[Anand] The Samsung 870 QVO (1TB & 4TB) SSD Review - Page 2 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[Anand] The Samsung 870 QVO (1TB & 4TB) SSD Review

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #11 of 40 (permalink) Old 06-30-2020, 05:51 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Paradigm Shifter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 3,015
Rep: 257 (Unique: 204)
Quote: Originally Posted by ozlay View Post
They should really have a fast HDD to compare to it. People seem to compare it to a HDD. But every hard drive iv seen was much slower. And yeah its not worth the price.
I agree, but it's tougher than you'd think.

In terms of access times, QLC beats HDDs. Any SSD does. But in terms of prolonged write speed, QLC drives suffer pretty badly. That'll probably change as they mature*, but for now sustained writes are a painful, painful thing on QLC.

Comparison to HDDs is difficult. What drive do you use? Did you get a drive that is SMR (which obliterates write performance, and WD recently pulled a "mea culpa" about their quietly transitioning several WD Red drives to SMR without telling anyone)? If I wanted to make a QLC drive look bad, I'd use a Toshiba M07 Enterprise drive, because I've seen sustained reads exceeding 200MB/s on them, and sustained writes in the 180-190MB/s range so long as files aren't fragmented. Or an Ironwolf Pro, where I've seen similar. If I wanted a QLC drive to look good... I'd use any SMR drive. Do you use one of the "exotic" SATA drives like a 1TB Velociraptor? Do you use a 15K RPM behemoth, or a <5400RPM "green" drive?

edit: *and the technology for getting around the limitations of QLC improves.


Paradigm Shifter is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 40 (permalink) Old 06-30-2020, 08:03 PM
WaterCooler
 
Sir Beregond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,257
Rep: 75 (Unique: 68)
Wow I am apparently so far out of the current knowledge of SSDs. My mind is a bit boggled to hear that certain modern SSDs have a slower write than a hard drive.

Guess I need to do some reading. All we really had when I built my last rig was SATA 3 2.5" drives.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Deus Ex (2015-)
(21 items)
CPU
[Intel] Core i7-4790k
Motherboard
[ASUS] Z97-DELUXE
GPU
[ASUS] GTX 980 Strix
RAM
[Corsair] Vengance Pro Series 16GB DDR3-2400
Hard Drive
[Crucial] M550 512GB
Hard Drive
[WD] Black 3TB x 2
Power Supply
[Corsair] AX750
Cooling
[EK] Supremacy EVO - Gold
Cooling
[EK] GTX 980 Strix - Fullcover w/ Backplate
Cooling
[EK] D5 X-RES Top 100 w/ D5 Vario
Cooling
[Monsoon] 3/8" ID 5/8" OD Compressions - Gold
Cooling
[XSPC] EX240 x 2
Cooling
[Corsair] SP120 x 5 / AF120 x 1
Case
[Corsair] Carbide Air 540
Operating System
[Windows] 8.1 Pro 64-bit
Monitor
[LG] 32GK650F-B
Keyboard
[Corsair] K70 - Red switches
Mouse
[Razer] Naga Epic
Audio
[Audio Technica] ATH-A700
Audio
[Antlion] ModMic
Other
[Lamptron] FC5-V2
CPU
[Intel] Core i7-960
Motherboard
[ASUS] Rampage III Formula
GPU
[EVGA] GTX 670 FTW 2GB
RAM
[Corsair] Dominator-GT 6GB DDR3-1866
Hard Drive
[Crucial] M4 128GB
Hard Drive
[Samsung] Spinpoint F3 1TB x2
Hard Drive
[WD] Caviar Black 750GB
Power Supply
[Corsair] AX850
Cooling
[XSPC] Raystorm
Cooling
[XSPC] EX360 and EX240
Cooling
[Scythe] Gentle Typhoon AP-15 x 5
Cooling
[EVGA] GTX 680 Hydro Copper w/ Backplate
Cooling
[XSPC] Dual-bay Res w/ [Swiftech] MCP655
Cooling
[Bitfenix] Spectre Pro Red LED - 140mm x 4
Case
[NZXT] Switch 810 Matte Black
Operating System
[Windows] 7 Ultimate 64-Bit
Monitor
[BenQ] XL2420TX
Keyboard
[Saitek] Cyborg V.5 Red LED
Mouse
[Razer] Naga Epic Red LED
Audio
[Audio Technica] ATH-A700
Audio
[ASUS] Xonar Essence STX
Other
[Lamptron] FC5-V2
CPU
[Intel] Core M-5Y10
GPU
[Intel] HD Graphics 5300
RAM
[Generic?] 8 GB DDR3
Hard Drive
[Generic?] 256GB SSD
Operating System
[Microsoft] Windows 10
Monitor
1920 x 1080
▲ hide details ▲


Sir Beregond is offline  
post #13 of 40 (permalink) Old 06-30-2020, 09:39 PM - Thread Starter
Politically incorrect
 
Liranan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Soviet China... Oh wait..
Posts: 9,158
Rep: 633 (Unique: 309)
Quote: Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter View Post
I agree, but it's tougher than you'd think.

In terms of access times, QLC beats HDDs. Any SSD does. But in terms of prolonged write speed, QLC drives suffer pretty badly. That'll probably change as they mature*, but for now sustained writes are a painful, painful thing on QLC.

Comparison to HDDs is difficult. What drive do you use? Did you get a drive that is SMR (which obliterates write performance, and WD recently pulled a "mea culpa" about their quietly transitioning several WD Red drives to SMR without telling anyone)? If I wanted to make a QLC drive look bad, I'd use a Toshiba M07 Enterprise drive, because I've seen sustained reads exceeding 200MB/s on them, and sustained writes in the 180-190MB/s range so long as files aren't fragmented. Or an Ironwolf Pro, where I've seen similar. If I wanted a QLC drive to look good... I'd use any SMR drive. Do you use one of the "exotic" SATA drives like a 1TB Velociraptor? Do you use a 15K RPM behemoth, or a <5400RPM "green" drive?

edit: *and the technology for getting around the limitations of QLC improves.
The 3TB DT01ACA300's I have in my server (XFS) have a sustained read/write of about 180MB/s, while QLC has higher access times that's not enough for me to say that these drives are acceptable, they're horrendous.

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by faraz1729 go_quote.gif
Haha, Liranan, you creep.

Tacitus - The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws

Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money. - Cree Indian Proverb
Liranan is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #14 of 40 (permalink) Old 06-30-2020, 11:30 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Paradigm Shifter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 3,015
Rep: 257 (Unique: 204)
Quote: Originally Posted by Sir Beregond View Post
Wow I am apparently so far out of the current knowledge of SSDs. My mind is a bit boggled to hear that certain modern SSDs have a slower write than a hard drive.

Guess I need to do some reading. All we really had when I built my last rig was SATA 3 2.5" drives.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
QLC is usable - just - if you realise its limitations and don't use it in any scenario where you might have sustained writes (>50GB) or sustained combined read/writes or want to keep the drive 90% full. But at the prices being demanded for them currently? Avoid like the plague because better drives using TLC can be had for similar or cheaper prices.

I was early on the QLC train, because they were about 30% cheaper than the TLC drives at the time where I was shopping and they were so new I optimistically thought, "well, how bad can they be, really?"

Answer: pretty freakin' bad. I have seen sustained writes in the 90MB/s range with nothing else happening on the drive (2TB Samsung 860QVO), and the 65-70MB/s range if doing sustained read/writes at the same time. I will admit this is something of a specialist edge case, but nonetheless, it's rather troublesome.

Lesson learned, I refuse to buy them again, but if the price is right, they can be acceptable depending on your usage scenario. I wouldn't use them as an OS drive, I wouldn't use them as a scratch drive, but I might think about using one as a game drive if the price was right. By that I mean about half the price of any other drive.

Quote: Originally Posted by Liranan View Post
The 3TB DT01ACA300's I have in my server (XFS) have a sustained read/write of about 180MB/s, while QLC has higher access times that's not enough for me to say that these drives are acceptable, they're horrendous.
I don't see where in what you quoted I said they were acceptable?

I did say, however, that you can cherry pick a HDD to make even a QLC drive look good: just go with an SMR drive. Seagate did a sneaky and "upgraded" their 8TB Barracuda Compute HDDs to SMR last year, and obfuscated the drive tech in their documentation in the process so it was hard to tell without actually having a drive to test. End result? I have four lemon drives where if I write more than about 10GB to them at once, they will choke and write at something crazy like <1MB/s. That is absolutely unacceptable, and even QLC is better than that.


Paradigm Shifter is offline  
post #15 of 40 (permalink) Old 07-01-2020, 01:52 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Martin778's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Central EU
Posts: 1,616
Rep: 18 (Unique: 18)
It feels like we've passed the peak of SATA SSD's long ago with drives like the 850/860PRO and MX500 and from then on it's manufacturers trying to create the cheapest junk folks would still buy. Even the NVMe market is slowing down as there are only a few PCIE4.0 models around and the 980 PRO is nowhere in sight, what's currently on the NVMe market is pretty much rebranding of the same stuff, sometimes with tweaked firmware.

Threadripper 3960X @ broken PBO EDC=40 | Aorus TRX40 Xtreme | Enermax Liqtech II 360 TR4 + EK Clear flush + 3x Noctua A12x25 | 4x8GB G.Skill TridentZ Neo 3800C14 @ 3733 CL14-15-15-30 CR1 | EVGA Kingpin 2080Ti @ 2115MHz / 8250MHz + Noctua A12-25 | 4x1TB 970 PRO raid0 | Corsair MP600 2TB | Seasonic Prime Platinum 1300W | In Win D-Frame 2.0 Gold | ASUS PG349Q
Martin778 is offline  
post #16 of 40 (permalink) Old 07-01-2020, 02:03 AM
Avid Memer
 
chessmyantidrug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Wichita Falls, TX
Posts: 5,935
Rep: 246 (Unique: 182)
Quote: Originally Posted by Martin778 View Post
It feels like we've passed the peak of SATA SSD's long ago with drives like the 850/860PRO and MX500 and from then on it's manufacturers trying to create the cheapest junk folks would still buy. Even the NVMe market is slowing down as there are only a few PCIE4.0 models around and the 980 PRO is nowhere in sight, what's currently on the NVMe market is pretty much rebranding of the same stuff, sometimes with tweaked firmware.
I don't know what kind of improvements you're expecting. Manufacturers are limited by interface. They can't make AHCI SSDs any faster than they already are. NVMe SSDs are different, but they're still limited by their interface. PCI-e 3.0 SSDs can't really go any faster unless they're allocated more lanes. PCI-e 4.0 SSDs haven't run out of bandwidth yet, but it's going to happen sooner or later. And it won't matter for the vast majority of consumers because they don't need that level of performance. AHCI SSDs are more than enough.

ITX gaming system
(17 items)
CPU
i9-9900KF
Motherboard
ASRock Z390 Phantom Gaming ITX/AC
GPU
EVGA RTX 2070 Super Black Gaming
RAM
Crucial Ballistix
Hard Drive
Samsung 970 Evo
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Pro
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 Pro
Hard Drive
Seagate FireCuda
Power Supply
Seasonic FOCUS SGX
Cooling
Scythe Big Shuriken 3
Case
SilverStone FTZ01-E
Operating System
Windows 10 Home
Monitor
BenQ XL2420Z
Monitor
BenQ RL2455HM
Keyboard
Deck Legend Fire
Mouse
SteelSeries Rival 500
Mousepad
HyperX Fury S Cloud9 Edition
▲ hide details ▲
chessmyantidrug is offline  
post #17 of 40 (permalink) Old 07-01-2020, 03:25 AM - Thread Starter
Politically incorrect
 
Liranan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Soviet China... Oh wait..
Posts: 9,158
Rep: 633 (Unique: 309)
Quote: Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter View Post
QLC is usable - just - if you realise its limitations and don't use it in any scenario where you might have sustained writes (>50GB) or sustained combined read/writes or want to keep the drive 90% full. But at the prices being demanded for them currently? Avoid like the plague because better drives using TLC can be had for similar or cheaper prices.

I was early on the QLC train, because they were about 30% cheaper than the TLC drives at the time where I was shopping and they were so new I optimistically thought, "well, how bad can they be, really?"

Answer: pretty freakin' bad. I have seen sustained writes in the 90MB/s range with nothing else happening on the drive (2TB Samsung 860QVO), and the 65-70MB/s range if doing sustained read/writes at the same time. I will admit this is something of a specialist edge case, but nonetheless, it's rather troublesome.

Lesson learned, I refuse to buy them again, but if the price is right, they can be acceptable depending on your usage scenario. I wouldn't use them as an OS drive, I wouldn't use them as a scratch drive, but I might think about using one as a game drive if the price was right. By that I mean about half the price of any other drive.


I don't see where in what you quoted I said they were acceptable?

I did say, however, that you can cherry pick a HDD to make even a QLC drive look good: just go with an SMR drive. Seagate did a sneaky and "upgraded" their 8TB Barracuda Compute HDDs to SMR last year, and obfuscated the drive tech in their documentation in the process so it was hard to tell without actually having a drive to test. End result? I have four lemon drives where if I write more than about 10GB to them at once, they will choke and write at something crazy like <1MB/s. That is absolutely unacceptable, and even QLC is better than that.
I am stating that these QLC drives are pointless as they are overpriced and don't perform well. Their performance is so abysmal that a low capacity HD easily beats them and I wouldn't even use them as a game drive. As for Seagate: there's a reason I don't buy Seagate, trust is one of those reasons.

Quote: Originally Posted by chessmyantidrug View Post
I don't know what kind of improvements you're expecting. Manufacturers are limited by interface. They can't make AHCI SSDs any faster than they already are. NVMe SSDs are different, but they're still limited by their interface. PCI-e 3.0 SSDs can't really go any faster unless they're allocated more lanes. PCI-e 4.0 SSDs haven't run out of bandwidth yet, but it's going to happen sooner or later. And it won't matter for the vast majority of consumers because they don't need that level of performance. AHCI SSDs are more than enough.
We are nowhere near saturating SATA's limit, unless you copy to and from another nVME drive all day, however most users don't so the only reason to get an nVME drive is for higher access times. Bandwidth is meaningless as I don't copy hundreds of gigabytes of data to and from my Phison drive every day.

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by faraz1729 go_quote.gif
Haha, Liranan, you creep.

Tacitus - The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws

Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money. - Cree Indian Proverb
Liranan is offline  
post #18 of 40 (permalink) Old 07-01-2020, 09:15 AM
9 Cans of Ravioli
 
The Pook's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 18,861
Rep: 1461 (Unique: 735)
Quote: Originally Posted by Liranan View Post
We are nowhere near saturating SATA's limit

SATA 3 is 750 MB/s theoretical max, actually getting that is impossible due to overhead. SATA spec includes a transfer protocol that uses some bandwidth so there's always going to be some of that spec that's unavailable. The real-world limit is ~600 MB/s peak and we already have drives that can sustain 550+.

Intel i9 9900K Coffee Lake @ X8 5309mhz (+47.5%)
AMD FX-8320 Vishera @ X4 5022mhz (+43.5%)
Intel i5 4690K Haswell @ X4 5013mhz (+43.2%)
AMD X4 960T Zosma @ X6 4870mhz (+62.3%)
Intel i7 6700 Skylake @ X4 4709mhz (+38.5%)
Intel i5 6400 Skylake @ X4 4588mhz (+69.9%)
2 OP pls nerf
(24 items)
NUC U
(9 items)
CPU
i9 9900K
Motherboard
AsRock Z390 Taichi
GPU
MSI GTX 1080 Ti
RAM
G.Skill DDR4 4133 32GB
Hard Drive
XPG SX8200 Pro NVMe 2TB
Hard Drive
HP EX950 NVMe 2TB
Hard Drive
2x Samsung 860 1TB RAID 0
Hard Drive
WD Blue 4TB SSD
Power Supply
Seasonic Focus Plus Gold 750w
Cooling
Corsair H115i Pro
Cooling
Raijintek Morpheus II
Case
Fractal Design Meshify S2
Operating System
Windows 10 Education x64
Monitor
Acer XF270HU 27" 1440p
Monitor
LG 24UD58 24" 4K
Keyboard
CoolerMaster MK730 (MX Blue)
Mouse
Glorious Model D
Mousepad
X-Ray 27" x 14"
Audio
Klipsch PowerGate
Audio
Schiit Hel
Audio
Micca RB42
Audio
Philips Fidelio X2
Audio
Philips SHP9500S
Audio
Audio Technica ATH-M50X
CPU
i3 8109U
Motherboard
Intel NUC8i3BEH
GPU
Iris Plus 655
RAM
Kingston DDR4 2400 16GB
Hard Drive
Mushkin Pilot NVMe 1TB
Hard Drive
SanDisk Ultra II 480GB
Operating System
Windows 10 Professional
Keyboard
Dierya DK63 60% (Outemu Blue)
Mouse
Logitech G603
▲ hide details ▲


The Pook is online now  
post #19 of 40 (permalink) Old 07-01-2020, 09:57 AM
WaterCooler
 
Sir Beregond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 3,257
Rep: 75 (Unique: 68)
Quote: Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter View Post
QLC is usable - just - if you realise its limitations and don't use it in any scenario where you might have sustained writes (>50GB) or sustained combined read/writes or want to keep the drive 90% full. But at the prices being demanded for them currently? Avoid like the plague because better drives using TLC can be had for similar or cheaper prices.

I was early on the QLC train, because they were about 30% cheaper than the TLC drives at the time where I was shopping and they were so new I optimistically thought, "well, how bad can they be, really?"

Answer: pretty freakin' bad. I have seen sustained writes in the 90MB/s range with nothing else happening on the drive (2TB Samsung 860QVO), and the 65-70MB/s range if doing sustained read/writes at the same time. I will admit this is something of a specialist edge case, but nonetheless, it's rather troublesome.

Lesson learned, I refuse to buy them again, but if the price is right, they can be acceptable depending on your usage scenario. I wouldn't use them as an OS drive, I wouldn't use them as a scratch drive, but I might think about using one as a game drive if the price was right. By that I mean about half the price of any other drive.
Wow. Yeah I guess these are all new terms for me (TLC, QLC). Will have to read up as I am looking to avoid having any mechanical drives in my next build (end of this year/early next year) and I am already slightly confused about M.2 and NVME and what all that means.

This is what I get for ignoring tech for a few years.

Deus Ex (2015-)
(21 items)
CPU
[Intel] Core i7-4790k
Motherboard
[ASUS] Z97-DELUXE
GPU
[ASUS] GTX 980 Strix
RAM
[Corsair] Vengance Pro Series 16GB DDR3-2400
Hard Drive
[Crucial] M550 512GB
Hard Drive
[WD] Black 3TB x 2
Power Supply
[Corsair] AX750
Cooling
[EK] Supremacy EVO - Gold
Cooling
[EK] GTX 980 Strix - Fullcover w/ Backplate
Cooling
[EK] D5 X-RES Top 100 w/ D5 Vario
Cooling
[Monsoon] 3/8" ID 5/8" OD Compressions - Gold
Cooling
[XSPC] EX240 x 2
Cooling
[Corsair] SP120 x 5 / AF120 x 1
Case
[Corsair] Carbide Air 540
Operating System
[Windows] 8.1 Pro 64-bit
Monitor
[LG] 32GK650F-B
Keyboard
[Corsair] K70 - Red switches
Mouse
[Razer] Naga Epic
Audio
[Audio Technica] ATH-A700
Audio
[Antlion] ModMic
Other
[Lamptron] FC5-V2
CPU
[Intel] Core i7-960
Motherboard
[ASUS] Rampage III Formula
GPU
[EVGA] GTX 670 FTW 2GB
RAM
[Corsair] Dominator-GT 6GB DDR3-1866
Hard Drive
[Crucial] M4 128GB
Hard Drive
[Samsung] Spinpoint F3 1TB x2
Hard Drive
[WD] Caviar Black 750GB
Power Supply
[Corsair] AX850
Cooling
[XSPC] Raystorm
Cooling
[XSPC] EX360 and EX240
Cooling
[Scythe] Gentle Typhoon AP-15 x 5
Cooling
[EVGA] GTX 680 Hydro Copper w/ Backplate
Cooling
[XSPC] Dual-bay Res w/ [Swiftech] MCP655
Cooling
[Bitfenix] Spectre Pro Red LED - 140mm x 4
Case
[NZXT] Switch 810 Matte Black
Operating System
[Windows] 7 Ultimate 64-Bit
Monitor
[BenQ] XL2420TX
Keyboard
[Saitek] Cyborg V.5 Red LED
Mouse
[Razer] Naga Epic Red LED
Audio
[Audio Technica] ATH-A700
Audio
[ASUS] Xonar Essence STX
Other
[Lamptron] FC5-V2
CPU
[Intel] Core M-5Y10
GPU
[Intel] HD Graphics 5300
RAM
[Generic?] 8 GB DDR3
Hard Drive
[Generic?] 256GB SSD
Operating System
[Microsoft] Windows 10
Monitor
1920 x 1080
▲ hide details ▲


Sir Beregond is offline  
post #20 of 40 (permalink) Old 07-01-2020, 10:41 AM - Thread Starter
Politically incorrect
 
Liranan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Soviet China... Oh wait..
Posts: 9,158
Rep: 633 (Unique: 309)
Quote: Originally Posted by The Pook View Post
SATA 3 is 750 MB/s theoretical max, actually getting that is impossible due to overhead. SATA spec includes a transfer protocol that uses some bandwidth so there's always going to be some of that spec that's unavailable. The real-world limit is ~600 MB/s peak and we already have drives that can sustain 550+.
How often do you copy so much data that SATA is the limiting factor?

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by faraz1729 go_quote.gif
Haha, Liranan, you creep.

Tacitus - The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws

Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money. - Cree Indian Proverb
Liranan is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off