Jump to content

Quality of NAND Flash Chips in BX500

AnirbanG007
By AnirbanG007
in Storage Devices
 Share
Posted

This might be a bad question, but I'm curious nontheless. I know the BX500 uses a DRAMless variant of the SM controller in MX500. I've heard the quality of NAND Flash chips used in DRAMless variants are generally lower. So, does the BX500 have lesser quality Flash than, say an MX500 or a Samsung 860 Evo?

Attention is what makes life meaningful.

Also, please quote me for聽a reply. 馃檪

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Lesser quality? Probably, yes.

Does it matter? Depends...

聽

If you use it just as a secondary bulk storage, it will be fine. But i would not use it as an OS drive.

If someone did not use reason to reach their conclusion in the first place, you cannot use reason to convince them otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author
7 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

Lesser quality? Probably, yes.

Does it matter? Depends...

聽

If you use it just as a secondary bulk storage, it will be fine. But i would not use it as an OS drive.

I know I'm not supposed to, but I got the 120 gig version聽as a boot drive, for my dad's very old C2D machine, which he occasionally uses. He only uses it for browsing the internet or seeing photos and stuff. I guess it'd be fine for his use-case, wouldn't it? He probably wouldn't even cross 60% of the drive, like ever. Also there wasn't anything else like it at that price point.

Attention is what makes life meaningful.

Also, please quote me for聽a reply. 馃檪

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
6 minutes ago, AnirbanG007 said:

I know I'm not supposed to, but I got the 120 gig version聽as a boot drive, for my dad's very old C2D machine, which he occasionally uses. He only uses it for browsing the internet or seeing photos and stuff. I guess it'd be fine for his use-case, wouldn't it? He probably wouldn't even cross 60% of the drive, like ever. Also there wasn't anything else like it at that price point.

I used a 480GB BX500 aswell (because it was the cheapest 480GB SSD i found) to switch out the old HDD on my dads notebook. He is also pretty much only browsing on it. For this kind of use case it's still fine and i didn't experience any kind of slowdowns etc because of a missing DRAM. Any SSD should be better than an old HDD as a boot drive.

If someone did not use reason to reach their conclusion in the first place, you cannot use reason to convince them otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
  • Author
56 minutes ago, James Evens said:

Current models聽of the BX500 are QLC.聽

Unless you want the cheapest SSD for bulk storage avoid this SSD.

I really didn't know they were QLC.

Edit: I googled, they are not QLC, they are TLC.

Edited by AnirbanG007
Change of response

Attention is what makes life meaningful.

Also, please quote me for聽a reply. 馃檪

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

120GB version is, most likely, still TLC. I do not think anyone apart of junk-grade Chinese brands made 120GB QLC SSD-s yet.

You can use utils from this page to try identifying specific chips used. You need SMI flash id, most likely.

聽

Also this ssd-s are fine as boot drive for office-like usage. As long as they are not completely filled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing Storage Devices

脳