FROM post 27
In case anyone else gets tricked like I did, this drive is basically an entry level performance unit, dramless. Samsung is piggybacking off the naming scheme reputation to hock these basic drives to unwitting consumers.
expired Posted by ct9999 • Jun 14, 2021
Jun 14, 2021 2:41 PM
Item 1 of 5
Item 1 of 5
expired Posted by ct9999 • Jun 14, 2021
Jun 14, 2021 2:41 PM
500GB Samsung SSD 980 PCIe M.2 NVMe Internal Solid State Drive
+ Free Shipping$60
$75
20% offB&H Photo Video
Visit B&H Photo VideoGood Deal
Bad Deal
Save
Share
Leave a Comment
Top Comments
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
The random r/w seems to be better than the 970 Pro, but everything else seems to be worse
113 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
And as such there is nothing going for this other than it is lower priced than the usual Samsung premium pricing. Given that Samsung is no longer the only game in the top performance group and there are plenty of contenders in the budget dram-less space, I dont see any reason to buy or recommend.
I can barely tell the difference between the HP 920 and 970 Evo. there is a diminishing of return after you hit certain speed. also, games (at least ones that i played) aren't bottle neck by loading speed. you may not able to tell any difference between SATA SSD and NVME unless you do a lot of video editing, database or running a lot VM .
I can barely tell the difference between the HP 920 and 970 Evo. there is a diminishing of return after you hit certain speed. also, games (at least ones that i played) aren't bottle neck by loading speed. you may not able to tell any difference between SATA SSD and NVME unless you do a lot of video editing, database or running a lot VM .
And as such there is nothing going for this other than it is lower priced than the usual Samsung premium pricing. Given that Samsung is no longer the only game in the top performance group and there are plenty of contenders in the budget dram-less space, I dont see any reason to buy or recommend.
samsung has been doing TLC for ages, anything non-pro has been TLC (i think the last one that's DLC was the 830, and that was a decade ago).
but honestly the MLC vs TLC argument has been largely outdated with the release of V-NAND. i won't get into the details here, but 3D V-NAND, even with smaller feature size, has been sufficient for most users (and WAY more than what the life time specified)
https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware...b_85
pay attention to that 250G 750 Evo (a 15nm TLC drive), sustained over 1.2PB of writes. the warranty of that was 3 year 60TBW. so a factor of 20
you are much more likely to experience the controller chip malfunction and lose all your data, than the flash cell wear out and loss some of your data (that's what happened to all my OCZ 64G/128G drives, but that's also over 15 years ago)
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
samsung has been doing TLC for ages, anything non-pro has been TLC (i think the last one that's DLC was the 830, and that was a decade ago).
If it convinced one person to buy this because they had heard MLC was more durable (and they are not Reddit nerds), then Samsung has pulled a successful con. No reason to give them a free pass.
There are performance implications of less durable SSDs, not just failure.
To get better TBW, they may do more aggressive wear leveling which gets progressively difficult as the SSD fills up and slows it down. Catastrophic loss of data for durability reasons doesn't typically happen. Typically, the controller chips can sense decreasing "levels" of retrieval in their write protocols and mark cells failed and use spare capacity. When the spare capacity gets used up, the total available storage gets less, so the SSD can effectively go for a long time but there are some artifacts in capacity or performance.
To quote professional reviewers about this SSD in https://www.guru3d.com/articles-p...iew,1.html
If it convinced one person to buy this because they had heard MLC was more durable (and they are not Reddit nerds), then Samsung has pulled a successful con. No reason to give them a free pass.
OCZ was an exception and long time ago. There is no evidence for the above that you are more likely to experience controller chip malfunction for current day SSDs (unless the controller chip was subjected to too much heat over time without sufficient cooling).
There are performance implications of less durable SSDs, not just failure.
To get better TBW, they may do more aggressive wear leveling which gets progressively difficult as the SSD fills up and slows it down. Catastrophic loss of data for durability reasons doesn't typically happen. Typically, the controller chips can sense decreasing "levels" of retrieval in their write protocols and mark cells failed and use spare capacity. When the spare capacity gets used up, the total available storage gets less, so the SSD can effectively go for a long time but there are some artifacts in capacity or performance.
To quote professional reviewers about this SSD in https://www.guru3d.com/articles-p...iew,1.html
i hear you, and i agree with everything you posted. but you are about 10 year too late to complaining about the use of MLC marketing term. Samsung has been using MLC to imply TLC since release of 840 Evo. it has become an accepted fact by this time.
It is never too late to expect them to do better now that there is plenty of competition. And not normalize "the lie" anymore.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Leave a Comment