4TB Samsung 2.5" 860 EVO SATA 6GB/s SSD $699 + Shipping ($624 after Cashback) @ Online Computer & PC Case Gear

Related Stores

OnLine Computer

PC Case Gear

• 

  jace88 on 17/09/2020 - 18:59

  Had to do a double take… my initial thought was that's expensive for an 860 QVO… but wait a minute…! At this price point, I don't know who wouldn't spend the extra $100 or so to get TLC instead of QLC!

  • 

    tessel on 17/09/2020 - 20:11

    +2

    Don't go chasing waterfalls…

    • 

      Click_It on 17/09/2020 - 22:04

      +2

      Please stick to the rivers and the lakes that you're used to?

• 

  [Deactivated] on 17/09/2020 - 19:12

  QLC deal here for anyone interested though it requires eBay Plus:

  https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/565066

  ~$148 cheaper after cashback + free shipping (vs about $10 to Brisbane). I have both and most people will not be able to tell the difference between them due to the SLC caching so paying 30% more for EVO isn't the best option for everyone. The only thing I prefer the EVO for is when using it as a cache drive / for heavier writes / raid. Just for storing documents / photos etc the QVO is fine because they're mostly write once / read many kind of things.

  Sure when the difference is $10 like the 1TB deals, or you have an advanced use case, EVO all the way.

  • 

    AgentXKnight on 17/09/2020 - 20:22

    I agree with you that generally for most people if they are using SSD for things such as storing document, photos or games generally QVO provide sufficient performance.

    Though in my opinion for high density >1TB SSD I personally prefer choosing higher performance over better $ per TB because SSD are still at least 4 to 5 times more expense per TB than HDD so there is certain point where getting more TBs from a single SSD has more diminishing returns compared to HDD where having better performance might offset the increase expense per TB.

    An example I have is if you had use case for needing large >4TB for a game drive and did not care about redundancy you can achieve this possibility cheaper through putting 3-4 HDDs in RAID 0, though with the con of not getting the same great performance as an SSD but getting better performance than a single HDD and having ability to get much higher TB density. Or another example is to combine a HDD with SSD cashe drive which can help achieve large TB disk space with good performance using SSD to speed up the slow parts of the HDD ie games and frequently used programs.

    • 

      [Deactivated] on 17/09/2020 - 20:43

      +1

      SSD's are more about IOPS really. I have a bunch of QVO's that just do things like store large data sets or photos. Random access speed is really important but raw bandwidth is not. So RAID 0 on hard drives doesn't come close on IOPS. For raw performance of smaller data I skip SATA all together and use NVME or preferably Optane or better yet RAM.

      For a lot of people I think QVO's are at the point where many people will be avoiding spinning disks entirely. Sure, they're not the absolute rock bottom budget option, but they use less power, produce less heat / noise, and just have lower latency and for some that's worth the premium over a noisy power sucking raid 0 array. There's also people that will throw these into a laptop or portable enclosure and take it on the go and you can edit 4k video off them fine.

      More to the point though, there's no measurable performance difference between the QVO or EVO in 99.9% of real world cases, so for most people if they're considering one or the other it's money for nothing. Technically TLC is better than QLC, but most writes will go into SLC on both at least until the drive is near full, so no speed difference, and most people won't come near the endurance limits of the QLC.

      (Though, if you do something like use it as a cache drive in a large NAS then you can end up doing silly high numbers of writes and burn through it in a few years - that was one of my original exceptions, because I've absolutely done that with a cheaper small SSD and burned through it in mere months).

      In my mind, owning multiples of each drive, the negligible performance difference isn't worth a 30% premium for most people. It's not 20% more performance for 30% more, it's not even 5% more performance for 30% more. If you're going to burn through the TBW warranty or use it to run write heavy databases or cache for a NAS or have it under load most of the time, then sure.

      Note, that doesn't mean I'm not trying to resist buying one, because I've already used up my '1 per drive model' cashback this round on the QVO and I'm apparently the kind of hoarder who spends too much to store 0's.

• 

  fishandchips on 18/09/2020 - 08:54

  Can this go into the new PS5 as Second Drive?

  • 

    jace88 on 18/09/2020 - 11:03

    +1

    I think it's too early to say what drives will be compatible or not, but it's a SATA drive so I would doubt it… at least for those PS5 games which require a high speed storage device. If you were asking for PS4 it would work given it's SATA, but you may as well save the money and get a QLC drive since you don't tend to write a lot when gaming.