Are all SSDs the same?

No, there are HUGE differences which mainly lie in the cells and how many bits they hold, which in turn translates into longevity. Also, there is a HUGE difference between a SSD with an NVMe Controller and one that uses the traditional SATA controller. NVMe drives use 4x PCI-E lanes which can give it insane speeds. The catch is many programs like PC games and the O.S. don't need such insane speed and bandwidth.

A SSD that uses SLC (Single Level Cell) or a MLC (Multi Level Cells) are a little bit more expensive to make but they can endure more read and write cycles. A SSD that uses SLC is rare on the consumer market as these are geared towards servers. Triple Level Cell and Quad Level Cells are cheaper to make but these will not last as long.

Also, there are differences with how well these drives handle heavy workloads. Some will throttle at 55c and others will throttle at 70c.

The fact of the matter is the only way you'll wear out a SSD is if you're reading and writing HUGE files to a drive constantly. Because of this, In the end this doesn't matter much at all if you pick a known namebrand like Crucial, Mushkin, Samsung, Intel, etc because any of these should last beyond their usefullness. You don't need to fell compelled into buying a Samsung 860 or 970 Pro because the amount of Read and Write cycles those things can endure is mass overkill. You would spend at least a decade trying to burn up one of those Samsung Pro drives.

The only thing I would suggest is buying something that comes with a 5 year warranty. I have a few 850, 960, and 860 EVO drives and they do well. Another one that I have is the Crucial MX500 and the Crucial is probably the first one I'd recommend. A Kingston is decent but that company has really fallen off the map in recent years. The other factor I'd recommend looking into is how many Gigabyte's of storage do you get for the dollar. It's hard to recommend a 120gb SSD for $20-30 when a decent 500gb SSD is $65.

I would stick to the name brands that also have been making system memory for years. Sandisk, Cruicial, Kingston, Samsung. Adata is probably fine, but you can usually get decent deals on the big brands so I usually go with one of them. You need to read the reviews for the particular model and stay away from models that seem to have a lot of people complain of drive failure.

SSDs get their name because they have no moving parts. ... While faster, SSDs are also a lot more expensive. This means a 300 GB SSD costs $150, while HDDs in the same price range can be anywhere from two to four TB.

SSDs vary in performance. Some are designed with varying sizes of cache to speed them up. Old ones might be no better than a USB flash drive. Read reviews, and see what major retailers are stocking. The trouble with user reviews is that people will leave them days after getting the product, and the failures can happen later. One SSD failed on me after 2.5 years, but it had a 3-year warranty, and was cheerfully replaced, although I had to pay return shipping. It was in a server, so always kept on.

No. They are all different. At present Samsung are very good value.

Hello!

Sometimes it can be difficult to navigate technology to determine which brand is better. Most SSDs are very similar but a couple things to look for are build quality, read/write speeds (how fast it works when moving files) and price. From past experience I have seen Samsung EVO SSDs are the best quality. I also own several SanDisk SSDs that I've had for several years and still maintain speed. I would do research yourself and see what is best for you.

Agent Christian B.

Consultation Agent

Geek Squad | Yahoo! Answers Knowledge Partner

05.20.19

Samsung EVO only only only.

There's different hardware specifications from different SSDs

Read/write speeds.