The SSD Review The Worlds Dedicated SSD Education and Review Resource | 
TxBench is one of our newly discovered benchmarks that we works much the same as Crystal Diskmark, but with several other features. Advanced load benchmarking can be configured, as well as full drive information and data erasing via secure erase, enhanced secure erase, TRIM and overwriting. Simply click on the title for a free copy.
REVIEW ANALYSIS AND FINAL THOUGHTS
It’s a bit awkward writing this report and I have to admit that it took longer than expected because, well, we have seen so much good come from Samsung and they are such a large part of the world being where it is today because of the advance of flash memory. We are certain that Samsung has more Editor’s Choice Awards than any other manufacturer on this website and we have been reviewing Samsung SSDs since their first Samsung 64GB SLC SSD release in 2008.
Because of this, Samsung has the right to the unabated truth with respect to the 870 QVO as I see it. The Samsung 870 QVO is just as Samsung states, in that it will reach 560MB/s read and 530MB/s write, with just under 100K IOPS, and it will have mass availability with great sales because Samsung products can and will sell based on name and reputation. The 870 QVO even has AES 256-bit encryption which is not so common these days.
In retrospect, the pricing is off and needs to come down. Samsung is one of the few that builds their SSDs completely in house. This alone should result in pricing for the same product lower than other manufacturers that have to put their product together through components from several companies. At the time of this report the Samsung 870 QVO was the most expensive for any similar competing product.
Next up, we really don’t understand why Samsung put a 3-year warranty on the Samsung 870 QVO when the rest of the industry has made 5-year warranties commonplace. The former 860 QVO had a three-year warranty and perhaps they are staying in line with that. It sure seems to be in bad form though, when Samsung hopes to maintain their image as the best but have a lower warranty than the now industry 5-year standard.
Lastly, the big news of the 870 QVO is that it will be available in capacities of up to 8TB, yet no 8TB samples were available for review. Remember what we were saying earlier about all the attention going to the biggest and fastest? That would include the 870 QVO if someone had one in hand to test. Testing a 1/2TB 870 QVO and then saying it has the same specs as the 8TB version is a bit of a let down we think.
Let’s just wait and see if anything changes with respect to warranty or pricing of this SSD. If it does, this report will be amended accordingly. The potential is there.
Not sure why Les focused on the warranty period (which is essentially meaningless) and doesn’t point out the higher endurance of Samsung’s latest QLC drive (which is actually important). For example, the Crucial P1 has a 200TBW at 1TB / 400TBW at 2TB vs. the Samsung 870 QVO at 360TBW at 1TB / 720 TBW at 2TB. By any estimation, regardless of the warranty period, the 870 QVO has a better warranty than the equivalent capacity Crucial P1. Same with the Adata SU630 / SU635. Seagate does a little better at 280TBW on their 960GB BarraCuda Q1, but still not as good as the Samsung drive. And it’s also a little strange that he would compare the 3-year warranty period on a QLC drive to the 10-year warranty period on an MLC drive, when every manufacturer has lower ratings on QLC and TLC, than MLC.
Appreciate your comment. I focused on this because 5-years is gaining alot of traction as the industry standard. In my opinion at least, it is a bit ironic since Samsung was the only to have a 10-year warranty some time ago. The great part of owning my own website is I can provide my thoughts without influence I guess. I also tied in my warranty concern with pricing thoughts as well. To qualify your examples, I was hoping for similar. The P1 is an m.2 NVMe drive with a five year warranty and cheaper. The SU630 is last gen and you would be lucky even finding a 1TB. The SU635…currently unavailable and again, old stock. Barracuda Q1 960GB is much much cheaper.
Now…warranty. I can guarantee anyone who has ever had to address a warranty issue wouldn’t agree with your thought that it is essentially meaningless. I actually left warranty support out of the report for the benefit of Samsung.
At the end of the day, I can live with a more expensive SSD OR a lesser warranty, but don’t think that both should be present, especially when the industry standard has been to show confidence in new NAND through warranty. Again thank you for your input.
The TBW for a Crucial P1, as an example is 5 years at 0.1 DWPD vs. the 870 QVO at 3 Years at 0.3 DWPD.
It’s the reason why businesses ignore warranty length in favor of TBW or DWPD (which is essentially warranty period / TBW). Its a more accurate determinant of drive endurance.
Curiously, I don’t find a lot of examples of 5 year warranties on QLC drives. A check on Amazon indicates there aren’t many straight QLC-based client SATA drives for consumers to choose from. Adata is 3 years. Seagate is 3 years. Team Group is 3 years. Addlink is 3 years. Inland is 3 Years. So, if you think 5 years is the standard, you should indicate what products you’re comparing it to.
First off, warranty has always been based on NAND flash memory for the most part. I thought I might check my previous reviews and, of the last 15, 13 were 5-year warranties. The only 3-year warranties were this review and Samsung’s last portable… a 3-year being the norm but not exclusive as we are seeing portables with 5-years now as well. 13 of 15…. There ya go. Further, this is not a business or enterprise SSD.
Lastly DWPD/TBW means absolutely nothing at three years and one day. 99% of consumers buying this drive won’t ever have need to watch either because they would never do anything that might bring either into question. I am certain they are a bit more comfortable with those two extra year warranty though… the industry standard.