About this item
It is latest 2nd generation QLC SSD
Sequential reads speed up to 560 MB/s
Sequential writes speed up to 530 MB/s
Intelligent TurboWrite accelerates write speeds
Maintains long-term high performance with a larger variable buffer
CamelCamelCamel.
Superficially, yes, but this is QLC, a trade-off: price vs. quality.
He's comparing them to NAS HDDs though, a quick look at Seagate Ironwolf Pro 8TB for example, shows them with a warranty 550TB/year for 5 years, so should be good for 2750TBW. The Samsung 870 QVO 8TB is good for 2880TBW, and you'd hope it would be faster across the board than a 7200rpm spin drive. Someone correct me if my math is off.
The price is still a big difference, but it's getting more competitive. And when you consider its smaller footprint, lower power use, and negligible noise (big concerns for some home users), you'd have to admit it's worth considering.
Samsung: “Warranty 3 Years Limited Warranty or 360 TBW Limited Warranty”.
Also as SSD fills up, you’ll be pounding same leftover cells over and over, whence, ”(QLC) NAND will likely support a maximum of 1000 write cycles” hits you.
@AlexF: So, on the Amazon page linked, where it says;
"Reliable and sustainable - The groundbreaking capacity of the 870 QVO doubles its reliability up to 2,880 TBW compared to the previous model 860 QVO. This formidable SSD provides reliability with a refined ECC algorithm that enables a stable performance"
Edit: Just found the mentioned 360TBW, and that was for the 1TB model.
"TBW : Terabytes Written. TBW : 360 TBW for 1TB model, 720 TBW for 2TB model, 1,440 TBW for 4TB model, and 2,880 TBW for 8TB model."
Edit: Just found the mentioned 360TBW, and that was for the 1TB model.
my mistake - thank you for correcting. However, that’d be the number for a 8TB drive filled with 7TB of data - right?
@AlexF: Likely, it's 2880TBW in a perfect scenario. Something like full drives writes, empty-full-empty-full etc seems feasible. It's hard to expect it would be a real world scenario like your example above, which would definitely be more realistic.
@AlexF: This is kind of a pointless discussion because QLC is all you're getting at this price point.
There's no 8TB SLC alternative. And even if there were, 2880TBW is already effectively infinite endurance for just about every use case !
7200RPM disks will be faster than this at sequential writes once you do more than 70GB in one go; assuming the spinny disk and ssds were both empty to begin wih
this is QLC, a trade-off: price vs. quality.
That's a trade-off that applies to absolutely everything.
If you buy the cheapest 8TB drive on the market, then you'd absolutely expect QLC. It's what you're paying for 🤷🏼♂️
Gday all. i have 4 of these.
realistically speaking, each tops out at 350MB/s read or write.
after writing 70ish gb. they slow down to 150MB/s ish
make sure to do a smart self test before putting them to use. one failed and got returned
Solid advice! I’m so use to throwing in 2tbs where it’s not completely the end of the world if 1 goes south.
What do you have them plugged into?
Qnap ts464
3x in raid 5 and 1 as spare/future growth
I would have thought raid 10 or the hibryd raid1/reliability array be better in case of an ssd
because the processes to calculating parity in raid 5 will artificially limit the write spèeds.
@cski: i like having a spare disk on board at all times. So i cant raid1 3 disks.
I'm also mainly on gigabit. One computer is attached directly to the nas on 2.5Gbe; and so… max 300MB/s which it already handles with ease.
most of my usage is fam photo hoarding. So xfers are pics & vids from that computer to the nas as a background task; later i'll work on em on my laptop or other computer through wifi.
so meh at Raid5.
also, it's all encrypted so there's more slowdown there.
@FoxJump: Modern raid 1 implementation on many nas operates on 3 disks they split alternating pairs
110 101 011
and back to equally distribute all data to utilise any number of disks the minimum of 2 disks.
The brands sometime call it something else like nraid or xraid
they store fam photos & vids ~4tb
some movie backups 2tb
so mostly read only use
main disks are 2x 1tb nvme where incoming photos/vids go first to be sorted or process.
why ssds? less chance of random bitrot, faster backups, faster hashing to protect my data and 21w vs 45w (or more if i had bigger disks)
So 25% failure rate? 😬
20%
The replacement tested ok
each tops out at 350MB/s read or write
is it because of your setup? shouldnt it be be going 560/530 R/W?
idk.
the contents /are/ encrypted. But even when doing a raid-scrub it doesnt go past that speed per unit.
Maybe the sata bus on my ts464 cant handle more than that per drive. idk.
Need this to run starfield, haha just kidding
With how much M.2 drives have come down, i had expected the price of these to be cheaper by now. They still need to be cheaper than this for me to bite. Progress, progress
nvme 8tb way more expensive
This is true. However, this is old tech since M.2 is becoming the new norm. Gen3, gen4 are very affordable compared to gen5. But sata ssd should be cheaper for bulk storage since HHD's are being phased out (not completely but they're no longer used by most gamers). I still use HDD for bulk, sata ssd for common and nvme for boot and temp
They’re still being used in all-flash servers owned by enterprises.
Also, try a tiered storage volume like StoreMI for example with your HDD and SATA SSD. Gives you the best of both worlds.
Got a 4tb nvme lexar recently for $240. That makes it cheaper per GB than this and more than 10x faster
Yup. It's just better to go with a motherboard with minimum 4 m.2 slots and buying 4tb nvme drives. 16tb of fast storage for 1k. Much better than buying this SSD
Now go look at prices for 8tb m.2 drives, they start from 1500.
One of these bad boys at $400 would be an instant buy
Yeah that's about my price point. I'd jump for a few at that price.
Good deals for larger high end HDDs are about $25/TB. SSDs should be $50/TB. M.2 $100/TB. Obviously dropping in price or random sales in the future. SSDs didnt sell as much because they never made them large enough for data size. It was meant to take over HDD but they stalled at 8TB years ago. This model is one of the worst for speed and quality for a supposed high end SSD, should be well under $50/TB
Ah almost the size of someone's life full of content in this size!! And we wonder how God is recording down every one of our moves.
Which god?
Go…….ogle
Note local retail prices for these fell about $100 in the past week or two - they were $699ish for ages but they've finally dropped to $599 at many stores.
QLC lol.
$100 cheaper for prime day
$758.08
Gosh this price is getting competitive with the pricey nas drives