Selecting SSD

[genexis_x]

I need a M.2 SSD for my laptop and I have finalized my choices:

WD Blue (SSD) 250GB ($99)

Samsung 850 EVO 250GB ($107)
Crucial MX300 275GB ($106)

My uses are Windows startup, loading games (Dota 2, CSGO and L4D2 only) and (sometimes) saving documents.

I have 3 questions here:
1. The MX300 275GB version seems to have a poor Random Read IOPS compared to WD Blue (SSD) and 850 EVO. Is it a big deal?
2. According to UserBenchmark, the 850 EVO is the fastest among the 3 SSDs while the Blue being the slowest. For my usage, will I notice differences in loading times among the 3 SSD above?
3. Which is the best SSD (among the 3 above) that match my needs?

Any help will be much appreciated!

[Xenift]

http://www.lazada.com.my/western-digital-wd-blue-pc-ssd-m2-250gb-l-500gb-l-1tb-21368885.html?ff=1

500GB roughly around that price point.

[Droidbot]

18 minutes ago, ZM Fong said:

I need a M.2 SSD for my laptop and I have finalized my choices:

WD Blue (SSD) 250GB ($99)

Samsung 850 EVO 250GB ($107)
Crucial MX300 275GB ($106)

My uses are Windows startup, loading games (Dota 2, CSGO and L4D2 only) and (sometimes) saving documents.

I have 2 questions here:
1. The MX300 275GB version seems to have a poor Random Read IOPS compared to WD Blue (SSD) and 850 EVO. Is it a big deal?
2. According to UserBenchmark, the 850 EVO is the fastest among the 3 SSDs while the Blue being the slowest. For my usage, will I notice differences in loading times among the 3 SSD above?
3. Which is the best SSD that match my needs?

Any help will be much appreciated!

The WD Blue is a rebranded Sandisk drive, based on the Ultra 2 design iirc

850 EVO is worth the $8 just for the extra speed and Samsung reliability imho

[Princess Luna]

Western Digial SSDs aren't too good, in fact their SATA 3 SSDs (Green and Blue) Are actually SanDisk SSD PLUS rebranded for WD, they outsourced manufacturing and everything to SanDisk.

[Droidbot]

Just now, Princess Cadence said:

Western Digial SSDs aren't too good, in fact their SATA 3 SSDs (Green and Blue) Are actually SanDisk SSD PLUS rebranded for WD, they outsourced manufacturing and everything to SanDisk.

Nah, they OWN SanDisk. Look it up. 

[Princess Luna]

Just now, Droidbot said:

Nah, they OWN SanDisk. Look it up. 

Damn, very recently bought them, that is a shame I still had the assumption SanDisk was riding solo. Regardless I agree with you, the EVO is the best pick.

[genexis_x]

38 minutes ago, Droidbot said:

The WD Blue is a rebranded Sandisk drive, based on the Ultra 2 design iirc

850 EVO is worth the $8 just for the extra speed and Samsung reliability imho

But I need SSD for just OS boot, loading casual games and saving documents. Will the 850 EVO overkill? Or should I go for the MX300 which has a larger capacity?
 

Also, can you answer the following questions? Thanks!

58 minutes ago, ZM Fong said:

The MX300 275GB version seems to have a poor Random Read IOPS compared to WD Blue (SSD) and 850 EVO. Is it a big deal?

58 minutes ago, ZM Fong said:

will I notice differences in loading times among the 3 SSD above?

@Princess Cadence

 

[genexis_x]

[Bump]

[Princess Luna]

33 minutes ago, ZM Fong said:

[Bump]

Well in real world performance you won't notice any shouting difference between the three, I would avoid the Western Digital one nonetheless, in fact I don't like them even for HDDs.

The EVO is likely to be the one that endures most due to very good manufacturing process, nonetheless Crucial MX is not bad by any means, if you feel the 250gb will be filled rather quick it could be worth going with the 275gb for that extra 1 game you going to be able to install on it