Sandisk, OCZ or Samsung SSD?

[logankeller]

Hello everyone.

I have a lower mid-range gaming PC (FX-6300, R9 270, 8GB RAM, all overclocked), which is quite decent for my needs. However, I feel, it's bottlenecked by 1TB SSHD I have now. So I would like to add some 240 - 250 GB SSD for system and applications, but I can't decide between these three drives:

Sandisk Ultra II - 103€
OCZ Arc 100 - 108€
Samsung 840 EVO Basic package - 121€

I know, that 840 EVO with Turbo Write (3GB SLC emulated cache) and RAPID mode (RAMdisk) is the best. But Sandisk is close behind in many benchmarks (as it also has 10GB SLC emulated cache) and OCZ also seems to be quite consistent across benchmarks.

I use PC for web browsing, multimedia, light office work and 1080p gaming. No IOPS intensive tasks, as far as I know.

Question is. Would I feel the real world difference in boot times, apps loading and system responsiveness using RAPID mode? Is it worth paying extra? Also, which one tends to be the most reliable?

Thank you for your advices

 

[USAFRet]

Not OCZ. They've had a terrible rep.

 

[viewtyjoe]

OCZ is like 50/50 crap and excellent stuff, but you won't know until you get it. Honestly I'd just pay the Samsung tax for something you know will work fantastically out of the box.

 

[middlemarkal]

crucial mx100

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

EVO or MX100 series.

 

[logankeller]

OCZ is like 50/50 crap and excellent stuff, but you won't know until you get it. Honestly I'd just pay the Samsung tax for something you know will work fantastically out of the box.

840 EVO then

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

Great choice.