Samsung 750 EVO SSD Review

[cat1092]

70 TBW for the 250GB version doesn't look promising either, though the bottom line will be that one will likely upgrade the SSD before that point, or will become obsolete & upgrade.

My Samsung 850 Pro has 150 TBW & 10 Year warranty, so should be set for years to come. My days of purchasing entry level SSD's are over, by my next 1150 build, where I'm going to use my i7-4790K in that's now installed in my XPS 8700 (have to update Speccy link in sig, but will give it in this post) & go with a M.2 or PCIe SSD. M.2 seems like the lowest cost option, yet if like mSATA & runs hot, then it's not a good deal. I'll do my research before purchase.

http://speccy.piriform.com/results/4Dt8ip3dZAqciBQ3VXImENT

If it were for a notebook that wasn't mission critical, may would consider purchase, at the right price.

Cat

 

[mapesdhs]

70 TBW for the 250GB version doesn't look promising either, ...

In reality, for the vast majority of users, it's plenty (and only a little less than the 850 EVO 250GB).

 

[Archaic59]

When it comes to a low budget gaming desktop build, an SSD quickly becomes a luxury and the money is usually better spent on a more powerful graphics card or higher quality power supply. I don't see the 750 EVO changing that. They may make their way into prebuilts and laptops but I don't forsee a lot of retail sales for these units unless the price comes down.

 

[mapesdhs]

I hardly think current typical 250GB SSDs are beyond the means of a budget build (especially with so many good deals on eBay, eg. I bought a completely new 850 EVO 250GB for 40 UKP BIN this week, item 322022322696 ), and it's more than worth the slightly higher cost in order to reduce stuttering in game data loading, faster game loading, etc. Even in a friend's older SATA2 PC, using an SSD made a huge difference to loading times, in one case cutting a loading time down from 2.5 minutes to just 20 seconds (P55 system with a 4.2GHz i7 870, old disk 1TB Samsung F3, replaced with Samsung 840 250GB). If people want a more powerful GPU and are on a budget, then just buy 2nd hand, plenty of options there.

But never mind gaming, I wouldn't build any system with a rust spinner for a system drive today.

 

[popatim]

Thats exactly what I was referring to, the 750's price is out of line with the market. Who would buy this when you can get better for less?

I forsee a huge price drop... LoL

 

[mapesdhs]

I don't think there'll be a price drop as long as units are selling ok, and keeping prices up when sales are strong is something Samsung has done in the past. Needs some other company to rock the boat; SanDisk made promising noises a year or so ago, but nothing's come of it. What really needs to happen is for the entire 120GB/128GB segment and everything below it to just die, the continued use of these lesser capacities is holding everything else up, because so many ordinary users buy them having been told they will be adequate (even though the price saving for losing half the space from a 250GB is minimal). It's like buying a half-load of bread, usually costs barely any less than a full loaf.

The 850 EVO 250GB was as low as 53 UKP over the xmas break, but it's way above that now.

 

[cat1092]

In the US, as of this moment on promo, Newegg is selling AMD Radeon SSD R7 480GB versions of their SSD's (rebranded OCZ units) for $119.99 w/promo code (sold out, just checked), so there's a lot of competition for the Samsung 750 EVO to overcome. Oh, and the 240GB version that was the same regular price has also sold out. These units included a 4 year warranty.

Plus there's still the warranty issue, for the same price & no faster speed (SATA-3), will take the 5 year warranty of the 850 EVO over the 750 version on any day. Intel also offers SSD's with 5 year warranties, one a little slower on the writes than the 850 EVO, still having 2 years of peace of mind is worth the other models.

And my 850 Pro has 10 years, as well as a Pro of the 840 with 5, while warranty isn't everything, it does give consumers some type of confidence that Samsung (or any OEM) has in their build, and be a factor in purchase. Samsung needs to add two more years of warranty on this product, otherwise will look to to be lesser (or watered down version) to the 850 EVO line, which on some sites, including Amazon, is a #1 best selling SSD.

While I'd like to share in the enthusiasm of the Samsung 750 EVO SSD, it's kind of hard join the ranks of those who are, if Samsung doesn't have confidence in their products, then why should I? The 850 EVO is promoted so heavily, that if I had a notebook or PC to sell & wanted to include a SSD to increase value, would go with that one, which with RAPID, on a SATA-3 controller, is about 1.9x faster than the 840 EVO, I have both and can feel the difference.

Not that I'm even enthused with the EVO line, the 120GB Samsung 850 EVO was bundled with a HDD, so got it for less than $30, was only looking for a 1TB HDD for Data, so both came together. Actually it's awaiting a home, stored in a box, hopefully can install in in my custom AMD build (gift from a friend) when my new SATA-3 MB arrives with AHCI (the only feature I'm upgrading for), no way to have true AHCI in the BIOS, and have to run the TRIM tool in the Intel SSD Toolbox more than usual (2-3x per week). Though it shows TRIM is enabled & have made the changes in regedit to make all right, it's just not possible in the BIOS to do so, and cannot even update the SSD's firmware , even with a bootable CD.

Not a bad build, all I added was the GPU, a WEI of 7 or more in all five WEI scores on Windows 7 isn't shabby, and to be running an AMD Athlon II x4 630 (Propus) CPU with only a 2MB L2 cache made it more so. The CPU's WEI was just one decimal below a more powerful PC with an Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 with 12MB L2 & 16GB of DDR3 PC2-12800 RAM, had it been one of the models with any L3 cache, may had beat it cleanly. Though honestly, don't think it's as close as it looks, the Q9650 still goes for $75-125 on eBay. The AMD Athlon II x4 630 cost barely over $100 in new sealed box.

Note that even on a SATA-2 MB though, the Intel SSD outscored all other components. It's the 120GB Intel DC 3500 SSD series.



Cat

 

[Bruce427]

As of April 22nd, the Samsung 750 EVO 250 GB was selling on Newegg for $84.99 and on Amazon for $86.99 -- both higher than Samsung's advertised retail.

With the Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB selling for $87.99 (Newegg) there is simply no rustication to consider the 750.

Moreover, it appears that the pricing on the 750 has been stable at higher than retail. So this may turn out to be a product in search of a marker, at least at the retail level.

 

[Bruce427]

As of April 22nd, the Samsung 750 EVO 250 GB was selling on Newegg for $84.99 and on Amazon for $86.99 -- both higher than Samsung's advertised retail.

With the Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB currently selling for $87.99 (Newegg) there is simply no justification for considering the 750.

Moreover, it appears that the pricing on the 750 has been fairly stable at higher than retail. So this may turn out to be a product in search of a market, at least at the retail level.

(T.H. Please delete the other duplicate post.)

 

[Bruce427]

As of April 22nd, the Samsung 750 EVO 250 GB was selling on Newegg for $84.99 and on Amazon for $86.99 -- both higher than advertised retail.

With the Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB selling for $87.99 (Newegg) there is simply no rustication to consider the 750.

Moreover, it appears that the pricing on the 750 has been stable at higher than retail. So this may turn out to be a product in search of a marker, at least at the retail level.

 

[Bruce427]

As of April 22nd, the Samsung 750 EVO 250 GB was selling on Newegg for $84.99 and on Amazon for $86.99 -- both higher than Samsung's advertised retail.

With the Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB selling for $87.99 (Newegg) there is simply no justication to consider the 750.

Moreover, it appears that the pricing on the 750 has been stable at higher than retail. So this may turn out to be a product in search of a marker, at least at the retail level.

 

[Bruce427]

As of April 22nd, the Samsung 750 EVO 250 GB was selling on Newegg for $84.99 and on Amazon for $86.99 -- both higher than advertised retail.

With the Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB selling for $87.99 (Newegg) there is simply no justication to consider the 750.

Moreover, it appears that the pricing on the 750 has been stable at higher than retail. So this may turn out to be a product in search of a marker, at least at the retail level.

 

[Bruce427]

As of April 22nd, the Samsung 750 EVO 250 GB was selling on Newegg for $84.99 and on Amazon for $86.99 -- both higher than advertised retail.

With the Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB selling for $87.99 (Newegg) there is simply no justication to consider the 750.

Moreover, it appears that the pricing on the 750 has been stable at higher than retail. So this may turn out to be a product in search of a market, at least at the retail level.