Hi all.
Just saw this on Amazon.
Looks like the cheapest price out there for a 2TB. I purchased it last year for about $370.
Probably not the highest performance SSD but I think it's a still bargain for the money.
Enjoy.
CamelCamelCamel.
3 of these in a RaidZ1….. tempting……
i just bought one. hard to pass for "only" $300 for 2TB.
as an alternative….
Samsung QVO 2TB for $325 delivered less $28 cash back
https://www.centrecom.com.au/samsung-860-qvo-2tb-25-sata-ssd…
Apparently the Ultra 3D is still better.
https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1114120-samsung-860-qvo…
Getting the Ultra also means not having to wait for cashback, and it's also cheaper.
I think the Samsung EVO ones are better than the QVO ones
They are Evo is TCL with 5 year warranty, QVO is QCL with 3 year warranty. I used a 2TB QVO as my secondary drive which worked well. I would get a better SSD for the primary drive
And in addition to price it looks like the QVO is using MLC and Sandisk is using TLC. In a nutshell, significantly less lifetime write cycles for the sandisk.
Read more here: https://www.reneelab.com/difference-slc-mlc-tlc.html
QVO is using MLC
Where did you see that? Perhaps you saw 4-bit MLC (also called QLC) which is worse than TLC (also called 3-bit MLC)?
Yes I think you mistook some of the marketing speak - QLC and TLC are technically all forms of "MLC". The QVO model is QVC 🙂
In this case, the SanDisk has the better design
Thanks for the link. I just ordered one
It's a pretty decent deal. We probably won't see any major drops in SSD prices any time soon, with the corona virus affecting china and korea.
2TB was too much for me though, I have had 4 ssd's die on me (none were samsung) so having such a large capacity ssd puts me on edge. I went for the 1TB version instead.
What does the neg mean? Useful information should not be provided? User benchmark is offensive to some readers? This is so stupid.
"Johnson". Heh. Heh. Is he American?
Thanks for the link. Some of those reviews are fabulous - may OzB rule forever!
That is exactly why +'s and -'s shouldn't be taken seriously, or given much consideration/weighting. You get randoms handing them out for no reason or no logic at all.
How reliable are these?
I bought the 240gb version a few years ago and it died on me a couple months ago
SSDs are hard to make a blanket statement about. Performance and longevity can vary unit to unit. Usually you look at it like this:
If information is critical, ensure you have a backup system in place
If you're worried about your purchase dying too soon, get one with a longer warranty (up to 5 years with some Samsung/Adata/etc)
If you're not concerned about either of the above, then buy whatever and hope for the best.
I've had SanDisk and the performance wasn't great, but I don't believe it ever died, though I have stopped using it even though it's still in my PC (not as primary).
I purchased a Crucial 250GB SSD in 2011 for $560, still going strong today!
Got an OCZ still going!
Mine would have been too if I didn't fry it by not properly connecting the power cable to it :(.
RIP OCZ Vector 240gb, you served me well
@nicholsonr: I wonder if they still make them like they used to!
In saying that, The two 1TB WD drives I got back then are still going!!
@RocketSwitch: I bought a Samsung 840 Evo 1TB back when they retailed at $500.
Still going strong even though read/writes are not as good as it was brand new… no failures or faults though :)
you prob get SLC in 2011, that was the fastest.
At the end of the day it's an SSD and writes kill SSD's, particularly the older ones. Many of the manuals stated not to put paging files on the SSD's.
This isn't the case today as modern SSD's are over provisioned so unlikely to impact normal users.
That being said, if you are hosting an app that writes a lot of small temporary files, like PLEX Transcoding (Yes, you shouldn't transcode), just run a modest RAM DISK. Using a free product like the free IMDisk Toolkit. This will save your SSD a lot of hurt. Not sure if I would bother with a modern SSD though, unless you have a lot of Plex users.
You also wouldn't\shouldn't use an SSD for anything with constant writes like an NVR. You would be suprised to see people shelling out for SSD's only to later learn that a decent physical HDD can outperform a lot of SSD's once the cache is exhausted (like continual NVR recording), or Database transaction log.
Treat every disk or SSD as though it could fail tomorrow.
Ensure you can recover the backups.
There is no such thing as a reliable storage devce.
In data centres, drives generally fail at a rate anywhere from 1 in 25 to 1 in 5000.
This drive is completely different compared to your 240GB drive. Different controller (the brain), different flash technology, made on different processes. It is a different product, just sold by the same brand. So it will fail at a different rate to your last drive.
Buy if you want a decent price on 2GB sata SSD. But like all drives, keep a back up.
Amazing price to value ratio
looks like the price is back up to $377 now when you try check out.
Good, saved me some money.
Good deal. Bought 4 for raid 0
This drive has a decent cache of 2GB like the Samsung 860, unlike the cheaper drives with no cache.
This is a great buy and don't have to wait for cashback.
That being said, performance of this drive will suffer once the write cache is exhausted as it is TLC vs MLC. 2gb is pretty good Lifespan shouldn't be reduced as this drive will be over provisioned to cater for the use of MLC.
While a decent drive, if you need performance go for the Samsung as it's AHCI mode is very good offering a nice performance boost. Samsung also has the option of enabling "Rapid Mode" which helps a lot of people, but others claim it hurts performance and even some claims of reduced stability.
General hint, larger drives of the same model (same technology) will have better write performance;
- Larger Write Cache
- More Physical Memory Cells that can be accessed in Parallel boosting speed
Hope this helps someone, justify the expense of a larger drive.
how does this ssd actually compare to the Samsung QLC i posted?
ps - i cancelled my order. cheap but i think i need to do more research amd have excess space still
In my worthless opinion pretty comparable with an QVO
Samsung have the reputation for a more reliable product and better service (generally for SSD's, but not all experiences have reflected this)
This particular SanDisk should edge the QVO out for performance. IMO: EVO is worth the money for a primary drive and longer warranty.
I will probably get negged again because it seemed quoting UserBenchmark is offensive to some strange user.
Anyway, UserBenchmark gave the QVO a slight edge. Probably the benefit of better SLC cache tuning.
You are getting very upset by the neg.
@FabMan: I wouldn't say very upset, just annoyed. Lately whenever I gave answers, provided useful information, or asked questions I would receive unexplained negs. And many times I had asked questions about the posts, then the descriptions would be edited to incorporate the answers, and I would get negged afterwards. This is a recent example.
@alvian: Hey I got a neg below for providing accurate information too! Its like people don't like accurate information. We should hang out in the under unappreciated club!
I did some research on QVO when it came out. QLC is not generally way worse than TLC (Sandisk uses this one). However, Samsung's software and design are good hence it can compensate some of the bad outcomes from the QLC.(Samsung did this last time when we had the transition from MLC to TLC, it used TLC before other manufactures). Lifespan wise, get TLC (Sandisk). Warranty service wise, chose Samsung. If you are not using them for huge files (constant write more than 25gigs), both drives will perform similar but after all the cache is used up for both drives, QVO will drop to around 80MB/s which is a bit slower than a 3.5-inch hard drive.
Hope this gives you some idea
Yuck Sandisk. Had the worst luck with there storage in the past.
I've had A LOT of SSDs that I thought were dead until I ran DISKPART (built in Windows tool) CLEAN on them.
All data was lost but the device was useable agan.
but would you really use it again after it just lost all your data? 🤔
Same here, I've had 2/3 sandisks die on me.
Recently I have also had a Patriot Blaze ssd die on me. Pretty convenient timing, as I was looking to buy a coaster
😂😂
I'm pretty sure Samsung QVO is still much better when it comes to reliability and sustained write speeds over 70GB+.
building a new PC, decided I wanted NVME. Kingston A2000 1TB for around $200 for stilly fast, how useful it is over Sata is likely negligible.
NVMe boots Windows ~100% faster than SATA 3. Games load significantly faster.
Don't disagree that it's faster on paper, but the gaming benefits seem pretty marginal (that being said I have a MP600 and have no regrets)
NVME makes next to no difference with my boot time. Most of the boot time is just waiting for the bios to load up… AMD needs to do something about that.
The main difference I've noticed is that hibernating and waking up from hibernation is a lot faster.
Windows and games do not load significantly faster than a decent SATA SSD, you are not telling the truth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdF_aerWcW8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TuGXvBhXKc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AYextvB9l4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3AMz-xZ2VM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNMcW2tL3r4
0 to 2 seconds improvement in Windows boot times and game load times.
Yeah it makes very little noticeable difference with most games. That said I run orthographic data off NVme for flight sims because that actually makes use of the bandwidth.
@raptormesh: That is interesting, does it use a lot of storage space too? I imagine the more areas you add, the bigger it becomes.
@FabMan: Yes, a full ortho for Japan for instance is close to 1TB, and that's not even at the highest level of resolution.
wow that's fairly cheap.