Best 512GB or 1TB SSD

[bernas]

Hello

I have an SSD Crucial MX100 256GB, but I have a lot of recent games, that I want to play and need a bigger SSD.

I have seen some reviews, and I think the best 512GB SSD at the moment is Samsung 850 Pro 512GB 2.5" SATA III, right? It costs around 330€ in my Country (Portugal).

I was thinking maybe expanding a little more, and going for the 1TB version of Samsung 840 Evo 2.5" SATA III, that costs 392€ in here (60€ more).

The Samsung 850 Pro 1TB 2.5" SATA III is too expensive, 580€ (250€ more than 850 Pro 512GB).

So I have three questions:

-Will there be a noticeable difference between 850 Pro (512GB) and the 840 Evo (1TB), that justifies, buying half the storage size, for an increment of performance?

-Also, in the 1TB range (wich is what I prefer), do you recommend any other SSD brand and model?

-Another thing, with the new SSD, that I will buy, and having one SSD Crucial MX100 256GB already, what kind of config should I set up for performance? Raid 0? or maybe another?

Could you help me please?

Best reggards

bernas

 

[LordConrad]

I guess it depends on your needs. will your Crucial MX100 plus another 512GB SSD be enough total storage? The Samsung 850 Pro is the best performer, but too expensive if you need a 1TB SSD. If you decide that you need a 1TB SSD, I recommend the Crucial M550 or the Samsung 840 Evo. Of the two 1TB drives, I would choose the Crucial M550 as it uses MLC NAND which should last longer than the TLC NAND in the 840 Evo.

 

[bernas]

Ok. Thank you LordConrad, for your help.

What about the RAID, should I set a config like that or leave ir "normal"?

 

[Doctor Bob]

You should RAID the system. Lots more speed and can build large amounts of storage. I recommend RAID 10 because you get 4x read speed, but have redundancy unlike RAID 0. RAID 0 offers 4x write instead of 2x write, but really how often are you writing big files besides installing games (or simulations, but that's another matter). If buying single drive refer to the endurance test for some thoughts http://techreport.com/review/27062/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-only-two-remain-after-1-5pb. Personally I WOULD NOT buy a Samsung. An intel is a reliable choice. I have heard good things about Crucial and Corsair, but don't have any data to back that up.

Currently Crucial MX100 256gb is 100 on newegg-> 400 for 1tb raid. Corsair LS 240gb is 85 after rebate, but one per household.

Another thought: after 500gb-1tb, you really should be saving on an HDD because how often do you really use those different files. If you havent played Crysis 1 in 5 years it belongs on an external (or internal if you prefer) HDD, not your SSD.

 

[LordConrad]

You'll get plenty of speed from your SSDs as is, no need for RAID unless you have the money and want redundancy. RAID 0 offers no redundancy and is never recommended except for temporary storage. RAID 5 requires a minimum of three drives and RAID 10 requires at least 4 drives.

Unless your willing to buy 3 or four drives, forget about RAID.

 

[Doctor Bob]

RAID 0 is definitely not great for SSD due to failure rate. A RAID 10 of 256 will absolutely give a performance increase over a single 1 TB drive. You will be spending 500gb of that in redundency, but ssd redundency prevents you from having issues. Most benefits of RAID are in sequential transfers. In the real world you only need this for high end video recording or large file transfers. But again if you're gonna blow $440 on a 1 tb ssd, $400 on 500 gb with 500 gb mirror is a smarter way to go for the long term. Buy a external 1 tb HDD for storing the files you dont use frequently (old games, all music, all movies). Stuff on ssd should only be what will benefit from increased read speeds (games you actually play a lot, OS, browsers, etc.). Your music will not load faster, your hdd can already play stored movies without delay starting them up and shouldn't freeze in the middle from loading times (hopefully).

I suggest buying a 256 gb (100 bucks) and then having a 1 tb for main storage (50 bucks). If youre making 50 bucks an hour go with a RAID 10 of 256gb drives for 400 rather than one large drive with no mirror plus the option of additional HDDs. I don't see 1 tb of ssd being useful for home use

Another thought: if one drive fails on your 512gb raid 10 you can back everything up to an external and then set the 3 256 gb drives up as separate disks. Thus even after a drive fails you will end up increasing storage space to 768 gb and have functioning drives (although sacrificing the original raid speed boost). If your 1 tb ssd fails you're just done, plus you dont get the performance increase of RAID (mainly in regards to sequential terms).

 

[LordConrad]

RAID 0 is definitely not great for SSD due to failure rate. A RAID 10 of 256 will absolutely give a performance increase over a single 1 TB drive. You will be spending 500gb of that in redundency, but ssd redundency prevents you from having issues. Most benefits of RAID are in sequential transfers. In the real world you only need this for high end video recording or large file transfers. But again if you're gonna blow $440 on a 1 tb ssd, $400 on 500 gb with 500 gb mirror is a smarter way to go for the long term. Buy a external 1 tb HDD for storing the files you dont use frequently (old games, all music, all movies). Stuff on ssd should only be what will benefit from increased read speeds (games you actually play a lot, OS, browsers, etc.). Your music will not load faster, your hdd can already play stored movies without delay starting them up and shouldn't freeze in the middle from loading times (hopefully).

I suggest buying a 256 gb (100 bucks) and then having a 1 tb for main storage (50 bucks). If youre making 50 bucks an hour go with a RAID 10 of 256gb drives for 400 rather than one large drive with no mirror plus the option of additional HDDs. I don't see 1 tb of ssd being useful for home use

Another thought: if one drive fails on your 512gb raid 10 you can back everything up to an external and then set the 3 256 gb drives up as separate disks. Thus even after a drive fails you will end up increasing storage space to 768 gb and have functioning drives (although sacrificing the original raid speed boost). If your 1 tb ssd fails you're just done, plus you dont get the performance increase of RAID (mainly in regards to sequential terms).

Reading his question leads me to believe that money is a factor. Not everyone is willing to pay more money for less storage space, especially if they already have a good backup solution in place (which most people in these forums probably do).

 

[bernas]

Ok. I will buy one 512GB SSD and will not do a RAID set up. My actual 256GB SSD + this new 512GB, should be enough for the games I am currently playing + OS + some important programs. I have an external 2TB HD that I use, for the music, movies, tv series, etc

Thank you all for the help!

Kind reggards

bernas

 

[Doctor Bob]

Ok. I will buy one 512GB SSD and will not do a RAID set up. My actual 256GB SSD + this new 512GB, should be enough for the games I am currently playing + OS + some important programs. I have an external 2TB HD that I use, for the music, movies, tv series, etc

Thank you all for the help!

Kind reggards

bernas

If you are just looking for a cheap setup buy 2 of these PNY drives at Newegg. 70 bucks a pop for 240 gigs is a lot of bang for your buck ssd wise. No idea what controller they use.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820178720&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=EMC-IGNEFL112414&nm_mc=EMC-IGNEFL112414&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL112414-_-EMC-112414-index-_-InternalSSDs-_-20178720-S0K

 

[bernas]

Ok. Thx for the tip.