Well, this is 10$ cheaper that 850evo, so this will be very popular among system builders and other with tight budget. Normal upgrade user will definitely go for 850. But this is good enought to most customers.
$10 for considerably worse performance does not a winner make.
I have a hard time swallowing the cheapo, terrible performance $60 TLC drives. If Sammy thinks anything more than $65 is a good price they have another thing coming.
$60 for a budget 120GB SSD is some audacity.
I and most others will stick to BX100s @ $70 and 850 EVOs @ $75 during the (frequent) sales.
And if it's upgrading a lot of the older machines desktops and laptops that still only run on SATA II...it doesn't matter. As long as it pushes 285MBps (ish) all day that's all it needs. A lot of kit out there is still SATA II.
Yeah it's got a sequential speed cap. Not all tasks are about peak speeds. I'm pretty sure in terms of IOPS a decent SSD will still beat the snot out of an OEM-grade penny-pinching budget model, even on old SATA 2. Which brings us back to the idea that this is for OEMs and builders - truly this is a "builder-grade" component. If you're upgrading or building for yourself, you'll likely pay a few extra bucks for an 850 Evo or similar unit.
With that being said, any of the modern SSDs are better than a mechanical drive. Blech.
this drive will likely be perfect for the older apple laptops that have that dodgy cable that does not support SATA 3 but the controller does (the cable fails if a high speed cable is used) i had to use a DVD HDD caddy on number of apple laptops due to that issue where it will not detect the SSD or HDD
I'm guessing the marketing value for "Performance Samsung SSD inside" is considerably higher than comparable Sandisk or Crucial SSDs. And the 10 bucks off compared to the 850 means the margins remain. And if current 1TB laptop drives get replaced by these 250GB 750s, I think everyone is a winner. :D
It's funny you mention that because I would prefer a Sandisk or Crucial/Micron drive over a Samsung anyday.
Have you ever tried warranting a Samsung drive? They are hell to deal with. And yes, I still have a sour metallic taste after the 840 Evo debacle that essentially was never fixed.
I also think Crucial/Sandisks Marvell drives, albeit slower, are more consistent, stable and deal with power loss substantially better than the MGX. The fact Samsung is making an SSD with 35TBW endurance in 2016 is pretty damning. I've seen 20GB racked up on old Intel X25-M's in a matter of years so 35GB in a 5 year period isn't out of the question. Just about any other SSD or hard disk for that matter will handle double that no problem at the rated capacity.
@vladx: "Don't know what you mean, I also have a 840 EVO and can confirm the performances issues are gone after the 2nd fix."
The fix forces a periodic rewrite of data that shouldn't have been necessary. Also, the fix doesn't work for machines that are powered down for large periods at a time as it requires power to monitor and execute the rewrites. This fix isn't optimal as it lowers the effective endurance of the drive. Combine that with the fact that the drive uses TLC flash with a write endurance of 1000x and you have a situation that enthusiasts aren't exactly "enthusiastic" to hear about.
That said, under normal consumer use, it will make little difference to the overall longevity of the computer. Use cases that are constantly modifying the whole data set will see little difference as the new firmware will not need to rewrite what is essentially fresh data. Use cases that see little writing will require the firmware to initiate rewrites, but they aren't consuming their write cycles at a very fast rate to begin with. However, use cases that constantly write and rewrite a small set of data while maintaining a large set of data that remains unmodified would result in a notably (though not excessively) lower life expectancy.
"Also, the fix doesn't work for machines that are powered down for large periods at a time as it requires power to monitor and execute the rewrites."
First, you shouldn't use an SSD for cold storage. Secondly, those periodic rewrites are insignificant to the life expectancy from user perspective, Just read the Techreport series on SSD endurance (http://techreport.com/review/26523/the-ssd-enduran... and you'll see that manufacturers are very conservative on the endurance numbers on consumer drives. They intentionally do it in order to not have consumer products take a piece of the enterprise pie.
And lastly, my point was the performance is back and like I mentioned without any real-world impact so stop spreading FUD like so many others on this site.
Yeah I've got at least one machine with an 840 Evo and it has been working great. 850 Evo is better, of course, I've got one of those too. I'd definitely trust one to at least not corrupt data over some of the other offerings (I'm looking at you, OCZ). Performance on my 850 Evo is hard to beat for the money, as well. This 750 Evo however, looks weak by comparison. They should sell it to OEMs cheap, and anyone in the retail market should shop around more.
Indeed. My Samsung 840 Pro 128GB in my main (desktop) PC has been in service for 2 years, four months, and has accumulated 32.55TB written. SMART indicates it still has 84% of its wear-leveling count remaining. That's another 11.8 years at this rate (and it will probably live well beyond its rated limit, if it is anything like the torture-tested 840 Pro as reported by TR). It would be near the end of its rated life if it were the 750 Evo.
bigger SSDs has more NAND space so they last longer the bigger the SSD is just companies tend to rate all there SSDs with the same say 50 to 150TB rated life/warranty void for all sizes but that is just for warranty that's all so they are not used in server type loads (most of them can do at least 500TB before they start to fail or show uncorrectable errors or high relocate sectors)
@Ascaris the TR test on all them drives was interesting and the the 840 Pro drive can be used way past its rated life past 2PB of data can be possible it even was 0 error free even with the power failure up to the point it suddenly failed with no warning which probably was a full NAND chip fail (as that site that was trashing them with random write to a bunch of SSDs so the drive might of had more writes if its was sequential writes, the test would of concluded a lot sooner if sequential writes was used)
If you sell 10000 computers, that 10$ will make 100000$ Profit. And 10000 computers is a very small Number... 20 cent is big money to production cost. Do you ever wonder why Intel use very crap thermal paste in their consumer prosessors? It is 1 cent cheaper or even more than better stuff, and Also goes old soon enough after the warranty goes old... They Are making Profit, not making the best bang for the back to the customers...
Yeah, that's why this drive is primarily aimed at system builders. If you're buying a 120 or 250GB drive for your own system, it's silly to not pay $10 more for the 850 Evo.
They're going to put it into computers and write "Samsung SSD inside" and it will be cheaper for the system builders, but the average customer will not be able to tell the difference.
To the 3rd party selling complete machines to the everyday masses yeah. Like haukionkannel said above. Most people out there aren't tech heads and the lower £££ matters.
The problem I have with SSDs right now is that they're so boring to me. What I need in my life are consumer grade NVMe 2TB+ SSDs. I'm sick and tired of buying multiple SSDs or splitting my application and data across SSDs and HDDs. One drive to rule them all, please.
So, everyone with perfectly capable CPUs that are barely slower than current tech should upgrade because SATA is old? I'm not disputing that SATA is the older tech, I'm just looking for a more nuanced and realistic view here. If your workload is sufficiently dependant on IO throughput, by all means get those NVMe drives. But implying that a SATA3 device like a 850pro is not going to do the job for a lot of people.... I have a Z87 4770k running at 4.5GHz. I'm not going to upgrade just for the convenience of M.2 PCIe NVMe support. And I won't do so until 6+ core CPUs with comparable IPC and OC abilities get decently priced.
No, SATA has a place. You realize a 2.5 SATA drive has about 10x-20x the volume of a NVME drive. No reason you could n't have a 3.5 inch SATA SSD either.
Thus SATA will always be the go-to for high volume storage. Flash memory isn't going to be shrunk down anytime soon either, it degrades both performance and reliability, so until we get something better than flash SATA is going to be the only place you can get something like a 4TB or 8TB SSD.
Shinking thing smaller and smaller is also more expensive, and like I said in terms of flash it also degrades performance. It's much cheaper to build a big-fast thing than a small-fast thing.
There is also the issue of RAID and mechanical drives for mass storage. I can setup a 20TB fakeraid with an SSD write-back cache for under a thousand dollars. Hardware raid would be about 2000$. The NVME version would be about 8000$ to 10000$.
Do you not think there is something wrong with the phrase "consumer grade NVMe 2TB+ SSD" ?
You could also RAID some SATA 2TB SSD's to give you want you need. I doubt you "really" need all of that space on NVMe, so maybe a 256 or 512GB 950 Pro + some 850 EVO's in RAID would work well, and is available now.
This drive hasn't been out long enough to know what price it will go on sale for. So I consider any comments on pricing pretty irrelevant.
Outside of that, there are only 3 brands of SSD I trust my data to, which is Intel, Crucial/Micron, and Samsung. I'll pay more for those 3 brands than I will other brands, because of reliability.
8 of the 48 reviews of that drive on NewEgg are "worked great until it died in a month and I lost my data". As I said in another post, Intel, Crucial, and Samsung are IMO on a different tier of reliability than everybody else.
I like how you're saying Samsung there without considering the issues they've had with the 840. Out of all three you mentioned, only Intel has had solid SSDs since the first gen.
I actually own an 840 Evo in my daughter's laptop. The issues with it never involved data loss or "early death", only degraded performance. Even in its degraded performance mode it still feels faster than a hard drive. And the patches they issued to "fix" it work pretty well to restore it back to SSD-like performance.
So, in short, I still trust Samsung on the SSD front way more than Sandisk.
Though I don't disagree that Intel makes excellent SSDs. They're the way to go for a "critical main desktop" type application.
I was going to say that as well. I have an 840 evo in my machine and I haven't lost any data. I regret purchasing it... but it works. The only SSD I've had die so far was a Kingston V100. Still have a couple intel 320 series ssd's running strong, a couple sandisk ones (don't recall the model numbers) that are working and a crucial M500 that is working.
X25-M (version 2) still going strong here just not as a main drive since 80Gb is puny. I have both SD Ultra II (960Gb) and 2x Extreme Pro (480Gb) going with no problems. The Extreme Pro was purchased straight after Anadtech glowing review particularly with its 10 years warranty. Not sure what the warranty is for the Ultra II but wouldn't be surprised if its 5+. For every review that says: my SSD died, you'll get a "my SSD is alive & well" so take em with a pinch of salt. It all depends on usage scenario and user expertise and we know how variable that can be.
Isn't that the truth! Nearly every item comes with glowing reviews mixed in with "mine died in xx time, and I am never going to buy from $company ever again." Consumer routers and hard drives seem particularly bad in that way-- if I avoided all of the ones with horror stories, I'd never have either of them.
Another thing people tend to overlook in reliability is the role of a good power supply. A cheap PSU can slowly sap the life from all the components in the system by introducing unacceptable levels of ripple, and you'd never know that was a cause or partial cause of the failure. On a laptop with the brick-style power supply, it is a good idea to replace a failed unit with an OEM unit of recent manufacture (less chance of dried-up caps) than some eBay special of unknown origin (other than to say China, which is where the OEM one came from too, almost certainly).
For desktops, the PSU is something people sometimes skimp on. I've never actually had a prebuilt desktop, but I would bet a lot of them have cheap PSUs, as it is probably a place where pennies can be pinched without a huge increase in RMAs before the warranty expires. I looked at new PCs on the site of one of the major online sellers about a year ago, and I was surprised at how many current models still had 120/240v switches on the PSU, which shows that they are older models without active PFC. That does not necessarily mean they're of poor quality, but it does make me wonder about them.
SSD's have lost a lot by being so hamstrung by their interfaces. CPU's have limited number of PCI-e connections and motherboards very little space for M.2 slots. SATA 3 is slow and bad protocol for SSD so that race to the bottom is only thing that is of any interest in 2.5" drives.
SATA 3 may not be super fast, but the only observable difference, IME, between an m.2 drive and a sata drive was 2 seconds on boot. Unless you are a content creator working with laarge video/pictures, m.2 has little to offer over sata.
Especially given that 2TB sata ssds exist, while m.2 is limited to 512GB, and that 512GB m.2 is more expensive than a 1TB sata ssd. And the ehat that m.2 drives give off compared to sata.
It may be "cheap", but it's worthless in my opinion. Only 120GB or 250GB, pretty much too small for anything except a boot drive. If there are no 1TB drives, why bother?
I apologize for being rude but that's just not what they are made for. Paying 1,000$ for a 2tb NVME SSD just for cold storage is a lot like buying a 500,000$ super-car just to drop your kids off at school....
A mechanical hard drive will roll out 150-200 GigaBYTES per second sequential read. 4k video is like 5 megaBYTES per second max. 8k would be 20, 16k would be 80. This is on h264, h265 will cut these in half, so you could watch a 32k video on something like a WD black.
I suppose if you wanted to play back something in 64k resolution you'd need an SSD though, at least until CPU/GPU tech makes h266 or h267 codec or whatever available.
To be clear. The only reason content creators need NVME drives for 4k is because they work in uncompressed or intermediate formats. They need NVME drives for the same reason that a 4k bitmap is like 22 megabytes while the JPEG is just one or two.
Between the OS and software, my Windows desktop is currently using about 110GB of a 250GB hard drive. I don't game much, but there are handful of titles loaded on that system and I haven't exactly been working very hard at keeping my drive clean.
On my primary computer (the desktop is more a network appliance than a day-to-day workstation as it runs headless now thanks to a combination of Steam in home streaming and VNC), a laptop with a 60GB SSD, there's about 35GB of free storage capacity, but the OS footprint is a lot smaller since it's a Linux box.
Granted, games are getting larger and a few newer titles I'm likely to play in the next year or so will make it necessary to start looking at more storage, but 250GB seems perfectly reasonable right now.
Yeah just running 80GB of the 250GB 850EVO in my workstation. Having masses of software and data hanging around on a mchine seem crazy to me. Each to their own. However, most customers I see struggle to go over 60-70GB.
This is because you guys don't pirate tons of movies and hoard them on SSD drives like some people who then complain about the cost of the media they use to store their pirated goods. I don't either, which is why the 250 GB SSD in my macbook pro is still only half full after nearly 4 years of use.
BTW complaining about the cost of storage for pirated goods is like the ultimate douchebaggery imagineable. Not only are you ripping off people who worked to create the content you've pirated, you want to complain about how much money you have to pay to companies to produce the storage that you need to store it.
That's not ultimate pirate douchebaggery, it would be complaining why pirated videos are no longer available in Xvid because everybody should cater to people with decade old DVD players.
My wife has 200 GB of Life Event Photos/Videos going back 20+ years (and I'd imagine people with much better cameras then we had could have significantly more, particularly if they have a larger family) and there's not a bit of media on the machine. After OS and regular applications the minimum suitable single drive would be 480 GB, without a lick of pirated media.
Would that 200GB+ be better backed up safely somewhere than sitting on the main drive? Keeping masses of mainly dead/unused data on a day to day machine seems odd nowadays. There are systems better suited for that kind of data.
Yeah amazing how limited people's imaginations are when it comes to hardware and other peoples usage needs. Unless it's pushing 2GBps it's junk. Tedious people. If every laptop in the world with a cheap 5400rpm HDD in it swapped to one of these 'bottom of the barrel' Samsung SSDs, it would be a revelation. Make my job of support a lot easier and faster.
Keep in mind, launch prices are always a bit high. Sammy could sell em for less at retail...but they're really not after retail with the 750...they wanna move em in bulk minus retail packaging costs. As far as performace, they're just right...for the intended market. As a budget OEM part, the vast majority of end users (80% maybe?) will fall in Anands light bench metric where this drive makes a pretty good showing. Any better would risk cannibalizing EVO sales. Overall, this product and placement was well thought out by Samsung...as usual.
...and from a performance standpoint a lil over-provisioning goes a long way. I'm assuming it's not compatible with magician's RAPID mode...unless say your a huge oem customer who'd pay a tad extra and make it a performance offering in more expensive lappys with enuff ram.
As long as Samsung is clearing unused chips from its stock, it could just offer these drives for $25 each to make a gesture of good will towards its existing customers and make some new ones too.
Cheapest option but purchased separately, $10 difference is not worth it. The perrformance of the 850 is useful for most people savvy enough to replace drtives.
$10 may be a big BOM savings for large system builders but it's pocket change for consumers looking to upgrade from a hard drive. This drive probably isn't aimed at you :)
I wouldn't trade $10 for half the write longevity and potentially other issues from using planar TLC. The 850 Evo is still the king and the Sandisk Ultra II is also a good deal when it goes on sale.
According to Amazon.com, this drive is currently more expensive then the 250gb 850 Evo. Makes zero sense to buy this today. maybe in a year it will be priced accordingly.
8$ is just too little of a difference and will not make a difference in a build as such.. I only see this as being implemented in finished machines from manufacturers, so that they can pop another 8$ in their pocket. Aftermarket.. Doubt it will sell a lot. Maybe i would use it in a HTPC, since it's not something that requires a lot of R/W operations once it's booted up
Well I needless to say I found the Samsung EVO 250GIG extremely reliable although it is a bit expensive, but for anyone that mostly run high performance graphics this price tag shouldn't be a big problem.
1. 750 may be a hit for developing markets. in particular i've seen 750 reviews on russian sites much earlier than here: fcenter/online/hardarticles/hdd/38770-Samsung_SSD_zadeshevo_obzor_Samsung_650_i_Samsung_750_EVO
2. Can you please add to your reviews checks of gc/trim effect and slc cache size as in the section 3dnews/931062/page-2.html#Деградация%20и%20восстановление%20производительности
Billy, when you guys run the benchmarks, are the Samsung Evo drives run with RAPID Mode on or off? Just out of curiosity, as I am looking to buy the 850 Evo and I'd like to know if I can expect this sort of performance without having to turn on RAPID Mode. Thanks!
Notice because of all the fatmouths saying they'll "wait until it is cheaper" the industry has now colluded to up the prices and make up some bs excuses of "low demand" "commodity trader speculation on minerals". Yes we can blame stock traders for a lot of things like high oil prices, high wheat and other food goods prices but come on I smell something fishy. I was about to buy a 250gb Samsung SSD on black Friday for $60 almost two years ago when some idiot shopper woman decided to merge into me when I was on my way home from work leading to a 15 month nightmare. I never did make it out to get my ssd. Fast forward almost 2 years later and they've doubled in price. I really wanted that.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
109 Comments
Back to Article
lilmoe - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Meh. I'll wait until it's half price.haukionkannel - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Well, this is 10$ cheaper that 850evo, so this will be very popular among system builders and other with tight budget. Normal upgrade user will definitely go for 850. But this is good enought to most customers.Space Jam - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
$10 for considerably worse performance does not a winner make.I have a hard time swallowing the cheapo, terrible performance $60 TLC drives. If Sammy thinks anything more than $65 is a good price they have another thing coming.
$60 for a budget 120GB SSD is some audacity.
I and most others will stick to BX100s @ $70 and 850 EVOs @ $75 during the (frequent) sales.
jabber - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
And if it's upgrading a lot of the older machines desktops and laptops that still only run on SATA II...it doesn't matter. As long as it pushes 285MBps (ish) all day that's all it needs. A lot of kit out there is still SATA II.Alexvrb - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Yeah it's got a sequential speed cap. Not all tasks are about peak speeds. I'm pretty sure in terms of IOPS a decent SSD will still beat the snot out of an OEM-grade penny-pinching budget model, even on old SATA 2. Which brings us back to the idea that this is for OEMs and builders - truly this is a "builder-grade" component. If you're upgrading or building for yourself, you'll likely pay a few extra bucks for an 850 Evo or similar unit.With that being said, any of the modern SSDs are better than a mechanical drive. Blech.
leexgx - Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - link
this drive will likely be perfect for the older apple laptops that have that dodgy cable that does not support SATA 3 but the controller does (the cable fails if a high speed cable is used) i had to use a DVD HDD caddy on number of apple laptops due to that issue where it will not detect the SSD or HDDleexgx - Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - link
high speed drive is used (not cable is used) edit be nice on here but that's unlikelyDeath666Angel - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
I'm guessing the marketing value for "Performance Samsung SSD inside" is considerably higher than comparable Sandisk or Crucial SSDs. And the 10 bucks off compared to the 850 means the margins remain. And if current 1TB laptop drives get replaced by these 250GB 750s, I think everyone is a winner. :DSamus - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link
It's funny you mention that because I would prefer a Sandisk or Crucial/Micron drive over a Samsung anyday.Have you ever tried warranting a Samsung drive? They are hell to deal with. And yes, I still have a sour metallic taste after the 840 Evo debacle that essentially was never fixed.
I also think Crucial/Sandisks Marvell drives, albeit slower, are more consistent, stable and deal with power loss substantially better than the MGX. The fact Samsung is making an SSD with 35TBW endurance in 2016 is pretty damning. I've seen 20GB racked up on old Intel X25-M's in a matter of years so 35GB in a 5 year period isn't out of the question. Just about any other SSD or hard disk for that matter will handle double that no problem at the rated capacity.
vladx - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link
" after the 840 Evo debacle that essentially was never fixed."Don't know what you mean, I also have a 840 EVO and can confirm the performances issues are gone after the 2nd fix.
BurntMyBacon - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link
@vladx: "Don't know what you mean, I also have a 840 EVO and can confirm the performances issues are gone after the 2nd fix."The fix forces a periodic rewrite of data that shouldn't have been necessary. Also, the fix doesn't work for machines that are powered down for large periods at a time as it requires power to monitor and execute the rewrites. This fix isn't optimal as it lowers the effective endurance of the drive. Combine that with the fact that the drive uses TLC flash with a write endurance of 1000x and you have a situation that enthusiasts aren't exactly "enthusiastic" to hear about.
That said, under normal consumer use, it will make little difference to the overall longevity of the computer. Use cases that are constantly modifying the whole data set will see little difference as the new firmware will not need to rewrite what is essentially fresh data. Use cases that see little writing will require the firmware to initiate rewrites, but they aren't consuming their write cycles at a very fast rate to begin with. However, use cases that constantly write and rewrite a small set of data while maintaining a large set of data that remains unmodified would result in a notably (though not excessively) lower life expectancy.
vladx - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link
"Also, the fix doesn't work for machines that are powered down for large periods at a time as it requires power to monitor and execute the rewrites."First, you shouldn't use an SSD for cold storage. Secondly, those periodic rewrites are insignificant to the life expectancy from user perspective, Just read the Techreport series on SSD endurance (http://techreport.com/review/26523/the-ssd-enduran... and you'll see that manufacturers are very conservative on the endurance numbers on consumer drives. They intentionally do it in order to not have consumer products take a piece of the enterprise pie.
And lastly, my point was the performance is back and like I mentioned without any real-world impact so stop spreading FUD like so many others on this site.
Alexvrb - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link
Yeah I've got at least one machine with an 840 Evo and it has been working great. 850 Evo is better, of course, I've got one of those too. I'd definitely trust one to at least not corrupt data over some of the other offerings (I'm looking at you, OCZ). Performance on my 850 Evo is hard to beat for the money, as well. This 750 Evo however, looks weak by comparison. They should sell it to OEMs cheap, and anyone in the retail market should shop around more.Oxford Guy - Monday, May 2, 2016 - link
There's a difference between a fix and a kludgy workaround.Ascaris - Tuesday, April 26, 2016 - link
Indeed. My Samsung 840 Pro 128GB in my main (desktop) PC has been in service for 2 years, four months, and has accumulated 32.55TB written. SMART indicates it still has 84% of its wear-leveling count remaining. That's another 11.8 years at this rate (and it will probably live well beyond its rated limit, if it is anything like the torture-tested 840 Pro as reported by TR). It would be near the end of its rated life if it were the 750 Evo.vladx - Tuesday, April 26, 2016 - link
@Ascaris: 84%? My 840 Evo is still 97% after 21 TB of written data so wear-leveling rating might not drop linearly.leexgx - Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - link
@vladxsmaller the SSD faster the health drops
bigger SSDs has more NAND space so they last longer the bigger the SSD is just companies tend to rate all there SSDs with the same say 50 to 150TB rated life/warranty void for all sizes but that is just for warranty that's all so they are not used in server type loads (most of them can do at least 500TB before they start to fail or show uncorrectable errors or high relocate sectors)
leexgx - Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - link
@Ascaristhe TR test on all them drives was interesting and the the 840 Pro drive can be used way past its rated life past 2PB of data can be possible it even was 0 error free even with the power failure up to the point it suddenly failed with no warning which probably was a full NAND chip fail (as that site that was trashing them with random write to a bunch of SSDs so the drive might of had more writes if its was sequential writes, the test would of concluded a lot sooner if sequential writes was used)
haukionkannel - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
If you sell 10000 computers, that 10$ will make 100000$ Profit. And 10000 computers is a very small Number... 20 cent is big money to production cost. Do you ever wonder why Intel use very crap thermal paste in their consumer prosessors? It is 1 cent cheaper or even more than better stuff, and Also goes old soon enough after the warranty goes old...They Are making Profit, not making the best bang for the back to the customers...
JimmiG - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link
Yeah, that's why this drive is primarily aimed at system builders. If you're buying a 120 or 250GB drive for your own system, it's silly to not pay $10 more for the 850 Evo.ewitte - Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - link
System builders will likely go even cheaper there are a lot of 240GB drives around $60. Nearly a $20 difference.Murloc - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
They're going to put it into computers and write "Samsung SSD inside" and it will be cheaper for the system builders, but the average customer will not be able to tell the difference.So yes, it's a winner.
lilmoe - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
You think $10 is worth the downgrade? Bruh...5th element - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
To the 3rd party selling complete machines to the everyday masses yeah. Like haukionkannel said above. Most people out there aren't tech heads and the lower £££ matters.lilmoe - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Sure, but the price difference is even lower with higher volume...nathanddrews - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Meh.Thanks for the great review - as always. The "meh" is just for the drive itself.
nathanddrews - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
The problem I have with SSDs right now is that they're so boring to me. What I need in my life are consumer grade NVMe 2TB+ SSDs. I'm sick and tired of buying multiple SSDs or splitting my application and data across SSDs and HDDs. One drive to rule them all, please.TheinsanegamerN - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
We should probably work on getting 1TB drives out and purchasable before worrying about 2TB models.vanilla_gorilla - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Samsung 850 EVO 1TB SSD are $291 on Amazon (Prime) right now. And the Samsung 850 EVO 2TB is the same price per gigabyte ($600 for 2TB).Meteor2 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
I don't know about 2+ TB but definitely more 1 TB NVMe drives. SATA is yesterday's tech.Coup27 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
SATA is not yesterdays tech.abrowne1993 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
More like yesteryearDeath666Angel - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
So, everyone with perfectly capable CPUs that are barely slower than current tech should upgrade because SATA is old? I'm not disputing that SATA is the older tech, I'm just looking for a more nuanced and realistic view here. If your workload is sufficiently dependant on IO throughput, by all means get those NVMe drives. But implying that a SATA3 device like a 850pro is not going to do the job for a lot of people.... I have a Z87 4770k running at 4.5GHz. I'm not going to upgrade just for the convenience of M.2 PCIe NVMe support. And I won't do so until 6+ core CPUs with comparable IPC and OC abilities get decently priced.Meteor2 - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
No, not at all, and no-one said SATA is inadequate. But it is part of the past, just like 486s and dial-up modems.Bleakwise - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
No, SATA has a place. You realize a 2.5 SATA drive has about 10x-20x the volume of a NVME drive. No reason you could n't have a 3.5 inch SATA SSD either.Thus SATA will always be the go-to for high volume storage. Flash memory isn't going to be shrunk down anytime soon either, it degrades both performance and reliability, so until we get something better than flash SATA is going to be the only place you can get something like a 4TB or 8TB SSD.
Bleakwise - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
Shinking thing smaller and smaller is also more expensive, and like I said in terms of flash it also degrades performance. It's much cheaper to build a big-fast thing than a small-fast thing.There is also the issue of RAID and mechanical drives for mass storage. I can setup a 20TB fakeraid with an SSD write-back cache for under a thousand dollars. Hardware raid would be about 2000$. The NVME version would be about 8000$ to 10000$.
Billy Tallis - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
There are 2.5" NVMe drives using the U.2 connector to provide the same 4 lanes of PCIe that can be supplied by the M.2 connector.slowdemon21 - Friday, April 29, 2016 - link
Agree. SATA is the skylake bottleneckewitte - Tuesday, May 24, 2016 - link
I hacked my bios to run a 950 pro in a z87 it was ridiculous to spend so much upgrading from a 4790k.Coup27 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Do you not think there is something wrong with the phrase "consumer grade NVMe 2TB+ SSD" ?You could also RAID some SATA 2TB SSD's to give you want you need. I doubt you "really" need all of that space on NVMe, so maybe a 256 or 512GB 950 Pro + some 850 EVO's in RAID would work well, and is available now.
Shadow7037932 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
The prices aren't competitive. The Ultra II in particular tends to go on sale rather often for around $50.Shadow7037932 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Also, if it's anything like the price drop we saw with the 850 EVOs, this could drop down to ~$50 or so in a few months I think.barleyguy - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
This drive hasn't been out long enough to know what price it will go on sale for. So I consider any comments on pricing pretty irrelevant.Outside of that, there are only 3 brands of SSD I trust my data to, which is Intel, Crucial/Micron, and Samsung. I'll pay more for those 3 brands than I will other brands, because of reliability.
AkulaClass - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
As 250GB low cost I would grab a SanDisk Ultra II.barleyguy - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
8 of the 48 reviews of that drive on NewEgg are "worked great until it died in a month and I lost my data". As I said in another post, Intel, Crucial, and Samsung are IMO on a different tier of reliability than everybody else.Shadow7037932 - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
I like how you're saying Samsung there without considering the issues they've had with the 840. Out of all three you mentioned, only Intel has had solid SSDs since the first gen.barleyguy - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
I actually own an 840 Evo in my daughter's laptop. The issues with it never involved data loss or "early death", only degraded performance. Even in its degraded performance mode it still feels faster than a hard drive. And the patches they issued to "fix" it work pretty well to restore it back to SSD-like performance.So, in short, I still trust Samsung on the SSD front way more than Sandisk.
Though I don't disagree that Intel makes excellent SSDs. They're the way to go for a "critical main desktop" type application.
andrewaggb - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
I was going to say that as well. I have an 840 evo in my machine and I haven't lost any data. I regret purchasing it... but it works. The only SSD I've had die so far was a Kingston V100. Still have a couple intel 320 series ssd's running strong, a couple sandisk ones (don't recall the model numbers) that are working and a crucial M500 that is working.Dwedit - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
I had the old Intel X25-M, and it had a catastrophic failure where the disk name changed to "BAD CONTEXT" and size changed to 8MB.K_Space - Wednesday, April 27, 2016 - link
X25-M (version 2) still going strong here just not as a main drive since 80Gb is puny. I have both SD Ultra II (960Gb) and 2x Extreme Pro (480Gb) going with no problems. The Extreme Pro was purchased straight after Anadtech glowing review particularly with its 10 years warranty. Not sure what the warranty is for the Ultra II but wouldn't be surprised if its 5+. For every review that says: my SSD died, you'll get a "my SSD is alive & well" so take em with a pinch of salt. It all depends on usage scenario and user expertise and we know how variable that can be.Ascaris - Thursday, April 28, 2016 - link
Isn't that the truth! Nearly every item comes with glowing reviews mixed in with "mine died in xx time, and I am never going to buy from $company ever again." Consumer routers and hard drives seem particularly bad in that way-- if I avoided all of the ones with horror stories, I'd never have either of them.Another thing people tend to overlook in reliability is the role of a good power supply. A cheap PSU can slowly sap the life from all the components in the system by introducing unacceptable levels of ripple, and you'd never know that was a cause or partial cause of the failure. On a laptop with the brick-style power supply, it is a good idea to replace a failed unit with an OEM unit of recent manufacture (less chance of dried-up caps) than some eBay special of unknown origin (other than to say China, which is where the OEM one came from too, almost certainly).
For desktops, the PSU is something people sometimes skimp on. I've never actually had a prebuilt desktop, but I would bet a lot of them have cheap PSUs, as it is probably a place where pennies can be pinched without a huge increase in RMAs before the warranty expires. I looked at new PCs on the site of one of the major online sellers about a year ago, and I was surprised at how many current models still had 120/240v switches on the PSU, which shows that they are older models without active PFC. That does not necessarily mean they're of poor quality, but it does make me wonder about them.
BrokenCrayons - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
I think it needs to come down in price before it'll be an acceptable sort of purchase.zepi - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
SSD's have lost a lot by being so hamstrung by their interfaces. CPU's have limited number of PCI-e connections and motherboards very little space for M.2 slots. SATA 3 is slow and bad protocol for SSD so that race to the bottom is only thing that is of any interest in 2.5" drives.TheinsanegamerN - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
SATA 3 may not be super fast, but the only observable difference, IME, between an m.2 drive and a sata drive was 2 seconds on boot. Unless you are a content creator working with laarge video/pictures, m.2 has little to offer over sata.Especially given that 2TB sata ssds exist, while m.2 is limited to 512GB, and that 512GB m.2 is more expensive than a 1TB sata ssd. And the ehat that m.2 drives give off compared to sata.
Margalus - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
It may be "cheap", but it's worthless in my opinion. Only 120GB or 250GB, pretty much too small for anything except a boot drive. If there are no 1TB drives, why bother?TheinsanegamerN - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Believe it or not, many people could fit their computer needs in 250GB.I only use about 500GB between all of the games I actually play, and the OS itself.
Meteor2 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Mmmm, I think a lot of people have digital media collections now. I have no DVDs or Blu Rays, but 600 GB of films and TV series.barleyguy - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Video doesn't need SSD levels of performance. Any modern spinning disk is fast enough to play video, even up to 4K.Personally, my video server machine is a 250 GB MX200 M-SATA SSD and a 4 TB hard drive.
Meteor2 - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Absolutely but I want a single high-performance disc.Bleakwise - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
Why do you want an SSD for cold storage backups? That's just silly.Bleakwise - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
I apologize for being rude but that's just not what they are made for. Paying 1,000$ for a 2tb NVME SSD just for cold storage is a lot like buying a 500,000$ super-car just to drop your kids off at school....Bleakwise - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
More like even up to 8k.A mechanical hard drive will roll out 150-200 GigaBYTES per second sequential read. 4k video is like 5 megaBYTES per second max. 8k would be 20, 16k would be 80. This is on h264, h265 will cut these in half, so you could watch a 32k video on something like a WD black.
I suppose if you wanted to play back something in 64k resolution you'd need an SSD though, at least until CPU/GPU tech makes h266 or h267 codec or whatever available.
Bleakwise - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
To be clear. The only reason content creators need NVME drives for 4k is because they work in uncompressed or intermediate formats. They need NVME drives for the same reason that a 4k bitmap is like 22 megabytes while the JPEG is just one or two.Eden-K121D - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
I think You meant MegaBYTES otherwise your hypothetical disk would be faster than anything on this planet LOLslowdemon21 - Friday, April 29, 2016 - link
SeaGate barracuda 195 MegaBytes per secBrokenCrayons - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Between the OS and software, my Windows desktop is currently using about 110GB of a 250GB hard drive. I don't game much, but there are handful of titles loaded on that system and I haven't exactly been working very hard at keeping my drive clean.On my primary computer (the desktop is more a network appliance than a day-to-day workstation as it runs headless now thanks to a combination of Steam in home streaming and VNC), a laptop with a 60GB SSD, there's about 35GB of free storage capacity, but the OS footprint is a lot smaller since it's a Linux box.
Granted, games are getting larger and a few newer titles I'm likely to play in the next year or so will make it necessary to start looking at more storage, but 250GB seems perfectly reasonable right now.
jabber - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Yeah just running 80GB of the 250GB 850EVO in my workstation. Having masses of software and data hanging around on a mchine seem crazy to me. Each to their own. However, most customers I see struggle to go over 60-70GB.bji - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
This is because you guys don't pirate tons of movies and hoard them on SSD drives like some people who then complain about the cost of the media they use to store their pirated goods. I don't either, which is why the 250 GB SSD in my macbook pro is still only half full after nearly 4 years of use.bji - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
BTW complaining about the cost of storage for pirated goods is like the ultimate douchebaggery imagineable. Not only are you ripping off people who worked to create the content you've pirated, you want to complain about how much money you have to pay to companies to produce the storage that you need to store it.StrangerGuy - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
That's not ultimate pirate douchebaggery, it would be complaining why pirated videos are no longer available in Xvid because everybody should cater to people with decade old DVD players.jabber - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Yeah must admit I don't have the need or want to hoard masses of ripped off content. That is a psychosis I can do without. It just junk.Deelron - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
My wife has 200 GB of Life Event Photos/Videos going back 20+ years (and I'd imagine people with much better cameras then we had could have significantly more, particularly if they have a larger family) and there's not a bit of media on the machine. After OS and regular applications the minimum suitable single drive would be 480 GB, without a lick of pirated media.jabber - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Would that 200GB+ be better backed up safely somewhere than sitting on the main drive? Keeping masses of mainly dead/unused data on a day to day machine seems odd nowadays. There are systems better suited for that kind of data.Deelron - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
It's backed up locally (two he's that switch every month) and via cloud. It's not just "sitting" there any more then a physical photo album would be.Margalus - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
It has nothing to do with piracy.. My Steam folder alone is over 1GB.erple2 - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
I think that I have save games that are larger than 1GB.Eden-K121D - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
You mean 1TBMargalus - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
lol, yes. that is what I meant...
Lolimaster - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
It's simply because you didn't embrace internet. That kind of low storage needs is more of the pre-2000's.Between movies, tv series, some cartoons, anime, manga it's easy to need more than 1 6TB drive. I have 4x 6TB's right now.
jabber - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Yes but you appear to be 16 years aold. Some of us are over 30. If you are over 30 I see that as a cry for help.Meteor2 - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Can't you come up with a more insightful comment, rather than a personal jibe?Eden-K121D - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
His Name Speaks VolumesBrokenCrayons - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link
Wouldn't embracing the internet mean using offsite storage or streaming content rather than storing it locally?cm2187 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Any news on Samsung's 4TB SSDs?trparky - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Crap. Does this mean that production of the 850 EVO will stop? God I hope not, the 850 EVO is still a clear winner in my mind.Kristian Vättö - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Absolutely not. The 850 EVO and PRO will continue to be available - the 750 EVO is just a new entry-level addition to the lineup.Coup27 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
What part of the article gave you that impression?trparky - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
I was thinking along the lines of the 750 EVO replacing the 850 EVO in the product lineup. That's something I hope doesn't happen.StrangerGuy - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Enjoyed the bottom to the barrel, cost cutting to the max 768p crappy laptop TN LCDs? Now coming to every future consumer SSDs near you.ingwe - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
I'll take a cheap SSD over a shitty 768p panel any day!DanNeely - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
The cheap SSD will still blow the spinning rust in the other crappy TN 720p laptop out of the water.jabber - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Yeah amazing how limited people's imaginations are when it comes to hardware and other peoples usage needs. Unless it's pushing 2GBps it's junk. Tedious people. If every laptop in the world with a cheap 5400rpm HDD in it swapped to one of these 'bottom of the barrel' Samsung SSDs, it would be a revelation. Make my job of support a lot easier and faster.Movieman420 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Keep in mind, launch prices are always a bit high. Sammy could sell em for less at retail...but they're really not after retail with the 750...they wanna move em in bulk minus retail packaging costs. As far as performace, they're just right...for the intended market. As a budget OEM part, the vast majority of end users (80% maybe?) will fall in Anands light bench metric where this drive makes a pretty good showing. Any better would risk cannibalizing EVO sales. Overall, this product and placement was well thought out by Samsung...as usual....and from a performance standpoint a lil over-provisioning goes a long way. I'm assuming it's not compatible with magician's RAPID mode...unless say your a huge oem customer who'd pay a tad extra and make it a performance offering in more expensive lappys with enuff ram.
iwod - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
What we need to know is final street price, not launch price.Because as it stand i have Zero reason to buy them. It needs at least a 50% price cost.versesuvius - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
As long as Samsung is clearing unused chips from its stock, it could just offer these drives for $25 each to make a gesture of good will towards its existing customers and make some new ones too.The_Assimilator - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Good to see you're "revieiwng" this drive. Could you maybe consider reviewing a spellchecker and/or editor in future?zodiacfml - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Cheapest option but purchased separately, $10 difference is not worth it.The perrformance of the 850 is useful for most people savvy enough to replace drtives.
serendip - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
$10 may be a big BOM savings for large system builders but it's pocket change for consumers looking to upgrade from a hard drive. This drive probably isn't aimed at you :)I wouldn't trade $10 for half the write longevity and potentially other issues from using planar TLC. The 850 Evo is still the king and the Sandisk Ultra II is also a good deal when it goes on sale.
Peroxyde - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
How is the Corsair LE compared to 850 EVO, 750 EVO? In terms of reliability?odedia - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
According to Amazon.com, this drive is currently more expensive then the 250gb 850 Evo. Makes zero sense to buy this today. maybe in a year it will be priced accordingly.Sn3akr - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link
8$ is just too little of a difference and will not make a difference in a build as such.. I only see this as being implemented in finished machines from manufacturers, so that they can pop another 8$ in their pocket. Aftermarket.. Doubt it will sell a lot.Maybe i would use it in a HTPC, since it's not something that requires a lot of R/W operations once it's booted up
slowdemon21 - Thursday, April 28, 2016 - link
I noticed PNY & OCZ BENCHED IN THE MIDDLE, Sammy on the bottom [loser]Ahmad kassem - Sunday, May 1, 2016 - link
Is it ok to make more than one partition on this ssd or any other ssd?wayneclaassen - Thursday, May 5, 2016 - link
Well I needless to say I found the Samsung EVO 250GIG extremely reliable although it is a bit expensive, but for anyone that mostly run high performance graphics this price tag shouldn't be a big problem.Bulat Ziganshin - Saturday, May 7, 2016 - link
1. 750 may be a hit for developing markets. in particular i've seen 750 reviews on russian sites much earlier than here:fcenter/online/hardarticles/hdd/38770-Samsung_SSD_zadeshevo_obzor_Samsung_650_i_Samsung_750_EVO
2. Can you please add to your reviews checks of gc/trim effect and slc cache size as in the section
3dnews/931062/page-2.html#Деградация%20и%20восстановление%20производительности
eduard.fisic - Sunday, June 5, 2016 - link
Billy, when you guys run the benchmarks, are the Samsung Evo drives run with RAPID Mode on or off? Just out of curiosity, as I am looking to buy the 850 Evo and I'd like to know if I can expect this sort of performance without having to turn on RAPID Mode. Thanks!jason_brody - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link
Can anyone help if I should go with this SSD or 850 series for my Dell E6500?elzafir - Tuesday, April 11, 2017 - link
The 250GB 840 EVO is $15 cheaper where I live compared to the 750 EVO of the same size. Which one should I get?Manisthisunreal - Friday, October 13, 2017 - link
Notice because of all the fatmouths saying they'll "wait until it is cheaper" the industry has now colluded to up the prices and make up some bs excuses of "low demand" "commodity trader speculation on minerals". Yes we can blame stock traders for a lot of things like high oil prices, high wheat and other food goods prices but come on I smell something fishy. I was about to buy a 250gb Samsung SSD on black Friday for $60 almost two years ago when some idiot shopper woman decided to merge into me when I was on my way home from work leading to a 15 month nightmare. I never did make it out to get my ssd. Fast forward almost 2 years later and they've doubled in price. I really wanted that.