Samsung 840 EVO vs Plextor PX-M5P |
Released August, 2013
Samsung 840 EVO
- 1,000 GB
- 2.5" SATA III
- 1,000 MB
6.9 Out of 10
by Tech Radar (Jul, 2013)The performance of these EVO drives is actually pretty astounding.
VS
Released August, 2012
Plextor PX-M5P
- 512 GB
- 2.5" SATA III
- 768 MB
6.7 Out of 10
by Tech Radar (Sep, 2012)It quotes performance figures of up to 540MB/s reads across the board, and while the write performance for the 128GB drive is quoted at up to 340MB/s, both the 256 and 512GB drives get up to 450MB/s..
SSDBoss Review Our evaluation of 840 EVO vs PX-M5P
read performance | |
How quickly data is read from the drive | |
| 4K Random Read, 4K Random Read Access Time and 512K Sequential Read | |
write performance | |
How quickly data is written to the drive | |
| 4K Random Write, 4K Random Write Access Time and 512K Sequential Write | |
real world benchmarks | |
How well the drive performs common tasks | |
| Windows 7 Boot-up Time, Photoshop Lens Filter and AS SSD ISO Copy | |
Benchmarks | |
How well the drive performs on common benchmarks | |
| PCMark Vantage and AS SSD Score | |
No winner declared
Too close to call
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Significantly higher capacity | 1,000 GB | vs | 512 GB | More than 95% higher capacity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Faster 4k random read | 318.8 MB/s | vs | 240.51 MB/s | Around 35% faster 4k random read | |||
| Larger cache | 1,000 MB | vs | 768 MB | More than 30% larger cache | |||
| Faster 512K sequential write | 510.27 MB/s | vs | 423.12 MB/s | More than 20% faster 512K sequential write | |||
| Lower avg. power consumption | 2.29 Watts | vs | 2.71 Watts | More than 15% lower avg. power consumption | |||
| Higher PCMark vantage score | 25,582 pts | vs | 23,353 pts | Around 10% higher PCMark vantage score | |||
| Lighter | 53 g | vs | 70 g | Around 25% lighter | |||
| Faster AS SSD ISO copy | 441.16 MB/s | vs | 287.61 MB/s | Around 55% faster AS SSD ISO copy | |||
| Lower 4k random read access time | 0.78 ms | vs | 1.04 ms | 25% lower 4k random read access time | |||
| |||||||
| Faster windows 7 boot-up time | 7.4 s | vs | 9.3 s | More than 20% faster windows 7 boot-up time | |||
| Significantly higher MTBF | 2,400,000 hours | vs | 1,500,000 hours | 60% higher MTBF | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of 840 EVO vs PX-M5P
4K Random Read
4K Random Write
Windows 7 Boot-up Time
Avg. Power Consumption
4K Random Read Access Time
4K Random Write Access Time
Reviews Word on the street
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $438 | ||
| Samsung 840 EVO vs Pro | ||
| | VS |  |
| $43 | ||
| Samsung 840 EVO vs Kingston SSDNow V300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| Samsung 840 EVO vs SSD 850 EVO | ||
| | VS |  |
| $215 | ||
| Samsung 840 EVO vs Crucial MX100 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $256 | ||
| Samsung 840 EVO vs Kingston HyperX 3K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $124 | ||
| Samsung 840 EVO vs Intel 530 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $300 | ||
| Samsung 840 EVO vs Crucial M500 | ||
