What is the best SATA3 SSD over time?

[Pyroven]

So, I bought a Kingston SSD Now V300 two or so years ago.

 

Now, two years later the read speed is about 200MBps at less than full capacity. About 170GB usage of 240GB. This is about half what it was when new.

 

It's still faster than a Hard drive, but I feel the need for something much faster for big games like GTAV and Shadow of Mordor.

 

So I've been looking for a secondary SSD, but I can't seem to find read and writes speeds for drives at 90% capacity, or over time, and that's what I really need to make a purchasing decision.

 

Where can I find such information? What SSD has the least performance degradation over time?

[GER_T4IGA]

Speed shouldn't drop with filling up. Either you are testing incorrectly or the speeds have alway been that bad.

GTA V only merely benefits from loading from an SSD. You will never get to snappy load times in that game.

There should be no degradation over time. NONE! I would get a samsung EVO. Proven to be reliable because many people buy it, longer than average warranty and good speeds. Also not to overpriced

[Technomancer__]

the Samsung 850 pro

but 850 evo is basically the same with a shorter warranty 

[GER_T4IGA]

1 minute ago, Ethocreeper said:

the Samsung 850 pro

but 850 evo is basically the same with a shorter warranty 

And a little bit less advertised seeds though I doubt this is more than measurable.

[Sakkura]

The Crucial BX300 holds up well, as do old high-end drives like the Samsung 850 Pro and Sandisk Extreme Pro. Considering the price, the BX300 would be the better choice.

40 minutes ago, GER_T4IGA said:

Speed shouldn't drop with filling up.

Oh they definitely should. Especially with a low-end SSD like the V300. Just check the differences on this test between empty and full. The V300 would probably do worse than any of the drives on the graph.

[Narnash]

my very first SSD died on me a couple weeks ago a Samsung 840 EVO 120Gb was 4 years old heavy used all the time (years as a boot drive, some time as a havy used "usb drive" and after that as game storage) , first some of the free space gone unusable and now I can't access the SSD at all (Win and Linux). However even though it isn't listed in the bios either on the last fresh win install 2 weeks ago it show up in the drive selection (was to lazy to unplug it) but I wasn't able to format it.

 

BTW the drive doesn't got remarkably slower over time, just some corrupted/unaccessable drive space and after that => dead.

[Columbo]

The only reason I can see a SSD drive with deteriorating performance would be due to de-fragmenting like on a spinner drive. That is a no no in SSD land and that is what I think has ruined SSD's. I don't over provision SSD's. To this date I have not lost an SSD due to hardware failure. I am committing a no no by not over provisioning. I view it like oil changes. Once every 10K miles but the oil change shops insist on once every 3K for obvious reasons. 

[SCHISCHKA]

Despite what has been written above there is evidence out there that SSD do degrade over time. here is a archwiki article on restoring ssd performance. I did this to my 5 year old intel 520's and they are like brand new. Intel and samsung btw give the longest warranties.

 https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Solid_State_Drives/Memory_cell_clearing

[Technomancer__]

40 minutes ago, Columbo said:

The only reason I can see a SSD drive with deteriorating performance would be due to de-fragmenting like on a spinner drive. That is a no no in SSD land and that is what I think has ruined SSD's. I don't over provision SSD's. To this date I have not lost an SSD due to hardware failure. I am committing a no no by not over provisioning. I view it like oil changes. Once every 10K miles but the oil change shops insist on once every 3K for obvious reasons. 

windows does not defragment ssds

it trims them and that helps

[SpaceGhostC2C]

52 minutes ago, Ethocreeper said:

windows does not defragment ssds

it trims them and that helps

windows 10 does not defragment ssds by default.

Earlier versions may default to defragmenting any drive, and in all cases users can enable defrag fro any drive.

[Columbo]

I was not implying that Windows defragments a HDD/SSD. I am saying people were conditioned to defragment their spinner drives for decades and SSD are memory on a chip and do not require defragmenting. Using disk defragmenter over time in Windows can degrade a SSD. 

[Pyroven]

The amount of misinformation in this thread is unbelievable. For those of you who don't realise it:

 

SSD performance does decrease with capacity used. Look it up.

 

This is not a debate about the verification of that fact. I simply wanted to know where to find comparisons of full SSD drives, because different drives are affected to differing degrees, which someone did actually link and so now this thread has essentially been solved.

[Columbo]

4 minutes ago, Pyroven said:

The amount of misinformation in this thread is unbelievable. For those of you who don't realise it:

 

SSD performance does decrease with capacity used. Look it up.

 

This is not a debate about the verification of that fact. I simply wanted to know where to find comparisons of full SSD drives, because different drives are affected to differing degrees, which someone did actually link and so now this thread has essentially been solved.

I think we can agree that SSD performance can decrease over time. But how you manage and care for your SSD can reduce the impact on the degradation of your SSD. I am simply saying that if an SSD is properly care for the degradation in performance would be in the single digits percentage wise performance. It's not an exact science but I would say anywhere from 1-9%  if a person properly maintains their SSD.