• Now's your chance win big! Join our community and get entered to win a RTX 2060 GPU, plus more! Join here.

    Meet Stan Dmitriev of SurrogateTV on the Pi Cast TODAY! The show is live August 11th at 2:30 pm ET (7:30 PM BST). Watch live right here!

    Professional PC modder Mike Petereyns joins Scharon on the Tom's Hardware Show live on Thursday, August 13th at 3:00 pm ET (8:00 PM BST). Click here!

Question Which M.2 SSD is more reliable?

yehiambenshushan

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2012
102
0
18,580
0
I can get for my new system Kingston SA2000M8/1000G or Gigabyte GP-GSM2NE3100TNTD
Both are the same price, both come with 5 years warranty

Just need to know which is better overall, which is more reliable in your opinion?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RealBeast

Titan
Moderator
I can get for my new system Kingston SA2000M8/1000G or Gigabyte GP-GSM2NE3100TNTD
Both are the same price, both come with 5 years warranty

Just need to know which is better overall, which is more reliable in your opinion?
I would opt for the Gigabyte as it is 5 years or 1600TBW, while the Kingston is 5 years or 600TBW. The warranty for each is the lesser of the two.

The Gigabyte also has much better random 4K performance, which is what most desktop users experience the most, although you might not be able to actually tell the difference. ;)
 

Maxxify

Distinguished
Aug 12, 2007
479
90
19,090
65
A2000: SM2263 + 96L TLC (Micron), Gigabyte is E13T + Toshiba TLC. So the A2000 has DRAM and arguably better flash. The main difference with the A2000 is that it has a large, dynamic SLC cache, which is very flexible, but less consistent than what you'd likely find in the Gigabyte drive.

The A2000 is absolutely better, DRAM plus a controller known for the best consumer performance, I have it a category (or half-category) above the E13T drives like the Gigabyte on my SSD buying guides for a reason. Large, dynamic SLC can be finicky, on the other hand the E13T relies on HMB (using some system memory for DRAM caching) which is also less reliable in my opinion, so they're both budget-oriented options.

If they were the same price and I was buying one drive for primary, I would personally go with the A2000, if those are you only two options.
 
Reactions: seanwebster
to put the 1600 TBW vs. 600 TBW numbers in perspective, my own three-year-old 960 EVO shows only 28 TBW thus far...(in other words, the three years will have lapsed long before the TBW ratings ever matter, as is typical)
 

Maxxify

Distinguished
Aug 12, 2007
479
90
19,090
65
Ha, yeah, TBW doesn't mean much for consumer drives.

I'd wager money that Micron flash would survive more writes, anyway - floating gate is more robust than charge trap in this case. Although Micron is moving to a form of TCAT, nevertheless BiCS is pretty much at the bottom.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: seanwebster

yehiambenshushan

Distinguished
Sep 28, 2012
102
0
18,580
0
Ha, yeah, TBW doesn't mean much for consumer drives.

I'd wager money that Micron flash would survive more writes, anyway - floating gate is more robust than charge trap in this case. Although Micron is moving to a form of TCAT, nevertheless BiCS is pretty much at the bottom.
I'm confused.
Which is better for everyday tasks and gaming and reliability?
The gigabyte comes with better performence 2500MB/s | 2100MB/s
but you say that the kingston is better for long term?

NOTE: The gigabyte m.2 card seems to be "NVME 1.3"
 
Last edited:

Maxxify

Distinguished
Aug 12, 2007
479
90
19,090
65
I'm confused.
Which is better for everyday tasks and gaming and reliability?
The gigabyte comes with better performence 2500MB/s | 2100MB/s
but you say that the kingston is better for long term?

NOTE: The gigabyte m.2 card seems to be "NVME 1.3"
The A2000's controller, the SM2263, is generally superior for load times and general usage than the Gigabyte's E13T. That is typical for SMI controllers especially as they tend to be paired with Micron flash. The rated sequential performance isn't really relevant. The A2000 also has DRAM while the Gigabyte does not, which can be impactful on general performance/usage. Whether or not this difference is significant is up to the user, but there's a clear winner here in my opinion.

Reliability is a different discussion. TBW doesn't really factor in because it's only for warranty purposes, you likely won't write enough for flash endurance to matter anyway. Although I'd give the edge to Micron (A2000) flash all else being equal since it uses a more robust technology (in simplified terms). You're more likely to have a failure with something else on the drive, in which case both have aspects that can be finicky: the A2000's large SLC cache can be inconsistent while the Gigabyte relies on system memory for some of its caching which is more susceptible to power loss, for example.
 
Reactions: seanwebster

seanwebster

Contributing Writer
Editor
Aug 30, 2018
113
27
620
4
Phison’s DRAMless E13T isn’t as good as the DRAM based Silicon Motion SM2263EN on the Kingston A2000. DRAMless designs wear out faster than DRAM based architectures, regardless of warranty and are less responsive. That E13T based gigabyte is a tier below the Kingston. And as Maxx said, rated endurance has low overall value when most consumers will only write up to 100TB within 5 years. - I speculate usually 30-75TB. But once the time runs out, the manufacturers not longer are responsible. It’s a marketing tactic more than anything.
 
Reactions: Maxxify

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts