Crucial MX300 Vs Samsung 850 EVO

[sam4747]

I am in Canada. I am getting 1Tb Crucial MX300 for $320 and on amazon Samsung EVO 850 1Tb is for $458. Both prices are for new ssd 

 Is Samsung EVO is worth it for extra $138 extra?

[ARikozuM]

Not really. It's up to you, though.

[Enderman]

If you care about reliability and longevity and better speed consistency then yeah.

[HKZeroFive]

Both drives use 3D NAND flash memory... so I'd honestly get the cheaper out of the two. The 850 EVO isn't worth the extra hundie, IMO.

[JoostinOnline]

10 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

Both drives use 3D NAND flash memory... so I'd honestly get the cheaper out of the two. The 850 EVO isn't worth the extra hundie, IMO.

Using 3D NAND doesn't mean it's better in any way.  It's just cheaper to manufacture in larger quantities.

[Gaussen]

i'd choose longer warranty = longer lifespan expectation

[rn8686]

850 Evo is slightly faster, but MX300 is much better value, get the MX if money is a concern. 

[HKZeroFive]

24 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

Using 3D NAND doesn't mean it's better in any way. It's just cheaper to manufacture in larger quantities.

The type of flash memory used usually plays a factor in determining a drive's longevity, performance, reliability and so forth... for example, a Crucial MX300 would be superior to something like the Samsung 750 EVO which uses cheap planar TLC memory.

 

But then again, who's going to see the difference in speeds between the MX300 and 850 EVO?

[User69420]

better get a m.2 pcie ssd like samsung 960 pro if you want high speed storage device

[19_blackie_73]

Mx 300 all the way 

I have both drives, 850 250 GB and MX 300 525 GB, and i see no difference even when both drives are filled 50%

The 138$ are spent better in another way than supporting samsung

[JoostinOnline]

4 hours ago, HKZeroFive said:

The type of flash memory used usually plays a factor in determining a drive's longevity, performance, reliability and so forth... for example, a Crucial MX300 would be superior to something like the Samsung 750 EVO which uses cheap planar TLC memory.

 

But then again, who's going to see the difference in speeds between the MX300 and 850 EVO?

3D NAND isn't related to SLC/MLC/TLC.  3D NAND is just a buzz-wordy way of saying that the cells are stacked on top of each other.  Single, multi, and triple level cell flash reflects how many bits each cell holds.  The more bits it holds, the slower it is.  That's why some TLC drives (like this one) have a cache of SLC memory to somewhat limit the negative effects (especially in benchmarks), similar to an SSHD.

 

As for longevity, flash memory never reaches its write limit in the real world.  The fact that there even is a limit tends to scare people, but the level is astronomical.  Your drive will either fail from other means, or just become an obsolete size, long before it reaches its write limit.  10 years ago, you were likely to see an 80GB HDD in a computer.  Compare that to now.

 

The MX300 isn't the fastest drive out there, but it's got a much better size/price ratio, so it's definitely what I'd recommend.  If there was a $10-20 difference, I'd say Samsung, but a $138 price difference is outrageous.