950 pro 512gb Vs 850 evo 1tb

[cc143]

I have recently come to the realisation that my now 5 year old 240gb OCZ agility SSD is not enough for my needs. I now have 8gb left empty on it. 

 

Currently, my Storage config is 240gb SSD for OS, Software, Games, Some important files (very small) and dual boot linux partition (40gb). along with a 2TB HDD to hold pictures videos etc (which is more than half full and has much less stuff on it than I normally have!) 

 

My plans for the future were to somehow afford a 512gb 950 pro SSD for everything above & current photoshop work + something like a 1tb SSD for some Files, while others are migrated to a potential NAS, once I can afford it. (I want to eliminate mechanical drives from my Desktop entirely.). 

 

Since this situation is basically forcing me to consider upgrading sooner than later, which one of these 2 options should I (potentially) take: 

 

1. buy a 950 pro and wait for 1tb class SSDs to get cheaper/ larger capacities become more affordable

2. Buy a 1tb 850 evo and buy a 950 pro once prices inevitably drop next year or so when 1tb models come out. 

 

It is worth noting that the boot drive will be written on much less frequently but will house significantly larger single items (i.e. a 40gb game will be wirtten at once and eventually deleted if need be VS 5-10gb writes a day on "storage drive").

 

Also note that I can't see the NAS coming faster than the SSD purchases for this build. i.e. it will be implemented later. 

 

My concerns are:

1. I have read mixed opinions on M.2 drives, some say the 950 pro makes such a noticeable difference I will be reminded of when I first installed an SSD, other say boot times are slower over the m.2 interface. 

2. How significant will price drops be in the foreseable future on either pcie ssds or larger capacity SATA SSDs?

3. Given my upgrade path, usage and SSDs potential lifespan, which one should be bought first? 

 

I should note that the last point does not really concern me since my current SSD is 5 years old, must have been formatted 20 times since purchase, used to be boot and storage drive for my laptop which was my main pc and still is diagnosed with excellent life expectancy (whatever unit of measure of time that is.)

 

Prices for the 2 are similar i.e. 950 pro £250 Vs 1tb 850evo £230. 

 

Another option would be an SM951 nvme m.2 drive, but price difference is small enough that I would prefer the consumer warranty etc of the 950 pro. 

[Senzelian]

I would always go for the higher capacity SSD.
A fast SSD is literally useless if you're still bound to use HDDs, because the SSD can't store large files.

That's why I use two 1TB 850 Evos.

[Made In Canada]

13 minutes ago, cc143 said:

I have recently come to the realisation that my now 5 year old 240gb OCZ agility SSD is not enough for my needs. I now have 8gb left empty on it. 

 

Currently, my Storage config is 240gb SSD for OS, Software, Games, Some important files (very small) and dual boot linux partition (40gb). along with a 2TB HDD to hold pictures videos etc (which is more than half full and has much less stuff on it than I normally have!) 

 

My plans for the future were to somehow afford a 512gb 950 pro SSD for everything above & current photoshop work + something like a 1tb SSD for some Files, while others are migrated to a potential NAS, once I can afford it. (I want to eliminate mechanical drives from my Desktop entirely.). 

 

Since this situation is basically forcing me to consider upgrading sooner than later, which one of these 2 options should I (potentially) take: 

 

1. buy a 950 pro and wait for 1tb class SSDs to get cheaper/ larger capacities become more affordable

2. Buy a 1tb 850 evo and buy a 950 pro once prices inevitably drop next year or so when 1tb models come out. 

 

It is worth noting that the boot drive will be written on much less frequently but will house significantly larger single items (i.e. a 40gb game will be wirtten at once and eventually deleted if need be VS 5-10gb writes a day on "storage drive").

 

Also note that I can't see the NAS coming faster than the SSD purchases for this build. i.e. it will be implemented later. 

 

My concerns are:

1. I have read mixed opinions on M.2 drives, some say the 950 pro makes such a noticeable difference I will be reminded of when I first installed an SSD, other say boot times are slower over the m.2 interface. 

2. How significant will price drops be in the foreseable future on either pcie ssds or larger capacity SATA SSDs?

3. Given my upgrade path, usage and SSDs potential lifespan, which one should be bought first? 

 

I should note that the last point does not really concern me since my current SSD is 5 years old, must have been formatted 20 times since purchase, used to be boot and storage drive for my laptop which was my main pc and still is diagnosed with excellent life expectancy (whatever unit of measure of time that is.)

 

Prices for the 2 are similar i.e. 950 pro £250 Vs 1tb 850evo £230. 

 

Another option would be an SM951 nvme m.2 drive, but price difference is small enough that I would prefer the consumer warranty etc of the 950 pro. 

@Senzelian is right, go for the 1tb 850 EVO SSD for now and then the m.2 950 pro later. (and even though the m.2 is faster the 850 EVO is great imo, i have a 250gb 850 EVO in my pc and its great!).

[cc143]

12 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

I would always go for the higher capacity SSD.
A fast SSD is literally useless if you're still bound to use HDDs, because the SSD can't store large files.

That's why I use two 1TB 850 Evos.

 

8 minutes ago, Made In Canada said:

@Senzelian is right, go for the 1tb 850 EVO SSD for now and then the m.2 950 pro later. (and even though the m.2 is faster the 850 EVO is great imo, i have a 250gb 850 EVO in my pc and its great!).

My storage drive is independent of my boot/software drive. I do nothing that requires constant access to large files, it is just that, a media drive, it houses videos, already edited pictures etc, it is a file repository. The reason why I would like to eventually eliminate it entirely is to have faster write speeds, however the HDD will by no means be a bottleneck to the SSD in any significant way. 

 

I don't need to edit more than a max of 30gb of pictures at once so the maximum storage I need to have empty at any given moment is 60gb. 

 

The issue is I do play more than one game in the same period so I will have something like 10 games installed at once, some of them 40gb, most of the closer to 25GB + my core use software (office, OS, photoshop, eviews, stata etc. which doesn't take more than 100gb maximum.) The possibility of having 10 40gb games installed simultaneously is virtually non-existent, when that happens, I will be considering adding a 2tb SSD;Ρ 

[Made In Canada]

7 minutes ago, cc143 said:

 

My storage drive is independent of my boot/software drive. I do nothing that requires constant access to large files, it is just that, a media drive, it houses videos, already edited pictures etc, it is a file repository. The reason why I would like to eventually eliminate it entirely is to have faster write speeds, however the HDD will by no means be a bottleneck to the SSD in any significant way. 

If you want your main files to load a bit faster (honestly, i dont think you will see a huge difference on the 950 pro m.2 compared to the 850 EVO as they are both fast SSD's) then by all means go ahead and use the 950 pro m.2.

 

However, for price to storage and performance, the 805 EVO cant really be beat. However, the m.2 is still 512gb (which is good) so if you are positive that will be enough and you are fine for slower load speeds on files and such on the HDD, then the 950 pro m.2 will be good.

Edited April 15, 2016 by Made In Canada
Rewording

[cc143]

Just now, Made In Canada said:

If you want your main files to load a bit faster (honestly, i dont think you will see a huge difference from the 950 pro m.2) then by all means go ahead and use the 950 pro m.2.

 

However, for price to storage and performance, the 805 EVO cant really be beat. However, the m.2 is still 512gb (which is good) so if you are positive that will be enough and you are fine for slower load speeds on files and such on the HDD, then the 950 pro m.2 will be good.

Files accessed through the HDD are bottlenecked by other means when it comes to their access. There is no extraction, only the occasional moving from the HDD to an external HDD etc so that will definitely not be an issue. 

 

My concern is, is the performance as significant as described? What about boot times? will they be slower Vs. a SATA SSD? if so by how much? is it that significant to offset faster in OS operating speed? 

[Made In Canada]

3 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Files accessed through the HDD are bottlenecked by other means when it comes to their access. There is no extraction, only the occasional moving from the HDD to an external HDD etc so that will definitely not be an issue. 

 

My concern is, is the performance as significant as described? What about boot times? will they be slower Vs. a SATA SSD? if so by how much? is it that significant to offset faster in OS operating speed? 

From my understanding of SSD's is that they make loading a breeze whether it being on a game loading in distant terrain (less stuttering) or if its a OS booting up and getting all the files in place (faster). As for the 950 pro m.2, i did a bit of searching and i see that the speeds is said to be more than i expected (up to 100%+ in some cases according to userbenchmark) so in this case, i would say the 950 pro m.2 is a great choice. (keep in mind that both are great SSD's and you will see a performance increase compared to your 5 year old SSD).

[Senzelian]

11 minutes ago, cc143 said:

I will be considering adding a 2tb SSD;Ρ 

Yeah, was considering a 2TB SSD, too.
Then I saw that two 1TB SSDs are cheaper and got two of those.
 

2 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Files accessed through the HDD are bottlenecked by other means when it comes to their access. There is no extraction, only the occasional moving from the HDD to an external HDD etc so that will definitely not be an issue. 

 

My concern is, is the performance as significant as described? What about boot times? will they be slower Vs. a SATA SSD? if so by how much? is it that significant to offset faster in OS operating speed? 

The performance difference is not as significant as people describe it.
A lot of people will tell you how great the 950 Pro is and that they noticed a huge difference, but they bought the product, so of course they will defend their purchase.

I haven't tested a 950 Pro myself, so I can't exactly tell you how much better it is than a 850 Evo, but Windows boots on my PC in just a few seconds. It takes longer for my motherboard to check the hardware before Windows takes control. I don't think a 950 Pro is a good purchase.

[cc143]

6 minutes ago, Made In Canada said:

From my understanding of SSD's is that they make loading a breeze whether it being on a game loading in distant terrain (less stuttering) or if its a OS booting up and getting all the files in place (faster). As for the 950 pro m.2, i did a bit of searching and i see that the speeds is said to be more than i expected (up to 100%+ in some cases according to userbenchmark) so in this case, i would say the 950 pro m.2 is a great choice. (keep in mind that both are great SSD's and you will see a performance increase compared to your 5 year old SSD).

Speeds on the 950 pro are insane, obviously not attainable completely or leverageable entirely but still, the performance increase is significant either way. 

1 minute ago, Senzelian said:

Yeah, was considering a 2TB SSD, too.
Then I saw that two 1TB SSDs are cheaper and got two of those.
 

The performance difference is not as significant as people describe it.
A lot of people will tell you how great the 950 Pro is and that they noticed a huge difference, but they bought the product, so of course they will defend their purchase.

I haven't tested a 950 Pro myself, so I can't exactly tell you how much better it is than a 850 Evo, but Windows boots on my PC in just a few seconds. It takes longer for my motherboard to check the hardware before Windows takes control. I don't think a 950 Pro is a good purchase.

Obviously the bootup times are significantly faster, my pc will start up in a matter of seconds and that is on a 5 year old 240gb ssd that I bought cheap back then! 

 

On paper, the performance difference is quite astonishing, and professional reviewers who were given review samples seem to praise it also.

I can't exactly go for more than 2 2.5inch drives, long story, lets just say, my 1000W PSU only has 2 SATA power connectors due to modularity;Ρ so I would prefer to go with 1 2tb SSD instead if I would go there as to be able to expand if its required in the future.