Samsung 860 EVO SSD Review — Tom’s Hardware
Early Verdict
Samsung managed to increase the performance over the 850 EVO, but at a price that most will simply pass on. The SATA interface limits what the company can do with this series and competition is closing in from both directions.
Pros
- +
Strong Performance
- +
Exceptional Software Package With DRAM Cache and Cloning
- +
Class-Leading Endurance
- +
Name Recognition and Reliability
Why you can trust Tom’s Hardware
Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.
Today’s best Samsung 860 EVO (500GB) deals
97 Amazon customer reviews
☆☆☆☆☆
$66.89
View
$109. 99
$74.99
View
Reduced Price
$99.99
$74.99
View
Reduced Price
Show More Deals
Today we’re looking at the new 860 EVO to see how Samsung improved on the world’s best-selling SSD. We’ll compare it to the new lineup of scrappy competitors that spurred the company to finally bring a new series to market and see how it ranks among our list of best ssds.
Samsung’s EVO series is so popular in some countries that it outsells every other SSD by a two to one margin. Samsung wants to leverage that proven formula with the new EVO series so it can cling to its dominant and profitable leadership position. Samsung changes its pricing when competitors close in, and the company always releases a faster model when others get too close to matching its performance.
Many think Samsung’s 800 Pro models are the best SATA SSDs money can buy. They work best with sustained workloads because 2-bit per cell (MLC) flash is more robust than TLC. But MLC is overkill for most consumer workloads, which tend to be short and bursty. Most people don’t work in marathon sessions; we’re more like dragsters that go a quarter mile at a time, and then we wander off. The EVO series is a good fit for consumer workloads because it often delivers higher burst speeds than the Pro series, but that high level of performance only lasts for a short time.
- Samsung 860 EVO Sata III 1TB (1TB Black) at Amazon for $138.99
Historically, Samsung has played with the EVO’s pricing to position its products slightly higher than the competition. The company’s control of critical components through its internal supply chain gives it an advantage that goes beyond cost. The performance, warranty, and endurance specifications usually favor the EVO, but Samsung keeps the price close enough that most shoppers will spend a little more to get a superior product.
Samsung’s V-NAND technology advantage has lessened now that nearly every fab is manufacturing quality 64-layer 3D NAND on a competitive node. Samsung has made advancements with fourth generation V-NAND, but the other companies have closed the gap. The hard limit of SATA interface is a factor, so it’s more difficult to make the 860 EVO stand out from the competition based on performance alone. Samsung managed to pull out a few other impressive numbers with the new series, but the price is not one of them.
Specifications
Samsung 860 EVO (250GB)
Samsung 860 EVO (500GB)
Samsung 860 EVO (1TB)
The 860 EVO series comes to market in the same 256GB to 4TB capacities as the 860 Pro we recently tested. The EVO series uses 3-bit per cell (TLC) flash, but it reserves 2.
3% of the NAND capacity for background activities and caching. That helps compensate for TLC’s lower native write performance.
Update (11/20/2019): Nearly two years after its launch, the 860 EVO is still on sale and, if it’s on sale, is a good alternative to the Crucial MX500, which remains on our list of best SSDs, because of its more competitive combination of price and performance. However, if you see a 1TB EVO for under $110 or a 2TB model for $200 or less, it’s a really good choice.
The 860 EVO also has three different form factors. The full range of capacities ship in 2.5″ while the M.2 2280 (SATA) scales up to 2TB and the mSATA model tops out at 1TB. Samsung and Mushkin are the only two SSD manufacturers to announce new mSATA SSDs in recent years. Most companies have shifted focus to M.2 SSDs and largely ignore the legacy mSATA interface.
On paper, the 860 EVO is only slightly different than the 850 series and the new 860 Pro, but most of the specifications are measured with high queue depth workloads that are more meaningful for professional products.
Consumer workloads occur almost exclusively at low-queue depths. They also tend to have extended idle time between bursts of activity.
Samsung lists identical performance specifications for every 860 EVO capacity point. Sequential performance weighs in at 550/520 MB/s of read/write throughput while random performance tops out at 98,000/90,000 read/write IOPS. You’ll need to push the drives very hard with intense multitasking to reach those heights.
Samsung’s advantage over the rest of the market is its ability to deliver the highest performance at low queue depths. This started before 3D flash but escalated when the company rolled out V-NAND. More troubling to other SSD manufacturers, Samsung’s continued momentum with each V-NAND revision makes it hard for competitors to pinpoint a performance target. V-NAND is now in its fourth generation, and Samsung raised the bar again for performance and endurance while further reducing power consumption.
Features
Samsung outfitted the 860 series with a new MJX controller that supports low-power DDR4 memory, so it likely has a new integrated memory controller.
We also suspect the company built the MJX controller on a smaller lithography that enables lower power consumption, cooler operation, and reduced manufacturing costs.
Samsung claims its fourth-generation 64-layer V-NAND is 30% more energy efficient than its 48-layer predecessor. Samsung accomplished the feat by reducing the input voltage from 3.3 volts to just 2.5 volts. It also reduced the program time to 500 microseconds, which is 1.5X faster than the previous generation.
We purchased our 860 EVO drives at Newegg, so they are the same as the models you can buy today. The 860 series supports hardware encryption with TCG Opal and Microsoft’s eDrive.
The 860 Pro came to us with a note about improved Linux compatibility and NAS use, but the EVO was not specifically mentioned. Given the sensitivity of the data stored on a NAS, we would recommend letting the EVO mature before considering this a viable option for that use case.
Pricing, Warranty and Endurance
Swipe to scroll horizontally
860 Pro 2. 5″64-Layer 3D MLC |
256GB | $139.99 |
|---|---|---|
| 512GB | $249.99 | |
| 1TB | $479.99 | |
| 2TB | $949.99 | |
| 4TB | $1,899.99 | |
| 860 EVO 2.5″64-Layer 3D TLC | 250GB | $94.99 |
| 500GB | $169.99 | |
| 1TB | $329.99 | |
| 2TB | $649.99 | |
| 4TB | $1,399.99 | |
| 860 EVO M.2 (SATA)64-Layer 3D TLC | 250GB | $94.99 |
| 500GB | $169.99 | |
| 1TB | $329. 99 |
|
| 2TB | $649.99 | |
| 860 EVO mSATA64-Layer 3D TLC | 250GB | $94.99 |
| 500GB | $169.99 | |
| 1TB | $329.99 |
The 860 EVO comes in 12 SKUs that cover three form factors and up to five capacities. We’ll focus on the 2.5″ models in this review, but we won’t close the door on a future review of the M.2 or mSATA models.
We purchased the 250GB, 500GB, and 1TB drives. The 2TB and 4TB models appear intriguing, but that quickly dimmed when I pulled out my AMEX. Pricing starts at $95 for the 250GB and jumps quickly to $170 and $330.
Some speculate the 860 series came to market in January to push back on Crucial’s MX500 that currently sells for $80, $135, and $260 for the same 250GB, 500GB, and 1TB capacities. Samsung won’t be able to curb MX500 sales based on pricing alone.
The 860 EVO carries a premium price, and that makes it vulnerable to low-cost SATA and NVMe SSDs. The latter is even capable of achieving higher performance.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
| Capacity Class | 256GB | 512GB | 1TB | 2TB | 4TB |
| 860 Pro (New) (TBW) | 300 | 600 | 1,200 | 2,400 | 4,800 |
| 850 Pro (TBW) | 150 | 300 | 300 | 450 | 600 |
| 860 EVO (New) (TBW) | 150 | 300 | 600 | 1,200 | 2,400 |
| 850 EVO (TBW) | 75 | 150 | 150 | 300 | 300 |
| Crucial MX500 (TBW) | 100 | 180 | 360 | 700 | x |
| WD Blue 3D /SD Ultra 3D (TBW) | 100 | 200 | 400 | 500 | x |
The 860 EVO breaks new ground for endurance.
If is wasn’t for the new 860 Pro that provides twice the endurance rating, the 860 EVO would top the consumer SSD market with its 150TB of write endurance for every 250GB of usable capacity. The SSDs still carry a standard five-year warranty.
Software and Accessories
We were able to test the latest version of Samsung’s Magician software now that the drives are actually on the market. The new 860 series and the 850 non-Pro/EVO from China are now supported. They also work with Rapid Mode, which is Samsung’s DRAM cache algorithm that increases performance and reduces wear on the flash.
The software allows you to monitor and test the drive. In some instances, you can even delete all the data with the secure erase function from inside the operating system. But that’s only if the stars align and you boot from a different drive. The list of criteria for that process to work keeps getting longer. You can also use Magician to build a bootable thumb drive to reach the same conclusion.
Unfortunately, it just takes more steps and complicates the process.
Samsung also gives 860 owners access to a data migration tool you can use to clone the data from an existing drive to your new storage media.
Packaging
Image 1 of 3
Can you guess what Samsung’s tagline is for the 860 EVO? «The SSD That Makes A Difference» is emblazoned on both the front and back of the package. The warranty on the retail package. Samsung doesn’t mention performance, endurance, or any other metric you might use in a retail store to compare this product to the one next to it.
The Samsung 860 EVO
Image 1 of 4
The 860 EVO looks like every other EVO that came after the 840 series. That was back when Samsung moved to a black case and retired the dark gray color scheme. The outside is basic, but Samsung doesn’t need to RGBify the proven design or even change the methodology. The EVO series comes without gimmicks, and that formula works as long as the 860 can stay one step ahead.
- 1
Current page:
Features and Specifications
Next Page 1TB Class Performance
Chris Ramseyer is a Contributing Editor for Tom’s Hardware US. He tests and reviews consumer storage.
Samsung 860 Evo review | TechRadar
TechRadar Verdict
The Samsung 860 Evo is a perfect follow up act that improves on its predecessor in every way with faster speeds and greater endurance – all while retaining its low prices to boot.
TODAY’S BEST DEALS
Why you can trust TechRadar
Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.
The Samsung 850 Evo is a hard act to follow – it’s still one of the best SSDs we’ve ever used, so the Samsung 860 Evo has its work cut out for it. Ever since it released in December 2014, the 850 Evo has enjoyed its prominence, thanks to fast speeds, tested endurance and great value.
Luckily, the Samsung 860 Evo follows in its footsteps successfully, with faster speeds and even better endurance. After thoroughly testing both the 2.5-inch and M.2 SATA versions of the 2TB Samsung 860 Evo, we can confidently say that it’s one of the best SSDs on the market right now.
Features and price
- Samsung 860 EVO (250GB) (SSD) at Dell for $49.99
As with Samsung’s recently revamped 860 Pro SSDs, the 860 Evo series is powered by 64-layer V-NAND technology. (V-NAND stands for vertical NAND, which contains flash cells stacked vertically and 3 dimensionally for greater density and speed) Additionally, the drives utilize a MJX SATA controller paired with 2GB of LPDDR4 DRAM – specific to 2TB models only – for enhanced speed and power efficiency.
These specs, when considered together, allow the M.2 SATA version of the Samsung 860 Evo series to achieve sequential read speeds up to 560 megabytes per second (MB/s) and sequential writes up to 520 MB/s.
The 2.5-inch drives from the same line only falter slightly with a 550 MB/s sequential read, but you’ll only find 4TB Samsung 860 Evo SSDs in this form factor.
Samsung has also improved its endurance with the 860 Evo. This is typically measured through a unit known as Total Bytes Written, which is mostly meant to give users a sense of how long their drive should last. Whereas Samsung pinned its last generation 850 Evo with a TBW of 300TB, the 860 Evo is rated at a whopping 1,200 TBW – in other words, four times the endurance.
Just like its predecessors,the Samsung 860 Evo series is meant to be both affordable and deliver a huge amount of solid state storage. Prices for both the M.2 SATA and 2.5-inch versions start at $94 (£98, AU$139) for 250GB, ramping up to $169 (£169, AU$245) for 500GB, $329 (£329, AU$476) for 1TB, $649 (£629, AU$1,049) for 2TB and $1,399 (£1,399, AU$2,249) for 4TB.
Benchmarks
Samsung 860 Evo (2TB SATA)
CrystalDisk Mark (Sequential) Read: 562.
7 MB/s; Write: 533.3 MB/s
CrystalDisk Mark (Random) Read: 339.4 MB/s; Write: 332.9 MB/s
10GB File Transfer: 14.58 seconds
10GB Folder Transfer: 26.91 seconds
Samsung 860 Evo (2TB M.2 SATA)
CrystalDisk Mark (Sequential) Read: 557.1 MB/s; Write: 515.9 MB/s
CrystalDisk Mark (Random) Read: 243.7 MB/s; Write: 236.3 MB/s
10GB File Transfer: 13.71 seconds
10GB Folder Transfer: 25.63 seconds
Performance
One of the first things that stuck out in our testing was the fact that the M.2 SATA version of the Samsung 860 Evo didn’t hit its maximum rated speeds in CrystalDisk Mark. this is probably because of driver issues, but we hope this is fixed in the near future.
Beyond that, ultimately nothing seems to be hampering the performance of the M.2 SATA drive, as it ran away with the fastest single file and file folder transfer by almost a full second in each regard.
In fact, our testing showed small but noticeable improvements in the Samsung 860 Evo’s performance over its predecessor. Namely, there are 5-20 MB/s improvements in both sequential read and write speeds. The 2.5-inch version of the Samsung 860 Evo also achieved significantly higher random random read and write speeds that are 60-70 MB/s faster.
When stacked against an Intel SSD 540s Series SSD (2.5-inch), Samsung comes out on top with significantly faster speeds overall, not to mention it costs less. Whereas this 480GB Intel drive is priced at $199 (£199, AU$269), the 500GB Samsung 860 Evo runs for $169 (£169, AU$245).
The Samsung 860 Pro is still the king of the SATA drives with a faster sequential read and write speed, on top of 10-20 MB/s faster random read and write speeds. These will ultimately lead to faster load times, booting sequences and general file transfers, though the difference will be virtually impossible to distinguish.
Final verdict
The Samsung 860 Evo is an undeniably better series of solid-state drives than their predecessors.
They achieve noticeably faster speeds and offer quadruple the endurance. While we struggled to see the 860 Pro as a noteworthy upgrade, Samsung has brought its budget SSD line to flagship spec – or at least the highest spec the aging SATA 3 standard will allow.
Samsung 860 Evo: Price Comparison
804 Amazon customer reviews
☆☆☆☆☆
$39
View
$49.99
View
$62.99
View
$89.
99
$69.99
View
Reduced Price
$99.99
$74.99
View
Reduced Price
Show More Deals
powered by
Kevin Lee was a former computing reporter at TechRadar. Kevin is now the SEO Updates Editor at IGN based in New York. He handles all of the best of tech buying guides while also dipping his hand in the entertainment and games evergreen content. Kevin has over eight years of experience in the tech and games publications with previous bylines at Polygon, PC World, and more. Outside of work, Kevin is major movie buff of cult and bad films. He also regularly plays flight & space sim and racing games. IRL he’s a fan of archery, axe throwing, and board games.
Overview of Samsung 860 Evo and 860 Pro SSDs in different capacities
2018 SSD testing methodology
As flash memory prices drop, consumer interest is gradually shifting towards higher capacity SSDs. Manufacturers are also spurring this process by increasing the maximum volumes (for example, in the early stages of market development, it was, as a rule, physically impossible to buy an SSD for a whole terabyte, and not just costly — they were not released) and “withdrawing” devices with a minimum capacity from the lines (simply because it is difficult to make them on «large» crystals). However, this does not please all consumers. Indeed, it is more convenient for a laptop user to use one high-capacity device (especially since two drives may simply “not fit” into some still current laptop models), but in a desktop system, you can usually use several drives of different types, so the idea is to buy a small SSD only for the operating system and basic applications, while continuing to store large amounts of information on cheap «hard drive terabytes», has been and remains quite attractive.
Perhaps it will remain so until manufacturers achieve full SSD/HDD price parity, which is not expected in the near future. Only here the concept of a “small SSD” is constantly changing over time, so that, despite the general price reduction, the cost of an “admission ticket” falls very slowly. It’s not that there weren’t drives with a capacity of less than 120 GB on the market at all — it’s just that these are mostly either old (and not always cost-effective) models, or representatives of the most budget families with their own cockroaches, including low performance. nine0005
Performance almost always depended on capacity. The reason is simple: multi-channel common controllers (except the cheapest ones) work well only with a large physical number of flash memory chips, effectively distributing the load across them. And the crystals themselves are constantly growing (which is necessary, among other things, to reduce the price), so the same total capacity at each step of progress is “gained” by an ever smaller number of them.
However, the performance of top modifications for various reasons often turns out to be far from the maximum in the line, but in practice this can usually be neglected: if there is a need for maximum capacity, then small performance losses are acceptable. But only suffering remains for the share of economical buyers: neither volume nor speed 🙂
All these dependencies have been known for a long time. But, as in all such cases, the question arises: have they not outlived themselves, having already turned into prejudices? If we consider the segment of SATA drives, performance is still limited there by the «ceiling» in the form of the interface itself. And among its representatives of the middle and high class, there are usually no “too small” SSDs, so even younger modifications in the lines that are of interest to some buyers can run into the interface. For example, the Samsung 860 Evo starts at 250 GB and the 860 Pro starts at 256 GB, which is enough for many applications. About three years ago, such a capacity was considered optimal at all, but now the buyers’ gaze has naturally shifted towards ≈500 GB drives, and we took these models for the first acquaintance with the mentioned lines.
But not only they are interesting! 2 TB or more, for obvious reasons, is still a piece of niche goods, but many already can afford 1 TB. At the same time, if the SSD is not the only drive in the system (and sometimes it is not required), then 250/256 GB is quite interesting: since the flash itself provides the bulk of the cost, the price depends almost linearly on capacity. Therefore, today we will add four more to the already tested two Samsung SSDs — from the same lines, but with a different capacity. nine0005
Samsung V-NAND SSD 860 Evo 250 GB, 500 GB and 1 TB
Moreover, this line is generally the best fit for the processes described above — unlike all the others, the younger modification uses 256 Gb crystals in it , and not 512 Gb, as in all the others. This is not very justified economically, but the company had to take such a step just so that the drive would not be too slow. Perhaps this would be worth doing in a 500 GB modification (as it was in the latest version of the 850 Evo, which uses the same memory), but it is, after all, more massive — so the economy is already deciding here.
And in the end, we can assume that the “average” device in the top three should be the slowest: it has fewer crystals than the older one, and the same number, but slightly slower than the younger one (in addition, the cache memory capacity, for example , the same). But these a priori assumptions can be hindered by the interface, and the features of the controller, etc. This is what we will check. nine0005
There is also a nuance with the capacity of the SLC cache — which is vital for TLC-memory drives. As we already wrote, in previous developments (840 Evo / 850 Evo) a static SLC cache was used, 3 GB in size for every 250 GB of capacity. This also gave some odds to older modifications — for example, a device with a total capacity of 1 TB could “accept at full speed” up to 12 GB of data, and its smaller counterparts are forced to reduce it after 6 or even 3 GB. In the new line, the size of the static part is reduced — and amount to 3, 4 and 6 GB, respectively (that is, the process did not affect only the minor modification of 250 GB).
However, new controllers, if there is free space on the drive, can also use it for SLC cache — up to 9GB for every 250 GB of capacity. Accordingly, the “cache-equipment” of older modifications has even increased (all the more so, for them, the problem of lack of free space is usually less pronounced — which is why they are purchased) — however, the younger ones are already capable of writing the same ten gigabytes at full speed, and more in practice is not necessary often. However, we have tests in the set that operate on large amounts of data, so the difference in the behavior of different models can be noticeable on them.
Samsung V-NAND SSD 860 Pro 256 GB, 512 GB and 1 TB
Unlike the previous line, this one uses faster MLC memory (respectively, such nuances as SLC cache and its size disappear), and all models use 256 Gb crystals. Accordingly, it is quite possible to expect either a linear dependence of performance on capacity, or … its complete absence — if performance «rests» on the interface, for example.
Or something in between, so that’s what we’ll check. And let’s compare the behavior of drives of different series of the same capacity (and not one, but three), since the controllers in them are just the same. nine0005
Testing
Testing procedure
The procedure is described in detail in separate article . There you can get acquainted with the hardware and software used.
Performance in applications
As has been said more than once, the results of high-level benchmarks rarely differ significantly even when using drives on different hardware platforms — all the more you should not expect from them when only the capacity and number of chips change. nine0005
However, a study of potential performance shows that die size does matter. But their number (contrary to popular belief) is not in this case: unambiguous outsiders (and even then only to a small extent) can be considered two SSDs with 512 Gb TLC memory crystals.
The previous version of the package, operating with somewhat «lighter» loads, increases the level of detail, dividing the six drives into three groups.
Three 860 Pros make it to the fastest, regardless of capacity. The 860 Evo 250 GB is next, and the last two Evo modifications close the procession. On the other hand, the absolute value of the difference between all devices clearly hints that the buyer in practice will see only different capacities. And different prices, of course, too. nine0005
Sequential operations
This also applies to similar operations, which in this class have long been usually limited to the connection interface itself. However, you can still look for a drive that will work a little faster than others — but switching to other interfaces will provide much more. At a minimum, when reading data — which is easy for flash memory of any type.
Random access
Curiously, within the framework of two modern families of Samsung drives, this can already be attributed to similar operations. Reading with CrystalDiskMark 6.0.0 still demonstrates almost identical results for all six. nine0005
Anvil’s Storage Utilities is a little more selective, but you can only pay attention to the loss of terabyte modifications of both Pro and Evo with a queue length of four teams.
In general, in fact, we tested the controller first.
Working with large files
When reading data, we traditionally tested the throughput of the interface. When recording, this happens only on the 860 Pro or older (from 1 TB) modifications of the 860 Evo. The younger pair provides less parallelism, since there are simply “not enough” chips for this. Now, if the company used 256 Gb crystals in a 500 GB drive (as in the younger model or in the 850 Evo), it would be enough. But, unfortunately, it was decided to save a little. nine0005
Reading simultaneously with writing is an example of a load where even now MLC memory can be useful even when paired with a SATA interface: as you can see, it is still not a limitation for the best TLC models. In general, 860 Pro differs from 860 Evo not only in the declared resource, but sometimes also in speed. True, and always at a price.
Ratings
In general, the results are predictable. Moreover, if Samsung used 256 Gb crystals in the 860 Evo, both families would look even more similar.
On the other hand, now it turned out to some extent even more successful: in the Evo trio, a terabyte drive is not only the most capacious and expensive, but also the fastest. Additional bonus to its buyers 🙂
True, given the results of high-level tests, it is no longer the fastest. However, this still doesn’t really matter: it’s easy to see that of all the SATA drives we’ve tested so far, the slowest Samsung SSD (which, as you might expect, is the 860 Evo 500 GB) is still faster than any competitors. That is, if productivity is at the forefront, then we can only talk about intra-company competition, nothing more. On the other hand, with this approach, it already makes sense to pay attention to other interfaces, as it seems to us. nine0005
Prices
The table below shows the average retail prices of the SSDs tested today, as of the time you read this article:
Total
In principle, the results are understandable and predictable based on the internal design of the drives.
Another question is that the internal structure is often a “black box” that can change (and in the same predictable direction) repeatedly during the life of the model, so that it can only be evaluated by indirect results. In this case, it doesn’t. But even without that, it is clearly visible that in the 860 Pro line, you can generally ignore the dependence of performance on capacity: the combination of «small» but fast MLC chips of 256 Gb and the SATA600 interface leads to the fact that all the capabilities of the latter turn out to be «selected without a trace” even by the younger model. If there was a 128 GB drive in the line, it might have turned out to be noticeably slower. But such capacities in new devices are found only in the lowest segment of the budget family, and SSD on expensive memory definitely does not fall into it. nine0005
The 250/256 GB chosen as the lower limit of these two lines is already more justified — at least for an economical user. And some “nonlinearity” of performance in the 860 Evo family is caused by the use of different flash memory crystals — without this, most likely, the performance of the 500 GB modification would have been higher, and it would also have been limited by the interface.
But Samsung decided to support a little only the most “multiplying” ones (fortunately, there are even fewer of them), as a result, firstly, the 860 Evo at 250 GB works a little faster than at 500 GB, and secondly, both are a little short of to the potential of SATA. Another question is that they “do not hold out” rather potentially: in practice, both of them are redundant for modern software in terms of speed characteristics. Therefore, you should not get too attached to a small difference in performance — capacity and price are more important. And starting with a capacity of 1 TB, comments on the speed of work also disappear. nine0005
Samsung 860 Evo 2TB M.2 2280 vs Western Digital Blue 1TB M.2 2280: What is the difference?
Type of SSD drive.
SSD cache
DRAM drive
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Western Digital Blue 1TB M.2 2280)
Solid state drives/SSDs with DRAM flash memory use high-speed RAM as a buffer/cache.
Performance is faster than non-DRAM SSDs that use slower NAND flash or system RAM (HMB). nine0005
This is an NVMe SSD
✖Samsung 860 Evo 2TB M.2 2280
✖Western Digital Blue 1TB M.2 2280
NVMe SSDs use the PCIe interface, which has a higher bandwidth than the SATA interface. This results in much faster read/write speeds compared to SSDs using the SATA interface.
built-in memory
2000GB
1000GB
Built-in memory is the built-in space for storing system data, applications, and user data in the device. With more internal storage, you can store more files and apps on your device. nine0005
SSD storage type
The storage type determines how many bits of data are written to each memory location. These storage types include SLC (one bit per cell), MLC (two bits per cell), and TLC (three bits per cell). The fewer bits written to each cell, the higher the speed and reliability.
PCI Express (PCIe) version
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Samsung 860 Evo 2TB M.2 2280)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Western Digital Blue 1TB M.2 2280)
PCI Express (PCIe) is a high-speed expansion card standard that is used to connect a computer to its peripherals. Newer versions support higher throughput and provide better performance.
Controller channels
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (Western Digital Blue 1TB M.2 2280)
The controller is the processor that controls the functions of the SSD. The number of channels indicates the number of memory chips that this controller can access at the same time. As a general rule, the more channels an SSD controller has, the better the performance. nine0005
Terabytes Written (TBW)
Terabytes Written (TBW) is a measure of the life of an SSD and is often covered by the manufacturer’s warranty.
