... cheap2

so write speed not so important for daily load? i saw many ssd not exceed 500MB/s for write speed..

wat do u mean by "it's better to invest something more worthy"? add another ssd? im planning to replace this ssd and put it inside my 6 years old laptop..

yeah... im using m5pro in my laptop... got 400++MB/s for read n 300++MB/s for write...

m6pro quite good.

haha

yes for general use, we don't need that much of writes.

i meant that you should get a larger and speedier drive

ah you have a small m5pro i guess. the 512gb version still can get 480+ MB/s read and 430+ MB/s after steady state. well it's not a big deal because it's fast enough.

yeah..im using 128gb m5pro for my laptop..quite good.. very fast comapre to intel 330 120gb..

im still in dilemma whether 256gb M6pro (rm570) or 240gb kingston hyper x 3k (rm430) or 512gb transcend 370(rm700)...help me choose plss!!

i know, right? there are some differences between mainstream and performance drives. it's just that in common usage, mainstream is usually fast enough.

just think deeper of what you actually need. if a mainstream drive is good enough for you, just go for space.

Too expensive... You can get a Crucial MX100 for that price...

yeah... dunno how to diff between performance and mainstream drives.. the boot time for my laptop and desktop quite same. merely 4 seconds..
.
i wanna go for space, but scare with the quality and reliability... 2 years ago, a lot of ppl recommend intel SSD due to reliability and warranty eventhough read n write speed quite low compare to other SSD. is it transcend a good SSD? any issue with 512gb version?

well it's mainstream vs. performance lol

boot time is usually the same. what matters is after boot

imo transcend ssd 370 is a decent drive for general use. it has what you can expect from a mainstream ssd. good or not, i think it's up to usage, and time. however we have a happy user here with no issues. it has some notable reviews from online review sites also.

tbh, there is no need for ssd to be super fast for common usage. if it's 350MB/s read/write then it's good enough imo.

by the way older intel drives although it's slower, is still one of the decent ones for general use. its longer warranty places a good value to it.

I'm looking at the price of Samsung 850 Pro 250GB vs Plextor M6E M.2 256GB. Base on the spec, M6E M.2 256GB should smoke 850 Pro 250GB at cheaper price for Z97 motherboard.

Did I miss anything?

Also, C-Zone selling Lite-On SSD cheap.

This post has been edited by TristanX: Feb 9 2015, 02:10 PM