Does it matter what SSD you buy?

[Kyonkanno]

Hello guys, I just wanted to share my experience and to hear your experiences on this regard. I have many computers around the house and have all kinds of SSDs. From Samsung 850 PRO down to a Kingston 120 GB UV400. Reviews shows that the 850 PRO is leaps and bounds faster than a lower end drive like the UV400. BUT in my experience, the lower end SSDs offer a close to indistinguishable experience to the higher end SSDs.

 

I haven't taken the time to measure precise numbers, but even if the 850 pro boots in 5 seconds and the UV400 boots in 10, it's good enough for me! I also have some other computers with mid end SSDs and have to say the same. It just leaves me thinking, Is it worth to pay the premium for not noticeable performance? Even Linus has said that NVME SSDs don't offer that OMGWTFBBQPWNT effect, when compared to any reliable SSD.

So my advice would be to buy any SSD you want as long as it's from a reputable brand and paying more attention to data integrity than performance. Also if you need other non-performance related features, like encryption, then you NEED to buy an SSD with those features. But the average Joe doesn't even think about encrypting his SSD.

[SCHISCHKA]

3 minutes ago, Kyonkanno said:

it worth to pay the premium for not noticeable performance?

I pay more for a drive with a longer warranty. Iv only used the more expensive Intel & Samsung drives for this reason, not for performance, but get higher performance spec with those drives anyway. The performance spec in the marketing is sequential read/write which does not reflect real world use.

[Matias_Chambers]

I usually don't notice the difference between my laptop SSD which is a cheap Kingston SSD and my 850 EVO in my desktop. The only thing I have noticed, is that my laptop sometimes takes a few seconds to respond when powering it on from sleep mode. 

[LogicalDrm]

I don't think speed difference even would show in normal desktop use. But if you are using really heavy software or use SSDs to keep project files, there the difference would show.

 

I too go for longer life more than speed. And reasonable pricing over speed. There are some cheaper SSDs I wouldn't consider, but also more known series I wouldn't get (like the fact I dislike anything from Corsair).

 

Its also funny that people (still?) trash Kingston HyperX drives because of what was going on with early SSDNow V300 series.

[Guest]

I've only got experiance with my Kinston HyperX 240 gb SSD. (not the budget kind I think) When I first used it, it was in my old system/slow SATA2 connection, making it run only at half the speeds it should be able to get. I did notice a HUGE performance boost, compaired to my HDD's. So that makes me think any SSD will do just fine, if you aren't a real power user. And those extra 2-3 seconds... Cough a few times, and they have gone anyways.

 

When compairing the same SSD in my new (low end but SATA3) computer, I only notice MAYBE 5 seconds of faster OS boot times. Just makes me think of an SSD, as not being the biggest bottleneck ever. Any SSD... When booting/loading games, it's seconds gained, and in my opinion, that extra speed doesn't really mean much in the real world. I think those speeds are more for bragging rights.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, LoGiCalDrm said:

I too go for longer life more than speed. And reasonable pricing over speed. There are some cheaper SSDs I wouldn't consider, but also more known series I wouldn't get

I think storage space is also a big thing, considering performance drops when full... So besides known series, also size...

 

2 minutes ago, LoGiCalDrm said:

Its also funny that people (still?) trash Kingston HyperX drives because of what was going on with early SSDNow V300 series.

I've got one, and thought they were great. Could you tell me something more about "trash Kingston HyperX drives"? (I know the SSDNow V300 series are budget, but the HyperX isn, right?

[LogicalDrm]

1 minute ago, Dutch-stoner said:

I've got one, and thought they were great. Could you tell me something more about "trash Kingston HyperX drives"? (I know the SSDNow V300 series are budget, but the HyperX isn, right?

I was saying that since Kingston had this issue (either lying about speed or drives dying because of bad components, can't remember) with V300 series drives, some users here were talking down ALL Kingston drives. Since it was only issue with one generation of drives of one series, it was just bullshit talk. AFAIK there hasn't been issue with V300 since then. I just wouldn't recommend them in gaming PCs, there are better budget drives.

 

I have HyperX 3K, have had it for 3 years, and I'm very happy with it. According to CrystalDisk I have still 96% of life left in it too.

[Kyonkanno]

this is why I said reliable brand. AFAIK, samsung doesn't make any budget drives but Sandisk seem to be a very reputable brand and have everything from low end to high end. I think you can't go wrong with them

 

[Guest]

@LoGiCalDrm Just checked my SSD box. I've got the HyperX Savage, no 3k or whatever on it. Also no mention of V300... So I assume this whole Kingston problem has nothing to do with my SSD, right? (I knew Kingston from way back, when they would provide lifetime warranty on memory, and the reviews I found, said the HyperX was good...)

[Kyonkanno]

Yeah, I don't think your SSD will give you problems. Kingston is trying to market HyperX almost as a separate brand, aimed at higher end clients.

[LogicalDrm]

4 hours ago, Dutch-stoner said:

@LoGiCalDrm Just checked my SSD box. I've got the HyperX Savage, no 3k or whatever on it. Also no mention of V300... So I assume this whole Kingston problem has nothing to do with my SSD, right? (I knew Kingston from way back, when they would provide lifetime warranty on memory, and the reviews I found, said the HyperX was good...)

Yeah, its much older than Savage product like. We are talking about 2013 summer happenings. I can link some news later, if I remember.

 

E: Remembered year wrong. It was 2014, not 2013. Here are some news about the issue. Which was about changing NAND to slower/cheaper version after receiving good reviews. A good reason to give some crap to said product line, and bit for company too. But not reason to continue giving crap for prolonged periods. If we would do that, there wouldn't be any trusted company.

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/184253-ssd-shadiness-kingston-and-pny-caught-bait-and-switching-cheaper-components-after-good-reviews

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7763/an-update-to-kingston-ssdnow-v300-a-switch-to-slower-micron-nand

Edited November 10, 2016 by LoGiCalDrm
Links to news added.

[porina]

1 hour ago, Kyonkanno said:

BUT in my experience, the lower end SSDs offer a close to indistinguishable experience to the higher end SSDs.

Agreed. I have a mix ranging from high end M.2 NVMe to V300s, to no name brand SATA SSDs, and in practical use there isn't really a difference you can feel. Maybe, if you're doing a big file copy, but outside of benchmarks it isn't really noticeable. Pretty much any SSD is a lot faster in normal use over a hard disk which is where most of the gain is.

 

Nowadays I tend to buy my SSDs more by capacity/cost ratio with a smaller nod towards brand.

[the gremlin]

2 hours ago, LoGiCalDrm said:

I don't think speed difference even would show in normal desktop use. But if you are using really heavy software or use SSDs to keep project files, there the difference would show.

 

I too go for longer life more than speed. And reasonable pricing over speed. There are some cheaper SSDs I wouldn't consider, but also more known series I wouldn't get (like the fact I dislike anything from Corsair).

 

i agree with  life > speed.

What SSD do you use that reflects this?

 

if I am using really heavy software, would it make sense to get a drive that's strong on both ends? something like the Samsung EVO series?

[LogicalDrm]

1 minute ago, the gremlin said:

 

i agree with  life > speed.

What SSD do you use that reflects this?

 

if I am using really heavy software, would it make sense to get a drive that's strong on both ends? something like the Samsung EVO series?

I got Kingston HyperX 3K which has been in use for 3 years. At the time it was midrange, with decent price/performance ratio. I use it as boot drive and some games. At the time it felt better option than Samsung 840 series.