Review WD Blue SN570 M.2 NVMe SSD Review: Bleeding-Edge Bargain

[Admin]

The WD Blue SN570 offers snappy mainstream NVMe performance with a DRAM-less architecture and BiCS5 TLC flash.

WD Blue SN570 M.2 NVMe SSD Review: Bleeding-Edge Bargain : Read more

 

[Deleted member 1353997]

Why is "Single-sided PCB" a plus? Is it because of thermals? Or for some other reason?

 

[salgado18]

Isn't there something wrong with the Black SN750? In these benchmarks it looks like one of the worst tested, but in the sole review it is one of the two best PCIe 3.0 on the market. It shouldn't be behind the SN550 in almost any metric on the sole review, yet all the comparison reviews show it as a very bad drive. Where did these numbers come from?

 

[Soaptrail]

I wish the graphs would call out PCIE 3 or 4 for each drive, even if it is only one graph, it would really help.

 

[dalauder]

Wow, at this price I was really expecting QLC.

 

[dalauder]

Why isn't it benchmarked against a single 4.0 drive? I'd like to see a performance comparison, just so that we could consider whether any NVME 3.0 drives are worth the savings (since this is probably the best one).

 

[seanwebster]

Why is "Single-sided PCB" a plus? Is it because of thermals? Or for some other reason?

For those upgrading their ultrabooks - many only accept single-sided M.2s.

Isn't there something wrong with the Black SN750? In these benchmarks it looks like one of the worst tested, but in the sole review it is one of the two best PCIe 3.0 on the market. It shouldn't be behind the SN550 in almost any metric on the sole review, yet all the comparison reviews show it as a very bad drive. Where did these numbers come from?

Nothing is wrong with the SN750 other than its architecture being a little laggy compared to the latest SSDs on the market. In these benches the SN750 also has the latest firmware and was set to Game Mode in WD SSD Dashboard for better performance (disables lower power states). In its review from two years ago, it was compared to different drives. Times have changed and so have the drives it's compared against. Newer flash is faster, controllers and firmware are more capable than ever. They are very responsive to small requests in client usage. The SN750 was built for sustained write performance with content creator use cases in mind, but its latency profile in regards to reading is a little high because of that.

I wish the graphs would call out PCIE 3 or 4 for each drive, even if it is only one graph, it would really help.

You can compare these numbers to any of the charts in other recent reviews. I'll be sure to include the blue with some gen4 SSDs in a few of my future reviews, too.

Why isn't it benchmarked against a single 4.0 drive? I'd like to see a performance comparison, just so that we could consider whether any NVME 3.0 drives are worth the savings (since this is probably the best one).

Because Gen4 SSDs don't compete against it for market share and vice versa. If you are looking to buy this, a Gen4 SSD shouldn't be on your mind. However, as mentioned, you can compare these numbers with my recent reviews to compare to whichever SSDs you like. A few of my future reviews will include the new Blue with some Gen4 SSDs.

 

[alceryes]

Why isn't it benchmarked against a single 4.0 drive? I'd like to see a performance comparison, just so that we could consider whether any NVME 3.0 drives are worth the savings (since this is probably the best one).

There's a good bit of performance room within just the PCIe 3.0 realm between these economical drives and performance ones. A performance PCIe 3.0 drive will beat these more economical ones by a substantial margin and, if you can find a holiday bargain, can be almost as cheap.
You won't see much difference between performance PCIe 3.0 drives and PCIe 4.0 in most daily tasks with the exception of working with or moving large amounts of data/files (or in benchmarks).

 

[Deleted member 1353997]

For those upgrading their ultrabooks - many only accept single-sided M.2s.

I see, makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[salgado18]

Nothing is wrong with the SN750 other than its architecture being a little laggy compared to the latest SSDs on the market. In these benches the SN750 also has the latest firmware and was set to Game Mode in WD SSD Dashboard for better performance (disables lower power states). In its review from two years ago, it was compared to different drives. Times have changed and so have the drives it's compared against. Newer flash is faster, controllers and firmware are more capable than ever. They are very responsive to small requests in client usage. The SN750 was built for sustained write performance with content creator use cases in mind, but its latency profile in regards to reading is a little high because of that.

I understand your argument, but it's not quite right. Comparing both reviews is not easy, since the benchmark tools use different versions, but ATTO is the same. In the Black review, it reaches the advertised speed of ~3,500 MB/s, but in the SN570 review it barely tops the SN550, staying behind it for most of the time. The SN750 should be better than the SN550 in every metric, but instead it lags in everything. That's not right, especially since both are from similar generations.

I also checked the tests of the SN550 review, and it seems the tests come from there. So is the SN750 worse in many metrics than the DRAM-less drive? I mean, it is below the advertised speed of 3,500 MB/s.

Were the tests of the original SN750 review performed in a different lab? Is it a different version? How come the better drive is worse?

Link to the SN750 review:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd-black-sn750-ssd,5957-3.html

Link to the SN550 review (40 days later):
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd-blue-sn550-m2-nvme-ssd-review-best-dramless-ssd-yet/3

 

[plateLunch]

Wow. Look at all the empty space on the board. I wonder if they could have fit the whole drive into a 2242 form factor. Would the drive have the same appeal?

Also, just noticed that the 500 GB SN570 and SN 750 SE are selling for the same price on Amazon and Newegg. $49.99. Something must be going on.

 

[Lafong]

SN550 at 500 GB showing at 43 bucks on my Newegg.

250 GB at 35 bucks;

1 TB; 84

2 TB; 190

good for another 13 hours supposedly


https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=sn550&N=8000 4841 4808&Order=1

I've got the 500 GB model in an external enclosure; highly satisfied.

 

[seanwebster]

I understand your argument, but it's not quite right. Comparing both reviews is not easy, since the benchmark tools use different versions, but ATTO is the same. In the Black review, it reaches the advertised speed of ~3,500 MB/s, but in the SN570 review it barely tops the SN550, staying behind it for most of the time. The SN750 should be better than the SN550 in every metric, but instead it lags in everything. That's not right, especially since both are from similar generations.

I also checked the tests of the SN550 review, and it seems the tests come from there. So is the SN750 worse in many metrics than the DRAM-less drive? I mean, it is below the advertised speed of 3,500 MB/s.

Were the tests of the original SN750 review performed in a different lab? Is it a different version? How come the better drive is worse?

Link to the SN750 review:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd-black-sn750-ssd,5957-3.html

Link to the SN550 review (40 days later):
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd-blue-sn550-m2-nvme-ssd-review-best-dramless-ssd-yet/3

You can not cross-compare results from this test platform to those on older reviews. The SN750 review date looks newer due to me adding in a 2TB capacity update, but its original post was Feb of 2019 while the SN550s was a year later. You can only compare the results within each of those reviews.

While the tests may look the same, each of those data sets are from different test systems and configs and not comparable to one another. In the dataset for the WD Black SN750's review, I used a Z370 system. I had different settings for ATTO, I left it on default of QD4 instead of QD1 in newer reviews. I had left Windows defender and smart screen functional, too. However, they impact data transfers and also game load performance. I disabled those features when I upgraded to a X570 system for PCIe Gen4 support, and rebuilt the dataset - which is what you see in the SN550's review and the 2TB capacity of the SN750. Now, I test with a Z590 system and made this new dataset as of around July, and have started including system info in these newer reviews.

Now, why is the Blue SN570 more responsive than the Black even though its DRAM-less? It's controller and firmware are more optimized for burst reads along with its newer BiCS5 flash. This new TLC that has faster random read performance on top, which helps enable its edge.

 

[plateLunch]

...what you see in the SN550's review ...

And which SN550 was that?
WD Blue SN550 SSD Performance Reportedly Cut In Half When SLC Runs Out

 

[salgado18]

You can not cross-compare results from this test platform to those on older reviews. The SN750 review date looks newer due to me adding in a 2TB capacity update, but its original post was Feb of 2019 while the SN550s was a year later. You can only compare the results within each of those reviews.

I guess it's confusing because the top of the article says "published June 26, 2020", you have to scroll down to see the actual publishing dates. Sorry for the mess, but the site should be more clear about it (like a published xx, updated yy).

While the tests may look the same, each of those data sets are from different test systems and configs and not comparable to one another. In the dataset for the WD Black SN750's review, I used a Z370 system. I had different settings for ATTO, I left it on default of QD4 instead of QD1 in newer reviews. I had left Windows defender and smart screen functional, too. However, they impact data transfers and also game load performance. I disabled those features when I upgraded to a X570 system for PCIe Gen4 support, and rebuilt the dataset - which is what you see in the SN550's review and the 2TB capacity of the SN750. Now, I test with a Z590 system and made this new dataset as of around July, and have started including system info in these newer reviews.

I tried looking into the benchmarks looking for different versions and all, but the original SN750 review doesn't state it's QD4. It means not only the platforms are different but the tools are also not comparable. That's more clear now, thanks.

Now, why is the Blue SN570 more responsive than the Black even though its DRAM-less? It's controller and firmware are more optimized for burst reads along with its newer BiCS5 flash. This new TLC that has faster random read performance on top, which helps enable its edge.

So I guess the conclusion is that the SN750 is a bad value in face of the SN570?

Anyway, thanks a lot for the clarifications, I didn't expect such in-depth answers! Maybe I should read the reviews in more detail

 

[jpbaril]

Also, just noticed that the 500 GB SN570 and SN 750 SE are selling for the same price on Amazon and Newegg. $49.99. Something must be going on.

If using with a PCIE Gen 3 motherboard, is there any benefit (or even maybe disadvantage) of choosing the SN750SE over the SN570 ?
They look very similar on paper.
Thanks.

 

[jayjay4]

Hi,
I see the 2T is also available .
Did you review the SN570 2TB drive as well?