840 Evo Vs. 850 Pro - Which is better?

Brenda813

Honorable
Aug 3, 2014
9
0
10,510
I need to upgrade my SSD and I'm 50/50 torn between the 840 EVO 1TB and the new 850 PRO 1TB. The 850 is a lot more expensive, but I'm more concerned about getting a hard drive that can handle my workload. If that means spending extra on a better hard drive, it has to be that way.

Can anyone provide direction as to which would be better?

I talked to someone at an Electronics/Computer store and he told me that the main difference is that the chips are better quality in the Pro and there's a 5yr warranty, vs. a 3yr with the Evo. However, as far as performance, I'm told there isn't a noticeable difference. At least not one that would justify spending $200 more. That also seems to be the consensus online, but people are throwing out read/write speeds and benchmark specs and unfortunately, I don't know what any of that means.

Basically, I need the SSD to handle the Adobe programs. I'm constantly in Photoshop. I also spend time in Illustrator, InDesign, Dreamweaver and Flash...soon After Effects as well. Sometimes I have to have multiple Adobe programs open at once. I also occasionally use a program called Camtasia where I'm recording things on my screen and creating videos. A video I did recently had the finished file as only 3.6 GB, but the Camtasia file was 50 GB. Use of Camtasia is rare. I do Graphic Design, Web Design and am starting to get into web animation. I want to be sure my hard drive can handle all of this.

I would love to go with the cheaper one, if possible, but my final decision will be based on the one that can handle my workload better.
 
Solution
Do not be much swayed by vendor synthetic SSD benchmarks.
They are done with apps that push the SSD to it's maximum using queue lengths of 30 or so.
Most desktop users will do one or two things at a time, so they will see queue lengths of one or two.
What really counts is the response times, particularly for small random I/O. That is what the os does mostly.
For that, the response times of current SSD's are remarkably similar. And quick. They will be 50X faster than a hard drive.
In sequential operations, they will be 2x faster than a hard drive, perhaps 3x if you have a sata3 interface.
Larger SSD's are preferable. They have more nand chips that can be accessed in parallel. Sort of an internal raid-0 if you will.
Also, a SSD will...
Do not be much swayed by vendor synthetic SSD benchmarks.
They are done with apps that push the SSD to it's maximum using queue lengths of 30 or so.
Most desktop users will do one or two things at a time, so they will see queue lengths of one or two.
What really counts is the response times, particularly for small random I/O. That is what the os does mostly.
For that, the response times of current SSD's are remarkably similar. And quick. They will be 50X faster than a hard drive.
In sequential operations, they will be 2x faster than a hard drive, perhaps 3x if you have a sata3 interface.
Larger SSD's are preferable. They have more nand chips that can be accessed in parallel. Sort of an internal raid-0 if you will.
Also, a SSD will slow down as it approaches full. That is because it will have a harder time finding free nand blocks to do an update without a read/write operation.

Yes, the 850 pro is a bit faster in most things. But you will be hard pressed to tell the difference.
The pro will nave more endurance, but a desktop user is on no danger of running out of updates which will be long after the device is obsolete.

Still, If you have the extra $200, I say spend it and get the 850 PRO. If you don't, you will always be wondering if you should have.
 
Solution