The m.2 SATA pricing doesn’t make sense

[The Torrent]

https://www.ebuyer.com/824763-samsung-860-pro-512gb-ssd-mz-76p512b-eu?mkwid=s_dt&pcrid=51482419619&pkw=&pmt=&gclid=Cj0KCQjww8jcBRDZARIsAJGCSGvTEDSnBqmyIKJ9t1PuvLqQbtJCxaUkCKlJ0ts_X55rOMFxP3d68DoaAhCOEALw_wcB

 

 

https://www.box.co.uk/ADATA-XPG-SX8200-480GB-PCIe-Gen3x4-M.2-2_2322262.html

 

 

if m.2 (on paper) is so much faster, why is the pricing so similar. Tbh if someone can be bothered to do the math (I’m not stupid I realise it’s easy but i cba) the ssd would probably be *more* expensive for lesser performance. Why is this?

[blbalsdfkjivbvwerlo3244534]

.

[Electronics Wizardy]

well your comparing it to the pro drive that has mlc and a good amount more endurance and write speed. Compare the evo to the sx8200.

 

ALso you can't just compare sequential speeds. You have to look at random io, esp at lower queue depths, and the drives look much closer that way.

[The Torrent]

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-860-Pro-256GB-vs-Adata-XPG-SX8200-NVMe-PCIe-M2-240GB/3950vsm480586

 

this says all.

 

why now?

[Electronics Wizardy]

14 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-860-Pro-256GB-vs-Adata-XPG-SX8200-NVMe-PCIe-M2-240GB/3950vsm480586

 

this says all.

 

why now?

well there is much more than aftifical benchmarks

 

warranty, brand and endurace are much beter on the samsung

 

mlc vs tlc

 

 

 

[blbalsdfkjivbvwerlo3244534]

.

[The Torrent]

40 minutes ago, coop152 said:

You don't seem to have understood.

 

Here is a link showing a comparison between the 860 pro and a similarly priced ADATA sata SSD:

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-860-Pro-256GB-vs-Adata-Premier-SP550-240GB/3950vs3623

Here is the comparison between that SSD and the nvme one.

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Adata-XPG-SX8200-NVMe-PCIe-M2-240GB-vs-Adata-Premier-SP550-240GB/m480586vs3623

As you can see, the two adata SSDs cost about the same but the m.2 one is better. They cost the same because they are both budget brand products. Performance isnt the point.

The 860 costs more than the other two because it has more expensive components and is from a more premium brand. The 860 could never be as good as the NVMe ADATA drive because of the SATA interface, but it is better than the similarly priced SATA ADATA drive.

A better comparison is a 960 vs your ADATA m.2 drive.

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Adata-XPG-SX8200-NVMe-PCIe-M2-480GB-vs-Samsung-970-Pro-NVMe-PCIe-M2-512GB/m482768vsm498971

See how the 960 costs more than the ADATA drive? Both samsung drives are better than their ADATA counterparts, and cost more as a consequence. Like I said, its about the brand (and the cost to manufacture) more than performance.

 

Ok so:

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-860-Evo-250GB-vs-Adata-XPG-SX8200-NVMe-PCIe-M2-240GB/3949vsm480586

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-860-Pro-256GB-vs-Adata-XPG-SX8200-NVMe-PCIe-M2-240GB/3950vsm480586

 

im the first comparison, the m.2 is shown to be 133% faster than the m.2.

In the second 122% and the m.2 is much cheaper.

 

now I have a new question:

the SATA drive is much slower, but is it still worth the price due to the brand name, how long it will last, etc?

[Electronics Wizardy]

4 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Ok so:

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-860-Evo-250GB-vs-Adata-XPG-SX8200-NVMe-PCIe-M2-240GB/3949vsm480586

http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-860-Pro-256GB-vs-Adata-XPG-SX8200-NVMe-PCIe-M2-240GB/3950vsm480586

 

im the first comparison, the m.2 is shown to be 133% faster than the m.2.

In the second 122% and the m.2 is much cheaper.

 

now I have a new question:

the SATA drive is much slower, but is it still worth the price due to the brand name, how long it will last, etc?

Are you shopping for drives or just making comparisons? What are you using this drive for?

 

Stop looking at userbenchmark so much, its not that good. You need program benchmarks. What are you using the drive for.

 

How much endurance do you need? Thats what your paying for in the pro drives. THe evo's are otherwise fine for almost all consumer uses.

[The Torrent]

1 hour ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Are you shopping for drives or just making comparisons? What are you using this drive for?

 

Stop looking at userbenchmark so much, its not that good. You need program benchmarks. What are you using the drive for.

 

How much endurance do you need? Thats what your paying for in the pro drives. THe evo's are otherwise fine for almost all consumer uses.

Will be doing a futerproof gaming pc build soon and will just use drive for storing os. I’m in search of the best for bragging rights.

[blbalsdfkjivbvwerlo3244534]

.

[Electronics Wizardy]

9 minutes ago, The Torrent said:

Will be doing a futerproof gaming pc build soon and will just use drive for storing os. I’m in search of the best for bragging rights.

For just a os drive, id get a 660p or a sx8200 here. A bit faster, about the same price. If you want cheaper get a mx500. The 860 pro makes no sense to me for your use. You don't need the endurance.

 

If you want bragging rights just run off optane, but really a 660p, mx500 or sx8200 as the best deals for ssds.

[blbalsdfkjivbvwerlo3244534]

.

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, coop152 said:

okay nevermind buy the 960 pro. You see how on userbenchmark more people have the 960 even though it doesn't compare that well? Cause it's easy to brag when everybody knows what it is. Say that you have an "ADATA XPG SX8200 480GB" and nobody would care unless you shoved it's specs in their face

why 960pro? thats last gen, get the 970 pro. But really get the evo if you want good, you have no use for mlc here. Or optane if you want bragging rights.