This collaborative space allows users to contribute additional information, tips, and insights to enhance the original deal post. Feel free to share your knowledge and help fellow shoppers make informed decisions.
Model: Crucial P310 1TB 2280 PCIe Gen4 3D NAND NVMe M.2 SSD – Up to 7,100 MB/s – Shift up to Gen4, with Acronis Offer, Internal Solid State Drive (PC) – CT1000P310SSD801
Deal History
Deal History includes data from multiple reputable stores, such as Best Buy, Target, and Walmart. The lowest price among stores for a given day is selected as the "Sale Price".
Sale Price does not include sale prices at Amazon unless a deal was posted by a community member.
Aside from warranty, NAND drive production is far less concerning than mechanical drives when it comes to "brand".
Just look at what's on the NVME PCB.
Outside of the NAND itself and the controller, the rest is very rudimentary. Most of it is components you'll find on every other circuit in existence.
As long as these companies are sourcing reputable NAND and controllers, that should be what matters most.
The only reason you didn't see more brands with mechanical drives is because the assembly of a mechanical drive is way more technical, requiring clean rooms and special gasses. However, the PCBs were often outsourced to the same types of companies now capable of making NVME drives.
What "best practices" guides are you referring to? Surely not the ones written by YouTubers and websites that run ads and partner with certain brands?
It's not like failure ratings are anything new. Hard drives advertise their MTBF and hardly anyone in the consumer world paid attention. It's just that this new crop of tech people are overly sensitive about everything (blame YouTube).
As for businesses, yes, the answer is to make regular backups.
That's why most of them are still using mechanical drives and tape.
If you had a petabyte to worry about, you would know this.
Okay, good. At least we have established you have no idea what you are talking about. How much down time do you think is involved with restoring a petabyte from mechanical drives?
Restoring from backups is a worst case nightmare scenario. It is better than going out of business but it is not something to take lightly. That is why you have RAID and also a strategy regarding the brands of the NVME drives you are using. That is also why there are companies that pay ransoms for ransomware even when they have backups. Sometimes it is literally cheaper just to pay the ransom and get back up and running than to restore from backup HDDs.
Drive brand and quality, RAID, and backups are a layered system. Only an ignorant amateur would think those things are interchangeable.
Also if you understood ZFS arrays you would understand why brand of NVME matters way more than brand of HDD.
Frankly I'm sick of people making these idiotic comparisons and analogies with "car warranties" and HDDs. These are all very different things used for different purposes with different failure modes.
Some reading for you "backup" Kang...
Quote
:
Advantages of paying the ransom
Reduce disruption
Regardless of the industry you operate in, ransomware can have a profound impact on your usual daily operations and may result in significant financial losses. Many organizations are willing to pay a relatively small amount of money in order to quickly resolve the issue and get their business back on track.
Can be cheaper
The main cost of ransomware is the associated downtime. In fact, according to Datto, the average cost of downtime is more than 10 times higher than the average requested ransom amount. As such, paying the ransom and quickly decrypting your files can work out to be much cheaper than spending time trying to restore your system from backups.
Insurance may help cover the costs
As mentioned above, there have been some high profile cases of insurance companies not paying out for ransomware incidents. Nevertheless, if you have invested in good cyber liability insurance, there's a good chance that your insurance will help cover at least a portion of the ransom cost.
Okay, good. At least we have established you have no idea what you are talking about. How much down time do you think is involved with restoring a petabyte from mechanical drives?
Restoring from backups is a worst case nightmare scenario. It is better than going out of business but it is not something to take lightly. That is why you have RAID and also a strategy regarding the brands of the NVME drives you are using. That is also why there are companies that pay ransoms for ransomware even when they have backups. Sometimes it is literally cheaper just to pay the ransom and get back up and running than to restore from backup HDDs.
Drive brand and quality, RAID, and backups are a layered system. Only an ignorant amateur would think those things are interchangeable.
Also if you understood ZFS arrays you would understand why brand of NVME matters way more than brand of HDD.
Frankly I'm sick of people making these idiotic comparisons and analogies with "car warranties" and HDDs. These are all very different things used for different purposes with different failure modes.
People who say "just have backups" are ignoramuses who have never worked in IT at scale.
Sorry, but you're full of it.
You're conflating a lot of different technologies and worst case scenarios in order to... what? Make things sound way more complicated than they need to be?
RAID is not a replacement for backups, for starters. It will not protect you from corrupted data. In fact, it propagates it. It's right in the name.
Likewise, data corruption isn't exclusively a symptom of hardware failure.
A proper backup strategy mitigates issues caused by either and is something every user —business or otherwise— should be doing as a last line of defense.
If you want to be choosy with brands, that's your prerogative. But it has zero bearing on whether or not you should be backing up your data.
As for the rest of your rambling, learn context.
Last edited by wherestheanykey March 8, 2025 at 05:37 PM.
You're conflating a lot of different technologies and worst case scenarios in order to... what? Make things sound way more complicated than they need to be?
RAID is not a replacement for backups, for starters. It will not protect you from corrupted data. In fact, it propagates it. It's right in the name.
Likewise, data corruption isn't exclusively a symptom of hardware failure.
A proper backup strategy mitigates issues caused by either and is something every user —business or otherwise— should be doing as a last line of defense.
If you want to be choosy with brands, that's your prerogative. But it has zero bearing on whether or not you should be backing up your data.
As for the rest of your rambling, learn context.
Lol!
Dude, backups are a clumsy worst case scenario. The fact you keep hammering them as your first line solution tells me all I need to know.
No sir. Brand of NVME, redundancy (RAID), file system (ZFS), best practices (scrubs), snapshots, ransomware protection (SnapShield), etc should be all in place to minimize the catastrophic need to use "backups."
Dude, backups are a clumsy worst case scenario. The fact you keep hammering them as your first line solution tells me all I need to know.
No sir. Brand of NVME, redundancy (RAID), file system (ZFS), best practices (scrubs), snapshots, ransomware protection (SnapShield), etc should be all in place to minimize the catastrophic need to use "backups."
Again, context.
You're on a thread about a consumer-grade 1TB NVME drive. And it's on sale, to boot.
Like I said previously, everyone should be backing up their data. As long as this is done regularly, it will mitigate most hardware failures, regardless of how they arise.
The fact that you're somehow finding qualms with this statement and attempting to make it overcomplicated might earn you an overinflated budget for your IT department, but it isn't going to work on people who know when to speak layman.
There's way too much conflation and far too much assumption/word insertion to take you seriously, even if what you're saying actually had traction.
Last edited by wherestheanykey March 8, 2025 at 06:03 PM.
Only slightly tho and by the time the cache fills, the TLC in the SN5000 will make it faster. Plus, the better durability/reliability of the WD is far superior.
Only slightly tho and by the time the cache fills, the TLC in the SN5000 will make it faster. Plus, the better durability/reliability of the WD is far superior.
I wouldn't say slightly.
It's apparently enough to warrant a $7 price difference.
Leave a Comment
Top Comments
According to https://www.techpowerup
Just look at what's on the NVME PCB.
Outside of the NAND itself and the controller, the rest is very rudimentary. Most of it is components you'll find on every other circuit in existence.
As long as these companies are sourcing reputable NAND and controllers, that should be what matters most.
The only reason you didn't see more brands with mechanical drives is because the assembly of a mechanical drive is way more technical, requiring clean rooms and special gasses. However, the PCBs were often outsourced to the same types of companies now capable of making NVME drives.
37 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
It's not like failure ratings are anything new. Hard drives advertise their MTBF and hardly anyone in the consumer world paid attention. It's just that this new crop of tech people are overly sensitive about everything (blame YouTube).
As for businesses, yes, the answer is to make regular backups.
That's why most of them are still using mechanical drives and tape.
If you had a petabyte to worry about, you would know this.
Restoring from backups is a worst case nightmare scenario. It is better than going out of business but it is not something to take lightly. That is why you have RAID and also a strategy regarding the brands of the NVME drives you are using. That is also why there are companies that pay ransoms for ransomware even when they have backups. Sometimes it is literally cheaper just to pay the ransom and get back up and running than to restore from backup HDDs.
Drive brand and quality, RAID, and backups are a layered system. Only an ignorant amateur would think those things are interchangeable.
Also if you understood ZFS arrays you would understand why brand of NVME matters way more than brand of HDD.
Frankly I'm sick of people making these idiotic comparisons and analogies with "car warranties" and HDDs. These are all very different things used for different purposes with different failure modes.
Some reading for you "backup" Kang...
Reduce disruption
Regardless of the industry you operate in, ransomware can have a profound impact on your usual daily operations and may result in significant financial losses. Many organizations are willing to pay a relatively small amount of money in order to quickly resolve the issue and get their business back on track.
Can be cheaper
The main cost of ransomware is the associated downtime. In fact, according to Datto, the average cost of downtime is more than 10 times higher than the average requested ransom amount. As such, paying the ransom and quickly decrypting your files can work out to be much cheaper than spending time trying to restore your system from backups.
Insurance may help cover the costs
As mentioned above, there have been some high profile cases of insurance companies not paying out for ransomware incidents. Nevertheless, if you have invested in good cyber liability insurance, there's a good chance that your insurance will help cover at least a portion of the ransom cost.
People who say "just have backups" are ignoramuses who have never worked in IT at scale.
Restoring from backups is a worst case nightmare scenario. It is better than going out of business but it is not something to take lightly. That is why you have RAID and also a strategy regarding the brands of the NVME drives you are using. That is also why there are companies that pay ransoms for ransomware even when they have backups. Sometimes it is literally cheaper just to pay the ransom and get back up and running than to restore from backup HDDs.
Drive brand and quality, RAID, and backups are a layered system. Only an ignorant amateur would think those things are interchangeable.
Also if you understood ZFS arrays you would understand why brand of NVME matters way more than brand of HDD.
Frankly I'm sick of people making these idiotic comparisons and analogies with "car warranties" and HDDs. These are all very different things used for different purposes with different failure modes.
Some reading for you "backup" Kang...
https://www.emsisoft.co
People who say "just have backups" are ignoramuses who have never worked in IT at scale.
You're conflating a lot of different technologies and worst case scenarios in order to... what? Make things sound way more complicated than they need to be?
RAID is not a replacement for backups, for starters. It will not protect you from corrupted data. In fact, it propagates it. It's right in the name.
Likewise, data corruption isn't exclusively a symptom of hardware failure.
A proper backup strategy mitigates issues caused by either and is something every user —business or otherwise— should be doing as a last line of defense.
If you want to be choosy with brands, that's your prerogative. But it has zero bearing on whether or not you should be backing up your data.
As for the rest of your rambling, learn context.
You're conflating a lot of different technologies and worst case scenarios in order to... what? Make things sound way more complicated than they need to be?
RAID is not a replacement for backups, for starters. It will not protect you from corrupted data. In fact, it propagates it. It's right in the name.
Likewise, data corruption isn't exclusively a symptom of hardware failure.
A proper backup strategy mitigates issues caused by either and is something every user —business or otherwise— should be doing as a last line of defense.
If you want to be choosy with brands, that's your prerogative. But it has zero bearing on whether or not you should be backing up your data.
As for the rest of your rambling, learn context.
Dude, backups are a clumsy worst case scenario. The fact you keep hammering them as your first line solution tells me all I need to know.
No sir. Brand of NVME, redundancy (RAID), file system (ZFS), best practices (scrubs), snapshots, ransomware protection (SnapShield), etc should be all in place to minimize the catastrophic need to use "backups."
Dude, backups are a clumsy worst case scenario. The fact you keep hammering them as your first line solution tells me all I need to know.
No sir. Brand of NVME, redundancy (RAID), file system (ZFS), best practices (scrubs), snapshots, ransomware protection (SnapShield), etc should be all in place to minimize the catastrophic need to use "backups."
You're on a thread about a consumer-grade 1TB NVME drive. And it's on sale, to boot.
Like I said previously, everyone should be backing up their data. As long as this is done regularly, it will mitigate most hardware failures, regardless of how they arise.
The fact that you're somehow finding qualms with this statement and attempting to make it overcomplicated might earn you an overinflated budget for your IT department, but it isn't going to work on people who know when to speak layman.
There's way too much conflation and far too much assumption/word insertion to take you seriously, even if what you're saying actually had traction.
It's apparently enough to warrant a $7 price difference.
Buy whichever looks better to you.
Leave a Comment