For a budget SATA SSD upgrade in 2026, the Crucial BX500 1TB wins on price per gigabyte, and the Samsung 870 EVO 250GB wins on long-term reliability. For most laptop and desktop upgrades the BX500 is the right pick. For a 24/7 server boot drive, an old NAS, or any scenario where a drive failure would ruin a week, pay the premium for the EVO.
Why the comparison comes up so often
The Crucial BX500 1 TB and the Samsung 870 EVO 250 GB end up in shopping carts a lot in 2026 because they're often near the same price — about $45 — and they're the two SATA SSDs from major brands at the budget tier that pass a basic credibility check. The BX500 is Micron's entry SATA part; the 870 EVO is Samsung's last-gen flagship SATA part now priced like a budget drive.
They are not the same kind of drive. The BX500 is a DRAM-less, 3D-NAND, budget-positioned SKU. The 870 EVO is a DRAM-equipped, V-NAND, premium-tier SKU that has been around long enough to be cheap. The buying decision is really "do I want maximum capacity at this price (BX500 at 1 TB), or do I want the better drive at a smaller capacity (870 EVO at 250 GB)?"
Key takeaways
- BX500 1 TB gives you 4× the capacity for the same price as 870 EVO 250 GB.
- 870 EVO has a 5-year warranty; BX500 has a 3-year warranty.
- 870 EVO has DRAM cache; BX500 is DRAM-less. DRAM matters for sustained writes, not bursts.
- BX500 sustains writes at 90–110 MB/s after its SLC cache; 870 EVO sustains 480+ MB/s.
- For a typical desktop or laptop boot drive, both feel identical in daily use.
- For a 24/7 server or any sustained-write workload, the 870 EVO is worth the smaller capacity.
Spec table
| Spec | Crucial BX500 1 TB | Samsung 870 EVO 250 GB |
|---|---|---|
| Form factor | 2.5" SATA | 2.5" SATA |
| Interface | SATA 6 Gb/s | SATA 6 Gb/s |
| Controller | SM2259XT (DRAM-less) | Samsung MKX (DRAM-equipped) |
| NAND | Micron 3D TLC | Samsung V-NAND TLC |
| DRAM cache | None (HMB-only) | LPDDR4 512 MB |
| Sequential read | 540 MB/s | 560 MB/s |
| Sequential write | 500 MB/s | 530 MB/s |
| Random read | 60 K IOPS | 98 K IOPS |
| Random write | 80 K IOPS | 88 K IOPS |
| TBW endurance | 360 TB | 150 TB |
| Warranty | 3 years | 5 years |
| Approx price (mid-2026) | ~$45 | ~$45 |
Per the Crucial BX500 product page and the Samsung 870 EVO product page, the headline numbers favor the EVO marginally on sequential and decisively on random I/O.
Benchmark table: what you actually feel
These figures sync with Tom's Hardware budget SSD coverage and consistent community testing.
| Workload | BX500 1 TB | 870 EVO 250 GB | Practical impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Windows 11 boot (cold) | 24 s | 21 s | Imperceptible |
| Steam game install 40 GB | 2 min 10 s | 1 min 35 s | Noticeable on big installs |
| Game level load (typical) | 6.2 s | 5.4 s | Barely perceptible |
| Sustained sequential write past SLC cache | 90–110 MB/s | 480–510 MB/s | Big delta on huge file copies |
| 4K random read (mixed) | ~60 K IOPS | ~98 K IOPS | Felt under heavy multitasking |
| Power consumption idle | 0.5 W | 0.3 W | Matters for laptops |
| Power consumption active | 2.8 W | 2.5 W | Matters for laptops |
For typical desktop use — boot, launch apps, install the occasional game — both drives feel identical. The EVO pulls ahead on (1) big sustained file copies and (2) heavy mixed I/O workloads like databases, VM hosts, or compile-heavy development environments.
Where DRAM-less hurts the BX500
The BX500 uses Host Memory Buffer (HMB), borrowing a small slice of system RAM in lieu of an on-drive DRAM cache. HMB is fine for typical desktop workloads — the buffer is small but the system RAM is fast enough to keep up. The cases where HMB shows its limits:
- Sustained sequential writes past the SLC cache (about 12 GB on the 1 TB model). The BX500 falls from 510 MB/s to 90–110 MB/s; the 870 EVO sustains 480+ MB/s indefinitely.
- Heavy random write workloads — database scratch volumes, VM hosts.
- Long-uptime servers where the SLC cache stays full for hours at a time.
For the upgrade scenarios most buyers face — a laptop SSD swap, a desktop boot drive, a Steam library volume — none of those apply.
Where the 870 EVO's TBW gap matters
The 870 EVO 250 GB carries a 150 TB endurance rating; the BX500 1 TB carries 360 TB. Per terabyte of capacity, the BX500's endurance is roughly 90 TB per logical TB; the EVO's is 600 TB per logical TB. The EVO is rated for far more lifetime writes per GB than the BX500.
For a typical desktop write pattern of 20 GB per day, both drives will outlast the system around them. For a Plex transcode scratch drive, an active video editing scratch volume, or a high-write-rate database, the EVO's endurance lead is meaningful.
For the laptop or desktop replacing a dying SATA drive, the BX500's endurance is more than enough for the next 5 years.
Real-world reliability: what the community has seen
The 870 EVO line has been on the market since 2021 with a strong reputation; the dominant failure mode of cheap SATA SSDs ("drive disappears from BIOS after firmware glitch") is essentially absent from 870 EVO returns. The Samsung Magician software supports firmware updates and SMART monitoring out of the box.
The BX500 has been on the market about the same length of time and has a more mixed reputation: most users report years of trouble-free use, but firmware bugs in early production runs caused some drives to brick after specific power-loss events. Crucial issued firmware updates to address these and current production runs are stable, but the legacy is part of the picture.
Practically: both drives have well-understood failure characteristics in 2026. Neither is a coin flip in the sense that no-name SSDs are.
Use cases mapped to picks
- Laptop or desktop boot drive upgrade, family use. BX500 1 TB. 4× the capacity at the same price; the workload is well below where DRAM helps.
- Steam library or general gaming volume. BX500 1 TB. Game installs are slower past the SLC cache but you do them rarely.
- Server boot drive on a 24/7 box. 870 EVO 250 GB. The 5-year warranty and DRAM cache earn their keep.
- Plex transcode scratch / video editing temp. 870 EVO 250 GB at minimum; consider a 500 GB or 1 TB EVO if the workload is heavy.
- Photo backup primary drive (Immich on Pi). BX500 1 TB. Per our Immich on Pi guide, the workload is sequential writes well within BX500's comfort zone.
- External backup target. Either is fine. The BX500's 1 TB capacity makes more sense for backup volume.
What about NVMe at this price?
The honest answer: if you have an M.2 slot, take the WD Blue SN550 1 TB NVMe for about $50 instead. It's 4× faster sequentially, 4–5× faster on 4K random I/O, and only $5 more than a 1 TB BX500. Many late-model laptops and almost every desktop from 2018 onward have an M.2 slot.
SATA picks like these still matter because (a) older systems are SATA-only, and (b) sometimes the M.2 slot is taken by the boot drive and you need a second volume.
For our full SATA-vs-NVMe budget analysis see Best Budget Internal SSD for 2026.
Common pitfalls
- Buying a drive for capacity that doesn't fit. Verify your case or laptop bay; the 2.5" form factor is the same but some thin laptops only accept 7 mm-height drives.
- Cloning to a smaller drive. The 250 GB EVO is smaller than most 2026 boot setups. Verify your used space fits.
- Forgetting TRIM. Both drives need TRIM; Windows enables it by default, Linux needs
fstrim.timer. - Underpowering an external enclosure. A USB 2.0 enclosure throttles both drives to ~35 MB/s.
- Comparing burst numbers only. The BX500's headline sequential write number is honest for the first 12 GB. Past that, the picture changes.
Common questions
- "Will the BX500 die in a year?" Statistically no. Both drives have similar real-world reliability; the EVO has a small edge in failure-rate data, not a huge one.
- "Is the 870 EVO worth 4× the price-per-GB?" Yes for sustained-write workloads, server boots, and anything you want to last 5+ years. No for typical desktop use.
- "Does the DRAM cache actually matter?" Yes on sustained writes, on random-heavy workloads, and on long-uptime servers. No on a laptop boot drive.
Three real upgrade scenarios
Family laptop, slow boot, 256 GB original drive almost full. The right pick is the Crucial BX500 1 TB. The user gets 4× the storage and a transformed boot time. The workload is a family laptop — Chrome, Office, video calls — that never sustains writes past the SLC cache. Total cost $45 plus a $12 SATA-to-USB enclosure for the clone.
Small Linux homelab box on 24/7. Samsung 870 EVO 250 GB as boot, 1 TB BX500 as data. The boot drive sees mixed I/O all day and rarely fills; the data drive sees sequential writes from backups. Split the workload across the drives that suit each side. Total cost $90 for both.
Photo backup primary on Raspberry Pi 4. The Crucial BX500 1 TB in a USB 3.0 enclosure, per our Immich on Pi guide. The workload is "many small writes plus occasional big copy" and the BX500 handles it fine. A second 870 EVO 250 GB lives in another USB 3.0 enclosure as the offsite weekly snapshot target.
What about the 870 EVO 1 TB?
When the 870 EVO 1 TB drops to BX500 1 TB pricing — which happens during sales — it is the obvious right answer over the BX500 at the same capacity. The DRAM cache, the 5-year warranty and the higher TBW endurance per GB all favor it. The reason it's not a Top Pick here is that at MSRP it sells for around $75–85, well above the BX500's $45. Watch for sales; if the gap closes to $10, take the EVO.
When NOT to buy either of these
- You have an M.2 slot. Buy the WD Blue SN550 1 TB NVMe at $50 — the price gap is small and the speed gap is large.
- You need ≥2 TB on one drive. Move up the same brand families to the 870 EVO 1 TB or the BX500 2 TB.
- You're building a NAS that runs 24/7. The 870 EVO works but a true NAS-rated drive (Synology SAT5210, WD Red SSD) is better-suited for that workload.
Bottom line
For most upgrades in 2026 — laptop SSD swap, desktop boot drive replacement, second drive for a Steam library, photo backup primary on a Pi — the Crucial BX500 1 TB wins on per-gigabyte cost and the workload doesn't punish DRAM-less. For a 24/7 server boot drive, a sustained-write workload, or anywhere you'd value the 5-year warranty over the extra capacity, the Samsung 870 EVO 250 GB earns the premium. Both are honest, well-understood drives; the choice comes down to which axis you're optimizing.
Related guides
- Best Budget Internal SSD for 2026
- Self-Hosted Immich on a Raspberry Pi 4 8GB
- Air-Gapped Local LLM Rig for Privacy
Citations and sources
This piece is editorial synthesis based on publicly available information. No independent first-party benchmarking is reported.
