Samsung EVO 500 / MX300 525GB / Trion 150 480GB

[daimonass]

Hello

I looking new SSD.. And i chose this three SSD:

Samsung EVO 500 - I prefer buy this, but some ppl says thats bad chose, becose: http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/samsung_750_evo_500gb_ssd_review,18.html
Is it really bad result?

And probably better chose MX300.

Or maybe better buy Trion 150 ?

 

[EarthDog]

You will honestly never notice the difference between them. I would go with the least expensive of the group or one that has the best warranty (Trion 150).

 

[AsRock]

Samsung 750, if shopping on newegg as it's cheaper.Or just get the Samsung 850 for about $10 more and 5 year warranty over the other being 3 years.

But sure you could just get the cheap Toshiba SSD.

 

[daimonass]

Well, i buying from my country..

EVO: 146.90€
MX300: 142.69€
Trion: 121.29€

All three SSD have 36 mouth warranty..

 

[newtekie1]

You will honestly never notice the difference between them. I would go with the least expensive of the group or one that has the best warranty (Trion 150).

This. I'd go with the cheapest. Honestly, warranty isn't as big of a factor to me, since they all should come with a 3 year warranty at least, and after 3 years with a sub-$100 product I usually find it too much hassle to RMA and instead just buy a new one.

 

[daimonass]

This. I'd go with the cheapest. Honestly, warranty isn't as big of a factor to me, since they all should come with a 3 year warranty at least, and after 3 years with a sub-$100 product I usually find it too much hassle to RMA and instead just buy a new one.

I agree with you..

 

[Countryside]

+1 to 850 and the extended guarantee

 

[RejZoR]

How far does the price difference go with 850 Evo or even Pro for you? Checking Geizhals for Europe and the difference between 500GB 750 Evo and 850 Evo is 15€ (127€ vs 142€). 850 Pro is 214€. That's a bit of a jump. But for extra 15€, I'd go with 850 Evo any time. These were proven time and time again to be basically on the same level as 850 Pro. And you get one of the most durable NAND chips around paired with excellent controller and 5 years warranty.

 

[EarthDog]

This. I'd go with the cheapest. Honestly, warranty isn't as big of a factor to me, since they all should come with a 3 year warranty at least, and after 3 years with a sub-$100 product I usually find it too much hassle to RMA and instead just buy a new one.

the OCZ has the shield+ warranty where they cross ship. Sounds perfect for you too... check it out on their website.

Isn't the Trion 5 years too?

 

[AsRock]

the OCZ has the shield+ warranty where they cross ship. Sounds perfect for you too... check it out on their website.

Isn't the Trion 5 years too?

3yw going by their site

http://ocz.com/us/ssd/tr150-ssd

 

[EarthDog]

Ty...

Still has the shield+ warranty which is big in case of failure.

 

[AsRock]

Ty...

Still has the shield+ warranty which is big in case of failure.

That depends for me it might be no good, if like ASUS and passed experiences they get bank details and charge you the price of the motherboard ( in my case ) and refund it when they receive the faulty one.

So if they do that it's no good as because a SSD\HDD broke down i cannot just say ooh i just buy another tomorrow lol. I can wait a week thats good for me and for a extra 20$ for a known good drive like the Samsung 850 evo i will gladly give it.

 

[newtekie1]

That depends for me it might be no good, if like ASUS and passed experiences they get bank details and charge you the price of the motherboard ( in my case ) and refund it when they receive the faulty one.

So if they do that it's no good as because a SSD\HDD broke down i cannot just say ooh i just buy another tomorrow lol. I can wait a week thats good for me and for a extra 20$ for a known good drive like the Samsung 850 evo i will gladly give it.

That's pretty standard practice for Advanced RMA.

 

[AsRock]

That's pretty standard practice for Advanced RMA.

Not trying to say it's bad, just that not everyone can just do that on a wim.

 

[Nobody99]

Samsung 750 has only 100 TBW endurance, which is laughable when you know that it will survive more data written but still you always have to look at the official endurance rating and if it is that low you should just got for the cheapest one.

 

[AsRock]

haha,makes no difference to most people as most don't copy some 90GB? a day to a drive.

 

[RejZoR]

I found one torture test yesterday where Samsung 850 Pro wrote 7 PB. Yeah, 7 Petabytes. Or 7000 TB. Go with the 850 Evo. Samsung's V-NAND is super durable. For the given (small) price difference, I don't see any reason to pick anything else. Even if it's lower binned, it should do 1PB without much issues. Which is more than average user will ever need.

 

[Nobody99]

I found one torture test yesterday where Samsung 850 Pro wrote 7 PB. Yeah, 7 Petabytes. Or 7000 TB. Go with the 850 Evo. Samsung's V-NAND is super durable. For the given (small) price difference, I don't see any reason to pick anything else. Even if it's lower binned, it should do 1PB without much issues. Which is more than average user will ever need.

Some tech site should be doing tests with sequential write on every SSD (few SSDs for each model), that way we could get real world endurance pretty quickly after the release.

 

[EarthDog]

Why? They did tests on a slew of drives like this already. It's not like anyone here will come close to writing that much over the life of the drive.

People need to realize that these things are more robust than some give credit for. Like with any drive, have a back up plan and there shod the be any worries.

 

[AsRock]

Why? They did tests on a slew of drives like this already. It's not like anyone here will come close to writing that much over the life of the drive.

People need to realize that these things are more robust than some give credit for. Like with any drive, have a back up plan and there shod the be any worries.

Hehe, more likely some thing else will fail before.

 

[RejZoR]

Most SSD's seems to drive when you experience sudden power failure. This seems to kill most SSD's en random. Not sure why though. I wonder what bricks them when this occurs...

 

[Nobody99]

Why? They did tests on a slew of drives like this already. It's not like anyone here will come close to writing that much over the life of the drive.

People need to realize that these things are more robust than some give credit for. Like with any drive, have a back up plan and there shod the be any worries.

When I see endurance rating of only 100 TBW or similar I don't put much faith in that drive and don't consider it any better than the cheapest SSD from a recognized brand. If SSD has 500 TBW or more then I might value it higher. More endurance more trust I put in the SSD. Last school year I used to download a lot GBs because they have a fast internet connection, but I downloaded all of the data on HDD and I downloaded a couple hundred GBs every week, looking back I see that this would result in noticeable wear on the SSD endurance and having 100 TBW SSD just wouldn't be reassuring.

 

[EarthDog]

Think as you wish... TBW ratings really affect so few...you are placing too much weight into TBW.

 

[Marstg]

Crucial MX300 has on-board capacitors that will allow to finish writing the data to disk even in the event of a power failure, none of the other ssds in the poll have that.