Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe M.2. (1TB) SSD review
Click here to post a comment for Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe M.2. (1TB) SSD review on our message forum
SpajdrEX
Would be nice to review also Adata XPG SX8200 Pro.
tunejunky
great review. really nice M.2
as much as i love tech, i hate buying something and 3 months later....
lolz
clamatac
thanks for the review
Manufacturers should include a heatsink like the one mentioned in the "New WD Black: SN750 NVMe SSD"
Incredible Lama
I think you just reviewed my future main drive 🙂.
Now I'm just wondering whether I should go with a single 1000GB drive or two seperate 500GB drives (one for OS and programs, and one for games)
DeskStar
@Hilbert
Just noticed on page ten of the real world trace testing you mentioned...
"It seems the SSD is a trace test wonder, definitely offering extraordinary performance, look at how these storage units put the traditional HDD to shame"
should it state traditional SSD?
nizzen
@Hilbert Hagedoorn
Do you know where samsung z-nand is? It was "press released" 1 year ago!
Samsung SZ985 Z-NAND SSD
https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-electronics-launches-800-gigabyte-z-ssd-for-hpc-systems-and-ai-applications
The Goose
this should of been given the same 1200tb endurance as the 970 pro.
valentyn0
Pro uses MLC not TLC, that's why EVO wont get that much endurance.
felix_w
Good and extensive review!
However, in the page of AS-SSD results, the screenshot is from 970 EVO 500GB drive.
Herbert,if possible, upload the correct from 970 EVO Plus 1TB drive.
Thank you
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Administrator
Well, that had me confused for a minute. I rechecked and it is the new Plus SSD.
https://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=47774
AS SSD is listing the drive as EVO 500GB, it, in fact, is the EVO Plus 1TB as you can see from the 1B2Q device name. I guess Samsung re-used a firmware. You'll notice similar behaviour in the Anvil benchmark.
Clawedge
The Samsung website mentions ram cache as ddr4 instead of ddr3 as stated in the review
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Administrator
Thanks, I've been able to confirm that it indeed is LPDDR4. The entry has been updated to reflect that.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Administrator
No, not really, it's enterprise gear though, so if sold that would be in completely different distribution channels.
Clawedge
Still says ddr3 on page one in the table
waltc3
Yep, although I wanted to see some competition out of the traditional HDD makers, doesn't look as if that's going to happen. Currently, the HDD is still king for raw capacity and price per GB, but HDDs are sort of sitting at the bottom of their pricing ramp while the price of NVMe continues on a sharp downward slope even as capacities and performance and longevity continue to rise! I saw an ad the other day for a 500GB 970 EVO NVMe for ~$120--'bout what I paid for me 250GB 960 EVO NVMe boot drive. (Drat, lost the link as I was hunting for something else when I saw it! Hope I wasn't "seeing things"...;))
Well-done, informative review, HH--as usual! 14 comment(s)
Fox2232
To be honest. I have seen sata3 drives corrupted because high quality data cable went too close to power delivery cable. I can't imagine how badly will sata4 work if it has to deliver competitive speeds. For me, it would have to move from theoretical 600MB/s to 2400MB/s to be somehow competitive. And doing that on just 2 data channels (4 data wires) seems rather difficult.
nizzen
SAS is doing the trick 🙂
Fox2232
Please elaborate on number of data pins required to achieve such bandwidth with SAS. Please add number of joined cables and images of solutions.
Calculate bandwidth per data pin and compare to SATA.
Maye88
THANK YOU!
For being the the only website I found which compared the 960 pro & evo and 970pro and evo to this drive. Every other major tech website neglected to include the pro versions!
Not only that but thank you for doing such in depth benchmarks.
clamatac
thanks for the review
I am buying one next week
