Did this coupon
work for you?
work for you?
Sorry, this deal has expired.
Get notified of deals like this in the future.
Add Deal Alert for this Item
Frontpage Deal
Samsung EDU/EPP Discount: 2TB Samsung 870 QVO 2.5" MLC V-Nand Internal SSD EXPIRED
$162
$219.99
+ Free Shipping
Samsung.com offers Eligible Samsung Education / Employee Discount Customers: 2TB Samsung 870 QVO Series 2.5" MLC V-Nand Internal Solid State Drive (MZ-77Q2T0B/AM) on sale for $161.99 when you follow instructions below. Shipping is free.
Thanks community member FrozenBeer for sharing this deal
Deal Instructions:
Thanks community member FrozenBeer for sharing this deal
Deal Instructions:
- Sign in with your eligible Samsung account that qualifies for Samsung Education or Employee Perks Program (EPP) Discounts
- Click here for 2TB Samsung 870 QVO Series 2.5" MLC V-Nand Internal Solid State Drive
- Add to cart
- Proceed to checkout
- Your total will be $161.99 + free shipping.
- 2TB capacity
- Samsung 4-Bit MLC V-NAND
- Up to 560 MBps Max Sequential Read Speeds
- Up to 530 MBps Max Sequential Write Speeds
- 2.5" SATA Form Factor
- Improved random access speed/sustained performance
Editor's Notes & Price Research
Written by
- Price Research: Our research indicates that 2TB Samsung 870 QVO Series 2.5" MLC V-Nand Internal Solid State Drive is $18 less (10% Savings) than the next best price from a reputable merchant with prices starting from $179.99
- Samsung Return Policy: Eligible for returns within 15-Days of delivery (details).
- Warranty: Includes 3-Year Warranty
Good deal?
You gave thanks to FrozenBeer for this post.
Thank you!
FrozenBeer posted this deal. Say thanks!
Thank you!
FrozenBeer posted this deal. Say thanks!
Original Post
Written by
Edited June 14, 2021
at 01:11 PM
SAMSUNG 870 QVO SATA III 2.5" SSD 2TB
only $161 with EDU discount Not as good as the Amazon deal from March, but $161 is still pretty decent.
https://www.samsung.com/us/comput...7q2t0b-am/
**warranty is only 3-year**
screenshot of the $161 price on Samsung EDU website attached below:
only $161 with EDU discount Not as good as the Amazon deal from March, but $161 is still pretty decent.
https://www.samsung.com/us/comput...7q2t0b-am/
**warranty is only 3-year**
screenshot of the $161 price on Samsung EDU website attached below:
If you purchase something through a post on our site, Slickdeals may get a small share of the sale.
Check Out Similar Computers Deals
View AllFrontpage Deal
$649
In Store Only
49
92
Frontpage Deal
$95
+ Free Shipping
55
114
Frontpage Deal
$35
+ Free Store Pickup
54
55
About the OP
45 Comments
Featured Comments
Because of the finer gradations of voltages at higher bit counts, it's slower to write. You have to be more careful placing the proper charge in the cell, and reading it back. Sometimes they even resort to reading it multiple times, and averaging the result to get the "correct" voltage measurement.
Because the charge slowly leaks out over time, the voltage gradually drops, eventually resulting in data loss. The more bits per cell, the smaller a drop before the data is lost. And the shorter the longevity of the data (unless the drive regularly refreshes the charge, which decreases the lifespan of the cell).
These are all consequences of using more voltage levels per cell. Nothing to do with the chips themselves.
Note that this puts these high-capacity QLC and PLC SSDs between a rock and a hard place. They're too slow for enthusiast use (unless you do a ton of SLC buffering). And they have poor reliability for long-term storage. So if you don't want to use them if you need to fast data access, and you don't want to use them if you need to write a little data and leave it there a long time, what exactly are you supposed to use them for? The caching performance is gonna have to be stellar, or they're going to have to prove its long duration endurance for QLC to be accepted.
The cost savings is not that big a deal either.
Say SLC costs $100 per TB of flash cells (NAND)
MLC would be $50, a $50 savings per GB compared to SLC
TLC would be $33, a $17 savings per GB compared to MLC
QLC would be $25, an $8 savings per GB compared to TLC
PLC would be $20, a $5 savings per GB compared to QLC
QLC is pretty close to the point where I would just rather pay the extra $8 (about $15 at retail) for the better speed and reliability of TLC. (The endurance issues with TLC have largely been canceled out by increases in drive size. A 1 TB SSD has 4x the write endurance of a 250 GB SSD, 8x that of a 125 GB SSD. Maybe that might be a niche for QLC in a decade, when a 10 TB SSD costs $100, and endurance is a non-issue.)
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Sounds like they don't have much faith in their drives, why should we?
Sounds like they don't have much faith in their drives, why should we?
Because of the finer gradations of voltages at higher bit counts, it's slower to write. You have to be more careful placing the proper charge in the cell, and reading it back. Sometimes they even resort to reading it multiple times, and averaging the result to get the "correct" voltage measurement.
Because the charge slowly leaks out over time, the voltage gradually drops, eventually resulting in data loss. The more bits per cell, the smaller a drop before the data is lost. And the shorter the longevity of the data (unless the drive regularly refreshes the charge, which decreases the lifespan of the cell).
These are all consequences of using more voltage levels per cell. Nothing to do with the chips themselves.
Note that this puts these high-capacity QLC and PLC SSDs between a rock and a hard place. They're too slow for enthusiast use (unless you do a ton of SLC buffering). And they have poor reliability for long-term storage. So if you don't want to use them if you need to fast data access, and you don't want to use them if you need to write a little data and leave it there a long time, what exactly are you supposed to use them for? The caching performance is gonna have to be stellar, or they're going to have to prove its long duration endurance for QLC to be accepted.
The cost savings is not that big a deal either.
- Say SLC costs $100 per TB of flash cells (NAND)
- MLC would be $50, a $50 savings per GB compared to SLC
- TLC would be $33, a $17 savings per GB compared to MLC
- QLC would be $25, an $8 savings per GB compared to TLC
- PLC would be $20, a $5 savings per GB compared to QLC
QLC is pretty close to the point where I would just rather pay the extra $8 (about $15 at retail) for the better speed and reliability of TLC. (The endurance issues with TLC have largely been canceled out by increases in drive size. A 1 TB SSD has 4x the write endurance of a 250 GB SSD, 8x that of a 125 GB SSD. Maybe that might be a niche for QLC in a decade, when a 10 TB SSD costs $100, and endurance is a non-issue.)Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Sounds like they don't have much faith in their drives, why should we?
Because of the finer gradations of voltages at higher bit counts, it's slower to write. You have to be more careful placing the proper charge in the cell, and reading it back. Sometimes they even resort to reading it multiple times, and averaging the result to get the "correct" voltage measurement.
Because the charge slowly leaks out over time, the voltage gradually drops, eventually resulting in data loss. The more bits per cell, the smaller a drop before the data is lost. And the shorter the longevity of the data (unless the drive regularly refreshes the charge, which decreases the lifespan of the cell).
These are all consequences of using more voltage levels per cell. Nothing to do with the chips themselves.
Note that this puts these high-capacity QLC and PLC SSDs between a rock and a hard place. They're too slow for enthusiast use (unless you do a ton of SLC buffering). And they have poor reliability for long-term storage. So if you don't want to use them if you need to fast data access, and you don't want to use them if you need to write a little data and leave it there a long time, what exactly are you supposed to use them for? The caching performance is gonna have to be stellar, or they're going to have to prove its long duration endurance for QLC to be accepted.
The cost savings is not that big a deal either.
- Say SLC costs $100 per TB of flash cells (NAND)
- MLC would be $50, a $50 savings per GB compared to SLC
- TLC would be $33, a $17 savings per GB compared to MLC
- QLC would be $25, an $8 savings per GB compared to TLC
- PLC would be $20, a $5 savings per GB compared to QLC
QLC is pretty close to the point where I would just rather pay the extra $8 (about $15 at retail) for the better speed and reliability of TLC. (The endurance issues with TLC have largely been canceled out by increases in drive size. A 1 TB SSD has 4x the write endurance of a 250 GB SSD, 8x that of a 125 GB SSD. Maybe that might be a niche for QLC in a decade, when a 10 TB SSD costs $100, and endurance is a non-issue.)Because of the finer gradations of voltages at higher bit counts, it's slower to write. You have to be more careful placing the proper charge in the cell, and reading it back. Sometimes they even resort to reading it multiple times, and averaging the result to get the "correct" voltage measurement.
Because the charge slowly leaks out over time, the voltage gradually drops, eventually resulting in data loss. The more bits per cell, the smaller a drop before the data is lost. And the shorter the longevity of the data (unless the drive regularly refreshes the charge, which decreases the lifespan of the cell).
These are all consequences of using more voltage levels per cell. Nothing to do with the chips themselves.
Note that this puts these high-capacity QLC and PLC SSDs between a rock and a hard place. They're too slow for enthusiast use (unless you do a ton of SLC buffering). And they have poor reliability for long-term storage. So if you don't want to use them if you need to fast data access, and you don't want to use them if you need to write a little data and leave it there a long time, what exactly are you supposed to use them for? The caching performance is gonna have to be stellar, or they're going to have to prove its long duration endurance for QLC to be accepted.
The cost savings is not that big a deal either.
- Say SLC costs $100 per TB of flash cells (NAND)
- MLC would be $50, a $50 savings per GB compared to SLC
- TLC would be $33, a $17 savings per GB compared to MLC
- QLC would be $25, an $8 savings per GB compared to TLC
- PLC would be $20, a $5 savings per GB compared to QLC
QLC is pretty close to the point where I would just rather pay the extra $8 (about $15 at retail) for the better speed and reliability of TLC. (The endurance issues with TLC have largely been canceled out by increases in drive size. A 1 TB SSD has 4x the write endurance of a 250 GB SSD, 8x that of a 125 GB SSD. Maybe that might be a niche for QLC in a decade, when a 10 TB SSD costs $100, and endurance is a non-issue.)