advertisement


SSD Advice

boneman

pfm Member
A topic that has nothing to do with you know what......

I recently bought an 860Evo2 2tb drive to go in my 2012 mac mini to replace the 1tb that's in there. After getting the drive I was thinking of getting another as the mini can take 2. Idea was a small SSD for OS/Apps as the boot drive and store all my itunes music on the big drive.

I notice the Crucial MX500 was about £50 less but when I initially bought the sammy the specs on amazon said it was a 6gbs write vs 560 for the mx. Don't know why I believed it at the time but turns out they are both in the upper 500s. One big difference is the durability rating. Sammy is double the Crucial. Is the 860evo worth the extra dosh? Just was thinking i could get a Crucial 2TB plus the 250GB as my boot drive for the same money. Opinions experience would be appreciated.
 
Definitely pay attention to the durability rating, NAND depth etc. Here’s a good overview of two outwardly similar drives at different price points:


He has other videos on SSD technology that are worth looking at too.

I’d personally not want to save much money on an SSD unless it was very regularly backed-up (which all drives should be anyway). Buy on robustness/maximum read/write cycles etc.
 
Definitely pay attention to the durability rating, NAND depth etc. Here’s a good overview of two outwardly similar drives at different price points:


He has other videos on SSD technology that are worth looking at too.

I’d personally not want to save much money on an SSD unless it was very regularly backed-up (which all drives should be anyway). Buy on robustness/maximum read/write cycles etc.
Thanks Tony so given these two drives and their mostly similar specs save the duro rating you'd still stick with the Sammy?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B078WRSSVT/?tag=pinkfishmedia-21
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
I buy nothing but Samsung EVO or PRO drives for my OS drives but serve all data from a RAID10 NAS (spinning discs) which in turn is backed up onto a 4Tb external spinning drive.
 
I’d definitely go EVO over QVO, though I have nothing against the Crucial MX500. It isn’t a recent SSD, but IIRC it is directly comparable to the EVO when it comes to NAND depth etc. I’ve got a couple of them, the first I paid over £300 for IIRC as that was the going rate!
 
I buy nothing but Samsung EVO or PRO drives for my OS drives but serve all data from a RAID10 NAS (spinning discs) which in turn is backed up onto a 4Tb external spinning drive.
sounds good. I have spinning drives for backup. Was thinking a 250GB OS boot drive plus the 2TB for iTunes Lib in the mini so that I have no moving parts in the music server.
 
I’d definitely go EVO over QVO, though I have nothing against the Crucial MX500. It isn’t a recent SSD, but IIRC it is directly comparable to the EVO when it comes to NAND depth etc. I’ve got a couple of them, the first I paid over £300 for IIRC as that was the going rate!
Well I have the EVO already so combined with opinions and "I can't be arsed to send it back" I'll likely stick with it. :D
 
I use a Crucial MX500 in my garage PC and its so much quicker than the hard drive it replaced its scary.

In my main machine I use an m.2 samsung drive which is faster again. the machine boots to windows in 16 seconds.
 
sounds good. I have spinning drives for backup. Was thinking a 250GB OS boot drive plus the 2TB for iTunes Lib in the mini so that I have no moving parts in the music server.

TBH I am very tempted to move the NAS to SSD as I did RAID 10 for speed and redundancy but the speed on an SSD is so much faster I could just have a simple RAID 1 and the SSD's are so much cheaper now.
 
TBH I am very tempted to move the NAS to SSD as I did RAID 10 for speed and redundancy but the speed on an SSD is so much faster I could just have a simple RAID 1 and the SSD's are so much cheaper now.

Yeah they have come down in price now enough. I still have loads of spinners at the mo so will likey use those as backup drives and slowly replace them. Thing is they work and if I don't need the space I feel guilty chucking them because let's face it, who's gonna want them. May as well use them until they are dead and then replace.
 
The only non-Samsung SSD I purchased was a Toshiba ( needed it ASAP and only Tosh or no-name available at that moment ), the Tosh failed after 2 years. All the Samsungs are still happy.
That's based on 2.5" drives, I haven't tried m.2 yet...
 
Unless you have 10Gigabit network or faster you will see no benefit from SSD`s in a NAS, 1Gigabit network Maxes out at 115-120 MegaBytes/sec transfer speed
Exactly. I have a Win10 machine with a server running WHS 2011 sitting next to it, connected via a Netgear GS105. File transfers ‘twixt the two never run faster than 112 or 113 MBps.

Mick
 
Obviously it's only a sample size of one but I've had one of those MX500s fail, after hardly any use as well. In contrast I have an old 250GB 840 Evo that has been wiped and had more clean installs than I've had hot dinners and it has never missed a beat.
 
Unless you have 10Gigabit network or faster you will see no benefit from SSD`s in a NAS, 1Gigabit network Maxes out at 115-120 MegaBytes/sec transfer speed

That’s a very good point. You may have saved me £400 ;-)
 
And given you'll only fill it up, not rewrite it, the ssd failure numbers are pretty meaningless when using as a music server.
 
Samsung are the most durable SSDs, Adata are also very good (made in the same factory as Kingston). Almost everything in the new PC/laptop market is SSD based now, very few new have mechanical HDDs. I sold a laptop a couple of weeks ago with an i7 9th generation processor, 32GB RAM and an M.2 SSD. It boots up in about two seconds flat, it really is almost instant.
 
I should probably mention that every hybrid drive I've had in a laptop has died, all top spec Dell machines, all over five years old.
 


advertisement


Back
Top