• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

SAMSUNG 830 512GB even lower on special

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
bryanW1995 said:
Um, tweak boy. You do realize that the Samsung 830 and crucial m4 both use the exact same controller, right? Rather than constantly bashing the 830, maybe you should buy one and benchmark it against an m4.
Click to expand...

I had 3 Samsung 128gb 830s and loved them all
 
Last edited:
bryanW1995 said:
You do realize that the Samsung 830 and crucial m4 both use the exact same controller, right?
Click to expand...

I don't get it. Is that some weird sort of joke that flew over my head? Because the Samsung uses a Samsung controller, and the Crucial uses a Marvell controller. Not the same at all.
 
moonbogg said:
Nice deal, but still too high for ANY hard drive IMO. I don't care if it was a 2gb SSD.
Click to expand...

I agree.. I'd go as far as to say the $/GB ratio for SSDs is absolutely outrageous. I still think more than 64gb or 128gb is too much right now.

Besides, its kinda pointless to have such a large SSD anyway. People actually have over 500GBs worth of heavy applications or games that warrant being put on an SSD?
 
jwilliams4200 said:
I don't get it. Is that some weird sort of joke that flew over my head? Because the Samsung uses a Samsung controller, and the Crucial uses a Marvell controller. Not the same at all.
Click to expand...

Yes, a brainfart. Samsung and marvell controllers are completely different. Of course, they are very similar in one very important aspect: they are reliable. Opinions vary on HOW reliable they are, but any impartial 3rd party observer will agree that they are both closer to the top of the heap in ssd reliability than they are to the bottom. And hdd reliability has zero to do with ssd reliability.
 
StarTech said:
Yes, most of us know the Crucial is cheaper, but thank you for reminding us. There are people that prefer the 830s. I am one of them. There is such a thing as a matter of preference. As I said, if the special was for the notebook kit, I would have placed an order before posting here.
Click to expand...

The question is why? I have both a Samsung 830 and an M4 in my laptop (2 drive bays) and they perform the same. If I run a benchmark program the Samsung will score a little higher, but I've used both as my OS drive, and IMO the M4 actually felt a little bit faster, so I use that for my OS, and the 830 for my VMs. They are both good drives, but there is no reason to pay a lot more for the Samsung - it doesn't perform any better.
 
Advantages of samsung 830 over crucial m4:
1. SSD magician
2. slightly better quality reputation
3. slightly faster

All 3 of those are worth something. FWIW, I decided that I would pay $10-15 more on a 256gb ssd for the Samsung than I would for the m4 back in April. M4 prices were significantly cheaper than that, so I went with Crucial. Stretching that analogy up to 512gb, I'd probably spend $20-30 more for a 512gb 830 than I would for an m4.

I know that Samsung prices have been dropping recently, and the equilibrium point between the 830 and m4 SHOULD end up pretty close to the price deltas that I discussed eventually. However, brand awareness/recognition being what it is, it is certainly possible that the Samsung will continue to enjoy an inordinate price premium in the medium term. If that happens, or if you need to buy sooner rather than later, then I would go for the m4.
 
Got the m4 512gb for $350 a few months back. The 830 512gb has never come close to this price. Got 1tb of ssd space for what the 512gb 830 was going for this past spring. Before you ask, try doing d800 36MP raw editing and conversion with 2 ssds.
My computer is processing them now almost as quick as my d700 files on a hdd lol.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Last edited:
No utility software, last time I checked only intel and Samsung have that. Having said that, wear out is VERY unlikely to be an issue for the light to moderate usage that is typical for consumers. For easy math, if your nand is rated for 3000 p/e cycles, then you would need to write 238gb of data to your ssd every single day for 9 years to wear it out. And even that assumes that the NAND will only reach 3000 cycles, which is extremely conservative. And even if both of those situations prevail, that ssd will be obsoleet in 10 years, anyway.
 
I hope wear will not be an issue, it is not for normal use. I plan to run VMWARE Workstation on Windows 7, with an OpenSUSE image which will be running a zSeries emulator sofware with z/OS on top, doing its own swap / page management.

Currently I have 16GB of memory. Even if I en up assigning 8GB to z/OS, it will be hard to avoid paging. So there will be three OSs doing memory management to disk one way or another. I will over provision the drive to some point, as I always do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top