A 950 Pro goes slightly over $190 brand new for the same amount of storage and the 950 pro just blows this out of the water.
Don't really see this a s a "deal"
infowolfeI am pretty sure Samsung re-invented the way to present durability. I don't trust data coming out from marketing department. I used to following these reviews. But frankly I know more than a few people who work with manufacturers and do reviews for them. They test things the way to make sure it scores better. Not the way that fits typical usage of consumers. Otherwise they will send a PR over to help with the review.
Of course, it's a business. I understand that. For the exact same reason, warranty is my only benchmark about durability. Not these empty words. 950 only offers 5 yrs instead of 10 yrs of 850 pro (within certain "mileage"). Sandisk offers 10 yrs and unlimited writing on their extreme pro. Intel offers 5 yrs and no limits as well. I found no reason to believe Samsung is even on par.
chris.yw@chris.yw... well, none of the rest of them are offering 3d NAND yet, and even when they do they'll be first-generation parts rather than samsung's 2nd and 3rd gen (the new 950 pro 1tb/850 pro 2tb) parts. Regardless of any marketing doublespeak, the method of construction in 3d NAND (which everybody else is racing to catch up to), providing much larger cell sizes means that from a physics perspective, the stuff's significantly more reliable than 3-bit and even 2-bit mlc on some of the smaller processes like <= 18nm because the dielectric/insulator breakdown and electron leakage issues simply stop existing thanks primarily to not having to pack so many components into such a small space. If your gate falls, your SSD doesn't just become unwritable, it becomes unreadable too (due to voltage drop/electron leakage). In reality, I could care less what anybody's warranties are unless they're also willing to quote write endurance AND publish LBAs written in SMART. (I should point out that I know some people with 64GB MLC Intel x25-m's that've been on 24/7 for 8 years now with 10.03TiB and 49.39TiB written to in-production SSDs by one org and another in private hands with 5.91TiB written). Due to better quality controls/processes and larger chip capacities, it's entirely reasonable to expect any major brand SSD (unless handicapped by firmware) with quality NAND to last well into the PebiBytes (base-2 aka *1024) written or well past 10 years, whether the warranty reflects the manufacturer's optimism or not. As for Samsung somehow gaming that rating.. or that rating being invented by them, I don't think either of those assertions can possibly be correct. Consider that the 25nm MLC Intel SSD 910, a 400GB 'Enterprise' SSD has an endurance rating of 7PB (unclear if PB or PiB) and warranty of 5 years (http://ark.intel.com/products/67008/Intel-SSD-910-Series-400GB-12-Height-PCIe-2_0-25nm-MLC). The Intel 20nm MLC SSD DC P3600 400GB (another "HET" device), has a write endurance rating (JEDEC standardized workload) of 2.19 PBW. Something kinda curious about that range of devices is that between the P3500 (219TBW), P3600 (2.19PBW), and P3700 (7.3PBW / 10 drive writes per day for 5 years), Intel has started 'binning' its SSD options, offering both gradually improving performance and endurance. This infographic might help things make a bit more sense:
infowolfeThat's a lot of information but real-world improvement is little when comes to Samsung's new tech. You need to think out what it does for you rather than how fancy the tech is. You should keep that in mind.
chris.yw@chris.yw what it gives me is performance superior consistency throughout the life of the drive (and when at close to capacity) and vastly increased write endurance over smaller 2d process nodes (which is why the rest of the industry is following samsung's lead on the 3d nand thing). pretty simple stuff, but very important stuff.