I tend to buy Samsung and Intel, both working well in my devices.
It's a generalisation, but be careful of using new Samsung consumer SATA drives (860, 870) if you're using Linux.
The Linux kernel has workarounds in place for the older ones (840, 850 series). But the workarounds for the newer models are only starting to be looked at this week:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=203475
Without those workarounds (eg disabling NCQ trim), there are data loss problems.
Fixed support for queued trim was part of the marketing claims for the 860 series. Whatever's going on with the 860 and newer drives requires deeper investigation, because there's plenty of reason to believe that simply applying the old workaround is not accurately targeting the real problem.
It doesn't seem to have any real downsides. :)
That depends greatly on what your software's policy for issuing Trim commands is. Partly because of the dearth of drives properly supporting queued trim, it is common for Linux distro to only run trim commands via cron job, rather than issuing them in real time during a workload.
I’m running Linux on top in WSL1 and VMWare.
Also running Linux on ARM devices which have neither SATA nor PCIx. When I need fast disks in them to compile my C++ code, I simply use a network-mounted drive to build, gigabit LAN is good.
[edit]
smart says they have 631 days of power-on time, so maybe 2019?
[edit]
I seem to remember having issues a while back but I haven't seen any since I upgraded my firmware to RVT04B6Q
According to that Wikipedia list, Western Digital does manufacture their own flash, through a joint venture with Kioxia.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/western-digital-advanced-...
Edit: Looking into this further, TechPowerUp, Computerbase and others have mistaken K90UGY8J5B for K9DUGY8J5B. It's an easy mistake to make, and I've done exactly this before. But it completely explains the performance difference. The D that changed to a 0 signifies a switch from 16 dies per package down to 8 dies per package. The digits signifying the capacity of the package have stayed the same. The "B" at the end signifying the generation has also stayed the same, but Samsung didn't introduce 512Gbit TLC dies until a generation after they introduced 256Gbit TLC dies, so on the smaller dies the "B" means 92L and on the larger dies the "B" means 128L.
Wasn't also caching strategy changed with the newer controller? Larger dynamic slc, slower folding speed?
Samsung's drives are still operating with SLC caches that are smaller than the theoretical limit, which means that even after the cache is full, the drive should be able to accept some amount of writes that bypass the cache and have near native TLC performance; flushing the cache can be deferred a bit longer until the drive is actually starting to run out of free blocks, as opposed to typical QLC drives with maximally-sized SLC caches that run out of free blocks at the same point where the cache runs out.