Personal computing discussed

Moderators: morphine, Steel

 
suku_patel_22
Gerbil In Training
Topic Author
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue May 29, 2018 8:55 am

960 Evo vs 860 Evo

Tue May 29, 2018 9:02 am

Hi all,
I am building a new system. The planned components are
1. Ryzen 5 2400G
2. ASRock A320M Pro4
3. Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000Mhz
4. Seagate Barracuda 2TB HDD
5. Corsair SF450 PSU

I am confused between selecting one of the 250 GB Samsung SSD'S.

Should I go with the new 960 Evo NVME or with the older 860 Evo with Rapid?
 
HERETIC
Gerbil XP
Posts: 472
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 4:10 am

Re: 960 Evo vs 860 Evo

Tue Jul 17, 2018 8:50 am

suku_patel_22 wrote:
Hi all,
I am building a new system. The planned components are
1. Ryzen 5 2400G
2. ASRock A320M Pro4
3. Corsair Vengeance LPX 3000Mhz
4. Seagate Barracuda 2TB HDD
5. Corsair SF450 PSU

I am confused between selecting one of the 250 GB Samsung SSD'S.

Should I go with the new 960 Evo NVME or with the older 860 Evo with Rapid?


Are you running anything,or likely to that can use the extra speed?
Do you have or likely to have,anything external,that can use those speeds?
If so then get the 960,and i'd recommend going up to 500GB.

If not pick the 860,you'll hardly notice the difference....................
good luck
 
synthtel2
Gold subscriber
Gerbil Elite
Posts: 805
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:30 am

Re: 960 Evo vs 860 Evo

Fri Jul 20, 2018 1:26 am

Unless you have a specific workload that needs very fast storage, you should go with the cheaper one. For the vast majority of desktop workloads, there's basically no difference in practical speed between a mid-range SATA SSD and the fastest stuff on the market.
 
strangerguy
Gerbil Team Leader
Posts: 256
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 8:46 am

Re: 960 Evo vs 860 Evo

Fri Jul 20, 2018 10:40 pm

Nobody should buy both for general purpose and gaming use, they are terrible in GB/$ terms and NVMe won't matter. The MX500 is better in every way, and the 2TB Micron 1100 which is just as fast in real world terms as any other drive mentioned is even better if you find it at $250 which is like over 2x the GB/$ of the 860 Evo and over 3x of the 960 Evo.
8700K 4.3GHz @ 1.05V | Cryorig H7 | MSI Z370M AC | 32GB Corsair LPX DDR4-3200 | GTX 1070 @ 0.8V | 500GB Evo 850 | 1TB M550 | 3TB Toshiba | Seasonic G650 | Acer XB271HU
 
dragontamer5788
Gerbil First Class
Posts: 147
Joined: Mon May 06, 2013 8:39 am

Re: 960 Evo vs 860 Evo

Sat Jul 21, 2018 11:24 am

The Samsungs offer bad value now.

I think HP EX920 had better practical benchmarks due to good low-depth queue speeds. So HP EX920 is better than the 960 Evo and cheaper to boot. The 860 Evo is just too expensive for a budget SATA drive. get an Crucial MX500 instead, or a budget M.2 drive like the Mushkin Pilot.
 
DancinJack
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:21 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: 960 Evo vs 860 Evo

Sat Jul 21, 2018 12:24 pm

You guys could at least answer the question he/she asked. I understand what you're trying to do, but you know how buying PC parts is. You want what you want sometimes.
synthtel2 wrote:
Unless you have a specific workload that needs very fast storage, you should go with the cheaper one. For the vast majority of desktop workloads, there's basically no difference in practical speed between a mid-range SATA SSD and the fastest stuff on the market.

I agree with this.
i7 6700K - Z170 - 16GiB DDR4 - GTX 1080 - 512GB SSD - 256GB SSD - 500GB SSD - 3TB HDD- 27" IPS G-sync - Win10 Pro x64 - Ubuntu/Mint x64 :: 2015 13" rMBP Sierra :: Canon EOS 80D/Sony RX100

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest