Best cheapo SSD?

[Nathat23]

So I have been looking for a fast enough 240GB SSD for my laptop, which only gets infrequent usage. Which of the following would be best?

ADATA SU650

Kingston A400

Patriot Burst

Silicon Power S55

Lexar NS100

 

(yes they are all crap, but I don't want to spend much)

[wojtepanik]

I would take SU800, they are decent, not that expensive

[Bananasplit_00]

MX500 has been A400 prices here for a while, it should be a lot better than any of those from what i know

[desertcomputer]

Best and cheap doesn't really goes in hand.

 

If it for infrequent uses, the cheapest would do. This would depend what region you're in.

[Mr.Humble]

Don't 500GB SSDs have better price/capacity in your region? Also going 20$ above the cheapest can get you a looot better SSD

 

Czech out these drives:

 

Seagate Baracuda SSD

WD Green

WD Blue

Kingston UV500

Crucial BX500

Crucial MX500

[hello_there_123]

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

[hello_there_123]

5 hours ago, Mr.Humble said:

WD Green

Kingston UV500

Both of these use the garbo tier Marvel 88SS1074 controller also found on the garbage Sandisk SSD PLUs.

 

edit: nvm wd green uses the sm2258xt controller which is the same found on the bx500. green is still garbage though , 2d im pretty sure 32L nand from sandisk 

[aisle9]

Inland Professional. 120GB for $20. I've used well over a dozen of them at this point and never seen one fail. Most of them use a Micron controller, IIRC, but the risk in buying them is that they're Micro Center's in-house brand and, therefore, are rebrands of other OEM drives. This means that there's not necessarily a lot of consistency in what's inside, and it shows in performance metrics.

 

That said, I have yet to hit a bad one and haven't seen degradation on the ones I am using, so I'm very happy to recommend them.

[hello_there_123]

39 minutes ago, aisle9 said:

 Most of them use a Micron controller, IIRC,

The sata inland uses a phison S11 controller , same found on the garbage A400...

[Dedayog]

39 minutes ago, hello_there_123 said:

The sata inland uses a phison S11 controller , same found on the garbage A400...

You can list controllers all day, and it looks like you enjoy doing so, but at the end of the day the cheapest controller in the cheapest SSD is still a decently reliable unit for whatever someone with $20-$40 can afford.

 

All the drives listed provide snappy and fast usability for years.  

 

@Nathat23 - get the cheapest one, in a rarely used laptop they're more than fine, all of them.

[hello_there_123]

2 minutes ago, jstudrawa said:

You can list controllers all day, and it looks like you enjoy doing so, but at the end of the day the cheapest controller in the cheapest SSD is still a decently reliable unit for whatever someone with $20-$40 can afford.

My point was that it,s not a micron controller

 

i don,t even thinnk micron makes controller

[jiyeon]

I recommend the Crucial BX500, it's fairly inexpensive and is made by Micron. I had it used as an OS drive when I had Ubuntu 1904 on it, and recently I've just been using it as a secondary storage.

[seagate_surfer]

Something that I tell people is that they buy SSDs that offer 5 years of warranty, in this way it ensures that they have technical support throughout this time and also that the SSD will last much longer than that. SSDs that offer only 2 years of warranty usually begin to fail before that date arrives.

[aisle9]

10 hours ago, hello_there_123 said:

The sata inland uses a phison S11 controller , same found on the garbage A400...

Actually, Inland doesn't always use the same hardware. Look at the specs listed. I have one 240GB Inland that has a 530Mb/s read speed, and one with 550Mb/s. I think their whole thing is "use whatever's readily available" and brand it as an "Inland Professional" drive.

[seagate_surfer]

The problem with cheap SSDs that are usually DRAMless is not found in MB/s, but in writing endurance. Watching movies or photos when you were fifteen, online videos, reading documents, opening programs and even loading an operating system does not require much effort, but that is not heavy usage and there is when a problem appears. SSDs require free space to handle algorithms that help with maintenance and that is why the more you fill it the slower it becomes, without a DRAM where to locate the algorithm the usage usually affects the first NAND chip of the block since that is where said administration codes are placed and that only increases the use of the same NAND chip because at the same time it is also used to record data. In other words, if you are going to give it a heavy usage, that is, transfer videos from one folder to another to be edited frequently or edit photos or use Photoshop or applications that are constantly requesting information then it is better not to use cheap SSDs because they are going to end burning in a heartbeat. For reading, they are fine and for sequential tasks because they behave the same, but not for writing or storing data.