[SOLVED] Should I Get The 970 Evo Plus or Pro?

[techflame700]

I’m upgrading my SSD and I’m currently comparing the Samsung 970 Evo Plus and 970 Pro. I will mostly use it for gaming and small file transfers. Is the Pro worth the price hike? How much better is the Pro than the Evo Plus? Thanks!

 

[kanewolf]

I don't believe you will see any practical difference between them. The pro benchmarks better, but in real life? Too many other variables to give significant benefits, IMO.

 

[Math Geek]

for a couple bucks more, get the pro model. for $20 more, stick with the evo plus. couple milliseconds here and there is not worth the added price premium.

i'd have to look again but i'm pretty sure the endurance is pretty much the same for both as well. that's really the only place you'll get that extra money's worth for the pro model. check that out and see if the price difference is worth whatever the added endurance is for the pro model. i don't think it's much different so $100 (current price difference i see) or more is not worth an extra week of endurance it may have...

sorry looked real quick and was mixing up the evo/evo plus numbers with the evo/evo pro ones. evo plus to pro model is twice the endurance so it might be worth the premium price. speed of the drive is not really worth worrying about but lasting twice as long is worth looking at and considering. not sure what size you're looking at but i see the 1 TB drives at $250 for the evo plus and $350 for the pro. less than 50% price increase for 100% extra endurance is worth it to me for the money to use it for twice as long.

true with the plus you're already talking about a long time before it dies, but twice a long time is not bad either

 

[1LiquidPC]

For games and small transfers, go for the Plus unless price is very close. For your usage endurance should be no issue at all. Been using several Pros and Evos for years and all have been great so far. No problem recommending either. Just bought a basic1TB QVO for gaming and backups to replace 1 TB HDD.

 

[techflame700]

for a couple bucks more, get the pro model. for $20 more, stick with the evo plus. couple milliseconds here and there is not worth the added price premium.

i'd have to look again but i'm pretty sure the endurance is pretty much the same for both as well. that's really the only place you'll get that extra money's worth for the pro model. check that out and see if the price difference is worth whatever the added endurance is for the pro model. i don't think it's much different so $100 (current price difference i see) or more is not worth an extra week of endurance it may have...

sorry looked real quick and was mixing up the evo/evo plus numbers with the evo/evo pro ones. evo plus to pro model is twice the endurance so it might be worth the premium price. speed of the drive is not really worth worrying about but lasting twice as long is worth looking at and considering. not sure what size you're looking at but i see the 1 TB drives at $250 for the evo plus and $350 for the pro. less than 50% price increase for 100% extra endurance is worth it to me for the money to use it for twice as long.

true with the plus you're already talking about a long time before it dies, but twice a long time is not bad either

Only other difference I could find between the models is that the Pro uses 2 Bit MLC and the Evo Plus uses 3 Bit MLC. Does that matter?

 

[1LiquidPC]

The EVOs use 3bit per cell, or TLC. The new QVOs use 4. The more bits per cell, the lower the overall endurance in most basic sense. However there is far more going on a technological level to mitigate this. The increased density is what's driving higher capacity and lower drive costs. Still remember my first SSD, the OCZ Core(original version). Back in 2007ish cost about $500 for 120GB and barely faster than HDD when new.

Back to the point, even a TLC drive is rated for filling drive several hundred times over before wearing out, even theoretically. The smallest 250GB 970 EVO plus is rated for 150TB wear. Roughly 600 drive fills.

 

[techflame700]

The EVOs use 3bit per cell, or TLC. The new QVOs use 4. The more bits per cell, the lower the overall endurance in most basic sense. However there is far more going on a technological level to mitigate this. The increased density is what's driving higher capacity and lower drive costs. Still remember my first SSD, the OCZ Core(original version). Back in 2007ish cost about $500 for 120GB and barely faster than HDD when new.

Ok I thought it had more meaning than that. What is the difference in cache between the Pro and Evo Plus? I don’t really write large files to my disk anyway so as long as I have a decent cache size I’ll be fine.

 

[TJ Hooker]

Only other difference I could find between the models is that the Pro uses 2 Bit MLC and the Evo Plus uses 3 Bit MLC. Does that matter?

2 bit MLC is generally faster and has better endurance. In practice you're never going to notice a difference in speed between the two drives and the Evo Plus still has plenty of endurance.

 

[1LiquidPC]

Should be no issue with caching. The PROs and EVOs work differently to achieve their speeds. Unless you are 50+ GBs at a clip or somewhere in there, no difference to you. Best bet is to check reviews comparing the two if you need specifics. That said, for everyday user, highly unlikely you would ever see a difference.

 

[TJ Hooker]

Ok I thought it had more meaning than that. What is the difference in cache between the Pro and Evo Plus? I don’t really write large files to my disk anyway so as long as I have a decent cache size I’ll be fine.

Both have the same size DRAM buffer. Evo plus relies on an SLC buffer, Pro does not.
You're overthinking this, like I said you're not going to notice any significant difference. And if you're transferring to/from another drive you're probably going to be limited by that other drive or the interface anyway.

 

[techflame700]

So if I were to get the Pro over the Evo Plus I would be paying more for endurance and slightly higher write speeds. Doesn’t really seem worth it. I’m going to get the Evo Plus. Sorry for over questioning lol just wanted to make sure I got the most performance I could get with good value.

 

[TJ Hooker]

To put endurance into perspective, the 960 EVO plus are rated for 0.3 drive writes per day (so 30% of total capacity worth of data written per day), and 600 complete drive writes worth of data in total over lifespan. That works out to 5.5 years if you're doing 0.3 drive writes per day, which is 75-300 GB worth of data every day (depending on what capacity you get).

 

[techflame700]

To put endurance into perspective, the 960 EVO plus are rated for 0.3 drive writes per day (so 30% of total capacity worth of data written per day), and 600 complete drive writes worth of data in total over lifespan. That works out to 5.5 years if you're doing 0.3 drive writes per day, which is 75-300 GB worth of data every day (depending on what capacity you get).

I would upgrade before then. Plus I don’t write that much in one day.

 

[TJ Hooker]

Exactly. Just trying to show how endurance won't be an issue for any normal person.