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
+37 Deal Score
33,824 Views

Extension exclusive offer

Get up to 1% Cashback on this exclusive Offer when you download the Slickdeals Extension.

Install Extension
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:
  1. Sign in with your eligible Samsung account that qualifies for Samsung Education or Employee Perks Program (EPP) Discounts
    • EDU Discount Members: Click here while signed-in to activate your EDU discount
    • EPP Discount Members: Click here while signed-in to activate your EPP discount
  2. Click here for 2TB Samsung 870 QVO Series 2.5" MLC V-Nand Internal Solid State Drive
  3. Add to cart
  4. Proceed to checkout
  5. Your total will be $161.99 + free shipping.
About the Product:
  • 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

This deal may be eligible for up to 1% cashback at Samsung with Cashback Rewards, a program exclusively for Slickdeals members that enables you to maximize your savings by earning Cashback Rewards Points on select deals found on Slickdeals. Points are redeemable for PayPal credit, gift cards and more. Sign up and start getting paid to shop.

*Note: This message is automatically added when Slickdeals detects a deal with an active Cashback Rewards offer. Please see terms and exclusions for details and to verify eligibility.

Share
Good deal?
You gave thanks to FrozenBeer for this post.
Thank you!
FrozenBeer posted this deal. Say thanks!

Original Post

Written by
Edited June 14, 2021 at 02:11 PM by
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:
If you purchase something through a post on our site, Slickdeals may get a small share of the sale.
Deal
Score
+37
33,824 Views
$162
$219.99
About the OP
Send Message
Joined Oct 2016 L7: Teacher
847 Reputation Points
24 Deals Posted
1,064 Votes Submitted
2,980 Comments Posted
Questions & Answers BETA
mrkmrk69 asked this question on 06-14-2021 at 01:00 PM
06-14-2021 at 03:56 PM
more than enough.
RulzMD asked this question on 06-15-2021 at 02:00 PM

45 Comments

1 2 3 4
Post to Q&A to get a quicker answer to your question!

Featured Comments

There's no quality difference in the chips. Flash memory stores data by placing a charge at a certain voltage inside a cell. QLC just uses more voltage levels per cell. SLC has 2 voltage levels (1 bit). MLC has 4 (2 bits). TLC has 8 (3 bits). QLC has 16 (4 bits). And the planned PLC has 32 voltage levels per cell (5 bits).

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.)
Devil's advocate: because it's cheaper memory and it's not intended to survive enthusiast use like TLC and MLC (higher quality chips). This is a business decision. You wouldn't sell a cow and warrant that it could fly.
Still waiting to replace my 1TB nvme ssd I bought three years ago for $69. Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron please stop colluding to milk the consumer at 1-2TB kkthx. We are ready to be cheated at 4-8TB.

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Feb 2007
L6: Expert
1,459 Posts
144 Reputation
#3
3 Year warranty??
Sounds like they don't have much faith in their drives, why should we?
Like Reaction
13
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
13
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Mar 2019
L5: Journeyman
699 Posts
110 Reputation
#4
Quote from plumbum :
3 Year warranty??
Sounds like they don't have much faith in their drives, why should we?
Devil's advocate: because it's cheaper memory and it's not intended to survive enthusiast use like TLC and MLC (higher quality chips). This is a business decision. You wouldn't sell a cow and warrant that it could fly.
Like Reaction
10
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
4
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Aug 2016
L2: Beginner
127 Posts
34 Reputation
#5
Good deal except that it's edu only
Like Reaction
1
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
0
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jan 2013
L6: Expert
1,247 Posts
#6
The edu loophole was fixed by them awhile back.. Severely limiting any edu deal..
Like Reaction
2
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
2
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Nov 2013
L3: Novice
100 Posts
18 Reputation
#7
Quote from tonkotsu :
The edu loophole was fixed by them awhile back.. Severely limiting any edu deal..Nor
The normal employer discount works too, not just edu
Like Reaction
1
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
0
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Oct 2010
L6: Expert
1,235 Posts
1,696 Reputation
Our community has rated this post as helpful. If you agree, why not thank ?
#8
Quote from SlickDealir :
Devil's advocate: because it's cheaper memory and it's not intended to survive enthusiast use like TLC and MLC (higher quality chips). This is a business decision. You wouldn't sell a cow and warrant that it could fly.
There's no quality difference in the chips. Flash memory stores data by placing a charge at a certain voltage inside a cell. QLC just uses more voltage levels per cell. SLC has 2 voltage levels (1 bit). MLC has 4 (2 bits). TLC has 8 (3 bits). QLC has 16 (4 bits). And the planned PLC has 32 voltage levels per cell (5 bits).

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.)
Like Reaction
36
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
5
Nothelpful Reaction
2
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Oct 2019
L3: Novice
151 Posts
98 Reputation
#9
Military Discount works too.
Like Reaction
0
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
1
Nothelpful Reaction
1
Reply

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Aug 2015
L5: Journeyman
852 Posts
90 Reputation
#10
Still waiting to replace my 1TB nvme ssd I bought three years ago for $69. Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron please stop colluding to milk the consumer at 1-2TB kkthx. We are ready to be cheated at 4-8TB.
Like Reaction
6
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
1
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Nov 2011
L5: Journeyman
722 Posts
79 Reputation
#11
Quote from plumbum :
3 Year warranty??
Sounds like they don't have much faith in their drives, why should we?
Not sure... but you can also see it as a way to just keep cost down on these budget-friendly SSD's... less time they need to warranty it, the cheaper they can make it, which is the idea behind QVO
Like Reaction
0
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
0
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Jun 2012
L4: Apprentice
854 Posts
96 Reputation
#12
Can this be use as extended hard disk drive for ps5?
Like Reaction
0
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
0
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Mar 2019
L5: Journeyman
699 Posts
110 Reputation
#13
Quote from Solandri :
There's no quality difference in the chips. Flash memory stores data by placing a charge at a certain voltage inside a cell. QLC just uses more voltage levels per cell. SLC has 2 voltage levels (1 bit). MLC has 4 (2 bits). TLC has 8 (3 bits). QLC has 16 (4 bits). And the planned PLC has 32 voltage levels per cell (5 bits).

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.)
Hence, they're cheaper (sorry I couldn't type as many words LOL)
Like Reaction
2
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
0
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Oct 2003
L10: Weather Phenomenon
3,007 Posts
705 Reputation
#14
Quote from Solandri :
There's no quality difference in the chips. Flash memory stores data by placing a charge at a certain voltage inside a cell. QLC just uses more voltage levels per cell. SLC has 2 voltage levels (1 bit). MLC has 4 (2 bits). TLC has 8 (3 bits). QLC has 16 (4 bits). And the planned PLC has 32 voltage levels per cell (5 bits).

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.)
I just need gaming storage. Is this any good for that?
Like Reaction
1
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
0
Reply
This comment has been rated as unhelpful by Slickdeals users
Joined Feb 2007
L6: Expert
1,459 Posts
144 Reputation
#15
Looks like our Cash back site that starts with an R is giving another 10% back bringing this to an all time low of $144 for me
Like Reaction
1
Funny Reaction
0
Helpful Reaction
0
Nothelpful Reaction
1
Reply
Page 1 of 4
1 2 3 4
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 

Trending Stores

Coupons for Popular Stores

More Samsung Deals

More Samsung Deals

Link Copied to Clipboard

Slickdeals is community-supported. We may get paid by brands or deals, including promoted items.