As long as you stick with TLC drives, you shouldn't have troubles with the endurance or life span of any modern SSD. Most 1TB drives with TLC memory last the equivalent of writing 300TB in them. Will you fill the drive so many times before you upgrade a gain?

That said, stay away from the drives fitted with QLC memory.

Problem is that you can't always see what is used in the model. But yeah, always take a good look what kind of memory is used in the model you're looking for.

For reference, I will probably use this one in my next build: https://www.alternate.de/ADATA/XPG-Gammix-S11-Pro-2-TB-SSD/html/product/1583693?

My general rule is that if you can't find what kind of memory it's using, assume it's the worst and move along. Better be safe than sorry.

I just upgraded my rig, so i ended up spending as much on a 1tb nvme as I did on my cpu. Mainly cause I don't want to have to replace it in 2-4 years when there's finally a next gen game that compels me to upgrade again.

I've been playing sekiro, and it takes between 5-8 seconds to load every time I die, which doesn't quite match the 10x theoretical improvement over my old SATA SSD. My PC starts up faster though...but that might be thanks to the much faster cpu.

I'm still storing my games on an HDD. SSD prices were getting there but were not quite there yet when I got my current SSD, so it's not big enough for games. I'm looking to upgrade at some point in the future but I'm in no rush to go through that hassle again since there doesn't seem to be any real need yet.

THX to both for infos and suggestions. 
One suggested measure I read is getting a drive oversized also compared to its future maximum filling, so that the drive internal logic has plenty of space to slow down wear, but it makes the overprice even higher. Using them mainly for data that are often read and rarely rewritten is probably the best solution to have both reliability and speed at a good price.
In a future of solid state drives that being meant to totally replace HDD's will have to offer longer term rewrite reliability, the holy grail could be self healing insulator layers in the ICs, maybe with the progress of nanomaterials it will become easier, for now the most notable examples are at a macroscopic scale, not suitable for chips for many reasons, the material dielectric strength is probably too low at microscopic thickness, they are macromolecules, much bigger than metal oxides, they are polymers so they can't be created in an easy and very robust way like oxidising the chip material itself, and their self healing capabilities require a bulk of material, another problem working at nanometric scale.
But maybe the solution will be completely different, for example some evolution of holographic storage.

ive just bought a m.2 drive to keep DCS world on but my 2 HDD i hope to replace them with SSD soon ive 5 drives total but the 2 mechanical drives need replacing. apart from that i will definatly be swapping back to console when ps5 comes out

Endurances from:
SLC > MLC
MLC > TLC
TLC > QLC

All took a hit.

But drive sizes increased, which meant you were able to write more overall data before failure.

QLC will reach a point where it will be a better option than TLC, it will just take some time... But for low-latency, absolute best reliability and performance, SLC is where it is at, sadly they aren't really produced anymore.
Samsung still makes MLC drives though which are the fastest on the market.

The only thing you got to be careful with is that while MLC usually means 2-bit but since M actually stand for muti it has been used instead of TLC in spec sheets.  I don't think I seen any cases yet of it being used instead of QLC.

For example you will see the 970 EVO listed as Samsung 64L V-NAND 3-bit MLC.  Which is actually TLC (3-bit).  Samsung Pro series is 2-bit (what most people consider MLC).

Yeah, it's another case of advertising fluff getting in the way of technology definitions. Is what it is.

To Samsungs credit they still use 2-bit NAND for their high-end offerings like the 980 PRO