Tuesday, November 27th 2018

Samsung Launches The New 860 QVO SSD Starting At $149.99 For The 1 TB Model

Samsung Electronics today unveiled its new consumer solid state drive (SSD) lineup - the Samsung 860 QVO SSD - featuring up to four terabytes (TB) of storage capacity with exceptional speed and reliability. Built on the company's high-density 4-bit multi-level cell (MLC) NAND flash architecture, the 860 QVO makes terabyte capacities more accessible to the masses at approachable price points.

"Today's consumers are using, producing and storing more high-resolution files than ever, including 4K videos and graphics-intensive games, escalating demand for greater capacities and performance in storage devices," said Dr. Mike Mang, vice president of Brand Product Marketing, Memory Business at Samsung Electronics. "Samsung continues to lead the move toward multi-terabyte SSDs with the introduction of the Samsung 860 QVO, delivering fast performance, reliability and value to more consumers around the world."
Mainstream PC users handling large multimedia content often need to upgrade their PC's storage to improve everyday computing experience. Based on the commonly used SATA interface and 2.5-inch form factor, the 860 QVO fits perfectly in most standard laptops or desktops. Also, by offering both high capacity and performance in a single, affordable drive, the 860 QVO eliminates the need to use a combination of an SSD and an HDD for booting and storage.

Featuring sequential read and write speeds of up to 550 megabytes per second (MB/s) and 520 MB/s, respectively, the 860 QVO achieves the same level of performance as today's 3-bit MLC SSD, thanks to Samsung's latest 4-bit V-NAND and the proven MJX controller. The drive is also integrated with Intelligent TurboWrite technology, which helps to accelerate speeds while maintaining high performance for longer periods of time.

For optimal reliability, Samsung provides a total byte written based on a thorough analysis of consumers' SSD usage patterns: a three-year limited warranty or up to 1,440 terabytes written (TBW) for the 4TB version, and 720 TBW and 360 TBW for the 2TB and 1TB versions, respectively.

The 860 QVO will be available globally from December 2018, with a manufacturer's suggested retail price (MSRP) starting at $149.99 for the 1TB model. For more information, please visit samsung.com/ssd or samsungssd.com.
Source: Samsung
Add your own comment

81 Comments on Samsung Launches The New 860 QVO SSD Starting At $149.99 For The 1 TB Model

#26
TheLostSwede
News Editor
GeoKasWell speeds are ok (intel in-chip raid with over 300MB/s) but there is some unknown factor that doesn't let me work smoothly in 4k editing.
The rest system is decent (7700k+32gbRAM+gtx980ti)
Yeah, SSD's have vastly improved response time and as someone that used to do a bit of video editing, going from mechanical drives to SSDs was amazing, especially when it comes to loading up saved projects. 4k is still a hog to edit though.
I'd suggest getting a smaller SSD and test with first, see what it feels like and then if it makes enough of a difference, then consider the full transition. Not going to be cheap though, even with this.
Also keep in mind that if you do simultaneous read/write operations, an SSD will destroy even your RAID in terms of performance.
Posted on Reply
#27
oxidized
R0H1TThe difference is marginal, unless we're talking about NVMe SSDs & even then the high end products from the competition are real close to the best of Samsung. Endurance ~ that's a pissing contest & the drives will most likely be obsolete before they exceed their TBW ratings. Check some of the results on TPU or here ~ www.anandtech.com/Bench/SSD18
The difference is there and it's consistent, they are faster because their memory chips are probably made better + better controller, and for the same reason the TBW is higher, which i wouldn't call a "pissing contest", there's not such thing as obsolete, it's not like they'll start malfunctioning for other reasons before exceeding TBW, i'm still using a 830 pro from samsung, so what do you think i should get rid of if because it's obsolete?
Posted on Reply
#28
Unregistered
Needs a price cut for sure before anything else.

That said, could be useful for non-critical storage like game libraries. Wouldn't use it for much else really, still too small for mass storage, not made professional workloads, and too slow as a system drive.
Posted on Edit | Reply
#29
R0H1T
oxidizedThe difference is there and it's consistent, they're are faster because their memory chips are probably made better + better controller, and for the same reason the TBW is higher, which i wouldn't call a "pissing contest", there's not such thing as obsolete, it's not like they'll start malfunctioning for other reasons before exceeding TBW, i'm still using a 830 pro from samsung, so what do you think i should get rid of if because it's obsolete?
You're twisting what I said to be something like a blight on Samsung? Samsung is the market leader because it's products are exceptionally good, however the difference in many cases is marginal & if you've seen enough reviews you'll find a competitor for virtually any Samsung drive at similar price levels. The endurance part is also overblown & totally depends on the usage of the drive, for instance write amplification can affect the endurance rating negatively.
Posted on Reply
#30
oxidized
R0H1TYou're twisting what I said to be something like a blight on Samsung? Samsung is the market leader because it's products are exceptionally good, however the difference in many cases is marginal & if you've seen enough reviews you'll find a competitor for virtually any Samsung drive at similar price levels. The endurance part is also overblown & totally depends on the usage of the drive, for instance write amplification can affect the endurance rating negatively.
Not twisting anything, you say those are marginally faster, and often, that "marginally" is just not marginally, it's just faster, and it's consistent, besides we're talking about few € difference from the MX500 to the EVO 860, for example the 250GB mx500 is 50€ on italian amazon, and evo 860 is 53€, do you think it's worth to get a faster and more durable SSD for 3€?


Crucial SSDs might've been good in the past, now they're no use, there are better products at roughly the same price.
Posted on Reply
#31
R0H1T
oxidizedNot twisting anything, you say those are marginally faster, and often, that "marginally" is just not marginally, it's just faster, and it's consistent, besides we're talking about few € difference from the MX500 to the EVO 860, for example the 250GB mx500 is 50€ on italian amazon, and evo 860 is 53€, do you think it's worth to get a faster and more durable SSD for 3€?


Crucial SSDs might've been good in the past, now it's no use, there are better products at roughly the same price.
Can you say the same about the rest of the world? I can assure you that Samsung's always more expensive in Asia, though prices will vary slightly (or greatly) depending on the country.

They're still good atm, as for (Samsung) drives yes they're generally better than the competition.
Posted on Reply
#32
oxidized
R0H1TCan you say the same about the rest of the world? I can assure you that Samsung's always more expensive in Asia, though prices will vary slightly (or greatly) depending on the country.

They're still good atm, as for (Samsung) drives yes they're generally better than the competition.
I don't know for certain, but i'm pretty sure that if those here cost 3€ premium, in asia they'll probably be not over 20€, besides, european and north american markets seems to be pretty aligned in terms of prices for these SSDs
Posted on Reply
#33
silentbogo
$130 isn't too bad, but I'd still wait for QLC BiCS drives.
As soon as we get some competition (I'm not counting Intel yet), we'll get lower than MSRP prices all across the board.
Posted on Reply
#34
stimpy88
I wouldn't touch QLC with a barge pole.

I hate this race to the bottom.
Posted on Reply
#35
DeathtoGnomes
QLC is only good for storage drives. Wouldnt use it for anything else.
Posted on Reply
#36
xkm1948
Avoid these QLC drives like a plague.
Posted on Reply
#37
TheGuruStud
GeoKasWell speeds are ok (intel in-chip raid with over 300MB/s) but there is some unknown factor that doesn't let me work smoothly in 4k editing.
The rest system is decent (7700k+32gbRAM+gtx980ti)
Access/seek time is pretty bad on mechanical. A quality SSD will solve your issue.
Posted on Reply
#38
hellerman
15mb random 4K read? Give me a brake. ....
Posted on Reply
#39
bug
DeathtoGnomesQLC is only good for storage drives. Wouldnt use it for anything else.
Unfortunately, p/e cycles have been quietly swept under the rug. And no review site calls manufacturers out on that one. I mean, it's good enough, yadda, yadda, yadda, I know the story. But TLC can have as little as 200 p/e cycles (probably for the planar variety, but still), imagine how problematic QLC can be.
Posted on Reply
#40
NC37
megamanxtremeIt does ... good? Nope, going for the Crucial drive.


Keep the H.D.D. for reliability, unless S.S.D.s are as reliable, nowadays.
Funny, reliable and HDDs used to be the status quo. I've had so many HDDs from multiple makers these days just wearing out and dying within warranties. More than the past. Suspect it is the sheer IOPS demand that is increasing these days. Placing extra strain, pushing them harder. Mechanical breaks down.
Posted on Reply
#41
bug
NC37Funny, reliable and HDDs used to be the status quo. I've had so many HDDs from multiple makers these days just wearing out and dying within warranties. More than the past. Suspect it is the sheer IOPS demand that is increasing these days. Placing extra strain, pushing them harder. Mechanical breaks down.
Eh, and before that there was a time where HDDs would mess your data up if you didn't park the heads right before shutting down. Times change.
Still, I don't think HDD's reliability has taken a plunge (which is rather surprising, considering how much the platter density has increased). It's just that SSDs, having no moving parts have walk right past HDDs and made them look worse by comparison.
Posted on Reply
#42
TheGuruStud
NC37Funny, reliable and HDDs used to be the status quo. I've had so many HDDs from multiple makers these days just wearing out and dying within warranties. More than the past. Suspect it is the sheer IOPS demand that is increasing these days. Placing extra strain, pushing them harder. Mechanical breaks down.
Nah, they're not made as well. WD is far worse than before, they used to be stellar. Hitachis just straight up don't fail. Toshibas aren't far behind.
Posted on Reply
#43
Skwearl
In reply to the people running video editing. Buy a hardware raid controller. Even an old one like a lsi megaraid 9265-i will run circles around any m/b i/o. One of the main reasons why, is cause it uses the pci lanes for data transfer and not the dmi lanes, which Everything has to pass through.
Posted on Reply
#44
TheLostSwede
News Editor
SkwearlIn reply to the people running video editing. Buy a hardware raid controller. Even an old one like a lsi megaraid 9265-i will run circles around any m/b i/o. One of the main reasons why, is cause it uses the pci lanes for data transfer and not the dmi lanes, which Everything has to pass through.
Because the onboard DRAM cache has nothing to do with it, right? Also, I think you're a bit confused, as on "modern" consumer level motherboards, most of the PCIe lanes goes via the chipset which goes via the DMI bus on Intel boards, so there's no benefit there, unless you put it in a x16 slot that's connected to the CPU and then technically halve your graphics card PCIe bandwidth. Obviously this would be different with HEDT hardware, but it's something most people don't have.
Posted on Reply
#45
Skwearl
TheLostSwedeBecause the onboard DRAM cache has nothing to do with it, right? Also, I think you're a bit confused, as on "modern" consumer level motherboards, most of the PCIe lanes goes via the chipset which goes via the DMI bus on Intel boards, so there's no benefit there, unless you put it in a x16 slot that's connected to the CPU and then technically halve your graphics card PCIe bandwidth. Obviously this would be different with HEDT hardware, but it's something most people don't have.
Hedt, yes but if your working on video, that was assumed, as it is one of the few tasks that more cores works beautifully on.
Posted on Reply
#46
sutyi
Here I thought I can finally get secondary cheapo 1TB SSD for games and such at a low price. This thing is in the same price range as the 1TB 860 EVO, but with much worse performance metrics... Meh.
Posted on Reply
#47
bajs11
ah finally a worthy successor to the super crappy 750EVO
Posted on Reply
#48
Vayra86
oxidizedNot twisting anything, you say those are marginally faster, and often, that "marginally" is just not marginally, it's just faster, and it's consistent, besides we're talking about few € difference from the MX500 to the EVO 860, for example the 250GB mx500 is 50€ on italian amazon, and evo 860 is 53€, do you think it's worth to get a faster and more durable SSD for 3€?


Crucial SSDs might've been good in the past, now they're no use, there are better products at roughly the same price.
No, Crucial still leads the bang/buck segment of consumer SSDs and also puts out that bang/buck part long before Samsung does (EVO was supposed to be that), and the price gaps are significant. You're now comparing current market prices but if you look at MSRP, the gap is much bigger.

In addition, Crucial gets bonus points for their power loss protection and has a better track record in terms of firmware - I haven't forgotten the lackluster Samsung Magician support and update quality either. If you want it cheaper, they also have a BX-line at the cost of some performance. But MX is a perfect balance of performance and reliability at the lowest possible cost at this time.



You also need to be looking at larger capacities in this segment, 250GB is small and would be my bottom consideration for an OS/applications drive. Those SATA slots are limited.
Posted on Reply
#49
Ubersonic
Vayra86No, Crucial still leads the bang/buck segment of consumer SSDs and also puts out that bang/buck part long before Samsung does (EVO was supposed to be that), and the price gaps are significant. You're now comparing current market prices but if you look at MSRP, the gap is much bigger.

In addition, Crucial gets bonus points for their power loss protection and has a better track record in terms of firmware - I haven't forgotten the lackluster Samsung Magician support and update quality either. If you want it cheaper, they also have a BX-line at the cost of some performance. But MX is a perfect balance of performance and reliability at the lowest possible cost at this time.



You also need to be looking at larger capacities in this segment, 250GB is small and would be my bottom consideration for an OS/applications drive. Those SATA slots are limited.
You're comparing TLC drives to MLC drives, of course the MLC ones will cost more, you get what you pay for.
Posted on Reply
#50
Vayra86
UbersonicYou're comparing TLC drives to MLC drives, of course the MLC ones will cost more, you get what you pay for.
The MX500 and the EVO are both TLC, and the M2 drives are different but command a smaller price gap, apparently.

So, no. The numbers don't support your statement. Bottom line: you're paying for Sammy's good brand image.

I'm also missing the actual test data of how Sammy's drives have higher durability. They can say its 150 TBW versus 100 TBW on the MX500, but MTBF on the MX500 is still higher. Its a coin toss, pick a number and you have your number one drive? Only time will tell.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jul 2nd, 2024 04:36 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts