1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Storage my 128gb samsung 840 pro arrived today but having 2nd thoughts

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by j4mi3, 16 Aug 2013.

  1. j4mi3

    j4mi3 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    28 Jun 2011
    Posts:
    1,033
    Likes Received:
    17
    -have about 200mb free on my 64gb 2 year old crucial m4 ssd so i desperately needed another.

    -trying not to spend so much on stuff i don't 'need' nowadays, a perfect example being my sig, with stuff like the enermax psu, the gtx 670 top version and so on.

    -therefore although the 256gb 840 pro appealed to me immediately, i decided i couldn't justify the price.

    -looked at the normal 840 drives, and after reading about the dire write speeds and lesser lifespan, I ordered a 128gb 840 pro

    -however, decided that in real life, whether it takes 10 seconds more to install a game wouldn't really matter to me, and the extra space the larger 840 (for the same price) would offer would be more useful than the 128gb 840 pro.

    -then i looked at the 840 evo drives. supposedly these negate the slow write times of the 840, yet are cheaper than the 840 pro for almost the same performance?


    so really what im saying is, I have a box on my desk with a 128gb 840 pro in it.

    should i keep it, or should i return it for a 250gb 840, or a 250gb 840 evo (is this better than 840)

    or should i stop complaining and stick with it


    I mean realistically, i have lasted 2 years with 30gb of hard drive space. so i could easily ration myself to ~90gb (after os install). and i could put any other games which don't fit on my crucial ssd. so i could work with 128gb.
     
    Last edited: 16 Aug 2013
  2. qualalol

    qualalol What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    24 Aug 2011
    Posts:
    74
    Likes Received:
    4
    For your use case the Evo seems most sensible -- I really doubt you'd notice any real difference. (I went with the pro specifically since I do a lot of compiling i.e. a lot of disk writing and want to have long-term reliability with that, otherwise I'd have gotten the normal 840 or the Evo.)
     
  3. PocketDemon

    PocketDemon What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    3 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    2,107
    Likes Received:
    139
    Although i'm not a fan of TLC nand, the problem is that there's nothing of the same kind of budget that compares performance-wise.

    This makes Evo a very decent compromise drive - & certainly a significant improvement on the 840 non-pro that was, arguably, the best compromise drive before it.


    Basically though, you only get the top end write speeds for the first 3GB - simply put it writes up to that point in MLC mode (effectively as a non-volatile cache) & rewrites the data in TLC mode subsequently; with the remainder of any writes being written in TLC mode.

    it takes no more than 15-30 seconds to rewrite the data from the MLC mode (assuming you're not continuing to write bunches of stuff) - & you're looking at ~50% of the sequential write speed being lost in the mean time - & then you have the 3GB of MLC for writing again.

    Whilst it's only 3GB & the SSD uses TLC, it's not *that* dissimilar to what, for example, OCZ did with their Vector drive (naturally that that would work in SLC mode up to 50% of the drive being filled & then rejig itself into MLC mode - though is slower than the 840 Pro), so it's not an 'out there' technology.

    (there's also some magical ram caching thing, aka 'rapid', for it that can improve small r/ws speed further, albeit that this would be a volatile cache & could lead to data loss on the write side without a UPS - the expectation being that this will be added to at least the Pro in the future... ...though i'm guessing only for non-raid usage since their s/w can't detect their own SSDs in arrays)


    Okay, there's also obviously lower longevity with TLC nand vs MLC, but if you're not writing huge amounts then it's a perfectly sensible option...

    ...well, assuming that you're confident in Samsung releasing a proper f/w on day 1 - there was an issue with the 840s that caused them to fail, though naturally other drives they've released have been fine & other manufacturers have had issues in the past so it's certainly not that they're inherently shonky in comparison.

    Personally, i would only suggest buying any SSD in the first month or so of retail availability if you've got a decent backup regime - & i use Samsungs (830s & 840 Pros) in both of my machines now.


    Anyway, obviously it's not as quick, comparing equivalent sizes, as the 840 Pro (indeed the 250GB Evo is a certainly slower than the 128GB Pro; though more particularly for heavier usage), however, with what appears to be your usage & that cost is a key factor in your decision then i'd consider swapping to it as you're suggesting...

    ...if you're going to back stuff up.
     
  4. djzic

    djzic Bokehlicious!

    Joined:
    8 Nov 2010
    Posts:
    896
    Likes Received:
    13
    How much are you looking to spend? The Toshiba HD5D is pretty good. I believe it levels with the 840 Pro on the 256gb drive and the 512gb drive is faster. Also it costs about the same as the Evo, but it's of the better MLC variety and not TLC. Sure, it may look ugly, but it's an enterprise drive...

    Also if you are prioritizing storage over performance and have £233.38 to spare, Scan are doing a deal on the 480gb variety of the OCZ Agility 3, which while not class-leading is still pretty fast, I have one myself and Windows 8 takes about 9-10 seconds to boot :)
     
  5. PocketDemon

    PocketDemon What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    3 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    2,107
    Likes Received:
    139
    Firstly, just to note, there's a lack of decent data on both the 512GB HD5D (though this is irrelevant since the OP couldn't justify the price of a 256GB Pro & the 512GB HD5D is £300) & the improvements in read speeds with the latest f/w of the 840 Pro (which is mostly irrelevant for the same reason).

    i've also assumed that price is the key metric here (without buying junk) - since that's the impression that the OP's given - & that, from the description only stating OS & games usage, that it's a comparatively lighter usage, but prioritising reads.


    Anyway, overall, at the 250/256GB level, the HD5D tests as being both slower & faster than the Evo depending on usage...

    Or, to be slightly more exact, for a heavy usage that's not predominantly based upon small r/ws then the HD5D is faster than the Evo (nearer to the Pro) - however this isn't what the OP's usage appears to be.

    instead, for a lighter usage that's going to have a mixed i/o, but certainly not based around significant amounts of (particularly sequential) writes in day to day usage - again prioritising reads as this is what the OP's usage appears to be - then the Evo is noticeably faster...


    The other things that particularly let the HD5D down are comparatively slow small read & writes - being around 40-50% slower than the Evo (even without enabling the latter's 'rapid' memory cache thing in the magician s/w)...

    ...that it lacks the performance consistency of the 840 range when it gets to even 50% full; albeit that this latter point *may* not be a significant issue for the OP's specific usage...

    ...&, whilst obviously not essential (i don't use it since i'm running SSDs in arrays & it's easier for me to update using the dos s/w), the Samsungs do have the magician s/w which can be used for updating f/w & whatnot - whereas, i can't immediately find any f/w updates for any of their SSDs on Toshiba's EU website.


    Then, atm, the pricing's such that the HD5D is ~£155 from eBuyer, whilst the Evo's ~£147 from Dabs - & you can get 1.51% & 2.2% cashback on the total before VAT respectively, via topcashback...

    ...though, obviously, the Evo's yet to find it's natural price point as it's a brand new drive.

    Whilst of no use to the OP wanting a SSD now, the HD5D has had time to settle in price somewhat (so it's a better buy than it was - though that's also d.t. the price of the 840 Pro marginally increasing), whereas the 250GB Evo 'should' end up dropping by at least £10-15 after a couple of months... ...maybe sooner.


    Anyway, given that the HD5D has come down in price from when it was discussed previously, it's certainly not a bad suggestion - but, as with the Evo, it does have limitations; just different ones.


    Otherwise, re-reading the OP's post, the lack of free space that's being proposed by the last sentence isn't great...

    ...remembering that the ideal is 25% OP & ~20% of the formatted space being unused - though, from your suggested usage, you *may* be better placed to get away with only doing the latter than with a heavier usage, but to be pushing filling the SSD...

    Anyway, along with this certainly both making a 250/256GB SSD a much better choice (simply as there's more space to play with), if the OP were going to be significantly overfilling the SSD then it'd throw things the Evo's way d.t. much better consistency when fuller.


    Oh, & as to the A3, 'if' the OP's going to make a leap to spending over £200 for a 480/500/512GB SSD, spending an extra ~£12 on a 500GB 840 (non-pro or Evo) would be a *much* better call imho.
     
  6. j4mi3

    j4mi3 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    28 Jun 2011
    Posts:
    1,033
    Likes Received:
    17
    thanks for all of your replies guys,

    decided in the end to just stick with the 128gb pro simply because i didn't want the hassle of sending it back and all that stuff.

    its very fast! and i am sure the space will be ample. sure i can't go nuts installing everthing under the sun, but its still good enough for me

    thanks again :)
     

Share This Page