# Samsung 870 QVO SATA 4 TB SSD



## 80251 (Aug 8, 2022)

I know this is a slow QLC SSD, but at least it has 4 GiB of LPDDR4 L1 cache and a 78 GiB SLC 2nd level cache. It's meant to replace my DT01ACA200 Toshiba 2 TiB 7200 RPM HDD which began serenading me with the click of death until it mercifully died after only writing some 5.7TiB of data and 4 years of life. It had about 1.6 TiB of data (games, music, programs, pictures, data) on it.

I have a few questions about the Samsung 870 QVO 4 TB

1. would a 28% overprovisioning help with the dreaded loss in write speeds?

2. even though it's write speeds are abysmal, they're still significantly better than the Toshiba 2 TiB HDD it's replacing right?

3. would it be worth it to get a small, fast, NVME, M.2 SSD to cache the slow Samsung 870 QVO?

4. if yes to 3, would one of the small, ultra-fast optane SSD's be the way to go? What capacity should I be looking at?


----------



## prtskg (Aug 8, 2022)

If you are ready to invest in optane, why not buy 4TB TLC SSD?


----------



## cvaldes (Aug 8, 2022)

Optane is expensive and dead.

The best approach in using the Samsung 870 QVO 4TB 2.5" SSD is to avoid frequent writing of large amounts of data. You'll be more satisfied with its performance if you consider it a mostly-read device for content storage (games, music, movies, photos, etc.) rather than something you'll be writing to frequently in large amounts.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 8, 2022)

80251 said:


> 1. would a 28% overprovisioning help with the dreaded loss in write speeds?


That would be more that you need. 12% would be more than enough for a 4TB drive.


80251 said:


> 2. even though it's write speeds are abysmal, they're still significantly better than the Toshiba 2 TiB HDD it's replacing right?


True.


80251 said:


> 3. would it be worth it to get a small, fast, NVME, M.2 SSD to cache the slow Samsung 870 QVO?


No. The performance as a secondary storage drive will be more than sufficient.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 8, 2022)

80251 said:


> 1. would a 28% overprovisioning help with the dreaded loss in write speeds?


If you are talking about leaving an unallocated portion of the drive as overprovisioning, then it won't help at all with the write speed issue of a QLC drive.


80251 said:


> 2. even though it's write speeds are abysmal, they're still significantly better than the Toshiba 2 TiB HDD it's replacing right?


Probably not what I would call significantly, but it will likely be better. The 4TB QVO writes to the QLC directly at about 200MB/s.  There are some hard drives on the market that can match that, I'm not sure if your old Toshiba was one of them.


80251 said:


> 3. would it be worth it to get a small, fast, NVME, M.2 SSD to cache the slow Samsung 870 QVO?


No. The QVO will work just fine by itself. It's not worth wasting the money on a M.2 cache drive. If you are going to do that, just buy a better 2.5" drive instead of the QVO.  IMO, the only time SSD caching makes sense is if you are caching a HDD.


----------



## chrcoluk (Aug 8, 2022)

I am no fan of QLC, but to answer your questions.

Writing to QLC natively is slower, slower than modern hdd's, but the majority of the time if not all of time time the drive should be writing to the pSLC cache, which will comfortably out perform your old HDD.

A 78 gig pSLC cache seems quite small for a 4TB SSD though.  So if you was doing something like transferring all your games at once to it, you might fill that cache during that operation, but once thats done, it will be moved to QLC in the background and the cache will be used again when it drops back to normal usage patterns.

Overprovisioning will help in longevity and to prevent the pSLC cache going down to its minimal size.  It shouldnt have any affect on QLC/pSLC write speeds though. (keeping free space has same effect).

I dont think there is a need to buy a separate caching SSD for your described use case, read speeds will be performant, and games are primarily read based.  Plus in your described use case writes will typically be going to pSLC which is performant.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 8, 2022)

Might be worth noting the 870 EVO 4TB is only $10 than the QVO on Amazon today.


----------



## 80251 (Aug 8, 2022)

@Toothless 
I did consider the 870 Evo until I read about the failure rates for these SSD's being really bad, which is surprising considering it's a Samsung product. TPU has a whole thread on the issues with the 870 Evo and it's backed up by reviews for the 870 Evo on both newegg and amazon with many failures being reported (relative to other SATA SSD's).

Will the 870 QVO be at least faster in IOP's and sequential reads than my Toshiba HDD was? It'll be more reliable than a spinner right?


----------



## Toothless (Aug 9, 2022)

80251 said:


> @Toothless
> I did consider the 870 Evo until I read about the failure rates for these SSD's being really bad, which is surprising considering it's a Samsung product. TPU has a whole thread on the issues with the 870 Evo and it's backed up by reviews for the 870 Evo on both newegg and amazon with many failures being reported (relative to other SATA SSD's).
> 
> Will the 870 QVO be at least faster in IOP's and sequential reads than my Toshiba HDD was? It'll be more reliable than a spinner right?


SSDs have a limited write endurance, and HDDs just have a "how long is this gonna spin the platter and wiggle the arm" type deal. 

My 970 EVO is at like.. 375TBW or something and the write is destroyed. Still choochin'.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 9, 2022)

80251 said:


> Will the 870 QVO be at least faster in IOP's and sequential reads than my Toshiba HDD was?


Should be. I have rarely seen an SSD not out perform an HDD. By how much is the question. You shouldn't worry about it.


80251 said:


> It'll be more reliable than a spinner right?


That depends on many factors. Personally, I have rarely had a HDD fail. It happens once every decade and never fails to show signs of that failure, giving more than enough time to back up the data, if important. This includes 2.5" HDDs intended for mobile. But then again, I only buy quality drives. You seem to be doing your homework and finding a reliable drive shouldn't be difficult. You'll get much storage space bang for your buck with an HDD. Well cared for, HDDs can a do last a decade and often much more.


----------



## 80251 (Aug 9, 2022)

@lexluthermiester

If I didn't have bad luck with hardware I wouldn't have any luck at all.

My Toshiba 2 TiB spinner was ~4 years old when it died (after writing only 5.7 TiB of data) and announced the fact through the click of death. No SMART statistics were failing when this happened and had no bad sectors and no reallocated sectors.

Then again, my Toshiba 2 TiB spinner did come back to life TWICE, to allow me to back up more data so I shouldn't complain. My one SSD failure (a Crucial MX500 250 GB SATA M.2) was total, absolute and without any warning whatsoever (i.e. no click of death). It disappeared from BIOS and device mangler.

I like Samsung because I have 4 of their SATA 850 Pros and none of them have ever given me any troubles at all.


----------



## Toothless (Aug 9, 2022)

If your SSD is clicking, you got a whole different issue.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 9, 2022)

80251 said:


> @lexluthermiester
> 
> If I didn't have bad luck with hardware I wouldn't have any luck at all.
> 
> ...


Perhaps WD would work better for you.


----------



## 80251 (Aug 9, 2022)

I think outside of backup media I'm done with spinners.


----------



## puma99dk| (Aug 9, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Perhaps WD would work better for you.


WD is a good choice I would go Purple or if you want to spend the money Gold.

Even I this time around went Seagate Exos the prices are really good and performance are wow for the bigger drives I got a 16TB.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 9, 2022)

80251 said:


> I think outside of backup media I'm done with spinners.


Well, then you should expect to pay premium prices for smaller storage drives. For mass storage, HDD's are still the better buy. 
However if you're sold on SSDs going forward, that 870 QVO will be good for many years. Buy with confidence.


----------



## newtekie1 (Aug 9, 2022)

chrcoluk said:


> Writing to QLC natively is slower, slower than modern hdd's



This statement is largely false. I think most people, at least on these forums, tend to believe this is true because of how horribly the 870 QVO 1TB performed in the review here. That drive definitely fits your description, since it drops to ~100MB/s when the pSLC cache runs out. And it also has a stupid small pSLC cache of only ~40GB. But that drive was crippled compared to other QLC drives, even higher capacity 870 QVO drives. The reason is that at 1TB of capacity, the drive only had a single QLC NAND chip to write to. And writing to just a single chip results in the terrible performance we saw in the review.

But the fact is that even the 2TB model, which has 2 chips that can be written to at the same time, doubles that speed to ~200MB/s when writing directly to the QLC. And it also doubles the pSLC cache size to ~80GB(which is still stupidly small).  And there are plenty of other QLC drives that perform much better in writing. There are drives that have a full 1/4 of their capacity as pSLC. These drives can do ~250MB/s when writing directly to QLC. Which is probably, as worst, matching the fastest HDDs on the market today but in reality still beating most HDDs. And that's only if you manage to use up all the pSLC cache, which is a lot harder on the drives with actual reasonable amounts of pSLC.


----------



## P4-630 (Aug 9, 2022)

Toothless said:


> If your SSD is clicking, you got a whole different issue.


Wonder where the noise is coming from..


----------



## chrcoluk (Aug 9, 2022)

newtekie1 said:


> This statement is largely false. I think most people, at least on these forums, tend to believe this is true because of how horribly the 870 QVO 1TB performed in the review here. That drive definitely fits your description, since it drops to ~100MB/s when the pSLC cache runs out. And it also has a stupid small pSLC cache of only ~40GB. But that drive was crippled compared to other QLC drives, even higher capacity 870 QVO drives. The reason is that at 1TB of capacity, the drive only had a single QLC NAND chip to write to. And writing to just a single chip results in the terrible performance we saw in the review.
> 
> But the fact is that even the 2TB model, which has 2 chips that can be written to at the same time, doubles that speed to ~200MB/s when writing directly to the QLC. And it also doubles the pSLC cache size to ~80GB(which is still stupidly small).  And there are plenty of other QLC drives that perform much better in writing. There are drives that have a full 1/4 of their capacity as pSLC. These drives can do ~250MB/s when writing directly to QLC. Which is probably, as worst, matching the fastest HDDs on the market today but in reality still beating most HDDs. And that's only if you manage to use up all the pSLC cache, which is a lot harder on the drives with actual reasonable amounts of pSLC.


Ok not so bad then, I think regardless with his use case he should after copying the initial data over, only be writing to the pSLC anyway.


----------



## bonehead123 (Aug 9, 2022)

The last spinners I owned were WD Raptors (7 of them), and when I finally sold off the last one in 2017, it was over 11 years old and still running as well as it did on the day I first installed it, and the person I sold it to is still using it right now 

That's probably why I only use WD's m.2's in all 5 of my rigs & also client builds now....


----------



## 80251 (Aug 9, 2022)

The anandtech review of the Samsung 870 QVO 4 TB model showed the write speed dropping to 163 MB/s for the last 16 GB of capacity after writing to the rest of the SSD:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15887/the-samsung-870-qvo-1tb-4tb-ssd-review-qlc-refreshed/2

At least once all the data is transferred to the Samsung 870 QVO 4 TB it won't be so bad because I won't be writing more than tens of gigabytes at a time to it thereafter


----------



## Wirko (Aug 9, 2022)

80251 said:


> The anandtech review of the Samsung 870 QVO 4 TB model showed the write speed dropping to 163 MB/s for the last 16 GB of capacity after writing to the rest of the SSD:
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/15887/the-samsung-870-qvo-1tb-4tb-ssd-review-qlc-refreshed/2
> 
> At least once all the data is transferred to the Samsung 870 QVO 4 TB it won't be so bad because I won't be writing more than tens of gigabytes at a time to it thereafter


Not just for the last 16 GB but from the beginning to the end, except for the initial cached gigabytes. Look at the graph!

Anandtech pays special attention to the last 16 GB due to the effect that's barely visible in QLC drives (TPU review) but is very pronounced in many TLC drives (TPU review). That's when the drive needs to flush the pSLC cache while writing new data at the same time, so it becomes slower than slow. That apparently doesn't happen in Samsung QVO models but never mind, it's just a technical curiousity and really shouldn't affect real life operation.


----------



## mb194dc (Aug 14, 2022)

bonehead123 said:


> The last spinners I owned were WD Raptors (7 of them), and when I finally sold off the last one in 2017, it was over 11 years old and still running as well as it did on the day I first installed it, and the person I sold it to is still using it right now
> 
> That's probably why I only use WD's m.2's in all 5 of my rigs & also client builds now....



I killed two WD 15k rpm SAS in a mail server, double disk failure actually, only one I've seen. Think having to write thousands of tiny files all the time got to them after 4 or 5 years.

Just took on a server owned used by others before that has 4 x Hynix SL308 250GB drives in it. All of them have 160TB written to them which is more than double endurance. Really a miracle they are still usable. Not sure how far they could be pushed further before failing.


----------



## Wirko (Aug 14, 2022)

mb194dc said:


> Just took on a server owned used by others before that has 4 x Hynix SL308 250GB drives in it. All of them have 160TB written to them which is more than double endurance. Really a miracle they are still usable. Not sure how far they could be pushed further before failing.


That's interesting. Can you check their SMART data to see how much life they think they have left?


----------



## ThrashZone (Aug 14, 2022)

Hi,
Frankly I would avoid 870 series completely to many issues
Go western digital instead.

Black is always my preference but for data drive blue is fine to.


----------



## mb194dc (Aug 14, 2022)

Wirko said:


> That's interesting. Can you check their SMART data to see how much life they think they have left?



Crystal Disk Info said health was good..., despite wear levelling count of 1. My understanding would be that this drive shouldn't be working still with these numbers 600TB of total NAND writes?. Hard disk sentinel gave life left of 1% and said should fail essentially. Had all the drives changed out now.


----------



## puma99dk| (Aug 14, 2022)

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Frankly I would avoid 870 series completely to many issues
> Go western digital instead.
> 
> Black is always my preference but for data drive blue is fine to.


I guess I missed a bullet there was thinking about getting one but, I am glad I didn't and kept med 850


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 14, 2022)

ThrashZone said:


> Frankly I would avoid 870 series completely to many issues


Such as?


----------



## Wirko (Aug 14, 2022)

mb194dc said:


> Crystal Disk Info said health was good..., despite wear levelling count of 1. My understanding would be that this drive shouldn't be working still with these numbers 600TB of total NAND writes?. Hard disk sentinel gave life left of 1% and said should fail essentially. Had all the drives changed out now.


Nice to see both Host Writes and NAND Writes. My Samsung 850 Evo only shows the host writes. Also, are you able to tell if they were mostly full most of the time before retirement? Less full would mean better overprovisioning, so a better chance to survive that much writing.

Now if you have no intention to put those SSDs to any use any more ... I suggest you to destroy one of them by constant writing, and forget about the other three for at least half a year, then check if the data is still intact.


----------



## mb194dc (Aug 14, 2022)

Can't tell what they were used for just that whoever used them wasn't paying attention to their health!


----------



## 80251 (Aug 14, 2022)

mb194dc said:


> Crystal Disk Info said health was good..., despite wear levelling count of 1. My understanding would be that this drive shouldn't be working still with these numbers 600TB of total NAND writes?. Hard disk sentinel gave life left of 1% and said should fail essentially. Had all the drives changed out now.


Look at that write amplification (host writes vs. NAND writes). It really is a thing.

I have a samsung 850 Pro 128 that was unpowered for over a year -- it still had all the data AFAICT when I hooked it up to secure erase it.


----------



## ThrashZone (Aug 15, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Such as?


Hi,
Think this is a good start 








						Samsung 870 EVO - Beware, certain batches prone to failure!
					

Certain 870 EVO 4TB and 2TB drives are affected by early failures where they develop uncorrectable errors and some data just cannot be read from them anymore. This seems to primarily affect drives produced in January/February 2021. For example, i have three 870 EVO 4TB, only one is affected (so...




					www.techpowerup.com
				




I've never seen such a bad release bash issue or not 
So it's enough for myself to pass on 870.


----------



## 80251 (Aug 15, 2022)

@ThrashZone 
That only applies to the 870 EVO line, not the 870 QVO line, which uses a different controller and different flash memory than the 870 EVO line.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 15, 2022)

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Think this is a good start
> 
> 
> ...


That was a single bad run and was quickly fixed. You can't blame an entire model range for one minor glitch. Come on man, you're smart enough to know that fact.



80251 said:


> @ThrashZone
> That only applies to the 870 EVO line, not the 870 QVO line, which uses a different controller and different flash memory than the 870 EVO line.


This too.


----------



## ThrashZone (Aug 15, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> That was a single bad run and was quickly fixed. You can't blame an entire model range for one minor glitch. Come on man, you're smart enough to know that fact.
> 
> 
> This too.


Hi,
Well I don't know how many samsung ssd's you have on your "personal machines" but I have a crapload of them 
None of 870 series is not on my buy list.

Wish I hadn't bought any 970's either frankly


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 15, 2022)

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well I don't know how many samsung ssd's you have on your "personal machines" but I have a crapload of them
> None of 870 series is not on my buy list.
> 
> Wish I hadn't bought any 970's either frankly


I've only once had a problem with a Samsung drive. It was an HDD from 2009 I think? When I RMA'd it they didn't send a refurb'd drive like other makers do, they sent a brand new one. I can't remember any SSD problems right off the top of my head. There might have been one, I just don't remember.

EDIT:
I do not count the early QLC drives that I deliberately ran max load until they failed as that was to prove QLC was unreliable. And Samsung was not the only QLC based drives I did that to. That testing run just doesn't count as those drives were pushed to their limits 24/7 until they failed.


----------



## Bomby569 (Aug 16, 2022)

ThrashZone said:


> Wish I hadn't bought any 970's either frankly



Hey what's wrong with the 970's?


----------



## ThrashZone (Aug 16, 2022)

Hi,
970 evo or plus are hot as hell is all which I hate hot spots.



lexluthermiester said:


> I've only once had a problem with a Samsung drive. It was an HDD from 2009 I think? When I RMA's it they didn't send a refurb'd drive like other makers do, they send a brand new one. I can't remember and SSD problems right off the top of my head. There might have been one, I just don't remember.
> 
> EDIT:
> I do not count the early QLC drives that I deliberately ran max load until they failed as that was to prove QLC was unreliable. And Samsung was not the only QLC based drives I did that to. That testing run just doesn't count as those drives were pushed to their limits 24/7 until they failed.


Well you skipped some good series like 850-860's pro and evo which I didn't skip them


----------



## 80251 (Aug 16, 2022)

The reviews at newegg and amazon for 870 EVO SSD's have more failures reported (relative to other SSD's, incl. the 870 QVO) for the last three months.


----------



## timta2 (Aug 16, 2022)

80251 said:


> The reviews at newegg and amazon for 870 EVO SSD's have more failures reported (relative to other SSD's, incl. the 870 QVO) for the last three months.


Which doesn't mean much of anything. People love to complain in reviews when they have trouble and without any kind of other stats, like the total numbers sold, it's meaningless. They are likely selling large numbers, which will result in a higher number of defect reports.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 16, 2022)

80251 said:


> The reviews at newegg and amazon for 870 EVO SSD's have more failures reported (relative to other SSD's, incl. the 870 QVO) for the last three months.


Not that I doubt you, but I'd like to look. Got a link?


----------



## ThrashZone (Aug 16, 2022)

Hi,
Yep I remember seeing some bad reviews to when I was thinking of getting one or two for os drives
Just sold the old 775 socket board/... instead said f-it.


----------



## 80251 (Aug 16, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Not that I doubt you, but I'd like to look. Got a link?



Here's newegg (5 reported bad in last 6 months)
https://www.newegg.com/samsung-4tb-...&cm_re=samsung_870 evo-_-20-147-795-_-Product

amazon (6 reported bad in last 6 months)
https://www.amazon.com/product-revi...sortBy=recent&pageNumber=3#reviews-filter-bar

The TPU thread on the 870 EVO said not even newer firmware was fixing the issue.


----------



## A Computer Guy (Aug 16, 2022)

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well I don't know how many samsung ssd's you have on your "personal machines" but I have a crapload of them
> None of 870 series is not on my buy list.
> 
> Wish I hadn't bought any 970's either frankly


Do you have a recommendation.  I was considering getting a 2GB 970 EVO Plus on sale for ~$190 to replace my 500GB 970 EVO however I have a x570 now and 4x4 seems it would be a better fit for the right price.


----------



## 80251 (Aug 16, 2022)

It's bizarre to me that Samsung has had literally nothing to say about the 870 EVO debacle. I even tried looking for 4 TiB 850 Pro's, but those can't be found anywhere (even used on ebay). 4 TiB 850 Pros actually existed right?


----------



## Bomby569 (Aug 16, 2022)

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 970 evo or plus are hot as hell is all which I hate hot spots.



I have the mobo's heatsink for it and i don't see anything crazy


----------



## ThrashZone (Aug 16, 2022)

A Computer Guy said:


> Do you have a recommendation.  I was considering getting a 2GB 970 EVO Plus on sale for ~$190 to replace my 500GB 970 EVO however I have a x570 now and 4x4 seems it would be a better fit for the right price.


Hi,
Western digital has been pretty nice spec's wise and price.
If I were in the market for some m.2 that would be my choice black series of course 



80251 said:


> It's bizarre to me that Samsung has had literally nothing to say about the 870 EVO debacle. I even tried looking for 4 TiB 850 Pro's, but those can't be found anywhere (even used on ebay). *4 TiB 850 Pros actually existed right?*


I doubt it 850 evo yes.

Pro's are os drives not storage.


----------



## Shrek (Aug 16, 2022)

Does this drive have enough internal capacitance to manage the RAM cache in the event of a power cut?


----------



## 80251 (Aug 16, 2022)

@Shrek the 4 TiB 870 QVO has 4 GiB of RAM cache, the 8 TiB has 8 GiB of RAM cache. How does that help in the case of a power outage though? The datasheet for the Samsung QVO doesn't mention anything about capacitance or power loss hold up times so I'm guessing it doesn't.

I thought it was only enterprise SSD's that had the capacitors to insure any RAM cache data is flushed to the NAND?


----------



## Shrek (Aug 16, 2022)

I was wondering if any commercial drives had this 'enterprise' feature.


----------



## 80251 (Aug 16, 2022)

I know back when I worked in IT at a DC the RAID controllers for the HDD arrays had on-board batteries to insure all data was either written to the array or saved on the RAID card local memory but that was a pre-SSD DC (Data Center).


----------



## Wirko (Aug 16, 2022)

Shrek said:


> Does this drive have enough internal capacitance to manage the RAM cache in the event of a power cut?


I was wondering the same thing so I checked several reviews of the QVO and nowhere is it assumed that the DRAM serves as a write cache.
Tom's Hardware: "Samsung's 870 QVO uses 1GB of LPDDR4 DRAM per terabyte of capacity for the controller to use as buffer space for NAND management and background tasks"
T.P.U.: "Last but not least, a DRAM cache chip is included to handle the mapping tables"
Part of the DRAM may still be used as a read cache to improve random reads. But not very likely.


----------



## qTtpqpa3Nd (Sep 8, 2022)

80251 said:


> I know this is a slow QLC SSD, but at least it has 4 GiB of LPDDR4 L1 cache and a 78 GiB SLC 2nd level cache. It's meant to replace my DT01ACA200 Toshiba 2 TiB 7200 RPM HDD which began serenading me with the click of death until it mercifully died after only writing some 5.7TiB of data and 4 years of life. It had about 1.6 TiB of data (games, music, programs, pictures, data) on it.
> 
> I have a few questions about the Samsung 870 QVO 4 TB
> 
> ...



I have this drive.

1. No

2. No. This drive usually writes at 30mb/s

3. If you are going that length buy 870EVO. The price difference is like $30.00. I saw 870EVO 4TB goes for as low as $320 something this summer. Why do yo go out of your way to buy worst product? BTY 870QVO now reported unusually shot life and high failure rate.
4. You got wrong idea. QVO is a garbage, slower than hard drive such as Western Digital Red Pro 16 GIG with 512MB of cash which surpass anything QVO cam offer in term of size, reliability, and performance and it only cost you @$299.00 American dollars QVO was made to take advantage of consumer who can't tell difference between TLC and QLC. It's a predatory product.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 8, 2022)

qTtpqpa3Nd said:


> It's a predatory product.


I would not completely disagree with this.


----------



## A Computer Guy (Sep 8, 2022)

qTtpqpa3Nd said:


> I have this drive.
> 
> 1. No
> 
> ...



For comparison I have an older Samsung 860 QVO 1 TB.  For light workloads QVO it's ok.

Copying 20GB it taps out at 437 MB/s.






At somewhere between 30 to 40GB it taps out at 76 MB/s


----------



## 80251 (Sep 10, 2022)

@A Computer Guy

Your random reads and writes have improved by > 300%?

The 1 TiB 870 QVO is the worst performer of the entire 870 QVO lineup because it has the smallest DRAM cache and the smallest pSLC cache of any of the models.

As for the 870 EVO series there is an entire thread devoted to the widespread failures of these SSD's.


----------



## A Computer Guy (Sep 10, 2022)

80251 said:


> @A Computer Guy
> 
> Your random reads and writes have improved by > 300%?


In the Samsung Magician screenshots:  I was messing around with RAPID so the 2022-09 is with RAPID on and 2022-08 is with RAPID turned off.
In the file copy screenshots RAPID was turned off.


----------



## chrcoluk (Sep 14, 2022)

80251 said:


> It's bizarre to me that Samsung has had literally nothing to say about the 870 EVO debacle. I even tried looking for 4 TiB 850 Pro's, but those can't be found anywhere (even used on ebay). 4 TiB 850 Pros actually existed right?


Is a thread about it on OCUK now, with people popping out of the woodwork to report RMAs and failures.  Samsungs failure to acknowledge isnt helping them as it means there is no confidence in the SKU now without an announcement its been fixed.

How long did it take them to open up on the 840 issues?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 14, 2022)

80251 said:


> The 1 TiB 870 QVO is the worst performer of the entire 870 QVO lineup because it has the smallest DRAM cache and the smallest pSLC cache of any of the models.


Yeah, but as long as one is not being used as a boot/OS drive, that's ok.


----------



## 80251 (Sep 14, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Yeah, but as long as one is not being used as a boot/OS drive, that's ok.


I see your point. 

It's on sustained writes after the pSLC cache is exhausted that really hurt the 1 TiB QVO, 80 MB/s peak sustained write is slower than either of my old Toshiba 2 TiB HDD's were in sustained reads or writes.

The anandtech review panned the 1 TiB QVO and even Samsung's own datasheet for the QVO series notes the following:

'Sequential write performance measurements are based on Intelligent TurboWrite technology. Performances after Intelligent Turbowrite are 80 MB/s (1TB), 160 MB/s (2/4/8TB). 

QD1 Random performances after Intelligent TurboWrite are 5.0K IOPS (1/2/4/8TB) for reads, and 22K IOPS (1TB) and 34K IOPS (2/4/8TB) for writes. 

QD32 Random performances after Intelligent TurboWrite are 45K IOPS (1TB) and 74K IOPS (2/4/8TB) for reads, and 22K IOPS(1TB), 42K IOPS(2/4/8TB) for write'


----------



## Zareek (Sep 14, 2022)

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well I don't know how many samsung ssd's you have on your "personal machines" but I have a crapload of them
> None of 870 series is not on my buy list.
> 
> Wish I hadn't bought any 970's either frankly


Three in my main rig, about five others in my wife's PC and the various laptops we have. I've owned a dozen of them and only had one fail(1TB 860 EVO) for a broken SATA connector that was my fault and Samsung replaced the drive under warranty, no questions asked. That being said, I'm not sure Samsung is what they used to be in the SSD world. Their drives have been so good to me, it's hard to walk away.



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Western digital has been pretty nice spec's wise and price.
> If I were in the market for some m.2 that would be my choice black series of course


WD used to be my go to for spinners but after the bait and switch with their Red series HDDs I don't trust them.



80251 said:


> That only applies to the 870 EVO line, not the 870 QVO line, which uses a different controller and different flash memory than the 870 EVO line.


I personally don't see the price difference as enough to justify QLC drives. They need to cost at least 30% less than a TLC drive if I'm going to consider them. Maybe another brand is worth considering if you don't trust the 870 EVO.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 14, 2022)

80251 said:


> I see your point.
> 
> It's on sustained writes after the pSLC cache is exhausted that really hurt the 1 TiB QVO, 80 MB/s peak sustained write is slower than either of my old Toshiba 2 TiB HDD's were in sustained reads or writes.
> 
> ...


The thing is, you're not going to use the drive as an OS drive, and you don't want HDD's, so get one and enjoy!


----------



## 80251 (Sep 15, 2022)

I just hope the 870 QVO doesn't crash and burn after 4 years (or less) like my 2 TiB Toshiba HDD did.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 15, 2022)

80251 said:


> I just hope the 870 QVO doesn't crash and burn after 4 years (or less) like my 2 TiB Toshiba HDD did.


Doubtful. However, there is a safeguard: Make backups of anything you can't lose.
You'll be fine.


----------

