Cheapest SSDs that you would recommend?

[c627627]

I will agree with your conclusion there.
I would also guess that they dont wanna scare peoples off with a low number. And would also say that the numbers really dont matter as much as writes as a gb/tb/pb number

Who doesn't want scare people off, some Anand article author? Why would writers be concerned about that?

One can say things like "whether a drive lasts 100 years or 200 years - it doesn't really matter," that's valid.
But out of curiosity, people still would like to know even if it's 1,000 years vs. 2,000 years.

I am still interested in how 3D TLC stacks up against TLC on "how long before it crokes" real life number.

 

[dejo]

I was speaking of the manufacturers not wanting to state a low p/e number.

 

[c627627]

I see.
Well isn't it a matter of a starting point of our discussion here that the manufacturer numbers are not as indicative as what independent testers say? I mean, can we really rely on what manufacturers say as far as these matters go?
Let me ask you this, earlier in the thread I talked about a Toshiba MLC drive I have.
I also have a PNY TLC drive.

Do you think it's reasonable to assume that the life-span (whatever it is) under same conditions for my MLC drive will be two to three times longer than my TLC drive?
If yes, how do I go about forming an opinion on where my ADATA 3D TLC would stand in that ratio?

 

[TheCheat]

So why no relative numbers (like that) between TLC and 3D TLC?

They might be tough to find because of DSP. DSP is a technology that helps the controller adjust the amount of voltage used on Nand cells based on how worn they are.

Again, it's hard to give out any specific numbers of DSP usefulness in real world, but for example STEC is claiming that their CellCare technology can extend the endurance of regular 3K P/E cycle MLC up to as much as 60K. I've heard unofficial figures as high as 100K for some companies' DSPs, but I would take all figures with a grain of salt until they are tested by a third party. Either way, even if a good DSP is only able to double the endurance of NAND, it's a huge deal as we move to even smaller process nodes and possibly even more bits per cell.

DSP coupled with V Nand or 3D Nand makes it tough to gage how useful a P/E cycle figure really is.

Do you think it's reasonable to assume that the life-span (whatever it is) under same conditions for my MLC drive will be two to three times longer than my TLC drive?
If yes, how do I go about forming an opinion on where my ADATA 3D TLC would stand in that ratio?

the 'lifespan' of the 3D TLC drive will be roughly the same as a regular MLC drive--- assuming both are the using the same process node NAND.

 

[dejo]

I am sure that there is no better way than to see it done in real world use. But if I remember correctly that anand test took several months to complete and also ate up the entire life of some ssd's
You always have some great questions burning C. It is always entertaining to see your questions and the responses you generate

 

[c627627]

So you guys are saying that 3D TLC gives us MLC reliability, but since it outperforms MLC, and since SLC is completely out of price range for most people, 3D TLC was really a good overall choice to get when it was on sale a month ago...

I really couldn't rest until I got that semi-figured out, and now the next logical question is if anyone has seen any road maps, what's coming after 3D TLC and when, what's it going to be about?
In another thread about large capacity mechanicals, it was kind of depressing that "only" 8TB is available to us for two hundred bucks.


On a separate question, I think a lot of us were expecting things to be different by 2017. Either a lot larger capacity mechanicals for less money or larger capacity SSDs by 2017 at fair prices.

Can't help but speculate about the artificial nature of that not taking place yet and the reasons being of course because they want to milk $ out of us for (a lot) longer for (just) 8TB mechanicals and low capacity SSDs. It would be nice to know what's rolling behind the hill, but Hard Drive Roadmaps (unlike CPUs) were always notoriously hard to come buy. I would imagine even harder now with consolidations having already taken place.

I remember when we thought that 8TB should have been under $100 by 2017 and larger SSDs should have been here already...

 

[dejo]

the tlc nand that "seems" to perform like mlc nand is usually limited to a performance span of whatever suedo slc cache that is offered with that particular drive. for sustained transfers- mlc usually wipes the floor with tlc

 

[TheCheat]

the tlc nand that "seems" to perform like mlc nand is usually limited to a performance span of whatever suedo slc cache that is offered with that particular drive. for sustained transfers- mlc usually wipes the floor with tlc

Dejo is correct ... thats why you see the "premium" drives (Samsungs 850 Pro,950Pro ,960 PRO series- for example) Use 3D MLC Nand.

 

[1.21_gigawatts]

I have both a Samsung 850 EVO 250gb and a Crucial MX300 1tb SSD. I paid $99 for the Samsung drive in July 2015 and a similar capacity drive from Crucial runs $94 at this time, so no real price drop there to write about. However when you jump up to higher capacities, that's where the price difference seems to be. My Crucial 1tb ran me $249 in October of last year, while a 1tb Samsung is running $324 right now!

Honestly, I don't see the slightest performance different between the two... Although I've never ran any read/write tests, in daily use I don't see a lick of difference...

I originally bought the Samsung for my gaming tower and used it along side a 1tb WD Blue spinner, and then the drive in my laptop was starting to act up... so I ordered the Crucial 1tb for the tower and stuck the Samsung in the laptop. Couldn't be happier. Both work fantastically well.

All that being said, I would stick with at least a well known brand name. My ultimate goal was to get a setup that was faster than the RAID spinner setup that I had before the Samsung drive, which left much to be desired... When I ordered the Samsung EVO drive I knew that they were on the cutting edge of SSD storage, but I wasn't about to pay the premium for the Pro lineup, not for my needs lol. And the reasoning for the Crucial drive, I wanted more than the 250gb of the Samsung, and I wanted to have just one drive the tower, and NO spinning drives... So the 1tb won, and I've never had any issues with Crucial RAM or even SD cards I've used over the years.

ANY SSD is going to outperform a spinner HDD, plane and simple, so as long as you stick to at least a brand that you've HEARD of, you should be fine. Reviews on NewEgg are your best friend Price wise, it all depends on your capacity you need. A 250gb is going to be entry level, anything higher than that is going to start costing you, especially when you get into the 1tb + range.

Everyone is going to have they're opinion, and if you want mine, for the absolute CHEAPEST entry level SDD, I would recommend a SanDisk SSD PLUS 240gb ($74 on NewEgg at this time), closely followed by Kingston SSDNow UV400 240gb ($72 on NewEgg - notice that price similarity in the 240-256gb size bracket...). 240gb should be ample storage for an average user and either drive would be WORLDS faster than a spinner drive.

my $0.02

 

[c627627]

The 256GB ADATA we talked about is now in that price range. It is $74 instead of $54 two months ago.
But even at $74 it is still a 3D TLC drive whereas the two you mentioned are TLC, not 3D TLC, correct?
And since 3D TLC is much better... we would be looking for 3D TLC drives for $74 or less to compare, not (inferior) TLC drives... That's my understanding.

 

[1.21_gigawatts]

I have no personal experience with Adata, that is my only hesitation with that... Don't get me wrong, it may be a GREAT drive, but I've just never used them, so it's hard for me to personally recommend it.

But I guess I'm slightly bias when it comes to things like this... That's why I'll only buy Asus motherboards, WD spinner drives (if I'm using spinners, like for my NAS), for the longest time Corsair for RAM (although I ventured to Kingston's HyperX lineup and have no complaints at all), and likewise there's certain brands I stay away from because I've had nothing but bad experiences, like MSI, Seagate... They've left a nasty taste in my mouth in the past one or two times, and it's hard to put my money on them again