What SSD should I get?

[xjohnny3589]

i'm looking for a 240GB, looking to spend less then 200$ USD. I'm going to use it for mostly gaming and basically my OS.

[Venomz1337]

Samsung EVO? They seem to be the best.

[ciprian97pop]

i'm looking for a 240GB, looking to spend less then 200$ USD. I'm going to use it for mostly gaming and basically my OS.

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/samsung-internal-hard-drive-mz7te250bw

[tk421]

You've got quite a few options at that price point but if it were me, I would go with a Samsung 840 EVO or (possibly) an Intel 530.

[Imabigmac]

The cheapest of either Samsung, crucial, Adata, Intel.

[nixproducer]

Maybe take a look at kingston's V300 series 120GB version its only 82 bucks and other sizes are available and also look at the 840 EVO like others have said

[dizmo]

Samsung. It's the fastest, and usually very well priced in its bracket.

I *think* the Intel might be a touch more reliable but not by much.

[xjohnny3589]

Samsung EVO? They seem to be the best.

 

Samsung. It's the fastest, and usually very well priced in its bracket.

I *think* the Intel might be a touch more reliable but not by much.

 

Maybe take a look at kingston's V300 series 120GB version its only 82 bucks and other sizes are available and also look at the 840 EVO like others have said

 

The cheapest of either Samsung, crucial, Adata, Intel.

 

Samsung EVO? They seem to be the best.

Pro edition?

[dizmo]

Mmm. No. I think the EVO is a newer drive. Just make sure you update its firmware before you install it. You can't do it once Windows is on the drive.

[ChillKyle]

Samsumg 840 Pro or Evo. I personally chose the EVO because of its appealing 5 year warrenty.

[TheProfosist]

Mmm. No. I think the EVO is a newer drive. Just make sure you update its firmware before you install it. You can't do it once Windows is on the drive.

Why doing that works fine...

Yes, if the EVO is newer but the Pro is still better.

[tk421]

Pro edition?

 

I wouldn't go for the 840 Pro.  The Evo is a tad bit slower but they're so close in overall performace that I don't think it's worth the price bump to get the Pro.

[dizmo]

Why doing that works fine...

Yes, if the EVO is newer but the Pro is still better.

Must have changed, the last SSD I had specifically stated not to update the firmware if Windows was currently installed on the drive.

 

The two drives trade off 50/50 in terms of performance.

I'd just go with the cheaper one.

[Glenwing]

It's really impossible to tell the difference between any half decent SSDs, so go with whatever is most wallet friendly from a reliable brand with good warranty.  I think the 240GB Kingston V300 is on sale for $165 or something like that on Newegg.

[WoodenMarker]

It's really impossible to tell the difference between any half decent SSDs, so go with whatever is most wallet friendly from a reliable brand with good warranty.  I think the 240GB Kingston V300 is on sale for $165 or something like that on Newegg.

It went out of stock because it went on sale for $130. The 840 Evo is not cheaper. 

[TheProfosist]

I wouldn't go for the 840 Pro.  The Evo is a tad bit slower but they're so close in overall performace that I don't think it's worth the price bump to get the Pro.

No its actually considerably slower on writes and is slower over all when it cant employ its TLC to SLC ticks and use RAPID. The 840 Pro now has RAPID BTW.

Must have changed, the last SSD I had specifically stated not to update the firmware if Windows was currently installed on the drive.

 

The two drives trade off 50/50 in terms of performance.

I'd just go with the cheaper one.

Ever since I had my 840 and 840 Pro shortly after launch its been fine. They used to warn you it might wipe the drive but even that hasnt shown up for a version or two.

The Pro is just flat out better and now also has rapid the thing you need to consider is if youll utilize the areas where its better and that justifies the price difference.

It went out of stock because it went on sale for $130. The 840 Evo is not cheaper.

No its not but for the performance you get especially when within the limitation of the tricks it employs I think its the best value. It works best in my opinion as a OS and programs drive.

[dizmo]

It went out of stock because it went on sale for $130. The 840 Evo is not cheaper. 

 

The 840 EVO Pro is $215, the 840 EVO is $160. Thus, the 840 EVO is cheaper.

 

No its actually considerably slower on writes and is slower over all when it cant employ its TLC to SLC ticks and use RAPID. The 840 Pro now has RAPID BTW.

Ever since I had my 840 and 840 Pro shortly after launch its been fine. They used to warn you it might wipe the drive but even that hasnt shown up for a version or two.

The Pro is just flat out better and now also has rapid the thing you need to consider is if youll utilize the areas where its better and that justifies the price difference.

No its not but for the performance you get especially when within the limitation of the tricks it employs I think its the best value. It works best in my opinion as a OS and programs drive.

 

The 840 Pro is better at smaller files, the 840 Evo is better at large files. They trade off on most things, or the Pro is barely better to the point where you'd only notice it in a benchmark.

Starts out strong, middle it evens out, it finishes pulling ahead in a majority of the benchmarks.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/665?vs=965

 

Honestly, I doubt 95% of people would notice the improvements the Pro as over the Evo. Save the $50, unless you want that extra 6gb.

[TheProfosist]

The 840 EVO Pro is $215, the 840 EVO is $160. Thus, the 840 EVO is cheaper.

 

 

The 840 Pro is better at smaller files, the 840 Evo is better at large files. They trade off on most things, or the Pro is barely better to the point where you'd only notice it in a benchmark.

Starts out strong, middle it evens out, it finishes pulling ahead in a majority of the benchmarks.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/665?vs=965

 

Honestly, I doubt 95% of people would notice the improvements the Pro as over the Evo. Save the $50, unless you want that extra 6gb.

its not the 840 EVO Pro. Samsung models are the 840 Pro, 840, and 840 EVO currently. There is soon to be a 840 EVO mSATA which im kinda waiting for .

I think you have that part backwards the EVO will be able to keep up or maybe slightly surpass the Pro on smaller transfers due to its ability to make a small part of its TLC memory SLC. The amount of space dedicated to this is dictated by the size of the drive. Toms Hardware has a great review that details that sort of stuff here http://goo.gl/xJ3iGZ . The 120gb and 250gb have the same since they both have cut down PCBs.

youll notice the difference on this that do stuff other than small transfers. There are many places this can happen but one easy one that you could try would be installing a game off of a backup. Also TLC has a significantly lower amount of writes than even MLC so for drives that have a better sustained rate the better endurance is appreciated. Either way as I said earlier the EVO is a good drive especially for the price but many of the things that make it good cant really be utilized unless its a standalone OS drive. I recently happened upon a thread where someone put them in RAID 0. When you do that you should probably only expect performance to be slightly better than standard 840's in RAID 0.

Yes, the drive is made for the average slightly tech savvy consumer which is why there are multiple different kits that it comes in and it intended to run as a OS drive which it does a quite good job at especially when you can run RAPID, which dont forget as of last month the 840 Pro can finally do (Whoo!).