It's 512gb. You're not comparing Apple to Apple.
1. 950evo is Nvme ssd and 860pro is SATA.
2. 860pro uses MLC which cost more than TLC the 960evo uses.
3. The NAND used in the 860pro has higher write endurance which also has an additional 2years warranty than the 960evo.
1) Are you really bringing up the fact that one drive is 500gb and the other is 512gb?
2) NVME > Sata3 any day of the week. Just look at those read and write speeds. No competition.
3) I'll give you that: it's true.
4) Again, this is true. Most users are, however, not reading and writing terabytes of data often enough to where this would become an issue (5 year is a much nicer warranty than 3 year though)
Consensus: The typical user would be better off with an 850 pro for <$150 (500gb model) or the 960 pro if they want more speed. And interestingly enough, the 850 pro has a 10 year warranty (who knows why tbh).
1. Yes, I am. For $5 more you get an extra 12GB. In my opinion Sata has better value than Nvme
2. This isn't a dick measuring contest. The reason I'm bring up that interface comparison is an important reason why people are buying this Sata drive. For the everyday user those Nvme read and write isn't life changing and, they might not have a NVMe slot.
4. This SSD isn't really the best of value. This drive is great if you run VM machines. A small advantage about this drive is has intelligent RAM cache software. That's only useful if you have spare ram and a UPS. If anybody is wondering what the difference between Windows SuperFetch and Rapid mode - Rapid mode cache writes; SuperFetch doesn't.
The EVO line would be better for the typical user. This drop brings it down to 850pro prices. The 850pro has a 10 years warranty because Samsung was trying to match SanDisk offering at the time.
Why the shit would someone want an EVO? If you're going NVMe, go Pro or Enterprise. I can safely say that the 960 EVO is a flaming pile of shit compared to the 960 Pro and SM963. Hell, if you're going SATA the sentiment still stands; Pro or Enterprise only.
Pro for single drive application, Enterprise for multiple (power loss protection for the win).
Have you seen the DWPD on EVO? Low endurance drive going into any of my systems? Piss off.
Its because the drop hasnt gone down in value yet. Assuming they had enough people in the drop then it would start to become a beteer deal. But yeah as of right now, terrible deal.
Has it occur to you that newer tech should cost more than older tech especially both being mass produced?
It is a legitimate complain . Dont know why people are pissing on it. It is more expensive but slower and older tech.
A GTX 460 should not cost more than a GTX 1080. Having a different slots doesnt make a difference, and SATA SSD is not vintage.
You are currently viewing a single conversation. Return to Full Discussion
http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-960-Evo-NVMe-PCIe-M2-500GB-vs-Samsung-860-Pro-512GB/m204072vsm431483
Consensus: The typical user would be better off with an 850 pro for <$150 (500gb model) or the 960 pro if they want more speed. And interestingly enough, the 850 pro has a 10 year warranty (who knows why tbh).
The EVO line would be better for the typical user. This drop brings it down to 850pro prices. The 850pro has a 10 years warranty because Samsung was trying to match SanDisk offering at the time.
Pro for single drive application, Enterprise for multiple (power loss protection for the win).
Have you seen the DWPD on EVO? Low endurance drive going into any of my systems? Piss off.
That's why.
It is a legitimate complain . Dont know why people are pissing on it. It is more expensive but slower and older tech.
A GTX 460 should not cost more than a GTX 1080. Having a different slots doesnt make a difference, and SATA SSD is not vintage.