Which one is better?

[Kiwi86]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/corsair-mp500-nvme-ssd-phison,33165.html the 480gb one

or

http://www.samsung.com/us/computing/memory-storage/solid-state-drives/ssd-960-evo-m-2-500gb-mz-v6e500bw/ the 500gb one?

 

[snurp85]

depends on what you are looking at... Samsung has faster read speeds but the Corsair has faster write speeds. However, Samsung also has higher IOPS. Overall though, you will not notice a difference between the two. Both are insanely fast. Only under extreme simulated benchmarks will you see a small difference, but again... both will have their advantages over the other depending on the test.

I personally would go with samsung unless the corsair is way cheaper

 

[Kiwi86]

Got it, Samsung is cheaper I think. Was confused only about these thing DRAM 1GB DDR3 this is for CORSAIR. I think Samsung is cheaper.

 

[rkzhao]

People here are generally in favor of all Samsung SSDs

That Corsair looks promising on paper and has better specs in several areas compared to the Samsung. But it's hard to tell how good or reliable an SSD operates just by raw number specs. Could be worth a shot though.

 

[Kiwi86]

People here are generally in favor of all Samsung SSDs

That Corsair looks promising on paper and has better specs in several areas compared to the Samsung. But it's hard to tell how good or reliable an SSD operates just by raw number specs. Could be worth a shot though.

Me too, I am more for Samsung but the only thing is there isn't any in stores here so I guess I will have to go for Corsair. I was just wondering if Samsung is much better, than in that case I will wait for Samsung.

 

[rkzhao]

I guess I should make a new post instead of editing my previous one.

Looking at the specs a bit more the Corsair doesn't even look like it should be the same market segment as a 960 EVO. 480 vs 500GB means more overprovisioning on the Corsair. 698 TBW on the Corsair means it's endurance is rated for more than 1 full drive write per day. That's way more than even the 960 Pro let alone the Evo. This is likely one of a few reasons why the Samsung is cheaper.

So I wouldn't say the Samsung looks better. Heat generation and how the firmware reacts to different workloads would be somethings I would want to check with the Corsair but really, it's not like Samsung is best in class for those aspects either. That's the thing about Samsung's SSDs. They seem to cut costs in areas like endurance where the average user likely wouldn't notice. It's worked well for them so far.

 

[Kiwi86]

I guess I should make a new post instead of editing my previous one.

Looking at the specs a bit more the Corsair doesn't even look like it should be the same market segment as a 960 EVO. 480 vs 500GB means more overprovisioning on the Corsair. 698 TBW on the Corsair means it's endurance is rated for more than 1 full drive write per day. That's way more than even the 960 Pro let alone the Evo. This is likely one of a few reasons why the Samsung is cheaper.

So I wouldn't say the Samsung looks better. Heat generation and how the firmware reacts to different workloads would be somethings I would want to check with the Corsair but really, it's not like Samsung is best in class for those aspects either. That's the thing about Samsung's SSDs. They seem to cut costs in areas like endurance where the average user likely wouldn't notice. It's worked well for them so far.

Thanks, this really helps!