OCZ Agility 3 v Samsung 840 Basic

cocjh1 · 31 Jul 2013 at 08:40

My two year old OCZ Agility 3 60GB SSD as a main drive is now full. I want to buy a larger SSD and looked at the Samsung 840 Basic SSD.

Reason for this thread is I'm trying to understand the tech spec differences, as my two year old drive appears, on paper, to outperform the write performance of the more recent Samsung drive.

http://ocz.com/consumer/agility-3/specifications
http://www.samsung.com/uk/consumer/memory-cards-hdd-odd/ssd/840/MZ-7TD120BW-spec

Struggle to believe the Samsung drive isn't a step up from my existing OCZ, so either I don't understand the spec details or my OCZ was well ahead of its time!? Anyone care to comment please?

Dervious · 31 Jul 2013 at 08:49

Here's a comparison.

http://www.ssdreview.com/review/com...erie-840-250gb-25-inch-dxt06b0q/reallife.html

Your current 60GB SSD would probably not perform quite so well as the 240GB version.

I keep saying it, but real world differences between most modern SSDs are usually very small, and you would be hard pressed to notice any difference between one model and another.

If you want faster write performance, why not consider the new 840 Evo ?

Dervious · 31 Jul 2013 at 08:58

And to show that benchmarks and specifications don't always tell the whole story.

IOMeter Bootup Average higher is better OCZ Agility 3 240GB 2.5" 2.06
83%
358.44 MB/s

Samsung Serie 840 250GB 2.5" DXT06B0Q
28%
120.57 MB/s

Which one boots faster ?

cocjh1 · 31 Jul 2013 at 13:21

Thanks for the link. So there's been no step change in performance over the past couple of years. I kind of agree with you. Once you've made the move from HDD to SSD there's bugger all real-world differences between the various SSD offerings. It more down to cost/reliability I suppose.

Dervious · 31 Jul 2013 at 14:45

cocjh1 said:
Thanks for the link. So there's been no step change in performance over the past couple of years. I kind of agree with you. Once you've made the move from HDD to SSD there's bugger all real-world differences between the various SSD offerings. It more down to cost/reliability I suppose.

In my experience, that's very much the case. Some people do seem rather keen to get the maximum performance possible, and I can understand that way of thinking. However, for the majority of folk, any decent SSD is going to do the job (make the system faster, quieter and use less power).

I`ve owned an Intel X25 80GB (old and slow by today's standards) and now own an 840 250GB. I`ve installed a fair few Crucial M4s, Samsung 830s and 840s and a couple of OCZs. They all perform well, and even when I went from the Intel to the Samsung, the difference wasn't massive. The Samsung is a bit faster, but I still remember the Intel being quick.