[SOLVED] Choosing an NVMe SSD --- higher TBW rating or longer warranty ?

[jdarmawan]

Which one is better to choose, NVME with longer warranty or NVME with higher TBW rating ?

Generally I have 3 choice of NVME SSD

1. 2 years warranty but over 1000TBW
2. 300-370TBW but 5 years warranty (lower cost than number 3)
3. 800TBW and 5 years warranty (higher cost than number 2, Same price as number 1)

Is it better to choose the longest TBW rate even if it only have a short warranty? Or is it better to have longer warranty but lower TBW? Or better to play safe with number 3 (average tbw, long warranty)?

 

[Aeacus]

I choose M.2 NVMe SSDs based on the capacity, reliability and price to performance ratio, rather than TBW or warranty.

Between 2 PCs, i have 3x M.2 NVMe SSDs in use:
Samsung 970 Evo Plus (2TB) - 1200 TBW - 5 years warranty (main PC OS drive)
Samsung 980 (1TB) - 600 TBW - 5 years warranty (2nd PC OS drive)
Samsung 960 Evo (500GB) - 200 TBW - 3 years warranty (used to be main PC OS drive, has only 30 TB written in past 4 years)

All-in-all, unless you constantly write/erase/copy/paste, the TBW takes a long time before reaching the max. Based on my own heavy PC usage, it would took me 26.5 years, to get 200 TBW on my old OS drive (960 Evo). But since i needed more space, i bought new M.2 NVMe SSD.

So, pick the M.2 NVMe SSD based on price to performance ratio (Samsung drives are the best in this field), and don't worry about TBW. Warranty length does indicate reliability but well made M.2 NVMe SSDs will far outlast the warranty period. (Mine has.)

 

[Lafong]

TBW is mainly useful to the manufacturer for 2 reasons: 1; to attract buyers who are impressed merely because of a higher number; and 2; to deny your warranty claim if you are an extremely heavy user, such as a corporate database that might actually write more than the TBW during the warranty period.

It has limited value to most standard users. Writing more than 20 TB per year is rare for home users and under 10 is common.

So, I'd say get the longest warranty, to the extent you are indifferent to price and capacity, all other things being equal.

You have two options with 5 year warranties, with different prices. Number 3 is the most costly and it's higher TBW is highly unlikely to be a factor during your ownership.

I'd go with number 2 due to its lower cost, UNLESS you have some reason to think it is inferior in some unmentioned and maybe unknowable sense: build quality, likelihood of failure, customer service/warranty issues if it should happen to fail, etc.

You did not mention capacities, so all of this is contingent on identical capacities or your indifference to their differing capacities.

 

[rcald2000]

jdarmawan. Hello. Please state the manufacturer, and model number and capacities of the three SSD's that you're considering. In my humble opinion, that information would be much more helpful to community in helping you make a decision. It also might be helpful to know your existing system specs, especially your motherboard, cpu and any storage already in use.

 

[USAFRet]

Make/model first.
Then warranty length.

TBW is mostly irrelevant for consumer use. You will likely never get to that, and especially not before the warranty age.

My current C drive is a 1TB 980 Pro.
Warranty is 600TBW or 5 years.
This drive has been in use 4 months, with just about 4TBW. That use extrapolated out to that 600, and that is 50 years.

 

[mdd1963]

I only just recently finally exceeded 40 TB written.... in 5 full years...

 

[Satan-IR]

I too would go with best brand/model for reliability and then longer warranty.

 

[jdarmawan]

Thanks all for the reply. I have several choice, all of them is 500-512GB:

1. Samsung 970 Evo Plus (5 years 300TBW)
2. WD Black SN750 (5 years 300TBW)
3. PNY CS3030 (5 years 800TBW)
4. Transcend 220S (2 years 1100TBW)
5. Adata XPG Gammix S50 Lite (5 years 370TBW)
6. Adata XPG SX8200 Pro (5 years 320TBW)

All of them have similar price, just the PNY a bit higher price and XPG SX800 Pro a bit lower price ($7 diffference from the other)

And from the information I have gathered, this is the sequential read and write speed

	Read	Write
Adata XPG Gammix S50 Lite	3900	3200
Adata XPG SX8200 Pro	3500	3000
PNY CS3030	3500	2000
Transcend 220S	3500	2500
WD Black SN750	3430	2600
Samsung 970 Evo Plus	3500	3200

 

[jdarmawan]

I never use PNY as storage brand, so i don't know how well it wil perform.
The transcend i've know it as an enterprise storage, and i know it have a good performance.
As for Adata i can't really say, because it have bad reviews as many as good reviews.
For WD and Samsung, I think they are the most famous brand.

All of them use TLC and have DRAM.
I'll use this NVME as my systems drive (Windows and Linux dual boot) for the programming and computer science purpose.
So, which one do you all think is better?

 

[Lafong]

You have almost no chance of noticing a performance difference between them.

You want the one with the lowest probability of regret. That gets into speculation immediately.

You could have major regrets with any of them. Then you can lash yourself for not looking into your crystal ball before the purchase.

Having said that....I'd go with either the Samsung or the WD in a leap of faith and a laughable reliance on brand awareness. "Famous" in your term.

Cross your fingers. Hope real hard, particularly that you never have to deal with a warranty or interact with customer service AT ALL.

I'd pay some attention to the retail vendor. But maybe they would all come from the same place. I don't know.

 

[Aeacus]

Samsung 970 Evo Plus (5 years 300TBW)

As you know, i picked 970 Evo Plus as my new OS drive, but mine is 2 TB in size. And this pick wasn't on a whim, but instead after reading several reviews,
970 Evo Plus review: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-970-evo-plus-ssd,5608.html

What makes Samsung drives stand apart, is tried, tested and proven reliability. And this is also the reason why i favor Samsung. Sure, their drives may cost a bit on the premium side (depending on a model), but to me, good reliability is worth the additional cost.

Also, Samsung drives have very good software support, in form of:
Samsung Data Migration tool - allows you easily clone your OS drive to your new Samsung drive
Samsung Magician - allows you to monitor and even benchmark your Samsung drives

 

[mdd1963]

I'd try to go Samsung too, when possible...

(There are occasionally 980 Pro sales, if you can a CPU and mainboard capable of PCI-e 4.0, not that there would be much difference to user, honestly, but, given even close to similar pricing or a sale, the 980 Pro would get a nod if you have PCI-e 4.0.

 

[USAFRet]

So, which one do you all think is better?

Of those choices, in order:
Samsung
WD
That is all...

 

[rcald2000]

jdarmawan Were it me, I would only consider the Samsung 970 Evo Plus or the WD Black SN750. And I would give a slight edge to the Samsung, because of their seamless "Samsung Data Migration Software". With all that being said, I'd also try to stretch my budget to purchase the 1 TB capacity over the 500GB, but I understand that it might not fit within your budget. Thank you for sharing your question.

For the record, I own:

1x Intel 660p 512GB (Do not buy this model, as it's QLC nand is no longer a good deal).
1x Intel 660p 2TB (Do not buy this model, as it's QLC nand is no longer a good deal).
1x Samsung 960 Evo 500GB
3x Samsung 970 Evo 2TB (two have original controllers, and one has newer controller).