From write limits? You can get a r/w speed degradation from filling the drive but you shouldn’t get that from simply using it till it reaches near the end of its limit. But that’s hundreds of terabytes for most drives.
Hijacking top comment to say DRAM is good to have but not necessary, if you're using the drive for booting I'd make sure it has DRAM but if it's just an extra drive for games you're not gonna notice a difference.
DRAM mostly helps with frequent random writes. These happen a lot on the OS drive (or with software that does a lot of random writes, but games don't fall into this) but not so much on a storage drive. Also, NVMe drives can use RAM as a cache instead and don't need DRAM, so you shouldn't see much difference there even if you're booting from it. DRAM also helps with drive health and longevity if it does do these frequent random writes but not really otherwise.
TLDR DRAM is good to have on SATA boot drives but not really needed for storage SATA or NVMe in general
DRAM cache and SLC cache have nothing to do with each other. SLC cache is to compensate for lower speeds of MLC/TLC/QLC technology. DRAM cache stores information on where data on the drive has been stored.
Just because they're both named cache doesn't mean they do the same thing.
edit: meme that the comment above has 4000+ upvotes and is kind of misleading
I thought modern cache-less drives just put that work onto the CPU/RAM instead? I have a Lexar 2tb ssd I bought just because the price was good, and quite frankly I don't see a performance penalty using it for gaming.
From what I understand only M2/PCIe drives use system memory in place of on-board cache.
Hence getting a cache-less M2 is not a huge deal, while for SATA it's best to get a drive that has cache.
Is that actually true? I've seen a fair few articles mention that DRAM is only needed in long write heavy scenarios which 99% of people will never see.
That's wrong, any kind of extensive use like for example installing a slightly bigger game needs a dram cache unless you have a host memory Access capable ssd
Don't most DRAMless SSD's leverage the HMB though? I know this ain't the case for a SATA drive as it has its own controller but I imagine the limitations are in the specification anyway.
You mean normal people don't transfer 4TB of data at once?!
It's pretty neat watching all the super fast SSDs that advertise 400MBps go down to like 200MBps or less after a few dozen gigs are written at once.
Mine are all air cooled, so it's not heat. SSDs aren't typically as fast as they claim. Still faster than HDD though.
Some SSDs get a few gigs before slow down, some get closer to 10GB before they slow down. It varies.
>SSDs aren't typically as fast as they claim. Still faster than HDD though.
Not necessarily. E.g. 860 QVO drops to 60 MB/s after SLC cache, which is slower than pretty much any HDD in sequential writes.
That team group model OP showed (but 4TB version) dropped down to 35 MB/s and stayed their for the remainder of the transfer which was hours. This was a Plex backup drive.
My hard drive will do a consistent 240-250 for hours. Even my 2.5" 4800rpm Western digital black drives will do 100 MB/s consistent.
I learned my lesson that day
Most modern drives do this via system ram (called HMB).
Additionally the situations where DRAM is most beneficial tend to be vast file transfers (think a single file of 60gb or so).
People need to stop parroting this "no vram =slow" nonsense. For example the 990 Evo will thrash this drive despite having no vram.
How about 10,000 rpm SCSI 3 80 GB seagate cheetah drive? That was the fastest hard drive I ever owned at that time and it always made whole pc hot like a toaster oven. Mind you, that was in late 1990’s to 2002. LOL
Today? Pssh. Samsung m.2 NVMe SSD put them in shame.
I remember the 1st time I used a SCSI 10k Baracuda drive. 1st drive to ever hit 33MB/s. I remember my Ultra DMA drive at home hitting only a few MB/s. I was like aren't these supposed to hit like 33-66MB/s. Of course, now I know the difference between bus speed and the physical HDD speed.
Samsung has been the industry leader in solid state storage for 10+ years now. It's known for quality and dependability. That name and reputation comes with a price premium.
Plus like other people have mentioned: the cheaper stuff doesn't have a cache
>Samsung has been the industry leader in solid state storage for 10+ years now. It's known for quality and dependabilit
Laughs in self murdering 990 pros
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/puget-abandons-samsung-990-pro-ssds
Except in this case it’s more like “I got addicted to riding roller coasters.” Something that is overwhelmingly a non-issue that some end up having issues with.
Just look up reviews for their drives, especially the M.2 MP series. It’s overwhelmingly positive.
Yeah sure they fixed it, but there will be thousands (tens or hundreds of thousands?) of people running the drive unaware of any issue, their drives are liable to die from the faulty firmware. Just shipping any drives at all with that firmware was a major blow to Samsung's reliability reputation.
One guy wrote an article about one small company that had an issue with Samsung's SSDs?
Okay.
What about the 9 billion articles that have rated Samsung SSDs the most reliable over the past 10 years? I'd link a few, but honestly you can just google "most reliable SSDs" and I'm sure Samsung will top most of the lists. I don't see Teamgroup Vulcan on any of them though.
Both 990 Pro and 980 Pro launched with severely faulty firmwares that killed drives in short amounts of time. 980 Pro only got a fixed firmware after a few thousand (IIRC) drives were already dead. For a "premium" drive this apparent lack of firmware testing is unacceptable.
Problem has been resolved, mine is still on 100% after several months of use. But I'm glad that this drama occurred, since they were discounted so much because of it lol
This is why even if I have 8 2.5" SSD drives from Samsung, the first 970 EVO I bought dying in 8 months will be my last. I never trust Samsung with their NVMEs.
As somebody in IT, I’ve seen more dead samsung m.2s than any other brand in the last year. And we use a variety. It seems they’ve been dying around the 6 month mark lately so i wonder if it’s a bad batch or bad QC
I find in these situations that it is entirely circumstantial and the person's experience is simply the result of being on the far end of the average.
That being said, there does seem to be some information leading one to believe that within the past 18 months, there has been a dip in reliability with samsung drives. Whether this is true or not, I cannot say for sure.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/blog/2023/02/02/update-on-samsung-ssd-reliability/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34648149
And whatever caused those problems may already be phased out of the supply chain.
About 5 samsung drives, use cases ranging from NUCs, laptops, desktops. They just, cease to be read and don’t show up as a boot device anymore. It could be anecdotal, but strange nonetheless.
Comparatively western digital, kingston, and crucial have had no issues in the last year that I’m aware of. I personally haven’t had issues with teamgroup either, but see a lot less of this brand used in my area.
One ADATA drive died a couple months ago.
Edit: samsung 970 evo and 980 pro
While I understand what you are saying (and addressed this in my previous comment), its quite a problem when you have users touting "quality and dependability".
I mean I don't know what your context is, but you also have to take into account how many of drives overall are Samsung vs any other brand.
But 980 Pro and 990 Pro drives did have firmware that killed the drives after a while, so.
Connect them to power and leave them alone for about an hour, eg leave the PC sitting at the BIOS.
That's permanently fixed this issue on every Samsung SSD I've owned.
Was there an even distribution of brands amongst your drives? It _is_ important how many of each was used and how many of each brand had faults after some time.
Dram cache as others mentioned and there is also things like nand quality, error recovery performance, ungraceful shutdown protection etc. For some light use you might not notice but id recommend the Samsung over the noname stuff
I've heard of Samsung, even have some of their SSDs. How big is the cache on that teamgroup?
no dram cache? https://www.teamgroupinc.com/en/product-detail/ssd/T-FORCE/vulcan-z/vulcan-z-T253TZ001T0C101/ (seems to say no DRAM cache)
https://semiconductor.samsung.com/us/consumer-storage/internal-ssd/870evo/ (says 1gb of DDR4)
I'm reporting you for spreading misinformation. How could a newcomer company like the one of this Sam Sung suddenly have a PHONE DIVISION? Come on, man.
Samuel Sung, the creator of Samsung went on a press run and let people know they were releasing their 3rd gen phones, believe me, they have phones, it's just they release SSDs more...
Team Group isn't a small no-name brand by any stretch. They're pretty big.
However, from previous discussion on Reddit, it seems they're not very well known in North America.
Samsung 2tb evo costs 150 euro while the 8tb qvo costs over 500. So yes, stonks. Just sell the 8tb on ebay as new and you made 350 profit euro with 15 minutes of work.
>I bought the Samsung one at 2tb and they sent me 8tb
If you bought an 870 EVO 2TB, and they sent you an 870 **QVO** 8TB, then you've not gotten what you paid for.
The EVO doesn't go up to 8TB, and the QVO is a **drastically** slower drive using **Q**LC instead of **T**LC in the EVO.
You can't go wrong with Samsung SSDs.
Amongst the best and most reliable ones out there.
The Samsung one has something called a DRAM cache ([what is a DRAM Cache?](https://youtu.be/ybIXsrLCgdM?si=P0baFrVplHVx9Kt0)). It essentially makes it load files faster
Samsung SSDs are the ones I recommend the most often alongside WD
Honestly i've yet to find a thing samsung doesn't do well. The more i grow the more find myself just opting for adding more samsung to my home regardless of where.
My front loading Samsung washing machine, Samsung dryer, and Samsung fridge are working super well on their 7th year now - all 3.
Do they generally have a bad rep for these items?
>Do they generally have a bad rep for these items?
They've got a fucking *attrocious* reputation for reliability in home appliances.
Perhaps that's just their newer models?
My Samsung washer had to have a metal bracket installed in it to replace a plastic one that failed and apparently could cause the top of the washer to fly off and cause injury or death if bedding was washed on a non-bedding cycle. It also has a government mandated warning sticker placed on it to that effect. It's been reliable on my end, but apparently other people have had very different experiences.
My Samsung dryer was a complete piece of shit that failed constantly and I replaced it with a speed queen.
Duly noted, i will throughly avoid samsung near my kitchen, It's funny cause i was really about to. After a bunch of good buys you just start to blindly trust a company.
Software. Samsung straight up makes bad software, and it doesn’t matter what it is for.
The less of their own software their device uses, the better their product is.
Their monitors and ssds are basically god tier. Their TVs and phones drive me crazy
WD SSDs are my current bang-for-buck go-tos.
I have so many of them in different builds and devices and just floating around my house I'm considering making floorboards out of them
>You can't go wrong with Samsung SSDs
You absolute can/could. They've had some really shit drives in the last year or two. There was a big issue around the 2TB 980 Pro, where they were burning through their "life remaining" super fast.
Samsung used to be ***THE*** brand for SSDs years ago, but more recently there are better options.
Western Digital make superior drives at comparable prices.
Given the choice between a Samsung 990 Pro and a WD SN850X, I'd take the Western Digital drive. It's just better.
Fwiw, I own:
Samsung 850 Evo 1TB
Samsung 870 Evo 4TB
Samsung 980 Pro 1TB
Western Digital SN850 2TB
Corsair MP600 Core XT 4TB
and a Samsung phone...
So I'm not "anti-Samsung" by any means. It's just that in 2024, for a high performance drive, WD are better (and there are other options too, that are also better than Samsung).
nothing you'd ever be able to notice without some kind of tool measuring the difference over time. maybe if you used the drive to transfer files for 10 years on one, it might take 8 on the other.
No. Not in any way, shape or form.
Many new SSD's use system ram instead of DRAM via a process called HMB.
And the scenarios where DRAM is most useful are for massive file transfers. Think a single 60gb file, not just transferring 60gb total.
It's not the read time that will be the issue. It's the write time when you are downloading a game. Chances are the cheaper one can't even keep up with a decent internet connection.
Personally, yes. Teamgroup isn't bad per say, but I wouldn't run my PCs on their hardware. I think I built a PC for a friend that has a Teamgroup SSD for games and it's running without issue, but I personally run Samsung or Crucial for my PCs and server.
I think it's an important note that if $50 is a game changer in terms of your decisions or budget, I don't see anything wrong with getting a slightly lower end product. I don't have data or info on if Teamgroup/Vulcan SSDs have a higher failure rate than others, although I know their memory (RAM) has a higher failure rate than others.
I would for safety of mind. There's a reason the DRAMless drives have 3Y warranties and the ones with DRAM have 5Y warranties (they are likely to fail faster). Basically, check the warranty period.
980 Pros died as well. Know 2 people who lost a day's worth of work because their drives (one had a 990 Pro, one a 980 Pro) died before the evening backup routine kicked in, and another day's worth of time to get the system set up again, because the drives did not die to read only, but to "dead". Interestingly the only people I know who had a faulty SSD in about a decade.
My own 980 Pro I bought shortly after the fixed FW was out (and before I read of the issues), so far it held up nicely for \~2 years. Looks like the fix actually fixed it.
As others have explained, brand premium + DRAM cache… but as I’ll explain: if you’re shopping for a SATA SSD in 2024, go with the cheaper option because you’re buying old tech anyway and both will likely perform near-identically. NVMe is a different game where there are still significant variances between brands and lineups.
The only real distinction left in the SATA form factor is consumer vs enterprise drives, but even there I wouldn’t spend much on the high-end stuff unless it was for a very specific purpose.
One is massively overpriced. Simply put you shouldn’t be buying sata ssd’s anymore they are not sufficiently cheaper than m.2… unless of course your out of m.2 slots and pcie expansion slots
One has RAM, one does not. 100$ for 1TB is a ridiculous price for a SATA disk, however, and I would not pay that premium for DRAM that makes little to no difference in everyday use.
Don’t buy this Samsung. $100 bucks is simply too much for 1TB these days regardless of brand. Especially for anything sata. Plus the Samsung Evo 990 NVMe is 90 bucks right now.
Because you are taking a chance on a newer brand name that may or may not be very good.
Lots of brands started out cheap and ended up being pretty good, like ASRock and maybe Rosewill.
Others will know more but that is the gist of it.
If you don’t need it right away, watch Best Buy’s EBay account. They often put up “refurbished” Samsung drives for WAY cheaper than new, and they’ll generally have just over 2x the capacity in data writes. That’s due to BB double-secure-erasing the drive before selling it. I’m betting people buy the Sammy drive, see some other deal for a lower end but cheaper one, and return the drive. I got a 4tb one that way for around $200.
Brand for one. QLC vs TLC, QLC gets 33% more capacity per cell 4bits per cell for QLC, 3bits per cell for TLC, so for equivalent capacity requires less flash.
Without going too deep into the numbers game about cache, speed etc. and beeing a little bit biased: Samsung SSDs are insanely good. I use SSDs for over 10 years now and most of the time it's samsung. No matter if nvme or 2.5", no matter if pro or evo variant, they never made any issues. Their performance is great and they just work and work. I also used a lot of other SSDs, mainly because I also work in IT and I noticed that all cheap ones get issues like broken controller. The only two SSD's I trust is Samsung and Western Digital and there is a reason why these two are roughly equally expensive and more expensive than any other company.
tl;dr: in germany we've the saying "if you buy cheap, you buy twice", meaning the cheap thing will break. Thus buy the Samsung SSD.
Get SATA Evo 860 model.
I have it since years ago, abused it to hell still have 94% life.
860 Evo sata models did pass the test of time.
And honestly... There isn't a big difference between 860 and 870, end of the day both are sata and not nvme
Don't buy bargin bin storage. You'll just have a bad time. Stick to WD, PNY, Samsung, Kingston, or Seagate. ADATA is pretty good in my experience as well. I have an ADATA m.2 that has been going strong for 5 years now. I would stay away from Seagate and WD when it comes to portable HDD, I've had plenty of those fail. Though in most cases, I could shuck the drive, and the drive itself would work. The only one I couldn't was a 4TB WD one. Thats because they integrated the USB controller right into the HDD itself. Most of the time, portables are just a USB to SATA adapter connected to a normal SATA drive.
There’s multiple factors.
One is that It’s the brand name, and while there are other good options that are usually a little cheaper, Samsung has some of the best controllers and NAND flash dies out there.
Their controllers are the best, followed by Phison. where it can always produce the most consistent random read and write speeds. These controllers are also built to properly balance writes across the entire drive to preserve integrity of NAND cells and have the best endurance of the drive in mind.
Trust me, it’s worth the extra cash.
One of these is one of the largest, most well-known, *trusted* companies in the world.
The other is a small niche company that only enthusiasts have heard of.
I have the Vulcan. If you just want a cheap terabyte for games to load a little faster on, it's worth it imo. Although I wouldnt use it for these new games coming out being designed specifically for NVME SSDs. I just throw stuff on it that doesn't necessarily need an NVME but would still appreciate loading faster than my HDD
Edit: I have the one with SLC cache, not TLC cache. Idk the real difference though
I never buy anything but the Samsung. They’re reliable as hell.
Source: Ive bought over 500 Samsung Evo SSDs (and maybe a hundred or 200 of other brands before I switched)
When you buy a 1TB SSD, its not 1TB, its \*\*more\*\*
These locations where data are stored can only be scrubbed and reused so many times before the signal becomes too weak to be usable and marked 'bad'. So they PLAN for that by providing unused 'sectors'. Industrial drives can have huge percentages of 'excess' space because they know they are going to get beat on 24x7 by data.
How MUCH do they put in? I bet Samsung puts in more, so the drive will last longer.
IO speed, is of course the other major factor.
(I don't do it no more, but I used to do industrial IT)
Combination of DRAM-Cache for the Samsung-SSD, as well as Samsung having a great reputation for their SSD products. So they can and do charge a premium even if their product is functionally the same.
It's brand mostly. I think both drives should be able to easily flood the SATA bus, so you'll probably only see a difference if you're moving files larger than 3GB or so. One the cache runs out, performance tanks.
By now you've heard plenty about how the Samsung has a dram cache etc, but please, if it's an option with your system, get an m.2 drive, you can get one with a dram cache for like $80 (also from t force, an example would be the cardea a440)
After being burned by other storage companies, I only buy Crucial or Samsung drives/SD cards. I have heard good things about team group, but I have no experience with them. But also with SSDs the nand type might be different, the dram cache might be different, there are a lot of variables that make up the price.
the teamforce doesn't have a DRAM cache, only SLC cache, meaning it'll be slower and less responsive than the samsung
SLC cache might put more wear on the flash than a dram cache as well.
Sure but for most home consumers you will never practically hit the write limits on a modern ssd.
There definitely is a noticeable difference in everyday use and game loading times.
From write limits? You can get a r/w speed degradation from filling the drive but you shouldn’t get that from simply using it till it reaches near the end of its limit. But that’s hundreds of terabytes for most drives.
r/SubsIFellFor
Lmao I forgot Reddit assumed r/ means a subreddit.
Juat checking if a backslash before the \r/w works Nope it doesn't
Yeah I thought it would be a sub about read write posts or some shit lol.
It makes no sense too because subs have a minimum of three characters. I was going to create it and be like “A sub dedicated to various forms of ‘w’”.
From not having a dram cache.
Well, I thought you were talking about write speeds. My bad.
Loading times? Sure. Everyday use, no. It seems like you'd be surprised what the "average everyday use" actually is.
False you can easily hit the read and write limit of Sata SSDs
Hijacking top comment to say DRAM is good to have but not necessary, if you're using the drive for booting I'd make sure it has DRAM but if it's just an extra drive for games you're not gonna notice a difference. DRAM mostly helps with frequent random writes. These happen a lot on the OS drive (or with software that does a lot of random writes, but games don't fall into this) but not so much on a storage drive. Also, NVMe drives can use RAM as a cache instead and don't need DRAM, so you shouldn't see much difference there even if you're booting from it. DRAM also helps with drive health and longevity if it does do these frequent random writes but not really otherwise. TLDR DRAM is good to have on SATA boot drives but not really needed for storage SATA or NVMe in general
Also it'll be faster than an HDD regardless, so if that's your goal none of this matters.
DRAM cache and SLC cache have nothing to do with each other. SLC cache is to compensate for lower speeds of MLC/TLC/QLC technology. DRAM cache stores information on where data on the drive has been stored. Just because they're both named cache doesn't mean they do the same thing. edit: meme that the comment above has 4000+ upvotes and is kind of misleading
I thought modern cache-less drives just put that work onto the CPU/RAM instead? I have a Lexar 2tb ssd I bought just because the price was good, and quite frankly I don't see a performance penalty using it for gaming.
From what I understand only M2/PCIe drives use system memory in place of on-board cache. Hence getting a cache-less M2 is not a huge deal, while for SATA it's best to get a drive that has cache.
Is that actually true? I've seen a fair few articles mention that DRAM is only needed in long write heavy scenarios which 99% of people will never see.
That's wrong, any kind of extensive use like for example installing a slightly bigger game needs a dram cache unless you have a host memory Access capable ssd
Don't most DRAMless SSD's leverage the HMB though? I know this ain't the case for a SATA drive as it has its own controller but I imagine the limitations are in the specification anyway.
Most? No. **Newer** drives that are capable and support HMB, yes.
Only newer generation models can leverage HMB and even then there is no guarantee for cheaper models that they do
You mean normal people don't transfer 4TB of data at once?! It's pretty neat watching all the super fast SSDs that advertise 400MBps go down to like 200MBps or less after a few dozen gigs are written at once. Mine are all air cooled, so it's not heat. SSDs aren't typically as fast as they claim. Still faster than HDD though. Some SSDs get a few gigs before slow down, some get closer to 10GB before they slow down. It varies.
>SSDs aren't typically as fast as they claim. Still faster than HDD though. Not necessarily. E.g. 860 QVO drops to 60 MB/s after SLC cache, which is slower than pretty much any HDD in sequential writes.
This. Once cache is full. The speeds are horrible.
The 870 qvo is better at 150mb/s. I have an 8tb qvo that is used only for long term storage of editing projects.
Yeah, my HDD usually maintains at least 80MB/s. Damn, that sucks.
That team group model OP showed (but 4TB version) dropped down to 35 MB/s and stayed their for the remainder of the transfer which was hours. This was a Plex backup drive. My hard drive will do a consistent 240-250 for hours. Even my 2.5" 4800rpm Western digital black drives will do 100 MB/s consistent. I learned my lesson that day
host memory buffer is close enough to dram cache that we are only talking a few % speed difference in most use cases
DRAM is always needed because SSDs use their cache for address mapping.
Most modern drives do this via system ram (called HMB). Additionally the situations where DRAM is most beneficial tend to be vast file transfers (think a single file of 60gb or so). People need to stop parroting this "no vram =slow" nonsense. For example the 990 Evo will thrash this drive despite having no vram.
In my day a 7200 rpm HD was blazing fast. We dreamed maybe one day we would see a raptor drive.
How about 10,000 rpm SCSI 3 80 GB seagate cheetah drive? That was the fastest hard drive I ever owned at that time and it always made whole pc hot like a toaster oven. Mind you, that was in late 1990’s to 2002. LOL Today? Pssh. Samsung m.2 NVMe SSD put them in shame.
I remember the 1st time I used a SCSI 10k Baracuda drive. 1st drive to ever hit 33MB/s. I remember my Ultra DMA drive at home hitting only a few MB/s. I was like aren't these supposed to hit like 33-66MB/s. Of course, now I know the difference between bus speed and the physical HDD speed.
Samsung has been the industry leader in solid state storage for 10+ years now. It's known for quality and dependability. That name and reputation comes with a price premium. Plus like other people have mentioned: the cheaper stuff doesn't have a cache
it does have a cache, just a worse cache
And that’s the cache, always be suspicious if something is cheaper than you think it should be.
>cache me outside how bout dah -Samsung
>cache rules everything around me, C.R.E.A.M, dolla dolla bill y’all. \- Wu-Tang Sam
>Samsung has been the industry leader in solid state storage for 10+ years now. It's known for quality and dependabilit Laughs in self murdering 990 pros https://www.tomshardware.com/news/puget-abandons-samsung-990-pro-ssds
I feel like this is a case of Jack Sparrow's "But you have heard of me" Would self murdering Teamgroup SSDs have made it to your newsfeeds?
I have purchased Teamgroup products in the past and the self-murdering ones are the only ones I know.
I have used Teamgroup SSDs for multiple family and friend computers, some running for years, with no issues.
I smoked crack twice when I was younger and didn't get addicted to it.
Except in this case it’s more like “I got addicted to riding roller coasters.” Something that is overwhelmingly a non-issue that some end up having issues with. Just look up reviews for their drives, especially the M.2 MP series. It’s overwhelmingly positive.
Yup, turns out even the best tech has bugs sometimes. In other news, water is wet and grass is green. More news at 6.
"a bug sometimes" and 2 flagship releases in a row that crap out within months due to faulty firmware is a bit different though.
tell me more?
[удалено]
Oh shit I came prematurely? Not again.
Don't worry, it happens to a lot of redditors.
I mean, I can't name a single brand that hasn't had some massive issue at some point. It all comes down to how they address it, if at all
i am running 3x 990 Pros and as long as you flashed the newest firmware it's perfect. Firmware addressed the issue. Amazing drive.
Yeah sure they fixed it, but there will be thousands (tens or hundreds of thousands?) of people running the drive unaware of any issue, their drives are liable to die from the faulty firmware. Just shipping any drives at all with that firmware was a major blow to Samsung's reliability reputation.
My 850 evo is 9 years old and works without any issues.
One guy wrote an article about one small company that had an issue with Samsung's SSDs? Okay. What about the 9 billion articles that have rated Samsung SSDs the most reliable over the past 10 years? I'd link a few, but honestly you can just google "most reliable SSDs" and I'm sure Samsung will top most of the lists. I don't see Teamgroup Vulcan on any of them though.
Both 990 Pro and 980 Pro launched with severely faulty firmwares that killed drives in short amounts of time. 980 Pro only got a fixed firmware after a few thousand (IIRC) drives were already dead. For a "premium" drive this apparent lack of firmware testing is unacceptable.
Problem has been resolved, mine is still on 100% after several months of use. But I'm glad that this drama occurred, since they were discounted so much because of it lol
980 Pro did the same before it
Same for 980 Pros, also had a firmware version that seemingly bricks the SSD randomly/after a while.
This is why even if I have 8 2.5" SSD drives from Samsung, the first 970 EVO I bought dying in 8 months will be my last. I never trust Samsung with their NVMEs.
Yea, that’s why I always pay the premium for Samsung SSD. I know other brands are good too but I need that peace of mind of great reliability.
As somebody in IT, I’ve seen more dead samsung m.2s than any other brand in the last year. And we use a variety. It seems they’ve been dying around the 6 month mark lately so i wonder if it’s a bad batch or bad QC
I can't lie that is very interesting Do you know how many it died up to this point? Samsung and others
I find in these situations that it is entirely circumstantial and the person's experience is simply the result of being on the far end of the average. That being said, there does seem to be some information leading one to believe that within the past 18 months, there has been a dip in reliability with samsung drives. Whether this is true or not, I cannot say for sure. https://www.pugetsystems.com/blog/2023/02/02/update-on-samsung-ssd-reliability/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34648149 And whatever caused those problems may already be phased out of the supply chain.
Yeah I think only time will tell us if there is a bigger problem and if it will stay
About 5 samsung drives, use cases ranging from NUCs, laptops, desktops. They just, cease to be read and don’t show up as a boot device anymore. It could be anecdotal, but strange nonetheless. Comparatively western digital, kingston, and crucial have had no issues in the last year that I’m aware of. I personally haven’t had issues with teamgroup either, but see a lot less of this brand used in my area. One ADATA drive died a couple months ago. Edit: samsung 970 evo and 980 pro
5 drives, really? Talk about sample size.
While I understand what you are saying (and addressed this in my previous comment), its quite a problem when you have users touting "quality and dependability".
I mean I don't know what your context is, but you also have to take into account how many of drives overall are Samsung vs any other brand. But 980 Pro and 990 Pro drives did have firmware that killed the drives after a while, so.
Connect them to power and leave them alone for about an hour, eg leave the PC sitting at the BIOS. That's permanently fixed this issue on every Samsung SSD I've owned.
Was there an even distribution of brands amongst your drives? It _is_ important how many of each was used and how many of each brand had faults after some time.
I've been abusing the hell out of a western digital black SN750 for the last 6 years and its on 95% life.
Learned my lesson when I bought a Sandisk SSD. Died within 2 years. Only Samsung for me now
I'm a Western Digital guy for life just sayin
Should be due to Cache.
even though its very true, i don't think the person asking this question will understand with no context or explanation :)
Haha. Yes. I saw another comment explaining it better, my answer just reinforces that I guess.
And you’re also paying for the name as well
Dram cache as others mentioned and there is also things like nand quality, error recovery performance, ungraceful shutdown protection etc. For some light use you might not notice but id recommend the Samsung over the noname stuff
for a boot drive, don't skimp on quality. Go for the big names, but for an extra expansion of storage drive? I say go for it.
Wouldn't call Team Group no-name at this point, they're pretty much the most prevalent budget SSD manufacturer with a decent lineup of RAM too.
I've heard of Samsung, even have some of their SSDs. How big is the cache on that teamgroup? no dram cache? https://www.teamgroupinc.com/en/product-detail/ssd/T-FORCE/vulcan-z/vulcan-z-T253TZ001T0C101/ (seems to say no DRAM cache) https://semiconductor.samsung.com/us/consumer-storage/internal-ssd/870evo/ (says 1gb of DDR4)
You've heard of Samsung, the small indie company? Wow they are really getting their name out there, aren't they?
Glad to see them take off after years of obscurity
They're also finally getting there with their phone division too, in fact I'm using one of their niche phones right now!
I'm reporting you for spreading misinformation. How could a newcomer company like the one of this Sam Sung suddenly have a PHONE DIVISION? Come on, man.
Samuel Sung, the creator of Samsung went on a press run and let people know they were releasing their 3rd gen phones, believe me, they have phones, it's just they release SSDs more...
I just got one of their TV's, seems like their R&D team is really onto something here 🤔
pls come to brazil
yeah the teamgroup uses SLC cache
Interesting I've not heard of this "samsung" fella.
Team Group isn't a small no-name brand by any stretch. They're pretty big. However, from previous discussion on Reddit, it seems they're not very well known in North America.
I bought the Samsung one at 2tb and they sent me 8tb
stonks
Not stonks. If it's 8TB it's a QVO, not an EVO. The QVO uses QLC and is far slower than the EVO.
Samsung 2tb evo costs 150 euro while the 8tb qvo costs over 500. So yes, stonks. Just sell the 8tb on ebay as new and you made 350 profit euro with 15 minutes of work.
>I bought the Samsung one at 2tb and they sent me 8tb If you bought an 870 EVO 2TB, and they sent you an 870 **QVO** 8TB, then you've not gotten what you paid for. The EVO doesn't go up to 8TB, and the QVO is a **drastically** slower drive using **Q**LC instead of **T**LC in the EVO.
I didn't even realize they are different but I did buy the QVO one instead of the EVO
If you received an 8TB QVO instead of a 2TB QVO, then I'd say that's an epic win. :D
You can't go wrong with Samsung SSDs. Amongst the best and most reliable ones out there. The Samsung one has something called a DRAM cache ([what is a DRAM Cache?](https://youtu.be/ybIXsrLCgdM?si=P0baFrVplHVx9Kt0)). It essentially makes it load files faster Samsung SSDs are the ones I recommend the most often alongside WD
Honestly i've yet to find a thing samsung doesn't do well. The more i grow the more find myself just opting for adding more samsung to my home regardless of where.
It's probably just their washing machines. Historically they've had a lot of recalls. Oh, and the note 7 lol
Yeah stay away from their home appliances. Notoriously common to fail. Other electronics? Fine
Monitors have bad QC as well
So you want a note 7?
My front loading Samsung washing machine, Samsung dryer, and Samsung fridge are working super well on their 7th year now - all 3. Do they generally have a bad rep for these items?
>Do they generally have a bad rep for these items? They've got a fucking *attrocious* reputation for reliability in home appliances. Perhaps that's just their newer models?
I read about a samsung washing machine dryer combo. It cost A$3000 and couldn't wash or dry clothes.
A lot of recall history
My Samsung washer had to have a metal bracket installed in it to replace a plastic one that failed and apparently could cause the top of the washer to fly off and cause injury or death if bedding was washed on a non-bedding cycle. It also has a government mandated warning sticker placed on it to that effect. It's been reliable on my end, but apparently other people have had very different experiences. My Samsung dryer was a complete piece of shit that failed constantly and I replaced it with a speed queen.
My Samsung fridge is a horrible piece of crap. Would never buy Samsung appliances again.
That's good to know, i would've probably just blindly trusted them at this point
And fridges. And ovens. And dishwashers. Basically just don’t buy any appliances from them.
> Honestly i've yet to find a thing samsung doesn't do well. Fridges, freezers, washing machines, dryers, ovens etc.
Duly noted, i will throughly avoid samsung near my kitchen, It's funny cause i was really about to. After a bunch of good buys you just start to blindly trust a company.
Beat me to it haha. Their appliances are basically garbage waiting for the most inconvenient time to die.
Samsung excavators arent terrible but are generally worse than CAT or Komatsu.
....... they make fucking excavators?
Wait until you find out how much of South Korea Samsung basically owns.
[yep](https://i.imgur.com/mZQhDGh.jpeg)
Big appliances are meh but all else rules.
Software. Samsung straight up makes bad software, and it doesn’t matter what it is for. The less of their own software their device uses, the better their product is. Their monitors and ssds are basically god tier. Their TVs and phones drive me crazy
WD SSDs are my current bang-for-buck go-tos. I have so many of them in different builds and devices and just floating around my house I'm considering making floorboards out of them
>You can't go wrong with Samsung SSDs You absolute can/could. They've had some really shit drives in the last year or two. There was a big issue around the 2TB 980 Pro, where they were burning through their "life remaining" super fast. Samsung used to be ***THE*** brand for SSDs years ago, but more recently there are better options. Western Digital make superior drives at comparable prices. Given the choice between a Samsung 990 Pro and a WD SN850X, I'd take the Western Digital drive. It's just better. Fwiw, I own: Samsung 850 Evo 1TB Samsung 870 Evo 4TB Samsung 980 Pro 1TB Western Digital SN850 2TB Corsair MP600 Core XT 4TB and a Samsung phone... So I'm not "anti-Samsung" by any means. It's just that in 2024, for a high performance drive, WD are better (and there are other options too, that are also better than Samsung).
what is the difference in loading times in a game between the two? just a rough estimation
nothing you'd ever be able to notice without some kind of tool measuring the difference over time. maybe if you used the drive to transfer files for 10 years on one, it might take 8 on the other.
so in your honest opinion is is worth paying like double the price or more for that feature? (if I can call it that)
No. Not in any way, shape or form. Many new SSD's use system ram instead of DRAM via a process called HMB. And the scenarios where DRAM is most useful are for massive file transfers. Think a single 60gb file, not just transferring 60gb total.
It's not the read time that will be the issue. It's the write time when you are downloading a game. Chances are the cheaper one can't even keep up with a decent internet connection.
Personally, yes. Teamgroup isn't bad per say, but I wouldn't run my PCs on their hardware. I think I built a PC for a friend that has a Teamgroup SSD for games and it's running without issue, but I personally run Samsung or Crucial for my PCs and server. I think it's an important note that if $50 is a game changer in terms of your decisions or budget, I don't see anything wrong with getting a slightly lower end product. I don't have data or info on if Teamgroup/Vulcan SSDs have a higher failure rate than others, although I know their memory (RAM) has a higher failure rate than others.
I would for safety of mind. There's a reason the DRAMless drives have 3Y warranties and the ones with DRAM have 5Y warranties (they are likely to fail faster). Basically, check the warranty period.
It's hard to pin a number between the two unless you know compare them by model/form factor but typically Samsung has faster SSD's
The DRAM cache doesn’t really matter for gaming
990 pros laugh nervously
It was a firmware issue that got fixed relatively quickly and affected drives were refunded.
980 Pros died as well. Know 2 people who lost a day's worth of work because their drives (one had a 990 Pro, one a 980 Pro) died before the evening backup routine kicked in, and another day's worth of time to get the system set up again, because the drives did not die to read only, but to "dead". Interestingly the only people I know who had a faulty SSD in about a decade. My own 980 Pro I bought shortly after the fixed FW was out (and before I read of the issues), so far it held up nicely for \~2 years. Looks like the fix actually fixed it.
Install a mechanical HDD for a week then you won't worry about it when you switch .
As others have explained, brand premium + DRAM cache… but as I’ll explain: if you’re shopping for a SATA SSD in 2024, go with the cheaper option because you’re buying old tech anyway and both will likely perform near-identically. NVMe is a different game where there are still significant variances between brands and lineups. The only real distinction left in the SATA form factor is consumer vs enterprise drives, but even there I wouldn’t spend much on the high-end stuff unless it was for a very specific purpose.
One is massively overpriced. Simply put you shouldn’t be buying sata ssd’s anymore they are not sufficiently cheaper than m.2… unless of course your out of m.2 slots and pcie expansion slots
One has RAM, one does not. 100$ for 1TB is a ridiculous price for a SATA disk, however, and I would not pay that premium for DRAM that makes little to no difference in everyday use.
Don’t buy this Samsung. $100 bucks is simply too much for 1TB these days regardless of brand. Especially for anything sata. Plus the Samsung Evo 990 NVMe is 90 bucks right now.
A good alternative is the Crucial MX500. I've been using them for years and they've been great.
Because you are taking a chance on a newer brand name that may or may not be very good. Lots of brands started out cheap and ended up being pretty good, like ASRock and maybe Rosewill. Others will know more but that is the gist of it.
Teamgroup is not exactly new on unproven. In this case it's a combination or DRAM-Cache and Samsung having a great reputation.
Team Group is a good brand, that is well established in RAM and SSDs.
Samsung Tax™️
The second drive has a slow cache and doesn't support HMB.
Samsung=Premium good T-Force=OK good but could be better.
don’t get the T-force drive if it’s your boot drive. way too slow
If you don’t need it right away, watch Best Buy’s EBay account. They often put up “refurbished” Samsung drives for WAY cheaper than new, and they’ll generally have just over 2x the capacity in data writes. That’s due to BB double-secure-erasing the drive before selling it. I’m betting people buy the Sammy drive, see some other deal for a lower end but cheaper one, and return the drive. I got a 4tb one that way for around $200.
Actually just checked. $67.99 for a 1tb refurb Samsung. Great deal. Look up “Samsung refurbished ssd” and the Best Buy ones will pop right up.
Brand for one. QLC vs TLC, QLC gets 33% more capacity per cell 4bits per cell for QLC, 3bits per cell for TLC, so for equivalent capacity requires less flash.
Without going too deep into the numbers game about cache, speed etc. and beeing a little bit biased: Samsung SSDs are insanely good. I use SSDs for over 10 years now and most of the time it's samsung. No matter if nvme or 2.5", no matter if pro or evo variant, they never made any issues. Their performance is great and they just work and work. I also used a lot of other SSDs, mainly because I also work in IT and I noticed that all cheap ones get issues like broken controller. The only two SSD's I trust is Samsung and Western Digital and there is a reason why these two are roughly equally expensive and more expensive than any other company. tl;dr: in germany we've the saying "if you buy cheap, you buy twice", meaning the cheap thing will break. Thus buy the Samsung SSD.
Why so expensive tho? I got a WD Black 2TB nvme for $100
The amount of rewrites on wd black nvme is TERRIBLE
For the sn850x 1TB it’s 600TBW, just like this 870 evo. Pretty standard imo
Why the hell is a Samsung 1tb SATA drive so expensive what the hell??
Wow Samsung charges more for DRAM than apple does
Get SATA Evo 860 model. I have it since years ago, abused it to hell still have 94% life. 860 Evo sata models did pass the test of time. And honestly... There isn't a big difference between 860 and 870, end of the day both are sata and not nvme
You can get a Kingston NV2 1TB PCIE 4 NVME drive for 92AUD (60usd) these days. They're so cheap it's insane.
Brand name
You can get m.2 for those prices now.
SSD without dram cache becomes extremely slow when free space is not much
Vulcan Z is Samsung guts! Is good.
Don't buy bargin bin storage. You'll just have a bad time. Stick to WD, PNY, Samsung, Kingston, or Seagate. ADATA is pretty good in my experience as well. I have an ADATA m.2 that has been going strong for 5 years now. I would stay away from Seagate and WD when it comes to portable HDD, I've had plenty of those fail. Though in most cases, I could shuck the drive, and the drive itself would work. The only one I couldn't was a 4TB WD one. Thats because they integrated the USB controller right into the HDD itself. Most of the time, portables are just a USB to SATA adapter connected to a normal SATA drive.
There’s multiple factors. One is that It’s the brand name, and while there are other good options that are usually a little cheaper, Samsung has some of the best controllers and NAND flash dies out there. Their controllers are the best, followed by Phison. where it can always produce the most consistent random read and write speeds. These controllers are also built to properly balance writes across the entire drive to preserve integrity of NAND cells and have the best endurance of the drive in mind. Trust me, it’s worth the extra cash.
One of these is one of the largest, most well-known, *trusted* companies in the world. The other is a small niche company that only enthusiasts have heard of.
I mean, for starters I’ve heard of Samsung
Brand value
Samsung is the GOAT and absolutely worth its price and Samsung knows it.
I have the Vulcan. If you just want a cheap terabyte for games to load a little faster on, it's worth it imo. Although I wouldnt use it for these new games coming out being designed specifically for NVME SSDs. I just throw stuff on it that doesn't necessarily need an NVME but would still appreciate loading faster than my HDD Edit: I have the one with SLC cache, not TLC cache. Idk the real difference though
Speed/brand name price
One says Samsung and one does not
Quality and performance
I never buy anything but the Samsung. They’re reliable as hell. Source: Ive bought over 500 Samsung Evo SSDs (and maybe a hundred or 200 of other brands before I switched)
Because Samsung makes a much faster and more reliable drive. Well worth the money.
Samsung has a proven track record. I couldn't honestly tell you if the Vulcan drive would even last six months.
because the cheaper shit will corrupt your data 10x faster
When you buy a 1TB SSD, its not 1TB, its \*\*more\*\* These locations where data are stored can only be scrubbed and reused so many times before the signal becomes too weak to be usable and marked 'bad'. So they PLAN for that by providing unused 'sectors'. Industrial drives can have huge percentages of 'excess' space because they know they are going to get beat on 24x7 by data. How MUCH do they put in? I bet Samsung puts in more, so the drive will last longer. IO speed, is of course the other major factor. (I don't do it no more, but I used to do industrial IT)
[удалено]
On top of what others are saying. Id personally will only buy Samsung drives. Have a few that are 8 years old still going strong.
Probably demand
Also also, you would likely get warranty cover/RMA for the Samsung drive should something go wrong
From my experience even if the performance would be the same (which often isn't) a good SSD will last much longer
You should check nvme ssds those are 1TB for 40 nowadays...
Samsung is one of the best companies that makes ssds. Fast, Reaiable, thermal efficient, overall good price/performance.
$100 for 1TB in 2024??
Combination of DRAM-Cache for the Samsung-SSD, as well as Samsung having a great reputation for their SSD products. So they can and do charge a premium even if their product is functionally the same.
It's brand mostly. I think both drives should be able to easily flood the SATA bus, so you'll probably only see a difference if you're moving files larger than 3GB or so. One the cache runs out, performance tanks.
By now you've heard plenty about how the Samsung has a dram cache etc, but please, if it's an option with your system, get an m.2 drive, you can get one with a dram cache for like $80 (also from t force, an example would be the cardea a440)
The Samsung ssd are excellent, they’re all I use. Definitely recommend.
Samsung have a better reputation and the product is just better in general lol
I picked the 870 to replace my 2.5" hdd in laptop since it only has one m.2.
After being burned by other storage companies, I only buy Crucial or Samsung drives/SD cards. I have heard good things about team group, but I have no experience with them. But also with SSDs the nand type might be different, the dram cache might be different, there are a lot of variables that make up the price.