Newegg: Samsung 850 Pro 2TB $849.99 ac fs

Status
Not open for further replies.
DejaWiz

DejaWiz

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
21,825
Pretty hot price for those needed in a 2TB MLC SSD right now.

$929.99 - $80 code = $849.99 with free shipping.

Product Page

Use code EMCEFFJ39
 
DejaWiz said:
For those that don't want shitty TLC, far better TBW endurance, and a 10 year warranty, the 850 Pro is superior in every way, therefore usually worth the added premium. :)
Click to expand...

yea and at 850 bucks thats a warranty process that would still be worth doing 4-6 years from now. I know i wont RMA a 100-200 dollar SSD because by time I do it will be like 50-100 bucks and too much of a hassel
 
DejaWiz said:
For those that don't want shitty TLC, far better TBW endurance, and a 10 year warranty, the 850 Pro is superior in every way, therefore usually worth the added premium. :)
Click to expand...

If you actually plan to use an SSD for 10 years, then go for it. I suspect that drive will be worth no more than 1/4 it's current price in 10 years...probably less and it's size will be considered too small, much like we no longer use the 500-750GB drives we used 9 years ago (and we certainly don't care if they die...so long as the data is backed up).

Me, I'll take the cheaper one. I've got drives that are 5 years old, and they all work and are a long way from dying.
 
Doesn't matter about the worth, as long as you get a usable drive in return is the purpose of the warranty, not only that but the insanely higher write endurance you get. But for normal consumers the Pro makes no sense, the Evo is a fantastic drive with the Pro being the best sata SSD on the market.

I will agree with everything Deja said except TLC being shitty, it's not. We only had one poor occurrence with it and that was on an extremely new process. That's like calling MLC shitty because SLC is so much more reliable.
 
Trimlock said:
I will agree with everything Deja said except TLC being shitty, it's not. We only had one poor occurrence with it and that was on an extremely new process. That's like calling MLC shitty because SLC is so much more reliable.
Click to expand...

TLC is far inferior to MLC for endurance and reliability, same as MLC is to SLC. There is no way to refute that, because it is fact.

Here's the way I see it:

SLC
- usually only available in lower capacities.
- very, very expensive.
- the amazing endurance should be categorized as insanity.

MLC
- available in the highest capacities available today.
- currently defines market pricing for given capacity ranges and interface styles.
- some models boast very good endurance.

TLC
- also available in the highest capacities available today.
- not much savings over MLC drives.
- the most inferior endurance and reliability...doesn't justify being priced so close to MLC except to sucker people out of their money.

NVMe
- pushing the boundaries of performance and capacity, and will only increase in size.
- very expensive compared to MLC, but will decrease significantly once it becomes mainstream.
- modest to superior endurance and reliability.
 
^ Fair and honest points, but it depends on your use case scenario. I currently run a 256GB 840 Pro as my boot drive, which will be upgraded to an NVMe drive at some point (probably my next build). I run a 1TB 850 EVO as my Steam drive, and it's perfect for that. Write once, read many. It would have been silly for me to have paid the extra money for the Pro. I'm not concerned about the "shitty" TLC in it in the least. I don't think it's fair to lump all drives of a certain type into a particular category. I chose not to have a TLC boot drive, but that doesn't mean it doesn't make sense for other uses.
 
For those that don't want shitty TLC
Click to expand...

Maybe if this was 19nm TLC and a 256GB model I would be concerned about write endurance however this is a 2TB drive on a ~40nm node. I expect the drive to be a $25 item when it wears out in 2 to 3 decades.
 
drescherjm said:
Maybe if this was 19nm TLC and a 256GB model I would be concerned about write endurance however this is a 2TB drive on a ~40nm node. I expect the drive to be a $25 item when it wears out in 2 to 3 decades.
Click to expand...

850 Evo = 2000 P/E cycles with a TBW endurance of 75TB for 120/250 GB and 150TB for 500/1000 GB.

850 Pro = 6000 P/E cycles with a TBW endurance of 150TB for 128/256 GB and 300TB for 512/1024 GB.

For most write few/read many environments (like a majority of typical home users), the 2nd gen TLC drives from Samsung will suffice, especially the 500+ GB drives with the higher TBW. For those that do video/audio creation, editing, and/or encoding, I would really try to persuade avoiding a TLC drive and go with a drive that has superior P/E count and TBW.
 
I have this drive, it's great. I bought it as the sole drive for my gaming rig.
 
10-year warranty is nice.. but it would be like me clinging onto my 74GB WD Raptor today. In 10 years, this SSD will be considered slow, small capacity and outdated.
 
w1retap said:
10-year warranty is nice.. but it would be like me clinging onto my 74GB WD Raptor today. In 10 years, this SSD will be considered slow, small capacity and outdated.
Click to expand...

10 years ago we saw the first 500GB HDD ship and Windows XP was dominant. We needed about 3-5GB for a fully updated XP install.

Today, 500GB is still the gold standard for most common storage capacity being shipped in prebuild/oem desktops and laptops. There's a solid mix of Windows 7, Windows 8/8.1, and Windows 10 out there for OS popularity/install base...each of which require around 20GB.

If we are to assume that Windows OS size increases over time, then in 2025 we'll need to give up about 25-40GB. 2TB should be plenty usable at that time for OS, Office/productivity, add-ons, etc. Games...well, probably not so much for the AAA titles. I'd expect 8-24TB SSDs being mainstream and priced then at what 500-1000GB units are today.
 
I'd rather just spend the price on a fast SSD to house windows 10 and my programs and get a raptor drive or other comparable mechanical drive with 4-6 TB to use for all my movies/games for that same price and call it a day....
 
DejaWiz said:
10 years ago we saw the first 500GB HDD ship and Windows XP was dominant. We needed about 3-5GB for a fully updated XP install.

Today, 500GB is still the gold standard for most common storage capacity being shipped in prebuild/oem desktops and laptops. There's a solid mix of Windows 7, Windows 8/8.1, and Windows 10 out there for OS popularity/install base...each of which require around 20GB.

If we are to assume that Windows OS size increases over time, then in 2025 we'll need to give up about 25-40GB. 2TB should be plenty usable at that time for OS, Office/productivity, add-ons, etc. Games...well, probably not so much for the AAA titles. I'd expect 8-24TB SSDs being mainstream and priced then at what 500-1000GB units are today.
Click to expand...
That 500GB gold standard is very sub-par compared to today's enthusiast gold standard. My point was in 10 more years, the 2TB SSD will be very sub-par (capacity, speed, latency, form factor, etc).. but yes, still usable and will most likely be entry level consumer desktop material. I just find it much better to upgrade every 3 years and get the latest and greatest for less of an investment. Within a short time period like that, you can usually sell on Amazon/Ebay and make back a good percentage. 10 year old equipment, not so much.
 
w1retap said:
That 500GB gold standard is very sub-par compared to today's enthusiast gold standard. My point was in 10 more years, the 2TB SSD will be very sub-par (capacity, speed, latency, form factor, etc).. but yes, still usable and will most likely be entry level consumer desktop material. I just find it much better to upgrade every 3 years and get the latest and greatest for less of an investment. Within a short time period like that, you can usually sell on Amazon/Ebay and make back a good percentage. 10 year old equipment, not so much.
Click to expand...

500GB is still quite a lot of space, even for gamers.

40GB Win 7/8/10
3-5GB Office Pro 2013
55GB misc apps, add-ons, etc.
300GB actively used games, music, pics, etc.

...that's 400GB total.

I still stand by my assessment that a 2TB 850 Pro purchased today could very well still be an extremely viable boot and app drive for an enthusiast system when the warranty runs out (assuming the TBW hasn't yet been exceeded). ...and assuming that SATA3 compatible ports are still around in a decade.
 
DejaWiz said:
500GB is still quite a lot of space, even for gamers.

40GB Win 7/8/10
3-5GB Office Pro 2013
55GB misc apps, add-ons, etc.
300GB actively used games, music, pics, etc.

...that's 400GB total.

I still stand by my assessment that a 2TB 850 Pro purchased today could very well still be an extremely viable boot and app drive for an enthusiast system when the warranty runs out (assuming the TBW hasn't yet been exceeded). ...and assuming that SATA3 compatible ports are still around in a decade.
Click to expand...

The question, however is that if the drive dies 6 years from now (1 year out of warranty), how much will a replacement cost. If it's 200 (give or take) then you're better off with the EVO, because after inflation you'll spend less(in inflation adjusted dollars).

Anyway, people should get what they want. I think the vast majority of users are better off with the cheaper drive, but perhaps Video recording/editing is a non server use case where the Pro is a better choice.
 
DejaWiz said:
NVMe
- pushing the boundaries of performance and capacity, and will only increase in size.
- very expensive compared to MLC, but will decrease significantly once it becomes mainstream.
- modest to superior endurance and reliability.
Click to expand...

NVMe is not a memory component format. It's a logical device interface, like USB or SATA. Both the Samsung SM951-NVMe SSD and the Intel 750 NVMe SSD are MLC SSDs that use PCI-Express instead of SATA. There's nothing stopping an SSD maker from making a TLC NVMe drive, though I won't try to guess whether they will actually do it.
 
evilsofa said:
NVMe is not a memory component format. It's a logical device interface, like USB or SATA. Both the Samsung SM951-NVMe SSD and the Intel 750 NVMe SSD are MLC SSDs that use PCI-Express instead of SATA. There's nothing stopping an SSD maker from making a TLC NVMe drive, though I won't try to guess whether they will actually do it.
Click to expand...

i doubt a TLC drive could ever be competitive. Dont get me wrong. TLC would be faster in the NVMe interface but TLC is inherently slower than MLC and the same goes for MLC compared to SLC. Removing the SATA bottle neck will make TLC look even shittier.
 
evilsofa said:
NVMe is not a memory component format. It's a logical device interface, like USB or SATA. Both the Samsung SM951-NVMe SSD and the Intel 750 NVMe SSD are MLC SSDs that use PCI-Express instead of SATA. There's nothing stopping an SSD maker from making a TLC NVMe drive, though I won't try to guess whether they will actually do it.
Click to expand...

I know that. NVMe is a host control format. My point still stands: the components selected HAVE to be durable, or they will wear out exponentially faster than a SATA host control just due to the faster read and write capability. Plus, it makes zero sense to couple upcoming 3D Xpoint and Memristor modules to a SATA host because MLC already keeps up with the full speed capability of a SATA3 bus.
 
I've had my Intel 520 SSD for 5 years now and I've used it pretty aggressively I think. Reading the smart data, I only have 10TB written to it so far and the Samsung 850 Evo has a TBW rating of 150. I think I'll stick to the Evo, especially since performance wise its still one of the fastest drives out there. IMHO 152 bucks isn't worth something I'm never going to see performance or life wise.

The Pro drive is for someone who will pay 152 dollars for a small performance boost you'll never feel in real application usage (not benchmarks) and for those who will exceed 150 TBW in 5-7 years (Because I don't expect anyone to have a drive around longer than that and if you do, especially if your a hardware enthusiast. And if you do, your in the minority.)
 
FrozenSteel said:
I've had my Intel 520 SSD for 5 years now and I've used it pretty aggressively I think. Reading the smart data, I only have 10TB written to it so far and the Samsung 850 Evo has a TBW rating of 150. I think I'll stick to the Evo, especially since performance wise its still one of the fastest drives out there. IMHO 152 bucks isn't worth something I'm never going to see performance or life wise.

The Pro drive is for someone who will pay 152 dollars for a small performance boost you'll never feel in real application usage (not benchmarks) and for those who will exceed 150 TBW in 5-7 years (Because I don't expect anyone to have a drive around longer than that and if you do, especially if your a hardware enthusiast. And if you do, your in the minority.)
Click to expand...

When you do mix workloads and steady state the difference from an EVO and PRO is massive. Also consistency is vastly different. I had first gen TLC but fuck...my PC would hang because it couldn't handle steady state or mix loads worth shit. PC would freeze for several seconds at a time.

take a look at consistency 850 PRO is substantially better
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8747/samsung-ssd-850-evo-review/5

Mix loads the PRO is better but if I am reading the chart right the Extreme Pro is king in mix loads

Also look at how much better the PRO is in QD2. It is almost 2x faster
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/6860/samsung-850-evo-1tb-3d-nand-ssd-review/index6.html

Look at these steady states and you clearly see a 2x gain on the Extreme Pro and PRO SSDs over the EVO and this is even the 1TB EVO. The difference is greater in the lower capacity drives.
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/6860/samsung-850-evo-1tb-3d-nand-ssd-review/index7.html

You buy these "Pro" drives for consistency and heavy usage performance. If you barely use the drive sure. EVO will be comparable but if you actually trying using the drive in the middle of the night when AV/AM goes off or try to multitask on the drive the EVO and the likes will eat shit. Man was the first TLC drive shit when AV/AM would kick off. PC would just hang for seconds and i would struggle to stop the scans so the PC would stop hanging. Extreme Pro solved that and I was even able to use PC while those scans went off. If you transfer large amounts of files while trying to do various others things to the SSD an EVO type drive will tank in performance to possible levels of even an HDD. It can be brutal.

This is coming from a guy that does 120-150GB writes per day and 300-400GB of reads per day and Most of my reads and writes are in large batches. So I have done maybe 500GB of writes in a single day and a TB of reads in a single day. My PC has sat idle for days at a time so those numbers are average with lots of down time.
 
Last edited:
SomeGuy133 said:
When you do mix workloads and steady state the difference from an EVO and PRO is massive. Also consistency is vastly different. I had first gen TLC but fuck...my PC would hang because it couldn't handle steady state or mix loads worth shit. PC would freeze for several seconds at a time.

take a look at consistency 850 PRO is substantially better
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8747/samsung-ssd-850-evo-review/5
You buy these "Pro" drives for consistency and heavy usage performance. If you barely use the drive sure. EVO will be comparable but if you actually trying using the drive in the middle of the night when AV/AM goes off or try to multitask on the drive the EVO and the likes will eat shit. Man was the first TLC drive shit when AV/AM would kick off. PC would just hang for seconds and i would struggle to stop the scans so the PC would stop hanging. Extreme Pro solved that and I was even able to use PC while those scans went off. If you transfer large amounts of files while trying to do various others things to the SSD an EVO type drive will tank in performance to possible levels of even an HDD. It can be brutal.

This is coming from a guy that does 120-150GB writes per day and 300-400GB of reads per day and Most of my reads and writes are in large batches. So I have done maybe 500GB of writes in a single day and a TB of reads in a single day. My PC has sat idle for days at a time so those numbers are average with lots of down time.
Click to expand...

Due to the amount of writing you do, a pro makes sense. You get a 10% performance boost and 2x the write cycles, but for most on this forum, they'll likely write significantly less in a year than you do in a month.

FWIW, this is Anandtech's review of this drive (which is more recent)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9451/the-2tb-samsung-850-pro-evo-ssd-review/10
 
SomeGuy133 said:
When you do mix workloads and steady state the difference from an EVO and PRO is massive. Also consistency is vastly different. I had first gen TLC but fuck...my PC would hang because it couldn't handle steady state or mix loads worth shit. PC would freeze for several seconds at a time.

take a look at consistency 850 PRO is substantially better
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8747/samsung-ssd-850-evo-review/5

Mix loads the PRO is better but if I am reading the chart right the Extreme Pro is king in mix loads

Also look at how much better the PRO is in QD2. It is almost 2x faster
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/6860/samsung-850-evo-1tb-3d-nand-ssd-review/index6.html

Look at these steady states and you clearly see a 2x gain on the Extreme Pro and PRO SSDs over the EVO and this is even the 1TB EVO. The difference is greater in the lower capacity drives.
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/6860/samsung-850-evo-1tb-3d-nand-ssd-review/index7.html

You buy these "Pro" drives for consistency and heavy usage performance. If you barely use the drive sure. EVO will be comparable but if you actually trying using the drive in the middle of the night when AV/AM goes off or try to multitask on the drive the EVO and the likes will eat shit. Man was the first TLC drive shit when AV/AM would kick off. PC would just hang for seconds and i would struggle to stop the scans so the PC would stop hanging. Extreme Pro solved that and I was even able to use PC while those scans went off. If you transfer large amounts of files while trying to do various others things to the SSD an EVO type drive will tank in performance to possible levels of even an HDD. It can be brutal.

This is coming from a guy that does 120-150GB writes per day and 300-400GB of reads per day and Most of my reads and writes are in large batches. So I have done maybe 500GB of writes in a single day and a TB of reads in a single day. My PC has sat idle for days at a time so those numbers are average with lots of down time.
Click to expand...

In your case, the Samsung Pro is definitely worth the 152 dollars extra. I'm speaking for the 95% of the population that uses their PC's for gaming and normal tasks like browsing the web. The difference in game load times, PC boot times and application loading times is negligible with the Evo unless your sensitive to something being a second or two faster.

And when it comes to Multitasking, My 1TB Sandisk Ultra II (TLC SSD) can run AV while loading games at the same time with no noticeable difference in load times. No freezing either.

And if your writing that much, I highly suggest you get the Pro as you'll eat up that drives NAND in no time.
 
FrozenSteel said:
In your case, the Samsung Pro is definitely worth the 152 dollars extra. I'm speaking for the 95% of the population that uses their PC's for gaming and normal tasks like browsing the web. The difference in game load times, PC boot times and application loading times is negligible with the Evo unless your sensitive to something being a second or two faster.

And when it comes to Multitasking, My 1TB Sandisk Ultra II (TLC SSD) can run AV while loading games at the same time with no noticeable difference in load times. No freezing either.

And if your writing that much, I highly suggest you get the Pro as you'll eat up that drives NAND in no time.
Click to expand...

So this is where SSDs eat shit and this is normal usage if you want to multitask or use the computer when a stupid scan goes off.

You decide to use the PC at midnight on a saturday and Kaspersky/ malwarebytes goes off. MBAM takes 2-3 hours to scan a 1TB drive if you do indepth scans. KAspersky takes like 8 hours. You download a new game while you are trying to watch a movie off your drive while the game is downloading. You are also reading and loading stuff on browser at the same time.

I do the said above a lot and TLC drives just eat shit like that. I am up in the middle of the night a lot and I always catch AV/AM and i can do all the above at once or more. Hell throw in a BD rip while your at it and your SSD is totally eating shit.

OS
Game download
TV show
BD rip
Browsing
AV
AM

all at the same time. Have fun with a shit TLC drive. That is normal usage. Nothing fancy just multitasking/ using the computer at night when those stupid scans go off. Right there your SSD will eat shit if it is not highend and thats just normal programs...a bunch at once but normal day to day stuff.

Heaven for bid you throw in some Photoshop or some other editing program into the mix.

Hell lets make it more fun. Throw Serpent-Twofish-AES encryptions with a whirlpool hash....That's what I got on OS now. God I am glad I got this 4.8/4.9 HW and 950 PRO. Testing CPU now and will be getting 950 PRO up by weekend and I can throw out my Extreme Pro (figuratively) It only has like 45TB of writes so far in the last year and a half. (369 days of actual on time)
 
SomeGuy133 said:
So this is where SSDs eat shit and this is normal usage if you want to multitask or use the computer when a stupid scan goes off.

You decide to use the PC at midnight on a saturday and Kaspersky/ malwarebytes goes off. MBAM takes 2-3 hours to scan a 1TB drive if you do indepth scans. KAspersky takes like 8 hours. You download a new game while you are trying to watch a movie off your drive while the game is downloading. You are also reading and loading stuff on browser at the same time.

I do the said above a lot and TLC drives just eat shit like that. I am up in the middle of the night a lot and I always catch AV/AM and i can do all the above at once or more. Hell throw in a BD rip while your at it and your SSD is totally eating shit.

OS
Game download
TV show
BD rip
Browsing
AV
AM

all at the same time. Have fun with a shit TLC drive. That is normal usage. Nothing fancy just multitasking/ using the computer at night when those stupid scans go off. Right there your SSD will eat shit if it is not highend and thats just normal programs...a bunch at once but normal day to day stuff.

Heaven for bid you throw in some Photoshop or some other editing program into the mix.

Hell lets make it more fun. Throw Serpent-Twofish-AES encryptions with a whirlpool hash....That's what I got on OS now. God I am glad I got this 4.8/4.9 HW and 950 PRO. Testing CPU now and will be getting 950 PRO up by weekend and I can throw out my Extreme Pro (figuratively) It only has like 45TB of writes so far in the last year and a half. (369 days of actual on time)
Click to expand...

I'm just going to say I know very few who does all of the above, at the same time, on the same drive. For what it matters, the OS barely requires many resources once its loaded and its impact is negligible. If I'm watching a TV show, its either on my NAS, external hard drive or over the internet. I would never store all my TV and Movie data on a SSD, even if it was a 1TB SSD (Rather have it stored on cheap disk.) BD Rip also gets sent to one of the three storage mediums above, never to the SSD. Browsing the web is also negligible and will not impact the SSD. As for running AV and AM, I use one software package for both and theirs plenty of resources available as the above tasks either are not using the SSD or not impacting it very much.

So even if I did all the above, which very few do at the same time, on the same disk, having an Pro over an Evo would not make any sense.

However, the Pro does help when your using it as your only storage medium and your hitting it with some I/O intensive application such as video data as you've stated. At that point, I'd be worried about my processor being able to handle all the tasks as my AV consumes approx. 100% of two cores on my 4 core processor when doing an in depth scan. And that in depth scan does not require 8 hours like it does for you. Mine completes in 30 minutes.
 
FrozenSteel said:
I'm just going to say I know very few who does all of the above, at the same time, on the same drive. For what it matters, the OS barely requires many resources once its loaded and its impact is negligible. If I'm watching a TV show, its either on my NAS, external hard drive or over the internet. I would never store all my TV and Movie data on a SSD, even if it was a 1TB SSD (Rather have it stored on cheap disk.) BD Rip also gets sent to one of the three storage mediums above, never to the SSD. Browsing the web is also negligible and will not impact the SSD. As for running AV and AM, I use one software package for both and theirs plenty of resources available as the above tasks either are not using the SSD or not impacting it very much.

So even if I did all the above, which very few do at the same time, on the same disk, having an Pro over an Evo would not make any sense.

However, the Pro does help when your using it as your only storage medium and your hitting it with some I/O intensive application such as video data as you've stated. At that point, I'd be worried about my processor being able to handle all the tasks as my AV consumes approx. 100% of two cores on my 4 core processor when doing an in depth scan. And that in depth scan does not require 8 hours like it does for you. Mine completes in 30 minutes.
Click to expand...

Kaspersky is only some what properly threaded. MBAM is signle thread. Also all these programs are QD1 IIRC. Also browser actually can use the HDD for whatever reason. Don't ask me. I see it access my HDD while its the only program open. Granted I ussually have like pandora, hulu, and 15 other tabs open at once.

I can tell you for a matter of fact that there is a tangible difference in speed using 950 PRO over my Extreme Pro and there was a night and day difference from the original 840 (first TLC drive) to extreme pro. That 840 was utter shit.

Find me a good program to log disk usage and I'll monitor my disk usage one day and post it.

Also I am in the works of building my NAS. Next week I am setting SnapRAID upa fter i finish tweaking new CPU and get a couple other PCs running and shuffle some SSDs around. I usually RIP watch and rip another as I watch while messing around with other stuff.

Trust me on this one. I wouldn't have dumped that 840 in a matter like like 3-4 months if it wasn't shit and went with an Extreme Pro. Night and day. I don't doubt that the 950 PRO will be similar. I have already noticed difference in various tests I did and those were only measuring 1 or 2 programs vs several at once. I still probably wouldn't stream off my NAS if I had the choice because I like to shuffle back and forth in a video and I hate stutter from loading.
 
I concur with what FrozenSteel said. I never do all of that at once and if I did, they'd all use separate drives (well mostly)

SomeGuy133 said:
Kaspersky is only some what properly threaded. MBAM is signle thread. Also all these programs are QD1 IIRC. Also browser actually can use the HDD for whatever reason. Don't ask me. I see it access my HDD while its the only program open. Granted I ussually have like pandora, hulu, and 15 other tabs open at once.
Click to expand...

I know it's unpopular to suggest this, but try Norton. i don't know if it's multi-threaded or not, but it doesn't take that long and better still and it runs it's scans when the machine isn't in use. I haven't used Kaspersky since 2008, so I don't know what it does these days.
 
nilepez said:
I concur with what FrozenSteel said. I never do all of that at once and if I did, they'd all use separate drives (well mostly)



I know it's unpopular to suggest this, but try Norton. i don't know if it's multi-threaded or not, but it doesn't take that long and better still and it runs it's scans when the machine isn't in use. I haven't used Kaspersky since 2008, so I don't know what it does these days.
Click to expand...

I have found Norton misses some basic viruses in the past and i dont trust it. It also has a horrible interface and doesn't let me control it like i would like to. (It is also intrusive as all get out like mcafee. This is nubmer one reason why norton and mcaffee can eat shit and die.)

Granted, Kaspersky is a dog on an SSD. It seriously trashes the hell out of it. MBAM isn't very tough because its single thread completely.

The only thing I could do that would make that list of items not be on the same drive is the movie. The rest has to be on main drive and it would be idiotic to not put those on the fastest drive.
 
nilepez said:
I concur with what FrozenSteel said. I never do all of that at once and if I did, they'd all use separate drives (well mostly)



I know it's unpopular to suggest this, but try Norton. i don't know if it's multi-threaded or not, but it doesn't take that long and better still and it runs it's scans when the machine isn't in use. I haven't used Kaspersky since 2008, so I don't know what it does these days.
Click to expand...

I also use Norton, switched from Kaspersky in 2010. Its a much better AV program than when I used it when I was younger. I've never gotten any malware, spyware or viruses since I loaded it back in 2010 (and I visit many sketchy websites) and its scans seem fast and when it comes to overall system speed, don't even know its running.
 
FrozenSteel said:
I also use Norton, switched from Kaspersky in 2010. Its a much better AV program than when I used it when I was younger. I've never gotten any malware, spyware or viruses since I loaded it back in 2010 (and I visit many sketchy websites) and its scans seem fast and when it comes to overall system speed, don't even know its running.
Click to expand...

the thing is it doesn't scan files already scanned but i dont trust that approach because it could always be dupped. Kaspersky has that too but i simply dont trust it for security reasons.
 
Panda is said to be very light on resources, and rated well during a recent AV Comparatives test.
 
SomeGuy133 said:
I have found Norton misses some basic viruses in the past and i dont trust it. It also has a horrible interface and doesn't let me control it like i would like to. (It is also intrusive as all get out like mcafee. This is nubmer one reason why norton and mcaffee can eat shit and die.)

Granted, Kaspersky is a dog on an SSD. It seriously trashes the hell out of it. MBAM isn't very tough because its single thread completely.

The only thing I could do that would make that list of items not be on the same drive is the movie. The rest has to be on main drive and it would be idiotic to not put those on the fastest drive.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why you think it's intrusive. At most it pops up once a week with a report of what it found. I haven't used Kaspersky in 10 years, but when I did, it popped up more dialogs than any other program I've used. I uninstalled it when the sub was up and never looked back.
 
nilepez said:
I'm not sure why you think it's intrusive. At most it pops up once a week with a report of what it found. I haven't used Kaspersky in 10 years, but when I did, it popped up more dialogs than any other program I've used. I uninstalled it when the sub was up and never looked back.
Click to expand...

how it hyjacks your browser, search engine, downloads, "performance alerts", "performance improvements, and countless other BS i dont want or need.

Plus its made for retards...so is kaspersky but its less painful. I miss how awesome Trendmicro was back in the day. It went total shit in like 2006. It was very crisp windows 2000 style with every to find advance menus and stuff. Now there are these unknown symbals, multiplay pages to click through...its annoying. Everything used to be on just a few pages and it was easy to find stuff but now its a hunt for advance settings.

dont get me wrong i am no fan of kaspersky but its more tolerable than norton.
 
SomeGuy133 said:
how it hyjacks your browser, search engine, downloads, "performance alerts", "performance improvements, and countless other BS i dont want or need.

Plus its made for retards...so is kaspersky but its less painful. I miss how awesome Trendmicro was back in the day. It went total shit in like 2006. It was very crisp windows 2000 style with every to find advance menus and stuff. Now there are these unknown symbals, multiplay pages to click through...its annoying. Everything used to be on just a few pages and it was easy to find stuff but now its a hunt for advance settings.

dont get me wrong i am no fan of kaspersky but its more tolerable than norton.
Click to expand...

I get none of those things. All you have to do is say don't install them and you don't get them. I'm not sure when you last used Norton, but it's pretty solid and rarely steals focus from whatever you're working on.
 
Might want to give Bitdefender a whirl. If an AV is making an SSD eat shit while you are using it, then you should either reschedule the AV tasks or look for a better AV. The AV is the problem, not the SSD.
 
evilsofa said:
Might want to give Bitdefender a whirl. If an AV is making an SSD eat shit while you are using it, then you should either reschedule the AV tasks or look for a better AV. The AV is the problem, not the SSD.
Click to expand...

The free version Bitdefender has 0 configuration and does some sneaky stuff.
For example, I ran a full scan and it found a bunch of false positives, quarantined half of them, deleted (or somehow hid) the other half without asking. Including .exe, .iso, .cmd files. Nothing shows in the history for those hidden/deleted files and I can't replace them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top