500GB Samsung SSD 980 PCIe M.2 NVMe Internal Solid State Drive EXPIRED

Good deal - we need deals on 1 and 2TBs too!

dramless, expect entry level performance.
The random r/w seems to be better than the 970 Pro, but everything else seems to be worse

Quote from PaulL3556 : dramless, expect entry level performance. The random r/w seems to be better than the 970 Pro, but everything else seems to be worse

"tl;dr - the 980 runs cooler, since it's not got that DRAM cache, and it will write 20GB a whopping .6 seconds slower than the 970 EVO Plus and 1.3 seconds faster than the 970 EVO. 980 is hands-down the SSD to pick. Details to follow if you're interested:

tl;you're STILL going to read? OK, here ya go:

Here's a rundown on how you would perceive the speed difference between the 970 EVO and the 980. At these verified _maximum_ transfer rates - if you are writing a 20 GB file okay? WRITING a 20GB file (assuming the source drive is not a bottleneck, i.e. is equivalent for both), the _theoretical_ elapsed time for the different SSDs is:

The 980 will write that 20GB in ~6.7 seconds (at 3000 MB/s)
The 970 EVO Plus will write that 20GB in ~6.1 seconds (at 3300 MB/s)
The 970 EVO will write that 20GB in ~8 seconds (at 2500 MB/s)

Which is to say that the differences would normally not be perceived. When considering that the 980, without the DRAM, is generating less heat - which matters - I would definitely go with the 980 for better heat management and a $20 savings over the 970 EVO Plus (2021-05-16 prices). You're only losing .6 seconds for those frequent huge file writes, heh.

20 GB is easily 3 to 5 full-length videos, in HD, or more - in under 7 seconds! Crazy.

Yep, go with the 980 with lower heat and wave goodbye to the .6 seconds... Ehh, probably not enough time to wave - wink goodbye. ;-)

As far as downloads - I cannot conceive of a situation where these SSDs will have ANY effect upon the speed. Period. Even on a super-fast broadband connection, the network is going to be the bottleneck. We are not quite getting multiple GB/s on typical broadband service. Typically, even a SATA drive at 550 MB/s will surpass most broadband download speeds, substantially even - most of the time."

- Quoted from Amazon Review

Quote from PaulL3556 : dramless, expect entry level performance. The random r/w seems to be better than the 970 Pro, but everything else seems to be worse

I thought the 980 was supposed to run somewhat cooler?(making heatsink somewhat unnecessary, especially if using a small enclosure)

Quote from FrozenBeer : I thought the 980 was supposed to run somewhat cooler?(making heatsink somewhat unnecessary, especially if using a small enclosure)

That is what is says, no? The 980 does run cooler and slightly slower b/c no DRAM cache

Quote from UniqueFang618 : That is what is says, no? The 980 does run cooler and slightly slower b/c no DRAM cache

my prebuilt Dell PC came with a WD 512GB nvme ssd.(not sure which kind it is, since it's OEM) A few months ago, there was a good deal on a FLIR attachment for old iPhones, so I bought one to play with. The WD SSD was the only red area in the PC(while copying large 4k videos files back and forth with an external HDD) It was even hotter than the i5-10400 running at 100%. I got a little nervous, so I installed a heatsink over it and added an extra 80mm pointing direct at the SSD.

How does this compare to the WD blue? And is a case necessary if it is just used to surf the web and watch videos?

Good for cache in Synology NAS?

Quote from livefrmnyc : Good for cache in Synology NAS?

Depends on your NAS. Their website says the 980 is not compatible with my 918+ but the 970 Pro is.

DRAM-less, pass

Quote from PaulL3556 : dramless, expect entry level performance. The random r/w seems to be better than the 970 Pro, but everything else seems to be worse

I just need to know what ones have dram? So I can start looking at those

Quote from BilboFraggins : Depends on your NAS. Their website says the 980 is not compatible with my 918+ but the 970 Pro is.

Thanks, I have to look it up then.