Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

SATA SSDs any reason to go Samsung over Crucial?

Mark Kaine
 Share

I just bought a Evo 870 and I'm having second thoughts ...

 

Note i haven't tested it yet, but i did test my existing SSDs. 2 Evos and a mx500...

evo860vsevo850vsmx500najc1.thumb.png.34c61e5eeacc23ae380a049a38b8c1fc.png

 

so this is pretty clear to me, the mx500 is faster, for ~35 euros less for the 1tb versions.  Now as said i haven't tested the 870, but I don't see how its gonna be much different (also considering the 850 handily beats the newer 860) so is there any reason why i wouldn't go with a crucial and save almost 40 bucks? I really thought "Samsung surely is faster" but doesn't seem like that at all...  (also note, I don't think age of the drives plays a role, the 850 is far older, has far more reads/writes and power on hours, yet, performs better than the newer 860... )

 

So why am I not returning this junk? (the 870) 🤣

 

 

Edit: OK I see the mx500 is slower by 100mb in "4k" read/writes... but i don't know what that means, is it more or less important than sequential? 

My Nvidia GPU undervolt tutorial  !

 

 

The direction tells you... the direction

-Scott Manley, 2021

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry too much about comparing those results from your existing drives. The 860 obviously isn't performing as it should, but I don't know why. From my experience the 870 EVO is very close to the 860 EVO. The MX500 is a perfectly fine drive as well. It's what I usually go with for most things. 

Phobos: AMD Ryzen 7 2700, 16GB 3000MHz DDR4, ASRock B450 Steel Legend, 6GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, 1TB Samsung SSD 980, 450W Corsair CXM, Corsair Carbide 175R, Windows 11 Pro

 

Pluto: Intel Core i7-2600, 24GB 1333MHz DDR3, ASUS P8Z68-V, 4GB XFX AMD Radeon RX 570, 1TB Samsung 860 EVO, 3TB Seagate BarraCuda, 700W EVGA BQ, Fractal Design Focus G, Windows 10 Pro for Workstations

 

York (NAS): Intel Core i7-2600K, 16GB 1600MHz DDR3, ASUS P8Z68-V, 1GB ZOTAC Nvidia GeForce GTX 550 Ti, 240GB Kingston V300, 3TB HDD + 3x2TB HDD, 750W Dell PSU, Dell XPS 630i case, Windows Server 2019

 

Mid 2011 27" iMac (general use Mac): Intel Core i5-2400, 32GB 1333MHz DDR3, Z68 Logic Board, 1GB AMD Radeon HD 6970M, 500GB Crucial MX500, 2TB WD Blue, macOS High Sierra

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Mark Kaine said:

I just bought a Evo 870 and I'm having second thoughts ...

 

Note i haven't tested it yet, but i did test my existing SSDs. 2 Evos and a mx500...

evo860vsevo850vsmx500najc1.thumb.png.34c61e5eeacc23ae380a049a38b8c1fc.png

 

so this is pretty clear to me, the mx500 is faster, for ~35 euros less for the 1tb versions.  Now as said i haven't tested the 870, but I don't see how its gonna be much different (also considering the 850 handily beats the newer 860) so is there any reason why i wouldn't go with a crucial and save almost 40 bucks? I really thought "Samsung surely is faster" but doesn't seem like that at all...  (also note, I don't think age of the drives plays a role, the 850 is far older, has far more reads/writes and power on hours, yet, performs better than the newer 860... )

 

So why am I not returning this junk? (the 870) 🤣

 

 

Edit: OK I see the mx500 is slower by 100mb in "4k" read/writes... but i don't know what that means, is it more or less important than sequential? 

The samsung also has 300tbw vs the crucials 180 tbw. It really isn't a big issue, but it does account for the price difference.

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


×