You already know what this is….
Slightly cheaper than previous deal here
Lowest ever according to the camels.
2TB for $237 also available Thanks endor
Deal ends in ~22 hrs of this post.
CamelCamelCamel.
You get $20-$40 steam credit for a 970 Evo Plus from elligible sellers too. It just says "Amazon" on the redemption page but you're right it probably only refers to Amazon AU
There’s also a bit of a sneaky clause if you look into the T&C’s. Amazon is listed as a reseller with an asterisk.
*Portable SSD T7 Touch & T7 models only. Excludes SSD 980 PRO, 970 EVO Plus, 870 EVO and 870 QVO models.
No indication of this is shown on the promo page you linked
That's a good pickup, yep no indication of that on promotions page.
Got one, thanks OP
Good deal, been waiting for 1TB m.2
Only 1 left
Does Amazon giftcard work for international items?
Yep, you can use your giftcard balance as long as you're buying via Amazon AU.
Thanks OP, was waiting for this deal.
Bought 2 for my ESXi homelab build(allowed me to buy 2 even though it said only 1 in stock. Still says only 1 left after my purchase @shap08).
Cheers!
Thanks OP, got the 2TB one.
Are these the best around , need it for a laptop
This would be one of the top drives with Gen 3 NVMe Interface. However newer Gen 4 drives exists. For most, SSDs are so fast that the difference between Gen 3 and 4 will be imperceptible except in a handful of niche use cases. The cost of an equivalent high end Gen 4 will be much more than this so unless you really need the higher speeds then this will be mire than fine
A Gen 4 NVMe SSD also requires newer CPUs (Intel 11th Gen or newer) with PCIe Gen 4 to actually make use of the newer interface otherwise it will default to Gen 3 speeds anyway
Thanks, I posted a deal on this at $153 and bought one at that price. It got "lost in the post", i.e. someone in the postal system, likely at the airport pinched it. I've ordered again off this deal , see if shows up, nice saving so thanks OP :)
This is the lowest price it's ever been on Amazon: https://au.camelcamelcamel.com/product/B07MFZY2F2
Personally I've never seen it cheaper this anywhere.
Maybe you wanna add the 2TB price at $237.64, that's also a very good price.
Thanks OP, yes, add 2TB deal to the title, I bought one for $237.
would this work for PS5 memory expansion?
you want the 980 Pro with heatsink, around $200 + $40 steam gc at bpct
Thanks mate
Somebody mentioned in the SSD deal that the 970 evos have a really high reported failure rate. It might be only one batch bought early last year but the reports still seem to be coming in of them failing after a few months. I'm unsure if there's any difference between the 2.5" SSD housings and M.2 cards for whichever component is the issue.
You can get a 980 from umart for $149, with $7 delivery for me. I ended up doing that for peace of mind, even if it meant also losing out on $20 Steam credit back which the SSD deal had.
https://www.umart.com.au/product/samsung-980-1tb-m-2-nvme-pc…
Or $156 from Amazon with free Prime delivery, so they seem to be price matched:
https://www.amazon.com.au/Samsung-3-500-Internal-Solid-MZ-V8…
3,500/3,000 MB/s
Pay a bit more and get the 980 Pro
The 980 pro is a pretty big price jump even with the $40 steam credit back.
I actually have a 1 month old 980 pro for my boot and work drive, but was looking for an SSD/M.2 to replace an old failing HDD, which doesn't really need peak performance (plus being silent and being able to move it out of the way of the front case fans are nice benefits).
no its not we aren't talking about 100s of dollar more expensive we are talking about 60 bucks more. for the 1tb 980 pro
@kungfuman: $60 is about 43% extra. That’s a considerable price difference. You’d also need a Gen 4 slot and I’d argue very few would notice the speed difference anyway
@FireRunner: 60 bucks differnce is nothing when it comes to storage of any kind computer parts. considering the jump between 2tb to 4tb to 8tb is 100s of dollars and if you add more speed on to that as well it can even go into 1000s. so a 60 dollar jump isn't anything to cry about.
exactly 980 pro can do 7000mbps
Sorry I just realised this is wrong. It was the 870 evo which had the reported failures. This is the 970.
Not all Samsung SSD models are great. I had a lot of issues with my Samsung 840 (died within a year). Samsung RMA was good though. Replaced with 850 Evo at the time and double the storage size of what I bought.
Another guy had his mSATA SSD replaced with a NVMe SSD (also double the storage size one).
Thanks for the tip! I have an 870 Evo 4TB and it also shows the same issue as reported all over the forums and reddit. Just lodged a warranty request with Samsung to see how they will handle it.
Gave me a scare, I have had the 970 evo plus for a while with no issues.
I wouldn't take what's happening with the SATA line to mean much for these.
And note that the 970 EVO is also not the same thing as this 970 EVO Plus. The 970 EVO is an older model which had Samsung's 64 layer flash instead of the 92 which the 970 EVO Plus originally had. (New versions of the 970 EVO Plus may have different flash and controllers from the original ones.) I'm not sure if Samsung is even still making 970 EVO or the ones sold now are old stock. Because they're generally priced higher, I think few people buy them unless they need it for something special e.g. a like for like replacement or it's the only device certified for their purpose. In any case, even if the 970 EVOs are having problems I wouldn't say it may mean that much for these 970 EVO Plus. (May or may not be very slightly more relevant than the SATA ones.)
most of those reported failures because people didnt' cool it properly.
Jesus that is cheap
Thanks OP! Just bought the 2TB version.
I've got a 500GB PCIE 4 boot drive and been wanting to buy PICE 3 drive for games folder for some time. But been waiting for a good price, this is one of the best prices I've seen so jumped on it asap.
Best part is, got $100 gift card from work, so only cost me $137!
Is the 2TB one eligible for the Steam gift card?
I wouldn't risk getting US version expecting to get the Steam gift card. Some people already have issues getting even AU purchased ones through (serial number being rejected).
Thanks for the information. Please if yiu can tell me, do you think this one is better: https://www.mwave.com.au/product/pny-xlr8-cs3030-2tb-m2-nvme…
Since it is a TLS memory but the Samsung 970 EVO Plus is MLC. TLC is better right?
@max-pc1010: MLC or DLC is better than TLC but both devices are TLC. Samsung calls their TLC as 3-bit MLC which while not technically wrong, is misleading or at least confusing. The only remaining easily available (2-bit) MLC/DLC device on the consumer side I'm aware of is the 970 Pro which is very expensive
@max-pc1010: You need to be careful. Unfortunately, this a a gripe a lot of people have on the way Samsung quotes their SSD products.
Samsung uses the term 3-bit MLC. 3-bit MLC is commonly known as…. you guessed it TLC.
The problem is that M standards for multiple, not double. So TLC "could be" referred to as 3-bit MLC, and QLC could be named 4-bit MLC. Technically, a proper MLC (2-bit) is better than TLC (or 3-bit MLC).
The current batch of 970 Evo Plus is a newer batch. It uses Elpis controller (same family as 980, 980 Pro) except, just like 980 (not the Pro one), it is limited to PCIe gen 3 though. So the newer batch has a better controller, larger SLC dynamic cache, but have inferior sustained write for large files (due to using more cost effective TLC NAND flash). However, between 970 Evo Plus vs PNY CS3030, I would normally go 970 Evo Plus as CS3030 is basically using Phison controller and reference design and Samsung SSD warranty is pretty good (obviously, it's best not to have the need to use it). The CS3030 has to be heavily discounted before I would consider it.
Note even if they're buying from shipped and fulfilled by Amazon Australia, beyond the hidden T&C mentioned above restricting Amazon to some of their portable devices, this is technically the US model number MZ-V7S2T0B/AM. The worldwide model number sold in Australia is the MZ-V7E2T0BW https://www.amazon.com.au/dp/B07C8Y31G1 I actually wonder if that's one of the reasons they exclude Amazon Australia as they sell both from whatever suppliers but Samsung is only willing to cover the one that's supposed to be sold in Australia.
Not from Amazon. Only the portable SSDs are eligible and I think it would only apply to Amazon AU
The 2TB last month went down to $237 but it lasted only a few minutes - when I went to checkout the price had gone up so I missed that. It didn't even register on camel3x. Good to see it comes back so thanks OP!
3Camels not always accurate. Bought an Amazon AU item for $15 and that price was there for days, 3Camels didn't detect that and still shows the cheapest is $17.95.
Had a similar thing where I saw very low prices on CamelCamelCamel but couldn't find it on Amazon 1-2 months ago. IIRC happened more than once within a few days.
I'm more surprised by the US vs AU discrepancy. I live in NZ not Oz and don't shop at Amazon that frequently. But I always assume when they have these deals from Amazon Global on Australia it means that they have or had a deal at the foreign store, it's been the case the few other times I've looked. However Amazon.com still has the 2TB at US$199 sold by Amazon.com as they've had for ages, and the 1TB is US$114.99, neither price are deals or would give these prices once conversion and GST come in to it not even close. Can't see any sign of a recent deal on slickdeals or camelcamelcamel or elsewhere either. I guess they could have started the deal early on global so people have a chance and/or given timezone differences but it's past midnight PT when deals on Amazon.com often start and no sign of it yet.
Thanks OP for the post.
I bought 1 TB SSD for $149 recently.
Just had a chat with the customer service and they are happy to refund me the difference as Store credit!
I would recommend anyone who bought recently in higher price to do the same.
Amazon is getting more difficult to refund price difference nowadays. Had contacted 3 different reps to ask for price difference these past 2 months and they straight away rejected it and asked me to return and buy a new one instead. It wasn't that much so not with returning it but it made me think twice of buying items not on sale :(
Thanks OP, snagged a 2TB one.
Thanks OP, grabbed a 2TB one too.
Can this be used for (early 2013) MacbookPro with this adapter: https://www.amazon.com.au/Sintech-Adapter-Upgrade-2013-2015-…?
edit: look likes it does with additional steps
Can this be used in PS5?
You need pcie 4 for ps5, that one is pcie 3, im pretty sure.
Correct on both accounts
Thanks Op got 2tb one
this a gen 3 one right not a gen 4? so its going to be slower than my current 5000mbps speeds I get with my Seagate nvme drive. hmmm the price difference isn't alot between the 970 and 980
This is gen3. I already have a 980pro (gen4) in my main mobo slot, but my 2nd slot is only Gen3 anyway so i got a 1TB.
I found this article comparing 980 vs 970 Evo Plus:
https://ssdsphere.com/samsung-980-vs-970-evo-plus/
Seems the base 980 is only gen3 anyway, and this is the better pick!
yeah I meant the 980 pro the price difference is very little between 970 and 980 pro for the 1tb.
ah gotcha
$199 (980 Pro) vs $138.10. There is a bit of a gap I thought? Or, there is a much better deal for 980 Pro 1TB? If yes, do share…
970 Evo Plus had a price drop due to Samsung changing the controller and the NAND chips. It is somewhat debatable whether the newer batch is better or not. However, at least it looks like the newer batch is better than 980 (non-Pro).
@netsurfer: its not a big gap considering how much performance you get out a 980 pro. its 3000mbps vs 7000mbps.
@kungfuman: When using benchmark software? Hard to really take advantage of that for home use. In real life usage, you need a source of some sort that can send more than 7000MBps. Also, once the cache runs out, it will drop.
Windows don't load twice as fast, games don't load twice as fast. With the controller change, the 4K random read/write gap also drops between the two.
@netsurfer: depends on the game. if you run a game like Rust that relys 100% on drive speed to load a game the faster you drive is the better.
@netsurfer: I haven't tested it with a 7000mbps drive but I have a 5000mbps Gen 4 drive and the difference between loading times is going from 2 minute on my old 2500mbps nvme drive to 50 seconds on my gen 4 nvme drive to load into Rust. Anyone that plays Rust knows that drive speed is key if you want to load into the game fast. I will give you some context if you use a 7200rpm hard drive to load a server in rust it will take 15 to 20 min to load a game.
@kungfuman: According to this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGa6WlICxrE
The difference between PCIe gen 3 and SATA SSD is around 5 seconds. Given that PCIe gen 3's hyped 2500 (or 3000) MBps over SATA3's 500MB/s is about 5X, that difference is only 5 seconds, so you are saying just doubling from 2500 to 5000 can boost it by 200% percent (saving more than 1 minute from the load)? Essentially, improving from 500MB/s to 2500MB/s is somewhat not beneficial, but from 2500 to 5000 is huge?
One of the issues currently is that PC games need to be re-optimised. Even if games start to support DirectStorage, we do need newer drivers and SDK (and maybe newer GPUs) to benefit from NVMe SSD in games because so far, real world test has shown DirectStorage is, at the moment, mostly just hype.
The Rust tests need to be performed on the same PC, otherwise there are other factors which can affect Rush loading time in a big way.
@netsurfer: again i actually timed that from rust loading times only not copy files like in the bench marks
Any recommendations for USB 3.1 GEN 2 enclosure that works with a M1 based mac?
I recommend getting a thunderbolt enclusures because the speed will be insane
It is mostly about the chipset. There are basically 3 types. For USB 3.1/3.2 gen 2, you probably want Realtek, followed by ASMedia then JMicron (unfortunately, Intel doesn't bother in this market space). You might find enclosures priced that way. Just an FYI, Samsung T7 uses ASMedia chipset.
If you pair this with USB 3.2 gen 2 enclosure, you are under utilising it somewhat (although once the SLC cache runs out, this SSD cannot sustained 1GB/s write).
Thunderbolt 3/4, there is really only 1 chipset provider at the moment, Intel. There are currently 2 chipsets available and you need to decide whether you want the 6 series or the 7 series (there is a price gap). The Thunderbolt 4 marketing BS just doesn't quite make sense for storage, since it does not offer any speed advantage. You probably want a quality PCIe gen 3 x4 SSD. This one, it has pros and cons. The new controller makes generally usage faster, but its eventual sustained write and write speed when the drive is close to fully filled does tank to a level that you cannot even get 1000MB/s with its TLC. The older batch doesn't have that issue, but it has other speed related issues.
Most, if not all, called Thunderbolt 4 accessories are actually Thunderbolt 3 (because the Thunderbolt 4 specs are kinda dumb, a lot of them are basically optional features in Thunderbolt 3). A new revision of Thunderbolt 4 seems inevitable later on so we will run into the same annoyance of Thunderbolt 3 for Thunderbolt 4 later on. Apple's own Thunderbolt 4 cable uses technically Thunderbolt 3 chipset.
One excuse for getting Thunderbolt 3/4 for M1 is that Apple appeared to have slightly crippled M1's USB 3.2 speed (unintentionally). This issue was address in M1 Pro/Max/Ultra.
Speed drop with new batch is widely believed to be because of change to 512Gb 128L NAND instead of 256Gb 92L NAND on old, rather than because of controller swap. For that reason only likely an issue with 1TB. On 2TB they've always used 512Gb chips so new version is expected to be better all round. But 2TB version with NAND & controller swap seems or at least as of 2 months ago seemed a lot less common.
Edit: Came across https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/getting-a-2tb-nvme-any-… when trying to find if there's any actual benchmarks of the 2TB new version now. Didn't find anything & I didn't investigate the claims in that thread, even find out what chipset is used in the enclosure but might be worth it if you're actually planning to put this in a TB3 enclosure.
For most people, the new batch is better because in most cases, it is faster, due to the new controller so it has a larger dynamic SLC cache. The sustained write drop (after the larger SLC dynamic cache runs out) is due to NAND change. Even if you have the older batch, you are NOT going to get 3000MB/s sustained write.
Honestly, there is a reason for the price drop for 970 Evo Plus. Also, per NAND chip storage size determines the true speed is nonsense. The reason it is harder to tell in 2TB is because dynamic SLC cache is normally a certain % of the total free storage. 2TB new batch would have a much larger SLC dynamic cache (especially when the drive is close to empty) meaning to really see the NAND swap issue, you need to write heaps more large files compared to 1TB.
@netsurfer: I agree that the newer batch is better in general, but my point was so far no one that I've seen has ever provided any evidence the 2TB one is worse in any way. Instead people who know what they're talking about especially NewMaxx expect it to be better in every way. This isn't the case for the 1TB. I don't disagree that people have overblown the disadvantages of the new 1TB and it is actually better for most people. And I never said the 2TB doesn't have a NAND swap. I just said when I investigated 2 actually 3 months ago now that I think more carefully, the evidence I found was that it was a lot less common, which was ironic since all evidence suggested it would be all around better.
Note in particularly I never said anything about sustained write speed mattering. Actually from my point of view people overestimate the importance of both sustained and non sustained sequential reads and writes. Yes it can matter, but often other things matter more. And so people chose E16+Kioxia 96L devices even though for a lot of purposes a good generation 3 device like this would be a better bet because while yes they have worse sequentials they tend to win out in other areas which often matter more especially mixed and random performance. Likewise because of the focus on sustained, people get excited about whole drive dynamic SLC like that used with the E16s and IIRC some E18 even though it means you get into instant folding rather than direct to TLC when you do run out of dynamic SLC cache, which comes at a fair cost. I've mentioned all this before on OzB.
Frankly IMO benchmarks especially highly synthetic benchmarks are actually often highly misleading and there are very few people who do decent SSD reviews. Sean Webster from Tom's Hardware is one of the better ones, probably in part because he's active in actually understanding SSDs (he's a participant in NewMaxx's discord for example) although from what I understand he's got a new job working with a manufacturer, so who knows how that will affect Tom's Hardware reviews long terms. The Tom's Hardware site, that's a different matter….. Anandtech is another one. But so many reviewers just perform a few synthetic reviews and that's it. (Mind you reviews in general are often crap. While things are getting better now especially ironically some of the Youtube reviews, so many reviewers give no indication that they ran a test more than once or if they did the variation. And especially whether they tried to replicating their results doing everything they did to when swapping components. And so many other aspect of basic science to produce useful data.)
Also I think you're missing the point. Multichannel is indeed a key reason why the move to 512Gb chips makes them worse. Fewer chips or rather fewer dies means that there's less opportunity for multichannel. You can dispute this if you want but to be blunt, I trust NewMaxx and others who've said it's the likely reason much more than you.
Edit: Unless I'm confused I think you might have edited your response before I replied which is fine, I'm sure I've done that a lot of times myself. But if you did, my response was based on what I saw at the time.
@Nil Einne: Let's use your link and the comment a guy made:
I bought a 2TB 970 EVO Plus, phoenix controller, and it's slow af (900mb/s write).
I returned it and the guy there said they're getting a new batch (elpis).
This is the OLD batch. That ~900MB/s is basically closer to the older batch's sustained write at TLC NAND flash speed for Mac through Thunderbolt 3. There is also an issue with older 970 EVO Plus where firmware update may help a bit (Thunderbolt / Mac related). In Windows, 970 EVO Plus old batch's true NAND sustained write should be around 1200 to 1400.
The new batch's sustained write drops to 700MB/s. However, the dynamic SLC cache hides it, making it harder to test and find that issue. Main stream review sites don't to run those tests. Even Tomshardware couldn't be bothered to run tests for new vs old. Also, we know 980 Pro's true TLC NAND sustained write speed as well.
It's common sense. Why do you think Samsung changed the controller? Also, you seriously think Samsung would go, 2TB 970 Evo Plus, let's change the controller, use the same type of older flash NAND chips (which they already have limited supply) and drop the price? I don't get this fixation on Samsung 970 Evo Plus 2TB.
If you bought 970 Evo Plus 2TB recently (new batch), then I think it is better (despite inferior NAND chip swap). However, let's just be honest here and understand it is the SLC dynamic turbo write (SLC cache) that's at play. Let's face it, we all know SSD makers are cheating, but we just cannot resist the SLC cache performance (at least in benchmark apps).
You cannot really have it both ways. You cannot say E16+Kioxia 96L is cheating but Samsung's Elpis with more cost effective NAND is not. And, only 1TB is affected (according to you) is not only incorrect but also double standard because E16 2TB is tough for any PCIe gen 3 x4 SSD to beat. E18 is totally different. With E18, it is about Samsung cannot just expect other controller makers won't overtake it. Samsung has put most of its effort in PCIe gen 5 now. E18 can get the best PCIe gen 4 controller title, but it doesn't matter because 980 Pro will sell more due to more attractive price.
Samsung is the one who started this SLC cache cheating. Other makers caught up and were more aggressive in the gen 3/gen 4 space recently. Samsung is merely returning the favour (or cheat better) in the newer batch of 970 Evo Plus. However, if you refused to look past that and want to believe Samsung put in a better controller, keep the same NAND, and drop the price, there is not much I can do. Do bear in mind, all these larger and larger SLC cache makes testing harder.
@Nil Einne: First of all, my originally comment is more about enclosure chipsets. Anyway, I will answer:
NewMaxx expect it to be better in every way
Who is NewMaxx? Has he done ANY new vs old Samsung 970 Evo Plus tests comparing 100% empty, 50% full and 90% full between those drives?
What makes him different and how does he overcome Elpis with more aggressive SLC dynamic caching? 970 Evo Plus 1TB, for most people, under most circumstances will feel faster and pretty much close to all benchmark tests (except full drive sustained write) will show the newer batch for 1TB being faster. Clearly, it would be the same for 2TB.
The tests where you can see the difference require filling up the SSD. It's time consuming and you need the ability to pump data to the drive fast enough.
@Nil Einne: Since I know someone said it with no links isn't particularly useful see e.g.
https://linustechtips.com/topic/1397959-970-evo-plus-1tb-is-… & https://www.reddit.com/r/NewMaxx/comments/ufoj6l/ssd_help_ma… & https://www.reddit.com/r/NewMaxx/comments/dhvrdm/ssd_guides_…
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/samsung-seemingly-caugh…
There may or may not be something more that I came across before but can't find again. There is more discussion on NewMaxx discord I've seen that I won't link to since it'll be useless to anyone who isn't a participant.
I'm not denying we can't be sure they're right, but IMO from all I've read, there's a good reason to think they are. Ultimately it's likely only Samsung can say for sure since it's likely only they who have the exact knowledge about everything that goes into their SSD and it's not like we can just swap components and test. I actually said one time before that there is a slight chance something Samsung did when limiting the Elpis to PCIe 3.0 was also a factor. It's probably not that likely but it's one possible factor. But IMO there's good reason to think that barring oddities like that, the controller swap itself was not the cause of the lower post SLC write speed, it's the NAND swap which was the primary reason, hence why I tend to point this out whenever it arises.
I did read a suggestion that unfortunately Samsung may have reduced performance in newer firmware versions https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/pmvc9k/samsun… perhaps because of people complaining about temperatures :-(
BTW I came across https://www.reddit.com/r/NewMaxx/comments/dhvrdm/ssd_guides_… which suggests to me the new Elpis+128L flash 970 Evo Plus at 2TB is still somewhat uncommon. Although in retrospect, perhaps I shouldn't have said ironic. One reason why the 1TB might be more common as mention by NewMaxx is because it's the sweet spot where they can save money by moving to 512Gb dies. 2TB already uses 512Gb, of the older 92L flash sure but it means the cost advantage is less especially if they're still producing enough of those (or have enough in reserve) and perhaps it's actually still cheaper for them to (depending on how many of their nodes can produce the new etc). 512GB and 256GB too low capacity for a density swap to make sense.
P.S. Forgot to mention last time, good on you for pointing out that when considering sustained you have to consider both before and after SLC exhaustion. Unfortunately far too many people seem to forget this and say if you write more than X where X is size of the SLC cache, device B is worse than device A even if device A has a slower SLC cache speed and it can take a while for device A to catch up. It's one of my pet peeves way up there with people overemphasising sequentials let alone sustained sequential transfer speed performance importance.
Edit: Maybe should clarify my point on benchmarks of SSDs. One of the big issues I have is that while raw metrics are relevant data points, in reality there's a lot that goes into their firmware that isn't well captured in raw metric. How they deal with different workloads varies and prioritisation and optimisation can be a decent issue. That's partly why a device which seems to be worse in all raw metric can somehow be better in some application benchmarks. Worse than that is that sometimes improving raw metrics can come at the real world performance. (As I already said, because it looks impressive, there's also an IMO unfortunate big focus, especially with a move between generations, on sequential speeds even though that often isn't that big a factor for a number of workloads.)
Unfortunately there are IMO few good real world benchmarks for SSDs, in part because the differences where measuring are often very small and also in part because the advantages also come in various simultaneous workload situations which are not easy to capture or reliability reproduce, and you also need different ones to avoid misleading people. While these problems also apply with benchmark of other areas, they tend to be less especially since there tend to be some decent real world benchmarks. As I said, one factor here is that for a lot of people it matters little. If you have a specific focus e.g. video editing you can look at what matters and try and work it out (this is one area where sequentials can matter a fair deal). If you're buying a lot for a specific purpose you should do you own benchmarks based on your purpose just as you should for a GPU or CPU or whatever.
@Nil Einne: The general issue is that you can find a lot of comments and reviews are biased. Even our arguments are biased.
I can find a review which talks about why you should avoid SN570, SN770, SN750 SE and Samsung 980 (basically all those which are DRAMless SSD), picking a benchmark that hurts DRAMless a lot (so much so they are all at the bottom at the benchmark and the difference was more than 2X slower vs SSDs with DRAM).
So, you are saying get the 2TB because you are more likely to get the older batch? Problem is, you still need to decide whether the Phoenix controller (which is dated) is worth it in general. That's basically the main issue with 970 Evo Plus at the moment. 80-90% of the time, you want that controller enhancement because the random read/write improvement AND it allows 970 Evo Plus to consistently beat 980 (non-Pro model). If you elected to go with the older one (regardless of whether it is 1TB or 2TB), you could end up trying to sugarcoat it too much with the sustained write speed AFTER SLC cache runs out. Problem is, 970 Evo Plus was released a while back and the old batch uses static SLC cache. Static SLC cache cannot be big (compared to dynamic SLC cache). Are you okay with the new/current 1TB 970 Evo Plus beats the older batch 2TB 970 Evo Plus in majority of benchmark (inc. games and app loading tests) except full drive write? Even if you write a 40GB file, the dynamic SLC cache is large enough that the new batch finishes the write much faster?
Remember that first comment in that first link you sent? The guy wanted to swap his older batch 970 Evo Plus with the new batch. The new controller WILL give that user the impression that it performs much better because majority of Mac benchmark software (more limited) won't exhaust the SLC cache and the write speed will look so impressive. If that user uses Mac's Crystal DiskMark equivalent, that person will be much happier with the new Elpis based 970 Evo Plus.
As a consumer, it is more important to know the pros and cons. What Samsung did was good and bad (WD was more dodgy). 970 Evo Plus is now more affordable and doesn't have the issue where 980 with Elpis beats 970 Evo Plus Phoenix in a lot of tests. E16 based SSDs can thank Sony. E19 SSDs, well, if we continue to see deals where they are priced below 870 EVO and 870 QVO, and they are TLC based, they are hard to resist considered WD did an even nastier NAND swap for SN550. Of course, you could use that benchmark which shows DRAMless SSDs can run into performance issue with E19 SSDs to justify going for 870 EVO.
The reality is that don't rely solely on reviews and other people's comments AND our own thoughts are biased. Whether the newer or the older batch is better depends on usage. Unless you write 500GB+ of data to the SSD regularly, you don't really have any legit excuse to indicate the older batch is better. I own both new and old 970 Evo Plus. I generally prefer the new one better because writing 500GB+ of data a lot hurts the SSD anyway.
Thanks for the reply everyone. I'm sticking with USB 3.1 gen2 due to the possible lack of compatibility with systems that don't have thunderbolt. Will look out for an asmedia or Realtek based enclosure.
I purchased the 2TB so hopefully I won't run out of cache too often. To be honest, 700MB/s is still an improvement over 450MB/s I'm getting with my portable (sata based) SSD.
Which would be better out of these two in terms of sustained write speeds when transfering 300-400GB files ….
970 EVO Plus 1TB or WD SN570 1TB ?
They still haven't shipped my drive yet…
same… can we complain anywhere?
Same still not shipped today
I reckon I'll wait until Friday then cancel it.
why? they shipped mine. they probably just waiting on stock
This is the second one I've ordered from them, first one "lost in the post". Been like 7 weeks I've been waiting now.
mm k. well you might as well wait it out and see if you get it at this good price.
Mine delivered today. Thanks OP.
Yes my 2tb arrived today also.
Well mine have just moved to preparing to ship….
Has anyone got a recommendation for a drive enclosure so I can migrate from my existing drive to new one. I have only 1 M2 slot on my motherboard.
Feck, didn't know the link was affiliate. Anyway I got a "UGREEN M.2 NVMe and SATA SSD Enclosure Reader, 10Gbps USB C 3.2 Gen2, Thunderbolt 3 Compatible, Tool-Free NVMe External Enclosure Supports M and B&M Keys and Size 2230/2242 /2260/2280 SSDs" for $46.99 from Amazon. I was very surprised the Samsung Migration tool worked with it plugged into a USB-C port on my antique mobo.
Be aware that I received the 1tb version and the seal had been broken. The box was slightly ripped and the copper seat of the grub screw looked like it had been fitted.
Is this eligible for the Steam Gift card?
Edit: No, it's Amazon US and even Amazon AU it only applies to portable SSD models T7 and T7 Touch