Do you need an ultra high-end SSD (like a 950 Pro) if you're just moving away from mechanical storage?

[mason-the-deathbat]

People talk about the high speeds of specific forms of SSDs, well wouldn't just about any SSD be noticeably faster than a 7200RPM? I've been used to hard drive speeds for years. Wouldn't a midrange SSD's speed be sufficient for most?

 

[COLGeek]

Yes, even a "low-end" SSD would be a marked upgrade in performance over a "fast" HDD. You don't have to go for the high-end SSDs to see leaps in performance over HDDs.

 

[smorizio]

look at the newer ssd that have dropped. ones with the newer controlers and memory chips.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/adata-ultimate-su800-ssd-review,4824.html

 

[lucas_7_94]

For start, going from HDD to SSD its a big jump. Now, from HDD to NVMe SSD, well, HELL faster.

Now, Samsung SSD for me, are the best on the market BUT expensive, you can get alternative brands, with "almost" same performance (this can causes a lot of confusion, but you can search a lot of info on google!)

Is highly commended that SSDS ( NVMe & PCI-E SSD ) to people which edit videos or rendering or task which needs big files. If you're just playing games, just a simple SSD will be plenty enough.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

I use MX300 M2's now and love them.

Also use EVO's and MX300 standard Sata SSD's.

 

[mason-the-deathbat]

look at the newer ssd that have dropped. ones with the newer controlers and memory chips.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/adata-ultimate-su800-ssd-review,4824.html

Not a bad price for an "ultimate."

 

[geofelt]

Do not be much swayed by vendor synthetic SSD benchmarks.
They are done with apps that push the SSD to it's maximum using queue lengths of 30 or so.
Most desktop users will do one or two things at a time, so they will see queue lengths of one or two.
What really counts is the response times, particularly for small random I/O. That is what the os does mostly.
For that, the response times of current SSD's are remarkably similar. And quick. They will be 50X faster than a hard drive.
In sequential operations, they will be 2x faster than a hard drive, perhaps 3x if you have a sata3 interface.
Larger SSD's are preferable. They have more nand chips that can be accessed in parallel. Sort of an internal raid-0 if you will.
Also, a SSD will slow down as it approaches full. That is because it will have a harder time finding free nand blocks to do an update without a read/write operation.

I changed from a 500gb Samsung 850 PRO to a 950 pro(son needed the 850 pro) and really could not tell much difference in everyday work.
Virus scans were faster, but that was about it.
For most, it will not be worth the price premium.

When all is said, today, Samsung seems to be the more reliable and better performer.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

Samsung and Crucial have been the best I've dealt with. I did have 2 ADATA models last year died in less than 6 months. Also have a Hyper X Fury , one of the original ones still running in my youngest son's setup.

 

[mason-the-deathbat]

How well do Western Digital's SSDs perform? Because I'm considering a WD Blue SSD at some point for an upgrade.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

WD SSD's are too new to the market to comment on , no real history yet.

 

[Karadjgne]

The 'real' difference between any Sata ssd, be it low end or high end, in performance is so negligible it's pointless to consider it a factor. The speeds at which ssd's run is almost unimaginably fast, so fast that you as a user couldn't tell the difference on any given day. It's only when moving up to the extreme high end, NVMe, that things start to get obvious, and thats only if you already know and can compare them.

So what's the gist? It's not 'ability' but 'reliability' that's important. This is where SSDs from Samsung, SanDisk, Kingston, Crucial and a few others higher end products really make a difference. Can they handle the traffic at rated speeds for as long (if not longer) than the old hdd. Easily.

The move to ssd can have a huge impact on time waiting to load, or almost none, depending entirely on what's doing. Just be warned, SSDs are not 'plug-n-play' like the old hdd, they will require a little user thought as to what is on them, size consideration, separating storage files from user files etc Example, don't ever Defrag an SSD, totally unnecessary

 

[USAFRet]

People talk about the high speeds of specific forms of SSDs, well wouldn't just about any SSD be noticeably faster than a 7200RPM? I've been used to hard drive speeds for years. Wouldn't a midrange SSD's speed be sufficient for most?

A regular 2.5" SATA III SSD is just fine. And WAY faster than your current HDD's.

In the manufacturers numbers game, bigger is better. More sales, of course. Out here in the real world, not so much.

Not actual numbers, but this is in the general range.
To open a specific file or application:
7200RPM HDD - 5 sec
SATA III SSD - 0.5 sec
'High end' SSD - 0.4 sec.

Oh my! The high end is 25% faster!!!
Yeah, but are YOU going to notice that 0.1 sec difference?

If and only if the price v size is similar, then go for the new flashy drive.
Otherwise, a good quality SATA III is just fine.

As time goes on, things get faster. Before long, these hotrod NVMe drives will be the mainstream.
But not quite yet.

 

[mason-the-deathbat]

My main drive is on a SATA II interface, so how much of an improvement would an SSD be at SATA II speeds?

 

[geofelt]

My main drive is on a SATA II interface, so how much of an improvement would an SSD be at SATA II speeds?

Random I/O 50x faster. That is what windows does 90% of the time.
sequential operations 2x faster(sata3 would be 3x)
Really a nice performance upgrade even with sata 2.

Then, Samsung has a free ssd migration aid that will move your c drive to one of their ssd devices.
Easy....

 

[USAFRet]

My main drive is on a SATA II interface, so how much of an improvement would an SSD be at SATA II speeds?

It will still be a huge improvement over the HDD.

 

[Karadjgne]

Hdd->ssd is like a bicycle->motorcycle. The Sata II interface might put a 55mph speed limit on things, but that's still way beyond anything the hdd is capable of achieving.

 

[dudeman509]

I put SSDs in 2 SATAII laptops. They felt like completely new computers. It's worth it.

I've been very pleased with my Crucial drives - both reliability and speed-wise, and my 850 Evo is new to me, but very zippy.

I am hard-pressed to notice the speed difference on a SATAIII bus between the slowest drive (an old M500) and the fastest drive (850 Evo).

 

[IkeaEraser]

What I don't understand is the read/write speeds of Samsung's 850 series is theoretically at 550~Mbps, but actually 350~Mbps. Does having it in M.2, mSATA configuration have any difference?

 

[Karadjgne]

Have you used Samsung Magician to optimize the SSD yet? Most all SSDs contain proprietary directives integral to their use. Windows uses generic drivers etc to make use of most all hardware but naturally being generic, doesn't usually take advantage of specific instructions or abilities. Kinda like VGA will work on any nvidia or AMD gpu, but good luck trying to get Windows to give you 1080p etc.

 

[dudeman509]

What I don't understand is the read/write speeds of Samsung's 850 series is theoretically at 550~Mbps, but actually 350~Mbps. Does having it in M.2, mSATA configuration have any difference?

Mine's in the 500's in some tests; in the 300's in others. It depends how big the chunks of data you're writing/reading from it are and whether they're contiguous blocks or random.