Kingston A400 (250gb) or Samsung EVO 860 (250gb)

[zack96]

Hi people

 

My Dell Precision M4400 which I've had since 2009 could do with a SSD as the original 5,400rpm is a little slow. 

I've upgraded the Ram to 6Gb.

 

The Laptop will mostly be used for Web browsing & old DOS and windows gaming (Quadro FX770m)

 

The laptop only uses SATA  3Gbs

So which one of these SSDs should I go for, Reliability is the main priority , Then  speed. I'm surprised that the old 5,400rpm HD lasted this long, can today's SSDs last half as long (5 yrs) I'll be happy 

 

Kingston A400 (250gb)  £25.00 

 

Samsung EVO 860 (250gb)  £45.00

 

I don't mind spending extra on the Samsung but because it's a 2009 laptop would the Kingston be OK or is it cheaper because it's not so reliable 

 

If today's SSDs are not as reliable HD then I'm quite happy to stick in a new 250gb WD 2.5" 7,200 rpm HD as reliability comes first than speed

[SpookyCitrus]

I've used plenty of Kingston A400s in the past and have yet for one to fail. Silicon Power is a different story. I say since it's an older computer save the extra $20 and go for the cheaper option while the Kingston is a tad slower with read and writes than the Samsung it will still increase the speed and improve most tasks of the computer just the same.

[Rhaemond]

A400. Best budget option. There is of course, a difference from the Samsung EVO since it is a more premium SSD, but for me, A400 is already great.

[Dedayog]

The Kingston is fine, and reliable.  If you can notice the difference in speed of the Kingston vs the Samsung, I'll buy you both.

 

 

[hello_there_123]

https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/product/8VfhP6/tcsunbow-x3-240gb-25-solid-state-drive-x3-240gb

 

Please do not listen to the people who are saying to get the A400. It is 2d TLC dramless trash with an equally trash controller and slows down significantly after being half filled. On the other hand the X3 has 3D TLC with DRAM and a decent controller (SM2258) while being cheaper!