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

[GeoKas]

Mechanical drives are slow for anything except sequential reads and writes. Obviously video is mostly sequential data, until you start working with multiple files, which is not something mechanical drives like, unless those files line up perfectly. Throw in some effects, audio, etc. and it's no longer such a sequential workload.
Obviously if you have a hardware RAID card with DRAM cache, then this will buffer some of this, but I guess that's not your case?
I'm sure you can max out the SATA interface with your RAID as well and I'm sure there will be use cases when you don't see a huge improvement, but keep in mind that on top of much faster access to files, you also get rid of the noise, the heat and the power draw of mechanical drives.
This is also assuming you don't fill the SSD to the brim and work at least to some degree within the SLC cache.

Well 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)

 

[TheLostSwede]

Well 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.

 

[oxidized]

The 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 ~ https://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?

 

[Deleted member 158293]

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.

 

[R0H1T]

The 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.

 

[oxidized]

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.

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.

 

[R0H1T]

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 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.

 

[oxidized]

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.

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

 

[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.

 

[stimpy88]

I wouldn't touch QLC with a barge pole.

I hate this race to the bottom.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

QLC is only good for storage drives. Wouldnt use it for anything else.

 

[xkm1948]

Avoid these QLC drives like a plague.

 

[TheGuruStud]

Well 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.

 

[hellerman]

15mb random 4K read? Give me a brake. ....

 

[bug]

QLC 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.

 

[NC37]

It 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.

 

[bug]

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.

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.

 

[TheGuruStud]

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.

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.

 

[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.

 

[TheLostSwede]

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.

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.

 

[Skwearl]

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.

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.

 

[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.

 

[bajs11]

ah finally a worthy successor to the super crappy 750EVO

 

[Vayra86]

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.

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.

 

[Ubersonic]

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.

View attachment 111407

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.