Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Questions About Installing A New SSD


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 NiTROACTiVE

NiTROACTiVE

  • Members
  • 23 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States
  • Local time:03:43 PM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 01:40 AM

I've been thinking of getting an extra SSD for my iBUYPOWER BB921 gaming PC. However, I have some questions about installing it.

 

First off, I am aware that the size of the other SSD is 2.5", as it has 120GB of space. It's also an ADATA SSD. I'm thinking of getting this SSD, unless if I should get one of the same company as someone from here said the SSD company didn't matter.

 

I'm also aware the screws needed for a 2.5" SSD (if I have to use them) are M3 screws.

 

Lastly, I also know that I'll need SATA cable to connect it to my PC. Would a SATA cable like this one be good? Also, as you can see from the pictures I took inside of the computer (it was pretty dusty in there at the time), there are ports named SATA6G_3, SATA6G_4, SATA6G_5, and SATA6G_6. Does it matter which port I connect in from my SSD?



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,397 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:43 PM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 02:05 AM

First off, I am aware that the size of the other SSD is 2.5", as it has 120GB of space. It's also an ADATA SSD. I'm thinking of getting this SSD, unless if I should get one of the same company as someone from here said the SSD company didn't matter.


As always, I recommend getting MLC drive and not TLC drive, that Samsung is TLC. Alternative https://pcpartpicker.com/product/cjcMnQ/mushkin-internal-hard-drive-mknssdre512gb
  

Lastly, I also know that I'll need SATA cable to connect it to my PC. Would a SATA cable like this one be good? Also, as you can see from the pictures I took inside of the computer (it was pretty dusty in there at the time), there are ports named SATA6G_3, SATA6G_4, SATA6G_5, and SATA6G_6. Does it matter which port I connect in from my SSD?


SSD cable OK.

Motherboard model is what? Probably does not matter, I'd put it into SATA6G_3 as SATA6G_5, and SATA6G_6 MAY be using different controller.

#3 hamluis

hamluis

    Moderator


  • Moderator
  • 55,865 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Killeen, TX
  • Local time:02:43 PM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:07 AM

More On TLC vs MLC

 

Louis



#4 MDD1963

MDD1963

  • Members
  • 699 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:04:43 AM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 05:29 AM

And more rebuttal on Samsung's SSD reliability problems since 2013....

 

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Samsung-SATA-SSD-s-Amazing-Reliability-772/

 

Just a small sample size of 3,000+ units, as rated by a small manufacturer's return/ warranty issues with a mixture of 840/850 products....

 

(They do acknowledge a few initial firmware 'teething' issues with the 840s...in 2011 or so....; numbers of failures of 500+ units sold in a one year period in 2015? Zero....' must have been a lucky fluke...)


Asus Z270A Prime/7700K/32 GB DDR4-3200/GTX1060


#5 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,397 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:43 PM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:02 PM

Too bad there is no data from other manufacturers' drives. Also every Samsung 840 and 840 Evo drive is broken and so 100% of those should go to warranty. That pretty much proves that statistic pointless.

Edited by Drillingmachine, 19 May 2017 - 12:03 PM.


#6 NiTROACTiVE

NiTROACTiVE
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 23 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States
  • Local time:03:43 PM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 12:27 PM

 

First off, I am aware that the size of the other SSD is 2.5", as it has 120GB of space. It's also an ADATA SSD. I'm thinking of getting this SSD, unless if I should get one of the same company as someone from here said the SSD company didn't matter.


As always, I recommend getting MLC drive and not TLC drive, that Samsung is TLC. Alternative https://pcpartpicker.com/product/cjcMnQ/mushkin-internal-hard-drive-mknssdre512gb

 
  Well if a MLC drive is recommended, then would this one be good also?
 

 

Lastly, I also know that I'll need SATA cable to connect it to my PC. Would a SATA cable like this one be good? Also, as you can see from the pictures I took inside of the computer (it was pretty dusty in there at the time), there are ports named SATA6G_3, SATA6G_4, SATA6G_5, and SATA6G_6. Does it matter which port I connect in from my SSD?


SSD cable OK.

Motherboard model is what? Probably does not matter, I'd put it into SATA6G_3 as SATA6G_5, and SATA6G_6 MAY be using different controller.

 

My motherboard model is H170-PRO as it's manufacturer is ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC.



#7 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,397 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:43 PM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 01:38 PM

MX300 is not MLC drive.

According to manual, there is no difference between SATA6G_3, SATA6G_4, SATA6G_5 and SATA6G_6 ports. You can use any of them.

#8 MadmanRB

MadmanRB

    Spoon!!!!


  • Members
  • 3,051 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:No time for that when there is evil afoot!
  • Local time:03:43 PM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 08:27 PM

Yeah the connector matters not as long as its SATA.

I have seen SSD's installed in computers over 10 years old :D


You know you want me baby!

Proud Linux user and dual booter.

Proud Vivaldi user.

 

ljxaqg-6.png


#9 LadyFitzgerald

LadyFitzgerald

  • Members
  • 10 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:AZ
  • Local time:12:43 PM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 09:02 PM

Drillingmachine, on 19 May 2017 - 12:05 AM, said:

 

NiTROACTiVE, on 18 May 2017 - 11:40 PM, said:

First off, I am aware that the size of the other SSD is 2.5", as it has 120GB of space. It's also an ADATA SSD. I'm thinking of getting this SSD, unless if I should get one of the same company as someone from here said the SSD company didn't matter.


As always, I recommend getting MLC drive and not TLC drive, that Samsung is TLC. Alternative https://pcpartpicker.com/product/cjcMnQ/mushkin-internal-hard-drive-mknssdre512gb

 

There is nothing wrong with higher quality TLC drives such as the current Samsung 850 EVOs. I certainly would prefer the EVOs over anything from Mushkin, including an MLC drive.



#10 LadyFitzgerald

LadyFitzgerald

  • Members
  • 10 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:AZ
  • Local time:12:43 PM

Posted 19 May 2017 - 09:10 PM

Drillingmachine, on 19 May 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:Drillingmachine, on 19 May 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

Too bad there is no data from other manufacturers' drives. Also every Samsung 840 and 840 Evo drive is broken and so 100% of those should go to warranty. That pretty much proves that statistic pointless.

 

That's pure nonsense. The 128GB 840 PRO in my desktop machine has been going strong for the past four years. The 500GB 840 EVOs in two of my notebooks have been doing just fine for the past several years.

 

Samsung had some problems with some of the 840 EVOs in the past but not all of them.


Edited by LadyFitzgerald, 19 May 2017 - 09:34 PM.


#11 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,397 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:43 PM

Posted 20 May 2017 - 05:23 AM

There is nothing wrong with higher quality TLC drives such as the current Samsung 850 EVOs. I certainly would prefer the EVOs over anything from Mushkin, including an MLC drive.


Funny, this sounds exactly like some years ago:
 

There is nothing wrong with higher quality TLC drives such as the Samsung 840 EVOs.

 
Let's put it this way: There has been problems with TLC drives, and problem is TLC NAND. So far there has been very few (none?) problems related to MLC NAND. so why take any risks with not so reliable TLC NAND when there is reliable MLC NAND choices available for same price? I have always recommended avoiding Samsung's SSD's and so far avoiding Samsung drives has been good overall choice.
 
What's wrong with Mushkin? It's essentially same drive as Crucial BX100.
 
 

That's pure nonsense. The 128GB 840 PRO in my desktop machine has been going strong for the past four years. The 500GB 840 EVOs in two of my notebooks have been doing just fine for the past several years.
 
Samsung had some problems with some of the 840 EVOs in the past but not all of them.

 
And? You could say same "drive XXX is working fine" from virtually any SSD drive.

As for 840 Evo, problem is TLC NAND so every Samsung 840 Evo is broken. Only way to fix them is to swap defective TLC NAND with something better, that practically means switching to new drive. It took quite long time from users to realize their 840 Evo is slower than HDD.

As one professional said: http://techreport.com/review/27824/crucial-bx100-and-mx200-solid-state-drives-reviewed/7
 

Given the issues plaguing some of Samsung's TLC-based SSDs, I'd take the MX200 over any EVO right now.

 

Current version would be: Given the issues plaguing some of Samsung's TLC-based SSDs, I'd take the any MLC drive over any EVO right now.



#12 LadyFitzgerald

LadyFitzgerald

  • Members
  • 10 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:AZ
  • Local time:12:43 PM

Posted 20 May 2017 - 02:07 PM

There is nothing wrong with higher quality TLC drives such as the current Samsung 850 EVOs. I certainly would prefer the EVOs over anything from Mushkin, including an MLC drive.


Funny, this sounds exactly like some years ago:
 

There is nothing wrong with higher quality TLC drives such as the Samsung 840 EVOs.

 
Let's put it this way: There has been problems with TLC drives, and problem is TLC NAND. So far there has been very few (none?) problems related to MLC NAND. so why take any risks with not so reliable TLC NAND when there is reliable MLC NAND choices available for same price? I have always recommended avoiding Samsung's SSD's and so far avoiding Samsung drives has been good overall choice.
 
What's wrong with Mushkin? It's essentially same drive as Crucial BX100.
 
 

That's pure nonsense. The 128GB 840 PRO in my desktop machine has been going strong for the past four years. The 500GB 840 EVOs in two of my notebooks have been doing just fine for the past several years.
 
Samsung had some problems with some of the 840 EVOs in the past but not all of them.

 
And? You could say same "drive XXX is working fine" from virtually any SSD drive.

As for 840 Evo, problem is TLC NAND so every Samsung 840 Evo is broken. Only way to fix them is to swap defective TLC NAND with something better, that practically means switching to new drive. It took quite long time from users to realize their 840 Evo is slower than HDD.

As one professional said: http://techreport.com/review/27824/crucial-bx100-and-mx200-solid-state-drives-reviewed/7
 

Given the issues plaguing some of Samsung's TLC-based SSDs, I'd take the MX200 over any EVO right now.

 
Current version would be: Given the issues plaguing some of Samsung's TLC-based SSDs, I'd take the any MLC drive over any EVO right now.


If Mushkin SSDs are so great, why don't they sell as well as the far more popular Samsungs? Mushkin once made great products. Now? Not so much.

You are living in the past. The issues Samsung had with the 840 EVOs is ancient history (btw, Samsung did come up with a firmware update that fixed most of the EVOs that had the slowdown problems so replacement was NOT the only fix). Also, only a percentage of the early 840 EVOs had any slowdown issues; many (such as mine) did not, especially the later ones. The 850 EVOs have not been having any problems at all (other than being in short supply due to the popularity of Samsung SSDs).

True, MLC SSDs are "better" than TLC SSDs in the same brand but there is such a thing as good enough, especially when better costs more. For most people, the Samsung 850 drives are good enough. Of course, if you are offering to pay people the difference in price between TLC and MLC SSDs...

Keep in mind that professional reviews are normally done on cherry picked products provided by the product manufacturer and do not reflect long term behavior of the product.

As far as MLC SSDs have fewer risks than TLC SSDs goes, so what? A brick house is less likely to burn down than a frame house yet more people live in frame houses than brick houses. Any media, be it SSD, HDD, floppy, paper, whatever, is subject to failure, no matter the quality. The only reasonably safe way to prevent data loss is for data to exist in at least three places, such as on a drive in the computer, an onsite backup, and an offsite backup. Even the best drives can fail prematurely without warning and/or any hope of data recovery. As long as one has a proper backup scheme in place (and keeps it up to date), data loss should not be a concern.

Edited by LadyFitzgerald, 20 May 2017 - 02:15 PM.


#13 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,397 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:43 PM

Posted 20 May 2017 - 02:50 PM

Since when best products are bestsellers?

840 Evo's have problems with low quality NAND. That cannot be fixed with firmware, that firmware "fix" does not fix the problem but makes SSD wear out faster. That problem is on every Samsung 840 Evo, only question is how quickly that slowdown occurs. It's still much shorter time than on any MLC drive. 850 Evo is TLC drive and once again, there are has not been problems with MLC NAND so buying TLC drive for same price as MLC drive is just stupid.

True, MLC SSDs are "better" than TLC SSDs in the same brand but there is such a thing as good enough, especially when better costs more. For most people, the Samsung 850 drives are good enough. Of course, if you are offering to pay people the difference in price between TLC and MLC SSDs...


What?
 
Mushkin MLC $159 https://pcpartpicker.com/product/cjcMnQ/mushkin-internal-hard-drive-mknssdre512gb

Samsung TLC $169 https://pcpartpicker.com/product/FrH48d/samsung-internal-hard-drive-mz75e500bam
 

As far as MLC SSDs have fewer risks than TLC SSDs goes, so what? A brick house is less likely to burn down than a frame house yet more people live in frame houses than brick houses. Any media, be it SSD, HDD, floppy, paper, whatever, is subject to failure, no matter the quality. The only reasonably safe way to prevent data loss is for data to exist in at least three places, such as on a drive in the computer, an onsite backup, and an offsite backup. Even the best drives can fail prematurely without warning and/or any hope of data recovery. As long as one has a proper backup scheme in place (and keeps it up to date), data loss should not be a concern.


Why pay more for worse product? That was my point with 840 Evo and is my point with 850 Evo also.

#14 LadyFitzgerald

LadyFitzgerald

  • Members
  • 10 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:AZ
  • Local time:12:43 PM

Posted 20 May 2017 - 03:58 PM

Since when best products are bestsellers?...


Since when have they not been not been? Generally speaking, the better brands outsell the poorer ones.

 
 

...840 Evo's have problems with low quality NAND. That cannot be fixed with firmware, that firmware "fix" does not fix the problem but makes SSD wear out faster. That problem is on every Samsung 840 Evo, only question is how quickly that slowdown occurs. It's still much shorter time than on any MLC drive...


You aren't paying attention. The slowdown problems the early Samsung EVOs were unique to the Samsung 840 EVOs, not all TLC drives. The major differences between TLC NAND and MLC NAND are TLC NAND will be an unnoticeable real world speed and they a shorter write life (which, on the better TLC SSDs, is still longer than most people will ever use the SSD). The slowdown issue did not occur with the later 840 EVOs because the later firmware fixed it (and Samsung also issued a firmware update that fixed the most of the earlier EVOs). But don't take my word for it. Read this article that was linked earlier. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Samsung-SATA-SSD-s-Amazing-Reliability-772/

However, NAND chips are not the only things that determine the quality of an SSD. The controllers also affect SSD quality. Some brands have better controllers than others. In fact, inferior controllers (such as the older Sandforce) are more likely to cause SSD failure than bad NAND. Btw, the Samsung 840 EVO slowdown issue was caused by controller firmware problems (which was later fixed), not the NAND.


 
 

...850 Evo is TLC drive and once again, there are has not been problems with MLC NAND...


That simply is not accurate. There were problems with MLC NAND when they first came out. For that matter, the early SLC NANDs also had problems. Also, the 850 TLC drives have not been having any problems, especially due to being TLC.








...buying TLC drive for same price as MLC drive is just stupid...

...What?

Mushkin MLC $159 https://pcpartpicker.com/product/cjcMnQ/mushkin-internal-hard-drive-mknssdre512gb

Samsung TLC $169 https://pcpartpicker.com/product/FrH48d/samsung-internal-hard-drive-mz75e500bam...Why pay more for worse product? That was my point with 840 Evo and is my point with 850 Evo also.


You are comparing apples to pears to kumquats. First, the Samsung 850 EVOs are NOT the same as the Samsung 840 EVOs! Second, the Muskins are not the same as the Samsungs. They use different controllers for starters. The Mushkin MLC has a shorter warranty period (three years with no mention of guaranteed write life) than the Samsung EVOs (five years or 150TBW; it's highly unlikely anyone will write 150TB to a 500GB SSD in five years). That alone all adds up to the Mushkins being the inferior drive, especially since Mushkin is withholding an estimate on how much write can expect. Just because a drive uses MLC NAND does not automatically mean it will be better quality than one that uses TLC NAND.



#15 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,397 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:10:43 PM

Posted 20 May 2017 - 05:09 PM

Since when best products are bestsellers?...


Since when have they not been not been? Generally speaking, the better brands outsell the poorer ones.


Better brand does not necessarily mean better quality or lower price. Usually better brand = poorer product for higher price.
 

You aren't paying attention. The slowdown problems the early Samsung EVOs were unique to the Samsung 840 EVOs, not all TLC drives. The major differences between TLC NAND and MLC NAND are TLC NAND will be an unnoticeable real world speed and they a shorter write life (which, on the better TLC SSDs, is still longer than most people will ever use the SSD). The slowdown issue did not occur with the later 840 EVOs because the later firmware fixed it (and Samsung also issued a firmware update that fixed the most of the earlier EVOs). But don't take my word for it. Read this article that was linked earlier. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Samsung-SATA-SSD-s-Amazing-Reliability-772/


Slowdown was problem for Samsung 840 and 840 Evo, both used TLC NAND. Because problems is TLC NAND that does not keep electric charge well enough, that problem is hardware based and cannot be fixed with any firmware.

That Puget systems statistic is totally crap. As I already explained, all Samsung 840 and 840 Evo drives were good for warranty. Even when Samsung "fixed" those drives, they were defective for long time. Btw it took Samsung over three years to "fix" 840 non-Evo problems. Three years. AFAIK that was not good enough reason for warranty process.
 

However, NAND chips are not the only things that determine the quality of an SSD. The controllers also affect SSD quality. Some brands have better controllers than others. In fact, inferior controllers (such as the older Sandforce) are more likely to cause SSD failure than bad NAND. Btw, the Samsung 840 EVO slowdown issue was caused by controller firmware problems (which was later fixed), not the NAND.


Sandforce problems were fixed by firmware updates. And once again, 840 and 840 Evo problems are NAND based. Many users reported same problem even when using updated firmware. That's proof that problem is low quality NAND and not firmware. So firmware did not fix anything.
 

...850 Evo is TLC drive and once again, there are has not been problems with MLC NAND...

That simply is not accurate. There were problems with MLC NAND when they first came out. For that matter, the early SLC NANDs also had problems. Also, the 850 TLC drives have not been having any problems, especially due to being TLC.


Like what? Perhaps very early MLC drives for early adopters had MLC/SLC based problems but since SSD drives became cheap enough for home users (say around 100GB for $300 or so), problems where elsewhere. SLC drives were never really cheap enough for home users.

850 Evo have no problems, yet. Here, system that works every time:

- Samsung 8yy sucks because 8xx had problems
- 8xx had problems but 8yy is good

After some time:

- Samsung 8zz sucks because 8xx and 8yy had problems
- 8xx and 8yy had problems but 8xx is better and it has no problems

After some time:

- Samsung 8nn suck because 8xx, 8zz and 8yy had problems
- 8xx, 8yy and 8zz had problems but 8nn is better and it has no problems

So newest Samsung is always good because it's not like previous ones.
 

You are comparing apples to pears to kumquats. First, the Samsung 850 EVOs are NOT the same as the Samsung 840 EVOs! Second, the Muskins are not the same as the Samsungs. They use different controllers for starters. The Mushkin MLC has a shorter warranty period (three years with no mention of guaranteed write life) than the Samsung EVOs (five years or 150TBW; it's highly unlikely anyone will write 150TB to a 500GB SSD in five years). That alone all adds up to the Mushkins being the inferior drive, especially since Mushkin is withholding an estimate on how much write can expect. Just because a drive uses MLC NAND does not automatically mean it will be better quality than one that uses TLC NAND.


Controller is different but Mushkin has MLC NAND, that alone makes it much better buy.

Warranty? You just posted statistics that say SSD's are so reliable that warranty period makes no difference. 150 TBW is not that much, I could easily write that much in three years if not saving some writes to HDD. Mushkin does not specify TBW as NAND is so high quality that it lasts three years anyway. Also Samsung's warranty is non-existent if there are problems. Again, remember it took Samsung over three years to fix 840 non-evo problems https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Storage/Samsung-Magician-497-and-Samsung-840-DXT0AB0Q-Firmware-Tested-Read-Speed-Issues-Fina

So much about Samsung's "warranty".

So Mushkin is clearly superior, not inferior, against 850 Evo. It's much more durable, cheaper and has better MLC NAND. I have always avoided TLC NAND and 840/840 Evo fiasco proved I made right choice.

Edited by Drillingmachine, 20 May 2017 - 05:11 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users