Upgrading SSD, good/bad time?

[Deleted]

I am considering upgrading my Samsung 830 Pro SSD to a 850 Evo one

1) Is now a good time, or are there some new SSD technology I should wait for?
2) I am mainly upgrading for increased storage, in terms of hardware, should I expect to be able to feel an increase in performance in regards to launching big applications?

[Miyagie]

Reading speed is equal (+5%) but writing goes faster from 30-35%.
Also the new 850s are more durable, Samsung even expand the warranty from 3 to 5 years.

[Evildeffy]

Reading speed is equal (+5%) but writing goes faster from 30-35%.
Also the new 850s are more durable, Samsung even expand the warranty from 3 to 5 years.

Actually technically the 850s aren't as durable as the older 830s.. this has to do with the lithography of the FLASH NAND.
The lower nm process the NAND is built on the lower their P/E cycles become.. the original X-25 SSD from Intel and OCZ Vertex series f.ex. had a 10.000 P/E cycle certification to the NAND used where common day SSDs with TLC especially have about 2.000
This isn't to say the NAND has deteriorated .. in fact it improved in all points except endurance rating but the main point of progress isn't the NAND FLASH really.
It's the controllers driving them.. they have, and arguably still are, the weakest link in an SSD and the 830 has proven itself to be very robust.

The OP will not really notice ANY difference between an 830 and a 850 EVO, just the fact it's larger.
Which isn't a bad thing, I went from 240GB (OCZ Vertex 2 x 128GB RAID0) to 512GB (Plextor M5Pro Xtreme) to 800GB (Intel SSD DC S3700) and haven't regretted a single moment of ANY of the prior purchases.

[Miyagie]

Then why every review i red about the 850 Evo praised it because of the 3D V-NAND durability (500-1000GB version)?

[Evildeffy]

Then why every review i red about the 850 Evo praised it because of the 3D V-NAND durability (500-1000GB version)?

V-NAND is a new type of NAND, it being vertically stacked much like the HBM on AMD R9 Fury (X) and Nano series.

It is TLC V-NAND which is more durable than standard TLC NAND but in any form of way it has less endurance than MLC NAND with 14nm lithography.
Just like MLC NAND of 35/42/50nm is more durable than 14nm but inherently far more costly to produce.

And 10.000 P/E cycles will never see the light of day of being reached in a con/prosumer environment.. only servers will reach that in a normal amount of time.

Technically even only 1.000 P/E cycles is more than enough for the normal consumer.
The controller is far more likely to die than the NAND.

[Blackmist]

You won't notice any performance increase, unless you're specifically running SSD benchmark software.

Your software is loading slowly because it's held back by your CPU, or in odd cases, waiting for data from elsewhere (like external servers as your software helpfully checks for updates).

[Fascinate]

TBH most times you cant tell a difference between a HDD and a SSD lol. At least on W10. If you are building a PC in 2016 ill suggest going full solid state storage, but i find it hard to recommend SSD's as an upgrade.

[Evildeffy]

TBH most times you cant tell a difference between a HDD and a SSD lol. At least on W10. If you are building a PC in 2016 ill suggest going full solid state storage, but i find it hard to recommend SSD's as an upgrade.

No... just no.
SSD is not just there for booting speed, there's plenty of other advantages both to gaming and programs.

Also try turning off fast boot in Windows 10 (form of Hibernate) and notice your non-existant difference.

[Bigvizz]

TBH most times you cant tell a difference between a HDD and a SSD lol. At least on W10. If you are building a PC in 2016 ill suggest going full solid state storage, but i find it hard to recommend SSD's as an upgrade.

Generally the combination of a smaller SSD e.g. 250 gig or so and a Larger HDD offers the best bang for your buck. Also having a secondary drive never hurts rather than having a single SSD for backup purposes of course or large media files.

[Lathais]

TBH most times you cant tell a difference between a HDD and a SSD lol. At least on W10. If you are building a PC in 2016 ill suggest going full solid state storage, but i find it hard to recommend SSD's as an upgrade.

Maybe for boot times, and maybe for being on the desktop, however, for actual load times in games and being able to actually launch and use software, even on W10, SSD makes a difference.

[Fascinate]

Why would i post my opinion if i hadn't evaluated it first hand, come on guys.

1. As stated above boot time advantage of an SSD is almost negated entirely by fast boot in windows 10 (why in the world would you shut this off lol). I just got an asus laptop with an i3 and a 5400 rpm HDD, from button press to being usable its around ~13 seconds.

2. In WoW (MMO's are the games that should benefit the most from load times) the only time an SSD matters is the initial load into a character. Once the textures are loaded into memory there is virtually no difference between SSD load times and HDD, ive tested this on many occassions. When you talk about advantages of SSD's if would be something like this, if you are in the middle of an arena or raid boss and DC getting back into the game as quickly as possible matters, ever since WoW went with a 64 bit client load times are just as fast as on an HDD past the initial load.

3. Cost aside, windows is just more intuitive with one drive. Most people would be annoyed by a two drive setup, who wants to have to select a folder everytime you download somethign whether it be a program you want on the smaller SSD or a game you dont care if it goes on there. If anything saving up for a larger SSD is the best option for most people, and is something i fully suggest people do on here all the time. Leave platter drives out entirely, but i usually dont recommened them as upgrades these days because its just not as large of boost to the system as it was on windows 7.

[Evildeffy]

Why would i post my opinion if i hadn't evaluated it first hand, come on guys.

Anecdotal evidence is always anecdotal, there have been tons of videos with direct comparisons of how and why including 64-bit client.
If you honestly believe that an SSD is ONLY for boot times you are sorely mistaken.

1. As stated above boot time advantage of an SSD is almost negated entirely by fast boot in windows 10 (why in the world would you shut this off lol). I just got an asus laptop with an i3 and a 5400 rpm HDD, from button press to being usable its around ~13 seconds.

Because Fast Boot doesn't always work or will, at times, cause "Laptop or Computer turns on.. but then shuts off again" crap.
It's not a 100% good feature, also having booted Windows does not equal start-up programs starting up in the background.

2. In WoW (MMO's are the games that should benefit the most from load times) the only time an SSD matters is the initial load into a character. Once the textures are loaded into memory there is virtually no difference between SSD load times and HDD, ive tested this on many occassions. When you talk about advantages of SSD's if would be something like this, if you are in the middle of an arena or raid boss and DC getting back into the game as quickly as possible matters, ever since WoW went with a 64 bit client load times are just as fast as on an HDD past the initial load.

Really? How about you log off in Ashran entirely and then log onto Ashran again when there's people about.
The blue bar boss isn't the only thing affected, if a good deal of stuff is about it takes a few seconds to load from HDD and until then it appears invisible.
(The infamous "I see shadows of characters on the ground but not the actual characters or NPCs!)
Not to mention stutter reduction when going from zone to zone which has to dump the memory and load up new .. anything.

There used to be (altered by Blizzard by having the graphics in question's border load above all else) hacks where people purposely took the slowest loading HDD in existence so they could run past the gates in Battlegrounds or certain instances before they had a chance to be loaded from the HDD since those objects aren't taken into consideration by the engine UNTIL you're ingame and the environment is loaded.

3. Cost aside, windows is just more intuitive with one drive. Most people would be annoyed by a two drive setup, who wants to have to select a folder everytime you download somethign whether it be a program you want on the smaller SSD or a game you dont care if it goes on there. If anything saving up for a larger SSD is the best option for most people, and is something i fully suggest people do on here all the time. Leave platter drives out entirely, but i usually dont recommened them as upgrades these days because its just not as large of boost to the system as it was on windows 7.

Windows is more intuitive with 1 drive? I honestly cannot believe you just said that...
If this was Windows 3.11 at the latest I might've agreed but Windows has been perfectly intuitive with multiple drives since Windows 95/NT.

In fact so much so that Apple copied the functionality from them.

And the whole most people being annoyed bit... how wrong you are.
Speaking out of anecdotal experience as well but having been a store manager for a computer shop, freelancer and business owner most people PREFER multiple drives where 1 drive is separate from the other so they can download their stuff there.
This is why 99% of all laptop manufacturers still give you 2 partitions on their drives JUST for this function and creating the illusion of multiple drives.

Not to mention going all-FLASH is not a good idea in consumer space due to the fact that if an SSD fails then the data is dead, gone, etc.
When a HDD fails you have a very large chance to retrieve the data from it before it's permanent.

Also ... why don't you go try starting any video editing program or Photoshop ... or any audio editing program or hell even Outlook with a HDD and then tell me that it's just as fast on your HDD as it is on any SSD.

The point is that "fast boot" aside there are other advantages to having an SSD that go beyond the whole boot only thing you seem to think it is.
For example your "usable state" is defined as seeing the desktop and being able to click things, at your speed it would still be starting programmes and it will take a while doing so with a 5400RPM HDD where with an SSD because all files can be accessed almost instantaneously there is no delay in Windows.

Your opinion is just as you state it.. an opinion.
There is plenty of captured footage and pictures proving you otherwise however.

If you feel you're the only person on this planet with evidence that it makes 0 difference on these things than I'll happily point you into the direction of media creators/studios as well as the all the businesses in the world whom are favouring SSD booting/running over HDDs and you can ask them why SSDs are a Godsend for them and how woefully inadequate hard drives are for their speed.

[Fascinate]

You can't write walls of text when your original statement was this:

SSD is not just there for booting speed, there's plenty of other advantages both to gaming and programs.

Also try turning off fast boot in Windows 10 (form of Hibernate) and notice your non-existant difference.

I was responding to this alone, and asking why in the world you would shut off fast boot. You can ramble on and on about programs the everyday user probably isnt going to use to try and make a point, but no one was ever talking about those programs in the first place.

And what i meant by intuitive was just that, not that windows can't handle multiple drives at once just fine. Windows knows that with one drive where to put stuff, when you add a drive the user has to select a location and for most people that is simply an extra step they would rather not deal with. MOST PEOPLE ARE USED to one drive in their PC, and would be frustrated not only have to select the locations they installed to but remembering WHERE they put them.

Again i am totally with SSD's going forward, when suggesting parts to people on here i rarely ever include a platter drive if they have a budget that allows a 1tb SSD. But when talking upgrades, i dont think it makes sense to most people unless they are on windows 7.

[Bigvizz]

3. Cost aside, windows is just more intuitive with one drive. Most people would be annoyed by a two drive setup, who wants to have to select a folder everytime you download somethign whether it be a program you want on the smaller SSD or a game you dont care if it goes on there. If anything saving up for a larger SSD is the best option for most people, and is something i fully suggest people do on here all the time. Leave platter drives out entirely, but i usually dont recommened them as upgrades these days because its just not as large of boost to the system as it was on windows 7.

What happens if a single drive set up fails...you lose everything base on your logic. "Cost aside" your abjectly stupid if you ignore cost because it helps your argument.

[Fascinate]

What happens if a single drive set up fails...you lose everything base on your logic. "Cost aside" your abjectly stupid if you ignore cost because it helps your argument.

SSD's MTBF is something absurd like 2 mil hours. Why would you even worry about that lol. I think there is some confusion here, i am not against SSD's at all i love them. But im not gonna suggest some to buy an SSD if they already have a properly running PC on windows 10. The cost aside comment was in regards to that, but if you are building a PC from scratch you should def try and fit the biggest SSD into your budget and leave the HDD out altogether.

[Bigvizz]

SSD's MTBF is something absurd like 2 mil hours. Why would you even worry about that lol. I think there is some confusion here, i am not against SSD's at all i love them. But im not gonna suggest some to buy an SSD if they already have a properly running PC on windows 10. The cost aside comment was in regards to that, but if you are building a PC from scratch you should def try and fit the biggest SSD into your budget and leave the HDD out altogether.

Not arguing that ssds are good or bad. Your argument on a single drive over a dual is kinda dumb and all drives have a chance of failure nothing is infallible.

[Fascinate]

Not arguing that ssds are good or bad. Your argument on a single drive over a dual is kinda dumb and all drives have a chance of failure nothing is infallible.

Meh if i had to redownload everything on my PC from scratch it would take less than an hour probably. I just find your logic funny, what % of pc's ship with multiple storage devices compared to 1? I bet its less than 1%.

[Deleted]

You can't write walls of text when your original statement was this:



I was responding to this alone, and asking why in the world you would shut off fast boot. You can ramble on and on about programs the everyday user probably isnt going to use to try and make a point, but no one was ever talking about those programs in the first place.

And what i meant by intuitive was just that, not that windows can't handle multiple drives at once just fine. Windows knows that with one drive where to put stuff, when you add a drive the user has to select a location and for most people that is simply an extra step they would rather not deal with. MOST PEOPLE ARE USED to one drive in their PC, and would be frustrated not only have to select the locations they installed to but remembering WHERE they put them.

Again i am totally with SSD's going forward, when suggesting parts to people on here i rarely ever include a platter drive if they have a budget that allows a 1tb SSD. But when talking upgrades, i dont think it makes sense to most people unless they are on windows 7.

It's not as complex as you make it sound having a second drive. You can choose directly where to download to without being prompted about destination folders. On top of that installation isn't an issue either as generally your 2nd drive is clean. This means if you install software to your 2nd drive and view it on Windows you will have a nice tidy list to look at. Kind of hard to lose things when they're in a neat little list. It takes a total of like 1-2 days of use to get used to having a 2nd drive, it's REALLY not going to frustrate many people :/

[Fascinate]

It's not as complex as you make it sound having a second drive. You can choose directly where to download to without being prompted about destination folders. On top of that installation isn't an issue either as generally your 2nd drive is clean. This means if you install software to your 2nd drive and view it on Windows you will have a nice tidy list to look at. Kind of hard to lose things when they're in a neat little list. It takes a total of like 1-2 days of use to get used to having a 2nd drive, it's REALLY not going to frustrate many people :/

Agree to disagree, and i will keep recommending one drive PC's going forward.

[Acidbaron]

3. Cost aside, windows is just more intuitive with one drive. Most people would be annoyed by a two drive setup, who wants to have to select a folder everytime you download somethign whether it be a program you want on the smaller SSD or a game you dont care if it goes on there. If anything saving up for a larger SSD is the best option for most people, and is something i fully suggest people do on here all the time. Leave platter drives out entirely, but i usually dont recommened them as upgrades these days because its just not as large of boost to the system as it was on windows 7.

Worst.Storage.Advice.Ever.

Yes, let's put everything on one drive because it's not like hdd's and ssd's have things to improve data transactions something called a mobo and the chipsets on them.

Windows can work just fine with several drives and partition setups. Just because morons think it's hard to select a drive doesn't mean it makes it more intuitive telling people to put everything on one single harddisk is a recipe for disaster and simply not done in the IT world, professional or just home usage.

- - - Updated - - -

Agree to disagree, and i will keep recommending one drive PC's going forward.

And that's how you contribute to computer illiteracy and i feel sorry for every fool that takes any advice from you seriously.