I currently have a 80GB SSD C drive and want to upgrade it for larger capacity. The problem is that I don't know where to start when i'm browsing online stores. The drop downs are M.2, PCI Express, Intel Optane, SATA, mSATA, and so on and I'm a bit lost. I "think" I need a 2.5 SATA III but i'm not 100% sure and would like some clarification before I go ahead. Also, can anyone recommend any reliable make and size? I currently have - SSD Drive - Intel SSD X25-M series (INTEL SSDSA2M080G2GC https://ark.intel.com/products/56601/Intel-SSD-X25-M-Series-80GB-2-5in-SATA-3Gb-s-34nm-MLC- Motherboard - Asus P6X58D Premium https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/P6X58D_Premium/specifications/ Advice appreciated
You’re going to want to stick to SATA SSDs as your motherboard doesn’t support any of the newer, shiny stuff. I’d thoroughly recommend a Samsung 860 EVO. It’s good bang for your buck and has a proven reliability record.
As @TheMadDutchDude said you will want to go with SATA. How big do you want to go? 250GB/500GB or do you have a specific budget range in mind? You can get a 480-500GB for around £70 or £80.
I'd recommend sticking to the big three: Samsung, Intel or Crucial. £48 for 250GB Samsung 860 Evo https://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Solid-State-MZ-76E250B-EU/dp/B078WQJXNF or £77 for 500GB) £50 for 250GB Crucial MX500 https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0764WCXCV (or £74 for 500GB) £52 for 256GB Intel 545s https://www.scan.co.uk/products/256...25-sata-iii-64-layer-3d-nand-tlc-internal-ssd (for some reason the 512 version is stupidly overpriced though)
Same as Anfield - Samsung and Crucial would be my votes. If you can wait a month then there are bound to be some cracking Black Friday deals around then
I've never had a Samsung or Crucial but after having a few others that failed (Corsair, Patriot) I stuck to Intel wherever I could. I've got a couple of Sandisk too, but one did vanish once and turned up about an hour later. I'd probably avoid Crucial after the 500 hour bug but that's just personal preference. I can't speak highly enough of Intel though, and let's face it your 80gb is now pretty old and I assume still working? Samsung do offer a fantastic warranty though, and I must admit I've never heard of one failing (yet).
I'm looking to upgrade as well, from a Samsung 830 256GB I bought in 2011. Intel has fallen behind Samsung in recent years.
5200 hour bug you mean That was an awful long time ago now (7 years ago or something wasn't it?). I've got a Crucial M4 still going strong after 6 years.
Not sure, but I know how it feels when a SSD dies and it's no fun so that just put me off. I wish they reported *something* or gave an error, but three times I've been sitting in Windows listening to music only for it to just freeze up and the SSD vanishes on reboot. I've also had SSDs do similar things when they need a firmware update, and that is a PITA too.
I've only ever had 1 SSD fail and that was an OCZ a looooong time ago. I think the Crucial M4 I mentioned before was to replace that actually. You're exactly right though - they just disappear and that's that. Not like a spinning disk where you start to get errors and slow downs - just fine one second and dead the next. Maybe it's to do with the fact that it's the controller that dies rather than the actual NAND dying. I have no idea to be honest - just thinking out loud.
You’re correct, sir. The controller is the most likely part to fail on an SSD. The NAND typically outlasts the controller several times over.
One of the controllers died on my OCZ Revodrive. I was a bit gutted, though it did work for a good few years.
Thank you everyone for the replies. Really appreciate it. I'm likely to opt for the 256GB or 500GB. Wasn't sure whether 500GB is overkill for a C drive as I mainly store my data on internal HDD drives but with programs and Windows bloatware I'm needing to update my little trusty 80GB to something else. Based on the suggestions I'm going to go with Samsung or Crucial and after looking, i'm swaying more to the 500GB for extra £20 ish more for double the space but I have more questions. For Samsung, what's the difference between Evo and Pro? I noticed that the Pro version was a lot more. For someone who doesn't do hardcore gaming or video editing, which would suit me more? Both Crucial and Samsung seem to have cloning software, are they both on par? At first I thought of doing a clean install but then I remembered my old Windows 7 was upgraded to Windows 10 but i'm not sure whether I just my old Windows 7 key if i do a clean one, so now i'm thinking of cloning. I've looked at Scan for easy comparison and I noticed Max Endurance and MTBF (quickly googled and it said "Mean Time Between Failures" which I've pasted below. Does this mean that Samsung has more endurance and less likely to fail? 250GB Crucial MX500, 2.5" SSD, SATA III - 6Gb/s, SM2258, 3D TLC NAND, Read 560MB/s, Write 510MB/s, 95k/90k IOPS, Retail >>>>>>Max Endurance 100TBW / MTBF 1,800,000 Hours 250GB Samsung 860 EVO, 2.5” SSD, SATA III 6Gb/s, MJX, 3D MLC V-NAND, 512MB Cache, Read 550MB/s, Write 520MB/s, 98k/90k >>>>>>>>>>>>> Max Endurance 150TBW / MTBF 1,500,000 Hours 256GB Samsung 860 PRO, 2.5” SSD, SATA III 6Gb/s, MJX, MLC V-NAND, 512MB Cache, Read 560MB/s, Write 530MB/s, 100k/90k >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max Endurance 150TBW / MTBF 2,000,000 Hours 500GB Crucial MX500, 2.5" SSD, SATA III - 6Gb/s, SM2258, 3D TLC NAND, Read 560MB/s, Write 510MB/s, 95k/90k IOPS, Retail >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max Endurance 180 TBW / MTBF 1,800,000 Hours 500GB Samsung 860 EVO, 2.5” SSD, SATA III 6Gb/s, MJX, MLC V-NAND, 512MB Cache, Read 550MB/s, Write 520MB/s, 98k/90k >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max Endurance 300 TBW / MTBF 1,500,000 Hours 512GB Samsung 860 PRO, 2.5” SSD, SATA III 6Gb/s, MJX, MLC V-NAND, 512MB Cache, Read 560MB/s, Write 530MB/s, 100k/90k >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Max Endurance 600 TBW / MTBF 2,000,000 Hours Thank you
TBW refers to the amount of data you can write before wear and tear of the NAND becomes an issue. MTBF is about chance of random failure. Take the 300TBW of the 860 Evo for example, thats 300 Terabyte, or roughly the equivalent of writing 7500 blu ray isos to it (40GB typical blu ray iso, x 25 to get to one TB, times 300), so with a "normal" consumer type workload it won't be an issue for many years. MTBF is basically a theoretical calculation on failure chance, higher hours rating = lower failure chance, but that is calculated across tens of thousands of drives. 860 Evo vs 860 Pro, the Pro is better at dealing with very heavy loads, i.e. latency won't increase as fast as with the Evo... but its rather theoretical as running into a situation where it is an issue is extremely rare during typical use. Either way, personally I don't think the premium for the 860 Pro is worth it over the 860 Evo.
The only reason for going for a Pro over the EVO is exactly as above - higher read/write endurance. I wouldn’t recommend it for a daily system as you’ll likely never come close to those figures anyway. Just being realistic. I’d grab the 500GB for the sake of £20. Move some of your games on to the SSD and enjoy fast level loads.
Samsung no longer makes a SATA 'pro' as anyone that really needs the speed for productivity will my buying an M.2 NVMe. I don't think you will notice a difference between the performance of any of those drives so get whichever is cheapest. As you are going from 80GB even 250GB will be a massive increase in free space.
I bought two Crucial M4s in 2012, still in use today. A simple firmware upgrade prevented the 5200 hour bug.
Amazing guys, thanks for making it easier for me. I'm going to go with 500GB but will wait if there are any deals on Black Friday/Cyber Monday and see which is cheaper for Crucial or Samsung.
