The Samsung 980 PRO PCIe 4.0 SSD Review: A Spirit of Hope
by Billy Tallis on September 22, 2020 11:20 AM ESTNote: All our previous testing has been on an Intel test bed. Because of the move to PCIe 4.0, we have upgraded to Ryzen. Devices tested under Ryzen in time for this review are identified in the charts.
Mixed Random Performance
Our test of mixed random reads and writes covers mixes varying from pure reads to pure writes at 10% increments. Each mix is tested for up to 1 minute or 32GB of data transferred. The test is conducted with a queue depth of 4, and is limited to a 64GB span of the drive. In between each mix, the drive is given idle time of up to one minute so that the overall duty cycle is 50%.
Since our mixed random IO test uses a moderate queue depth of 4, the PCIe Gen4 drives don't get much chance to flex their muscle. The overall scores are still generally bound by NAND flash latency, which doesn't vary too widely between current generation drives. There's also a small performance boost when running this test on our newer, faster Ryzen testbed. The Samsung 980 PRO is clearly an improvement over its predecessors, but is merely tied for first place among flash-based drives with the SK hynix Gold P31.
 |
|||||||||
| Power Efficiency in MB/s/W | Average Power in W | ||||||||
Both capacities of the 980 PRO turn in good efficiency scores for the mixed random IO test, substantially improving on Samsung's previously mediocre standing. The 1TB 980 PRO's efficiency is second only to the SK hynix Gold P31. The 980 PROs are a bit more efficient running at PCIe Gen3 speeds than on the Gen4 platform, despite the ~10% performance boost on the faster system.
 |
|||||||||
There are no real surprises in the performance profiles of the 980 PROs. Both capacities show the same general behavior as earlier Samsung drives, albeit with small improvements to performance and power consumption across the board.
Mixed Sequential Performance
Our test of mixed sequential reads and writes differs from the mixed random I/O test by performing 128kB sequential accesses rather than 4kB accesses at random locations, and the sequential test is conducted at queue depth 1. The range of mixes tested is the same, and the timing and limits on data transfers are also the same as above.
The Samsung 980 PROs take the top spots for our mixed sequential IO test, with even the 250GB 980 PRO edging out the 1TB Seagate FireCuda 520. Even when limited to PCIe Gen3, the 980s are a clear step up in performance from eariler high-end drives. The improvement for the 250GB model is the most impressive, since the 250GB 970 EVO Plus is significantly slower than most of the 1TB drives.
 |
|||||||||
| Power Efficiency in MB/s/W | Average Power in W | ||||||||
The 980 PROs turn in more good power efficiency numbers that place them clearly ahead of everything other than the SK hynix Gold P31. And this time, the P31's efficiency lead relatively small at no more than about 25%.
 |
|||||||||
The 980 PROs show a drastically different performance profile compared to earlier Samsung drives. The 970s tend to bottom out during the write-heavy half of the test and recover some performance toward the end. Now with the 980 PRO, performance in the write-heavy half doesn't drop precipitously, so we see a steady decline that most closely resembles how the Intel Optane SSD handles this test
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
137 Comments
View All Comments
AmericanLocomotive - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link
Except when you compare it to the 970 Evo Plus or 970 Pro, it's not really any better at all.https://www.storagereview.com/review/sabrent-rocke...
MFinn3333 - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link
"In 4K write activity, the Samsung 980 Pro was ahead by a mile with a peak performance of 383,099 IOPS and a latency of 329.1ms. The next best drive only reached 144K IOPS and almost 900ms in latency.""The Samsung SSD 980 Pro is the best-performing consumer drive we’ve tested to date, it more than doubled the numbers of its competitors in some areas. "
Right, it's so not better at all...
AmericanLocomotive - Thursday, September 24, 2020 - link
Yeah, compared to the chosen drives in that review. Cherry picked drives to make the 980pro look better. Compare it to the 970 Pro numbers in this review: https://www.storagereview.com/review/sabrent-rocke...It's hardly better at all.
MFinn3333 - Friday, September 25, 2020 - link
The Sabrent Rocket Gen3 drive was included in the review.Notmyusualid - Tuesday, October 6, 2020 - link
+1techxx - Tuesday, September 22, 2020 - link
Why in the world would anyone buy this over the SN750 at $110?Oxford Guy - Tuesday, September 22, 2020 - link
Samsung seems to be hoping it can rely on the Pro branding to get people to buy TLC without knowing it. The article mentions that other companies have dropped MLC so Samsung may be betting on two things:1. It will be possible to coast for a bit on the Pro name, before enough people catch on. So, a bit of extra money can be made via the legacy of MLC.
2. By the time consumers catch on they won't be so mad because of the power of the "everyone else is doing it" fallacy.
StrangerGuy - Friday, September 25, 2020 - link
They will, if they want to pay their due idiot taxes to Samsung.Which is quite a big crowd judging from QVO sales numbers, and that's a much more offensively bad product than the 980 Pro.
James5mith - Tuesday, September 22, 2020 - link
"...the 980 PRO is an improvement ... over the 970 EVO Plus, but is not as fast as the MLC-based 970 PRO."I think that (edited) comment sums up the entire launch of this product.
Quantumz0d - Tuesday, September 22, 2020 - link
Sabrent Rock 4 Plus is going to be my next drive. No more MLC = No more Samsung tax and not worth buying this at all, those have even higher TBW and more SLC caching than this garbage overpriced product with false PRO tag.