Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samsung Announces 970 PRO and 970 EVO NVMe SSDs (anandtech.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the new-and-improved dept.

hyperclocker shares a report from AnandTech: Samsung has announced the third generation of their high-end consumer NVMe SSDs. The new 970 PRO and 970 EVO M.2 NVMe SSDs use a newer controller and Samsung's latest 64-layer 3D NAND flash memory. The outgoing 960 PRO and 960 EVO were first announced in September 2016 and shipped that fall, so they have had a fairly long run as Samsung's flagship consumer SSDs. Compared to its predecessor, the 970 EVO promises a small improvement in sequential read speed, and a more substantial boost to sequential write speed for all but the smallest 250GB model. Peak random access performance is also substantially improved, but again the 250GB model gets left out, and is actually rated as slower than the 960 EVO 250GB. The warranty on the EVO has been extended from three years to five years, and the write endurance ratings have been increased by 50% to retain almost the same drive writes per day rating.

The 970 PRO's performance specs aren't too different from the 970 EVO. Many of the ratings are the same, and the ones that differ are mostly better by just 3-11% for the PRO. There are just two major exceptions to this. First, the PRO doesn't rely on SLC write caching so it can maintain its write speed far longer than the EVO. Second, the rated write endurance of the 970 PRO is twice that of the EVO, going from just over 0.3 Drive Writes Per Day to 0.6 DWPD. Neither of these are an important factor for ordinary consumer use cases, but they help the 970 PRO retain some shine as a premium product.

51 comments

  1. Oh boy, better pick which organ to sell now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looking forward to see how much they charge for the privilege of storing far less than spinning disks.

    1. Re:Oh boy, better pick which organ to sell now by cirby · · Score: 1

      From the prices in the article, they're the same price or lower than the 960 evo.

      Of course, it's more expensive than spinning rust, but the throughput is pretty insane.

  2. Get one, it's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you do any hard drive intensive work, it's a miracle. My current PC boots cold faster than the old one woke up from sleep.

    1. Re:Get one, it's worth it by Calydor · · Score: 1

      I built a new system a few months ago with a 960 EVO for the system drive. I came not from a SATA drive, but from a 320 GB PATA drive. I have no idea how it's survived this long.

      Anyway, a full reboot of Win7 until the desktop is available again takes 40-45 seconds now from hitting the Reboot button. I used to go make coffee while waiting.

      SSD is not about storage. It's about access time.

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    2. Re:Get one, it's worth it by AHuxley · · Score: 0

      Does Crysis load more quickly?

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re: Get one, it's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your system must be ass. I have spinning rust, and mine only takes 45 seconds from button to desktop. On a core2duo with 8gb if ram, windows 7, 500GB SATA.

    4. Re: Get one, it's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Less than 10 second from initial power on to desktop. It only has an M.2 NVMe drive.

      Adding a SATA device can extend the POST process by a considerable amount; of no fault of either the NVMe or OS

    5. Re: Get one, it's worth it by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I have a M.2 SATA drive and a 512GB 950 Evo and it takes me only about fifteen seconds. And I have some extra crap in my boot.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re: Get one, it's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your system must be ass. I have spinning rust, and mine only takes 45 seconds from button to desktop. On a core2duo with 8gb if ram, windows 7, 500GB SATA.

      Shit. You fucking rule dawg!

    7. Re: Get one, it's worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a M.2 SATA drive and a 512GB 950 Evo and it takes me only about fifteen seconds. And I have some extra crap in my boot.

      Oh yeah, well I have a ...

      Actually nobody gives a shit what I have or how fast it reboots.

    8. Re: Get one, it's worth it by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Less than half a second from power-up to interface: Tandy Color Computer 3.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  3. You can thank me for this. by greenwow · · Score: 1

    Just ordered a new 960 last Friday so of course a faster one is coming.

    1. Re:You can thank me for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      LOL. My boss finally decided to let us buy SSDs so we bought three dozen Samsung 860 500GB drives just two weeks ago that I have to start installing the end of this week. Our CTO argued against SSDs since he said viruses would spread faster if we had faster drives, but he finally got overruled.

    2. Re:You can thank me for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is your CTO my CTO, because that's the same reason he gave us for only buying spinning rust for servers and laptops? I wish he would be man enough to just admit that we don't want to spend the extra money on an SSD .

    3. Re:You can thank me for this. by Walter+White · · Score: 1

      860 is a recent release, no?

      And in any case, the viruses will spread 2-3 times as fast on the NVME drives? All your important files will be encrypted in seconds!

    4. Re:You can thank me for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but he finally got overruled.

      By HR, I hope.

    5. Re:You can thank me for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL, you nailed it. Several new hires complained to HR that the build of our main project takes >50 minutes on their work laptops but takes less than 15 minutes on their home computers with an SSD. We're paying developers and average of about $90 per hour with our costs and benefits so management finally started to care.

    6. Re:You can thank me for this. by jcr · · Score: 1

      Is HR who you go to when your senior management is incompetent? I thought they were just for handling Weinstein wannabes.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    7. Re: You can thank me for this. by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Show him how much faster it is to search email in Outlook and local files. It's an instant sell every time =)

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    8. Re:You can thank me for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously doubt you would notice any difference between the two unless you are doing some very strange loads. Warrenty has gone up from 3 to 5 years but this may just be from the extended testing on older models showing that the drives will probably outlive their owners.

    9. Re:You can thank me for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So every one of your compiles on a non-SSD is costing you about $45, it does not take many compile runs for those drives to be paying for themselves.

    10. Re:You can thank me for this. by bernywork · · Score: 1

      I'd say that to troll staff....

      --
      Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat. -- Author unknown
    11. Re:You can thank me for this. by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      Just ordered a new 960 last Friday so of course a faster one is coming.

      Does anybody even care about SSD speed any more?

      In real terms these incremental improvements are just meaningless numbers now. Manufacturers should focus on reliability/durability instead.

      --
      No sig today...
    12. Re: You can thank me for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually the CXOs are exempt from hardware purchasing limitations. Anyway, it's very hard to buy a business laptop without an SSD these days (consumer ones still ship with them though).

    13. Re:You can thank me for this. by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      Does anybody even care about SSD speed any more?

      In real terms these incremental improvements are just meaningless numbers now. Manufacturers should focus on reliability/durability instead.

      Well, for SATA, you can't have faster SSDs. We've hit the max for SATA3 for at least a few years now (540MB/s). So the 800 series SSDs from Samsung are basically incremental improvements as they've hit max speed years ago.

      And I'm pretty sure the durability issue has been a non-issue, especially with Samsung SSDs - a test done took 2 years of constant 24/7 writing on the smallest 830 Pro at the time (64GB?) to finally die. The larger SSDs simply have more blocks to go through.

      Hell, out work has switched everyone to PCs with SSDs in them, and we've had no failures in the past couple of years since we've started issuing SSDs. And they aren't babied - these SSDs are used in developer PCs compiling actively. We've even put them in our nightly build machines where they compile and build on the SSD itself (the build is then archived to an HDD). The biggest problem we've had is the HDDs in developer PCs often die first (we do a 512GB SSD + 4TB HDD combination).

      As for reliability, Samsung had problems with their 830 EVOs a while back, but since they they've been rock solid. I can't say for other SSDs (We've had one Intel 320 SSD die and lose all its data, but it was revived doing a secure erase. And the SSD died because the user dropped the laptop and said laptop ended up in pieces on the floor. This was back when SSDs didn't necessarily have power outage protection).

      Heck, Samsung used to warrant their SSD Pro series for 10 years, something the IT director and I thought was ridiculous - mainly because the SSD would be horribly obsolete and the machine decommissioned by then. Nor do we anticipate users wearing out their SSDs anytime soon. I did an analysis and even after 3-4 years of use, the SSDs in my PCs have barely any wear on them

    14. Re:You can thank me for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I care more of PRICE.

    15. Re:You can thank me for this. by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Yeah at those prices it doesn't take long before even doing a RAID 0 of SSDs with SSD backup drives become cheaper.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    16. Re:You can thank me for this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've hit SATA3 limits long ago for _sequential_ workloads.
      According to Anandtech, the 970 EVO can get as low as 50MB/s (random read), well below the SATA limit.
      So, whether SATA or NVMe is enough, depends on your workload.

      Also, how long NAND cells can retain their data, depends on how often they are written.
      IIRC, when cells are new (written once), they retain for 10 years. And when the drive reaches their max rated writes (TBW), 1 year data retention is guaranteed.

      Sure, there have been tests where they write petabytes to the things and they still work.
      But what then is not tested, is how long the drive retains its data after so many writes.
      Which in that scenario, given well known NAND degradation properties, is exactly _the_ reliability metric to look after!
      If in such a test you rewrite the drive every 20 minutes, you never discover it can only retain for 30 minutes.

    17. Re:You can thank me for this. by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Note that many if not most Intel SSDs have an expiration date. They "die" on purpose.

      --
      I come here for the love
  4. forgot to mention the most important thing... by Espectr0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...the price!

    EVO:
    $119.99 (48Â/GB) 250 GB
    $229.99 (46Â/GB) 512 GB
    $449.99 (45Â/GB) 1TB
    $849.99 (42Â/GB 2TB

    PRO:
    $329.99 (64Â/GB) 512GB
    $629.99 (62Â/GB) 1TB

    --
    Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
    1. Re:forgot to mention the most important thing... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Samsung claim this supports OPAL v2 / eDrive encryption, but when I checked their last generation M.2 drives it was actually promised in a coming firmware update. I wonder if they have it actually working on release for these ones, because you can't really enable it later without wiping the drive.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  5. Neat but... slash those prices. by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Cheapest HDD I can buy here in Norway at the moment: 4TB for 799 NOK = ~$20/TB before VAT, cheapest SSD is 1911 NOK for 960 GB = ~$200/TB before VAT so still 10x and it's been that way for a while. The Samsung EVO 960 price was almost flat for its entire lifetime, same if I look at the Crucial MX300 which has also been around a good while. Sure better warranty, endurance, performance and consistency is nice but the data still has to fit. I miss the old days when computers got twice as good for half the price every 18 months or whatever the latest bastardization of Moore's law was. RAM prices have tripled from the bottom in 2016. GPUs have gone nuts on the crypto craze. You actually got a better computer for the same money a few years ago than you do today, except maybe the CPU where Ryzen has made some ways.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:Neat but... slash those prices. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100% agreed.
      Prices of SSDs now are the same (or upper) that they were 3 years ago.

      I'm not sure that this is because of a stress on demand.

      Looks like a good job for antitrust investigation.

    2. Re:Neat but... slash those prices. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Yes but can you get it in your pocket. You have to remember the fundamental reason for these increases is demand from new gadgets.

      Computers didn't stop getting "better", the definition of "better" just changed from faster / more capacity per price, to smaller formfactor per price.

      Though with interest in phones and tablets starting to become lackluster and hopefully peaking maybe we can see a change in the trend.

      Also I just upgraded my 5 year old SSD. Sure it was the same price per TB but I also got an order of magnitude increase in speed. "Better" is in the eye of the beholder.

      Unless you're buying a GPU, then you're screwed.

    3. Re:Neat but... slash those prices. by iampiti · · Score: 1

      Yeah, SSD prices have been flat for a time that's true but I read some articles a while ago that actually predicted this: They claimed the end to "easy" size reductions in flash memory were near and thus SSD prices would stop falling. It looks that's just what is happening so maybe prices will not go down for a while.
      Looks like HDDs will be best for price per byte for the foresable future

    4. Re:Neat but... slash those prices. by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Game consoles use flash memory.
      Smartphones use flash memory.
      Tablets use flash memory.
      Set-top boxes use flash memory.
      IoT gadgets use flash memory.

      The demand for flash memory keeps increasing and companies don't want to build new flash memory factories in case demands slows down. Prices go up.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  6. Something is missing here. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think unicode support would have made your post better but that's just my 2Â. ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:Something is missing here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Angstrom per british person is very common measurement for hard drives not sure what your problem is :P

    2. Re: Something is missing here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll see your angstrom and raise you a beard-second http://m.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-beard-second.htm

  7. Speed isn't everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, at this point, SSD is fast enough. I really just want larger SSDs over faster ones. Today, I can go over to Amazon and buy a 8TB platter drive for $150 and I get 32 times the storage for roughly the same cost as one SSD. Hard drive manufacturers keep making drives with more capacity because that's how they figure they stay in business. SSDs haven't really caught up in per-GB storage costs. And then you've got Intel's Optane memory tech, which may nullify some of the advantages of SSDs. The writing's pretty much on the wall: SSD manufacturers either need to up their game or disappear. Don't get me wrong, I own three EVO 512GB drives because I love their silent operation and improved system performance but I also own a ton of other storage too.

    1. Re:Speed isn't everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you need 8TB of storage you obviously need a HDD if you don't want to go into personal bankrupcy.
      However, for most people the sane choice is to have a small SSD as your root drive with OS+browser and if you need lots of storage add a HDD for large games, movies etc.

  8. Thanks for the advertising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean it is not like you already do this, elsewhere on the site.

  9. Great ad, but don't buy these drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These drives, like most SSDs, will last about 6 months.

    Good luck with that.

    1. Re:Great ad, but don't buy these drives by blackomegax · · Score: 1

      Nice try, seagate. SSD's are reliable over years, under *excessive* abuse. Under *consumer* or moderate usage, they'll last for decades.

    2. Re:Great ad, but don't buy these drives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The facts do not mesh with your statement, shill.

  10. The consumers HDD should cost no more than $120 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guys, the latest brand new HDD was about $120 for decades, now the brand new HDD is several hundreds. WTF!
    I don't care about technolgoies, it is the storage and it does not matter how fast and big it is!
    The consumers HDD should cost no more than $120

    1. Re:The consumers HDD should cost no more than $120 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There will be a price fixing case soon - don't worry.

  11. Snakeoil by Immolo · · Score: 1

    When building my current high end PC I had a pretty good budget (Thanks to unlimited overtime at work that year) and although I noticed a day and night improvement in upgrading my old SATA2 hard drive to an SSD when I shelled out for my 256GB M2 950 pro I haven't noticed once any improvement that makes me glad I spent the extra money. I know about the thermal issues and such but I just notice a time where that 2.5GB/sec speed comes in use to just a standard SSD. Has anyone else noticed this or was the 960 pro the one I should have waited for?

    1. Re: Snakeoil by Immolo · · Score: 1

      Should really proof read before posting I meant to say I don't notice an improvement at all.

  12. I noticed the prices dropping back in late Feb. by Gondola · · Score: 1

    I noticed late February that prices on a couple different brands of NVMe SSDs had dropped around the same time, and have stayed a little lower since.

    Prices are finally starting to move. I'll snag one of those 960s or Samsung 961s if they go a little lower. My SATA SSD is tolerable at current prices.