- Nov 20, 2014
- 3
- 0
- 4,510
Referring to their *approximate* 250GB size versions, I read a comment
Perhaps someone could give me some advise then, please.. at the moment the 500GB Samsung 840 EVO is only $10USD more than the crucial MX100 512GB, and the 840 EVO 250GB only $10 more than the MX100 256GB; My question I guess is, do you really notice a difference between them in daily use, and have you used the "Samsung Magician software with RAPID mode" that comes with the Samsung?
I'm struggling with finances somewhat but my computer to runs to slow at times, especially since it's recently become my only computer with me to work on. I figure with the built in DRAM cache and and added system memory cache the Samsung SSD would be helped to hold up better during heavy wrights; my plan would be to use the caddy-adapter to put my current 750 GB 7200 RPM Hybrid where my BLU-Ray drive is since I almost never use it, and anything performing slowly would be installed on the SSD [along with the OS].
But the RAID-like ECC function of the MX100 and its ability to not loose or corrupt a file if the computer crashes or runs out of power suddenly while writing to it is are very *drool over* features after experiencing more then my share of corrupt files and windows repairs/reinstallls in the past. Upgrading to a faster HDD's is usually the most appearance-related speed , increase you can make since generally speaking it's the slowest component and overall most waiting is for it to read/write.
So, does anyone have an opinion: Is it an easily noticeable speed difference that would make an obvious difference on a slightly older Laptop like mine, or should I go with the more dependable sounding drive (The MX100)?
I would be opting for the 500/512 GB version so they're probably fairly similar, though I believe the MX100 has a better seq write speed than its predecessor, about equivalent to the Samsung at 500MB/s (while the 256 GB I believe benched about 300MB/s - well, I'm basing that off a review off details listed on amazon.com so its not necessarily accurate, especially since those would be manf. listed specs -my point being it's now advertising numbers nearly the same for read/write/IOPS).
Thank you in advance --Yazz
Perhaps someone could give me some advise then, please.. at the moment the 500GB Samsung 840 EVO is only $10USD more than the crucial MX100 512GB, and the 840 EVO 250GB only $10 more than the MX100 256GB; My question I guess is, do you really notice a difference between them in daily use, and have you used the "Samsung Magician software with RAPID mode" that comes with the Samsung?
I'm struggling with finances somewhat but my computer to runs to slow at times, especially since it's recently become my only computer with me to work on. I figure with the built in DRAM cache and and added system memory cache the Samsung SSD would be helped to hold up better during heavy wrights; my plan would be to use the caddy-adapter to put my current 750 GB 7200 RPM Hybrid where my BLU-Ray drive is since I almost never use it, and anything performing slowly would be installed on the SSD [along with the OS].
But the RAID-like ECC function of the MX100 and its ability to not loose or corrupt a file if the computer crashes or runs out of power suddenly while writing to it is are very *drool over* features after experiencing more then my share of corrupt files and windows repairs/reinstallls in the past. Upgrading to a faster HDD's is usually the most appearance-related speed , increase you can make since generally speaking it's the slowest component and overall most waiting is for it to read/write.
So, does anyone have an opinion: Is it an easily noticeable speed difference that would make an obvious difference on a slightly older Laptop like mine, or should I go with the more dependable sounding drive (The MX100)?
I would be opting for the 500/512 GB version so they're probably fairly similar, though I believe the MX100 has a better seq write speed than its predecessor, about equivalent to the Samsung at 500MB/s (while the 256 GB I believe benched about 300MB/s - well, I'm basing that off a review off details listed on amazon.com so its not necessarily accurate, especially since those would be manf. listed specs -my point being it's now advertising numbers nearly the same for read/write/IOPS).
Thank you in advance --Yazz
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram