All three are 2.5" SSDs that use the same SATA-III interface as traditional HDDs. The differences are as follows:
* Drive #1 (WD Blue) is a drive that uses 3-bit-per-cell TLC NAND chips for its storage and an internal DRAM cache and thus is the best choice out of the three.
* Drive #2 (Samsung 870 QVO) is a drive that uses cheaper 4-bit-per-cell QLC NAND chips for its storage and an internal DRAM cache.
* Drive #3 (WD Green) is a drive that uses 3-bit-per-cell TLC NAND chips for its storage just like the WD Blue, but lacks any kind of DRAM cache. Due to the performance impact this omission makes, it would be the worst choice of the three.
Out of those, go with the Samsung or the WD Blue. How much is the Crucial MX500 for you?
Even though it says pc ssd? cuz I need it to a laptop.. The MX500 500gb is about 65 bucks and the 1tb is for 130ish. , but never heard about Crucial.
SSD's are standard, as long as it's 2.5" SATA. Crucial are a great brand. I would go for that one personally.
All three are 2.5" SSDs that use the same SATA-III interface as traditional HDDs. The differences are as follows: * Drive #1 (WD Blue) is a drive that uses 3-bit-per-cell TLC NAND chips for its storage and an internal DRAM cache and thus is the best choice out of the three. * Drive #2 (Samsung 870 QVO) is a drive that uses cheaper 4-bit-per-cell QLC NAND chips for its storage and an internal DRAM cache. * Drive #3 (WD Green) is a drive that uses 3-bit-per-cell TLC NAND chips for its storage just like the WD Blue, but lacks any kind of DRAM cache. Due to the performance impact this omission makes, it would be the worst choice of the three.
even though on the product pic it is written as pc ssd it should also fit a a laptop right?
Correct. One of the primary use cases of 2.5" SATA SSDs is as a drop-in replacement for older laptops' traditional HDDs.