R5 5600X | Thermalright Silver Arrow IB-E Extreme | MSI MAG B550 Tomahawk | 16GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3600/CL16 | MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X | Corsair RM650x | Cooler Master HAF X | Logitech G400s | DREVO Excalibur 84 | Kingston HyperX Cloud II | BenQ XL2411T + LG 24MK430H-B
Speed at that level is generally irrelevant for the consumer.
Also it's Crucial's first foray into 3D-NAND so they will have to work out all the kinks in their firmware, performance will improve over time.
Also the benchmarks generally MLC NAND has an advantage in most territories of speed you're referring to over TLC NAND due to how it works.
SLC NAND is stupendously fast in that regard but costs a metric crapton.
And unlike Samsung, which has firmware flaws in general, Crucial prefers to err on the side of caution and prioritizes reliability first and then focuses on speed.
Point however remains that even if he takes the Crucial MX300 he will not be displeased with it where-as the Intel SSD 530 is equipped with a SandForce controller which is known to have issues and have horrid QC from the parent company.
Also the Crucial MX200 has entered it's Legacy period as it will no longer be produced and the stores will only sell what's left if the MX300 maintains it's reliability after a 6-month period so it will not be available for long anyway.
I use the same benchmark software. As another poster said, it could be Samsung's Rapid Mode causing it to test out of RAM instead of the SSD itself. Aside from that, I'm unsure why it would show you 6600MB/s when most EVO 850 benchmarks are in the 540MB/s range and a SATA 3 port's max throughput is 6Gb/s, or 750MB/s.
Not to start an argument or anything but my Crucial SSD kept disappearing from my system (one of the older mx100 ones) got a refund since they did not stock them anymore, bought a Samsung 850 evo in stead and haven't had any problems with that one, shit can always go wrong, even with reputable brands.
I atm would recommend Intel, Samsung and for more budget oriented builds OCZ trion 150.
Correct, any brand can and will fail at some point in time.
The statistics however from my experience, albeit anecdotal, and the shops/suppliers I still have contact with all confirm with me that Crucial has a far less failure rate than Samsung and even Intel (non-Marvel or Intel based controllers).
That said I am rocking an Intel SSD DC S3700 800GB and I have no issues with it ... but it's not in the range of affordability for 99,99% of all people.