Question WD Blue 2TB SATA SSD vs Crucial MX500 2TB SSD

[GPag]

To replace the SATA SSD in my laptop I am looking at the Western Digital Blue 2TB SATA SSD and the Crucial MX500 2TB SATA SSD. The performance specs on both drives look pretty similar and they both have 5 year warranties. The biggest difference seems to be that the WD drive is an about $40 more expensive.
Is there anything about the WD drive that makes it worth the higher price?
Thanks.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Shmee]

I would say they are roughly equivalent, and would go with whichever is cheaper.

 

[kschendel]

It's possible that there might be some differences in performance in certain massive sustained write scenarios, which most people don't do on a daily basis. For 99% of users the two will be indistinguishable. I'm with Shmee, buy the cheapest.

 

[Scour]

The speed are similar, but I don´t know if the WD-problem is still solved. The Blue read data which is stored a year or longer very slow.

WD Blue 3D NAND: Loss of performance reported when reading old files | AllInfo

Some users of a WD Blue 3D SATA SSD report significant performance drops when reading old files with transfer rates in the single-digit MB/s range. However, there is still no confirmation of a general problem. Rewriting the data to the SSD helps. Slow reading old files on WD Blue 3D SSD The...

allinfo.space

I would go for the MX500

 

[GPag]

The speed are similar, but I don´t know if the WD-problem is still solved. The Blue read data which is stored a year or longer very slow.

WD Blue 3D NAND: Loss of performance reported when reading old files | AllInfo

Some users of a WD Blue 3D SATA SSD report significant performance drops when reading old files with transfer rates in the single-digit MB/s range. However, there is still no confirmation of a general problem. Rewriting the data to the SSD helps. Slow reading old files on WD Blue 3D SSD The...

allinfo.space

I would go for the MX500

Thanks I did go with the Crucial.

I read the info in the link. That problem is really weird. Why would when a bit was set make a difference? Maybe the little old monk in the disk, who was transcribing the 1’s and 0’s used ancient Babylonian, died and the new guy is using Arabic.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Why would when a bit was set make a difference?

One of the many tasks of the SSD firmware is to refresh bits. The firmware is probably failing to do that which is causing errors. The older the files, the more errors accumulate in those NAND cells. This forces the error correction to kick in but there are so many errors that reading the bits correctly takes time and causes the slowdowns. Remember scratched CDs where the CDROM drive would go bizzz bizzz like it was having a really hard time? This is kinda like that.

 

[bononos]

Seems like the WD blue ssd have more performance/failures latgely because WD have quietly switched to dramless according to a Techpowerup thread. The product sheet doesn't mention dram cache. Its a shame that WD has sunk so low. WD also cheapened the M2 SN550 by switching to cheaper nand.

WD forum thread about failures on the new version.

WD BLUE 250 GB SA510 issues

Unfortunately, I’ve had the same experience. It is very unfortunate. I know we sold HUNDREDS of the old 3D NAND drives and they treated us extremely well. At this time, we’ve switched over to the Samsung EVO drives. I cannot sell questionable quality drives to my customers - they depend on...

community.wd.com

Dramless confirmed-

WD Blue SA510 SATA SSD Poor Performance

One of the SSDs I choose when upgrading older laptops that still use a mechanical HDD is the WD Blue SA510 SATA SSD. In my head I was thinking it's just another WD Blue SATA SSD, a solid mid-range SSD from a reputable known brand manufacturer. But I've started to notice weird performance issues d...

linustechtips.com

 

[Tech Junky]

I'm using a SN770 in my TB enclosure and another one in my laptop as a secondary drive. The dram thing is not really an issue. It compensates with ram use as needed. The 770 actually performs better in my TB enclosure for speeds than my SN850 by a good 30%+.

It would seem that the dram argument doesn't hold water when it comes to performance. I tested several different drives to find the best performance and was a bit shocked.

 

[Shmee]

Seems like the WD blue ssd have more performance/failures latgely because WD have quietly switched to dramless according to a Techpowerup thread. The product sheet doesn't mention dram cache. Its a shame that WD has sunk so low. WD also cheapened the M2 SN550 by switching to cheaper nand.

WD forum thread about failures on the new version.

WD BLUE 250 GB SA510 issues

Unfortunately, I’ve had the same experience. It is very unfortunate. I know we sold HUNDREDS of the old 3D NAND drives and they treated us extremely well. At this time, we’ve switched over to the Samsung EVO drives. I cannot sell questionable quality drives to my customers - they depend on...

community.wd.com

Dramless confirmed-

WD Blue SA510 SATA SSD Poor Performance

One of the SSDs I choose when upgrading older laptops that still use a mechanical HDD is the WD Blue SA510 SATA SSD. In my head I was thinking it's just another WD Blue SATA SSD, a solid mid-range SSD from a reputable known brand manufacturer. But I've started to notice weird performance issues d...

linustechtips.com

Does this apply to higher capacity WD Blues, such as 2TB plus? The kind one might use in a fast NAS volume.

 

[bononos]

Does this apply to higher capacity WD Blues, such as 2TB plus? The kind one might use in a fast NAS volume.

Its very likely that all blues are dramless. WD introduced a new 'Red' NAS ssd line which has dram cache. Its not mentioned in the spec sheet but WD confirmed that it has on their forum.

 

[bononos]

I'm using a SN770 in my TB enclosure and another one in my laptop as a secondary drive. The dram thing is not really an issue. It compensates with ram use as needed. The 770 actually performs better in my TB enclosure for speeds than my SN850 by a good 30%+.

It would seem that the dram argument doesn't hold water when it comes to performance. I tested several different drives to find the best performance and was a bit shocked.

Dram cache is important for SATA drives otherwise performance will crater and possibly create other issues like drive failures(see WD blue example in my previous post).
OTOH PCIE/NVME flash drives can use HMB caching using system ram which is why native dram cache is less important, its still slower but its not going to be bad.

 

[manly]

Does this apply to higher capacity WD Blues, such as 2TB plus? The kind one might use in a fast NAS volume.

I researched this not long ago, and the SATA 2TB+ Blues are still the old model. Note they don't yet label these as SA510, which consumers rightly should avoid.

Whenever WDC refreshes the 2TB+ model numbers or attaches the SA510 marketing name, you won't want those either.

I didn't check their NVMe Blue drives, but I'm sure at some point they would have switched some models over to the cheaper DRAM-less design as well.