Hmm, rebadged 970 Evo+?

For many those speeds will be more than adequate. Lack of dram is a bigger problem. I'm suprised that the Pro is stuck on nvme 1.3 though

Relative speed cut in half but realistically are the targeted users going to notice? I'm still on SATA SSDs so even going to this would be a huge increase and I probably wouldn't be able to tell, I'm probably also someone who would notice vs a ‘normal’ PC user.
Do ‘normal’ users even notice the lack of DRAM?

Seems like these have a market and for the ~10-20% price difference I'd be totally OK going with the non Pro!

Rob_B
Relative speed cut in half but realistically are the targeted users going to notice? I'm still on SATA SSDs so even going to this would be a huge increase and I probably wouldn't be able to tell, I'm probably also someone who would notice vs a ‘normal’ PC user.
Do ‘normal’ users even notice the lack of DRAM?

Seems like these have a market and for the ~10-20% price difference I'd be totally OK going with the non Pro!

Oh you can tell alright…. makes everything better, faster, smoother

When you copy over files,etc its noticeable. Samsung SSDs also tend to be overpriced so its quite likely NVME SSDs with DRAM caches from WD,etc will be probably available for similar money or less.

AT-least this is not equivalent to the rust drive SMR conspiracy. Not conning the consumer by removing the PRO label is EXTREMELY ideal. Many of these fabless SSD manufacturers lie to the consumers face in broad daylight. You see a ‘bargain’ 500gb SSD but you need special time to read the entire manual just to know if it has adequate Dram.

CAT-THE-FIFTH
When you copy over files,etc its noticeable. Samsung SSDs also tend to be overpriced so its quite likely NVME SSDs with DRAM caches from WD,etc will be probably available for similar money or less.

Not doubting that DRAM-less is worse, but file copies (assuming you are not talking about 100,000s of tiny files) would probably be the least affected by the DRAM cache (and scribble pad).

QLC running out of MLC-mode cache and being force to use only QLC cells on the other hand is very noticeable.

EDIT: Except these are MLC… Well still when copying large files (burst copy mode), I don't think DRAM is that important.

For an average user though how often will they hit these limits (I know there is no single good answer to this question) for me I've never noticed a slowdown and don't have a habit of copying multi gigabyte files. Surely we're hitting the law of diminishing returns here and have done for some time, the target market for these likely aren't people who run workloads that would hit these limits.

I'm just playing devil's advocate, but then again if ‘better’ drives exist for the same price just without the Samsung sticker on them then it's a moot point I guess!

kalniel
Hmm, rebadged 970 Evo+?

I thought that as well, but not quite. https://hexus.net/tech/items/storage/126701-samsung-electronics-970-evo-plus-nvme-ssds-launched/

Seems to be a difference in V-Nand used, controller update, NVMe 1.4 and minus the DRAM. Also seems to be worse than a 970 EVO Plus in terms of IOPS / “up to” write speed.

If anything, I'd opt for the 970 EVO Plus, on paper it looks the better option.

These SSD 980 devices have just been officially announced by Samsung.

Rob_B
…. Surely we're hitting the law of diminishing returns here and have done for some time, the target market for these likely aren't people who run workloads that would hit these limits.

….

Well, exactly.

There are different types of people in the world, with different driving motivations (and bank balances). In those areas that interested me (cars, computers, photography, hifi, and a few others, though not necessarily in that order).

Limiting it to crude categories, when in relity it's more granular than this, there are :-

- those who want the best they can get and are obsessive about it,
- those that want the cheapest that will get the job done,
- those that aim for best balance.

Truthfully, I've always been a bit oriented towards the first type. I don't know how many times I've started out looking at something modestly priced, and get seduced by that “it's only £x more to go up a notch” rationale. Six such notches later ….. ;) :D

I can even think of several threads on here, recently, where some of you will have seen me do it. Like, starting out looking at a £500 Canon camera for a specific purpose, and end up (via two other models) with a decision (currently on hold) for a £2500 model that solves several other issues that I didn't start out looking to solve.

So these days, I work quite hard to get a <insert product type> that is good enough for what I need it to do, with maybe a soupçon of what I want or rather fancy as well, but only a soupçon.

Which is why this sort of spec is right up my street - most of the advantages at relatively modest cost. Rarely (very rarely) these days do I have the need, or even really even the desire to chase “state of the art”. Not only does the rather more pragmatic approach save me a fortune (which is a good job, given that camera choice) but it's easy on the psyche too. Few things are worse than aiming for the very best, for state of the art, cutting edge …. because about 5 minutes after you buy, the Mark II comes out, or a competitive product goes a bit further, and your cutting edge just got blunted.

So my philosophy these days (most of the time, except cameras) is to get something that does the job, add that soupçon of extra to give me a warm glow, and then give a smug smirk when manufacturers redefine state of the art just after I committed. My frustration level, and irritation level, is much lower as a result.

I doubt an average user will see it as a huge change.

SSD's will always sell and will sell well. Especially Samsung SSDs which are know for good quality, reliability and speed. Wouldn't cause a fanboy or a brand lover from stopping and thinking about it.

If the price is right, read and write “Up to 3,500 MB/s, Up to 3,000 MB/s” seems pretty good.

mtyson
These SSD 980 devices have just been officially announced by Samsung.

Also reviewed by Anandtech https://www.anandtech.com/show/16504/the-samsung-ssd-980-500gb-1tb-review

They seem a bit of a mixed bag, they suffer for the lack of dram in certain scenarios, but excel with the extra SLC cache and HMB enabled. I'd still opt for the 970 EVO Plus though (or the 980 Pro).