Any decent name brand MLC SSD will do. Intel, Sandisk, Toshiba, Crucial and Corsair are all good brands.
I can only base my views on my own personal experiences. I own a Samsung 850 Pro SSD and an 850 EVO mSATA SSD, and both are still working great after about a year. They're as responsive as the day I got them, dead quiet, and no problems whatsoever. But then I have a friend that got an 840 EVO SSD and it took a crap on him. So maybe there's something to what you say. I don't use the software that comes with it btw.
sorry for delayed response. the intel drives while not as fast are bulletproof for the most part imo. and i agree the mlc is more reliable with the tld being faster in most cases.
I have three Samasung SSDs, a 840 EVO, a 840 Pro and a 850 EVO. I didn't experience trouble on the two EVOs so far. I had two freezes on the 840 Pro but I couldn't find out the cause. It could be anything. I backup my data regularly to be on the safe side. Another update says the whole problem, allegedly a Samsung problem, is caused by some linux-raid kernel code (or something like that). In the end I don't know if other SSD brands like Intel are much better. You can choose between the different types of flash and decide if it's worth the additional cost. I do not use Samsung software because I don't use Windows but I did a firmware upgrade on the 840 EVO. It went smooth with an old laptop. The first try with my newer laptop failed.
Not really. 850 EVO is a new generation 3-D TLC NAND. It was advertised as more durable and reliable that the 2-D 840 EVO, however I don't trust that claim. TLC still uses 3 electronic levels per cell, therefore has 2(3) = 8 states for the controller to control; MLC has 2 electronic states per cell, so only 2(2) =4 states to manipulate. SLC only has 2 states per cell, therefore SLC is the most reliable and expensive. There is a reason why Apple stopped using TLC in their high capacity iphone 6 models. Although the 850 EVO has 5-year warranty, I personally won't buy it. The 840 EVO had great reviews when it first came out, however problems occurred within a year of use. In reality, the speed difference between any decent SSDs is negligible, human being can not feel a 0.01 ms difference.
Still looks like I lucked out chose the right ones. The 850 Pro (regular) SSD doesn't seem to have the problems the 840 Pro did. And whatever problems the EVO's had seem not to exist on the mSATA variety. At least, I don't hear anyone complaining about either type in here. They've been working great for me... the 850 Pro's in two Inspiron 530's and the 850 Evo mSATA in a Dell Precision M6800 Mobile Workstation. And I'm even pretty hard on them. I have CCleaner automatically deleting my sandboxes, set to secure file deletion. And have lots of stuff sandboxed. I would keep it to only 1 pass though.
The problem was with the (non-Samsung) controller, not the storage cells. I just got the 850 EVO a couple days ago...whew..fast. I seem to notice a difference over my Crucial m4 SSD--it's not 0.01ms difference, it's 0.01ms for every transaction. A 5-year warranty indicates the faith the OEM has in their product--a faith backed by their wallet since it would cost to replace a high-failure-rate item had their faith been misplaced.
Yes, I did notice that one of my machines with a Samsung 840 had felt slower. I ran one of the tools mentioned in the Samsung threads which measures read speeds and sorts them based on file age, and this demonstrated that this drive had a general slowdown of older files - but not as marked as what we'd been seeing for 840 EVOs. I ran Puran's DiskFresh, which improved both the result from the tool as well as perceived speed. After seeing the flat-out denial and condescension from Samsung support to people in my local area reporting SSD problems, we made our next 4 SSD purchases with Crucial instead.
My personal preference is for Crucial, but realistically you won't notice much of a difference in speed with modern SSDs. I'd recommend buying based on price, reliability, and any features you need. We have SSDs from Crucial x4, Corsair x2, Kingspec x1, and Samsung x3 ranging from current generation to 5-6 years old. Only the very old drives are noticeably slower (e.g. Samsung PM800), but even one of the Samsungs from before the 830/840 series still performs as well as a modern SSD - but then again it was pulled from an EliteBook. I'm actually impressed by the Kingspec drive - I'd researched to make sure I was getting their newest (fastest) drive, priced similar on Aliexpress to their older models. It performs as well as any top brand both in real world usage and synthetic tests, despite looking plain as anything. At the time it was cheap because of exchange rates, but now for me there's little reason to risk buying from overseas.
Are you kidding me? It appeared to be a controller problem, but the real reason was because the TLC cells produced so many errors that the controller had to perform error correction like crazy. Because the error was so much, the controller was eventually overwhelmed. The fact is, Apple stopped using TLC NAND, and continues to use MLC NAND using the same controller. Go ahead and enjoy your TLC SSD. Wait and see after a year or two.
Absolutely true to my experience too, with both regular SSD & mSATA. My Lite-On mSATA actually grades out as slightly faster, but it's not a noticeable difference no matter what one I'm using. I wouldn't even consider this at all on my list of criteria knowing what I know now. They are all fast. Very, very fast. Durability, price, features, and noise (or lack thereof) should be your play. If I get another one I'll try out Intel. Seems a popular choice in here and I trust the input I get in this place.
