Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Hello Everyone, Lets slow down a bit here and make sure we are comparing Apple's to Apple's. You can most certainly find the Samsung 850 EVO or a Sandisk drive for less expensive than this drive.
This drive is an MLC based drive, which I've posted a link to below for those of you who are interested in learning the difference. In a nutshell, TLC drives slow down quite a bit when reading/writing large amounts of data vs MLC drives.
During a 20GB write test with the Kingston Savage VS others including the Samsung EVO, The Savage drive completed the transfer in half the time.
This drive is also provisioned so you'll always have the advertised amount of storage rather than the now more common practice of getting less than expected.
http://www.speedguide.net/faq/slc-mlc-or-tlc-nand-for-solid-state-drives-406 http://www.pcworld.com/article/2998497/storage/tlc-nand-ssds-the-crippling-problem-storage-makers-dont-advertise.html http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/kingston-hyperx-savage-ssd-review-240gb/
This Kingston drive is also their performance drive. In fact this drive outperforms the Samsung 850 Pro 1TB SSD drive.
Here are some brief specs.
Samsung 850 EVO 1TB Read - 540mb/sec Write - 520mb/sec
Samsung 850 PRO 1TB Read - 550mb/sec Write - 520mb/sec
Kingston HyperX Savage 960GB Read - 560mb/sec Write - 530mb/sec
I would say that the Samsung drives are good SSD drives but not comparable to the Kingston Savage series drives. The Samsung drives are cheaper for a reason. They are TLC non provisioned drives.
It has also been mentioned that this is high priced for this drive. I can not find it cheaper anywhere else or find a drive with its performance for less. If you can find this Kingston HyperX drive for less please let us know as it gives us more leverage with the vendor.
@nbcbubba @Lateralus @elcid @mconnor92
emc2
68
Mar 24, 2016
Tex-Arozzi1st: This is Massdrop. Users request products according to winners on a poll. Massdrop contacts manufacturers to get a discount on the most requested products. Samsung and to a lesser extent Crucial, are the most popular manufacturers for SSDs on the market right now. I find it incredibly hard to believe that there was a drop poll for SSDs where a Kingston Savage SSD won over Samsung EVO or Pro SSDs.
2nd: I find it hard to believe you're being entirely honest and this post sounds like it was made by a used car salesman trying to make a quick sale. This entire post is both incorrect and shady at the same time.
>This drive is also provisioned so you'll always have the advertised amount of storage rather than the now more common practice of getting less than expected. Overprovisioning is the practice of designing the storage SSD to appear as a smaller volume than the capacity held by the NAND chips on the SSD. This help to promote more even NAND wear and more sustainable performance values as the drive is filled, because it sections off a little "extra space" for the firmware to use, away from direct user interaction. The drive's NAND chips still total to 1 Terabyte.
The common practice of getting less than expected is due to all storage manufacturers selling and advertising drive storage in base 10 (decimal), but the computer innately viewing the storage in base 2 (binary). Overprovisioning and the "getting less than expected" phenomenon has nothing to do with each other.
What's being sold here is a 960 Gigabyte drive, which the OS will see as a 894.069 Gibibyte drive. By comparison, a 1 Terabyte drive will be recognized by the OS as a 931.322 Gibibyte drive.
You are NOT getting a 960 Gibibyte drive for the OS to see and use, here.
>This Kingston drive is also their performance drive. In fact this drive outperforms the Samsung 850 Pro 1TB SSD drive. No, it doesn't. According to sample user data submitted by actual owners of these drives in actual installations, rather than a clean benchmarking setup, the opposite is very much true, with random writes/reads on average of 40% better for the Samsung 850 Pro over the Kingston Savage. http://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-850-Pro-1TB-vs-Kingston-HyperX-Savage-960GB/m15466vsm29829
Unfortunately, there's a sparse lack of user data for the Kingston Savage, but this is primarily because Samsung effectively sells way more SSD units. But the data available still reflects Samsung to be a clear winner here.
>I would say that the Samsung drives are good SSD drives but not comparable to the Kingston Savage series drives. The Samsung drives are cheaper for a reason. They are TLC non provisioned drives.
Again, spreading misinformation. Samsung 850 EVO drives use TLC (3 layer NAND), but Samsung 850 Pro drives use MLC (2 layer NAND). Additionally, 850 EVO drives use a small amount of overprovisioning (120GB, 250GB, 500GB, rather than 128GB, 256GB, 512GB, etc.), while 850 Pro drives do not use overprovisioning (although this can be done manually using software, if desired). Overprovisioning as whole is a trade off between NAND longevity + sustained performance when full vs having more total storage space. Samsung as a whole sells a mix of SLC, MLC, TLC drives both with and without overprovisioning to a variety of different sectors and customers and at different prices.
>It has also been mentioned that this is high priced for this drive. I can not find it cheaper anywhere else or find a drive with its performance for less.
It is a low price for the Kingston Savage. But the Kingston Savage does not have the best value here. And yes, there are higher performance SSDs that cost less than this Kingston Savage, and Samsung is not the only manufacturer of them.
This just feels like a really shady way to try to get users to buy something that they don't want, which is contrary to the mission of MassDrop. These and other such shady drops are pushing me away from the Massdrop experience, and I may just leave entirely. I do hope there's greater transparency between Massdrop and its customers in the future.