Question Advice on Buying New SSD (M.2 PCIe or 2.5" SATA)

[Palador]

I had a motherboard issue a while back and couldn't replace it for a while, but recently did so, only to discover that the 2.5" PNY SSD I had decided to die while it was not in use (even though I had used it a few times attached as an external drive). I'm now looking for a new SSD as a boot drive.
At first I was leaning more towards a 250 GB drive (and still possibly will), but I've seen a few good options at not too high prices in the 500 GB range.
My main question is which one you think I should go for of these:
Samsung 980 PCIe 3.0 at 52 euro
Crucial MX500 2.5" SATA at 50 euro
Both drives are on solid discounts at present, but if there are other ones you think I should look at, then I'm open to that, not specifically attached to these, just that I know they have a good reputation generally.
I've heard a lot about Samsung and how they're the best drives on the market and how much better PCIe is than SATA, however, in reading the reviews, it seems that a lot of people have issues with having their PCs recognize Samsung drives and that really the performance difference between the two is negligible.
The MX is slightly cheaper which is a plus for it. The other advantage is that I have a SATA to USB 3.0 adapter, so I'll be able to use it as an external drive should I need to.
Are there any other advantages/disadvantages either way that I should consider?
I'll be using the computer for some gaming, some audio and video editing, etc. I have a couple HDDs inside already.

Current Build:
Ryzen 3 1200
MSI B450M PRO-VDH Max
Patriot 2400
RX 550

Thanks so much.

 

[USAFRet]

Your motherboard should recognize the Samsung just fine.

As far as a performance difference?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YoRKQy-UO4

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DKLA7w9eeA

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ9LyNXpsOo

 

[Palador]

Ah, cool. Thanks for the video links. Interesting that they all thought the SATA was the fastest.

If I may ask, which one do you think you would choose?

Also, in the case of the SATA drives, would there be a difference in real world performance between, say, the Crucial MX and the Crucial BX or would that be pretty much impossible to tell as well?

I also found the PNY CS900 480GB at 39 euro, so that sounds like it's quite a steal, but not sure how it compares to the other 2. I believe it doesn't have DRAM though.

 

[USAFRet]

Ah, cool. Thanks for the video links. Interesting that they all thought the SATA was the fastest.

If I may ask, which one do you think you would choose?

Also, in the case of the SATA drives, would there be a difference in real world performance between, say, the Crucial MX and the Crucial BX or would that be pretty much impossible to tell as well?

I also found the PNY CS900 480GB at 39 euro, so that sounds like it's quite a steal, but not sure how it compares to the other 2. I believe it doesn't have DRAM though.

Between the Crucial MX and BX...the MX.
The BX is a much older design.

Of the PNY vs MX500, the MX500.
DRAMless can be a performance issue.

 

[Lafong]

If things go as you would hope, you likely can't tell the difference between the Samsung 980 and the Crucial MX500.........it wouldn't matter re performance.

If things DON'T go as you would hope (failure, aggravation, unhappiness for whatever reason, RMA, customer service).........the vendor or the manufacturer may come into play.

Do they both come from the same vendor and have the same return privileges direct to the vendor?

If you ever have to deal with the manufacturer, your mileage may vary... Google for customer service horror stories for any candidate. You'll find plenty. All anecdotes.....just like you would get on this forum.

Roll your dice, consult your prayer beads, etc. I'd guess at least a 90 percent likelihood the choice wouldn't matter.....because you never have a problem with the drive and the performance is as expected.

The above would not apply if you are obsessed with benchmarks.

 

[Math Geek]

i have one of those pny cs900 drives. it is a good bit faster than the WD blue 4 tb hdd for sure. if i run a benchmark it comes in WAY slower than the samsung 970 evo plus m.2 drive i also have. but i can't tell the difference between the 2 drives in real world stuff. i can start a vm from each ssd drive and they seem to load about the same overall. not enough to make me favor one over the other really.

i went with the 2 TB 970 evo plus m.2 drive just cause it was a good price and i had the empty slot and i wanted it

had nothing to do with speed expectations

 

[Bob.B]

I had a motherboard issue a while back and couldn't replace it for a while, but recently did so, only to discover that the 2.5" PNY SSD I had decided to die while it was not in use (even though I had used it a few times attached as an external drive). I'm now looking for a new SSD as a boot drive.
At first I was leaning more towards a 250 GB drive (and still possibly will), but I've seen a few good options at not too high prices in the 500 GB range.
My main question is which one you think I should go for of these:
Samsung 980 PCIe 3.0 at 52 euro
Crucial MX500 2.5" SATA at 50 euro
Both drives are on solid discounts at present, but if there are other ones you think I should look at, then I'm open to that, not specifically attached to these, just that I know they have a good reputation generally.
I've heard a lot about Samsung and how they're the best drives on the market and how much better PCIe is than SATA, however, in reading the reviews, it seems that a lot of people have issues with having their PCs recognize Samsung drives and that really the performance difference between the two is negligible.
The MX is slightly cheaper which is a plus for it. The other advantage is that I have a SATA to USB 3.0 adapter, so I'll be able to use it as an external drive should I need to.
Are there any other advantages/disadvantages either way that I should consider?
I'll be using the computer for some gaming, some audio and video editing, etc. I have a couple HDDs inside already.

Current Build:
Ryzen 3 1200
MSI B450M PRO-VDH Max
Patriot 2400
RX 550

Thanks so much.

An advantage for the m.2 is less cable clutter if that's important to you.

Perf wise the diff is about zip.

 

[Palador]

Thank you everyone for your great comments and help. I'm still throwing the advantages and drawbacks back and forth in my mind, but I'm kind of leaning towards the 2.5" Crucial drive right now for the reason that I can easily use it it another computer whether as a portable drive or second internal storage drive. Thanks for the great advice. I really appreciate all of the comments.