Conclusion

The Samsung 870 EVO is a new SATA SSD in a market where all the interesting action is centered around NVMe SSDs. The 870 EVO is necessarily a low-key product refresh, but Samsung deserves praise for actually making this a new model instead of simply updating the parts used in the 860 EVO.

Given the limitations imposed by the SATA interface, our expectations for any new SATA SSD are mild. Performance can only improve in the corner cases and power efficiency cannot make big leaps without getting rid of the SATA performance limits. Prices can go down, but we've been seeing a lot of that even without a new generation of 3D NAND and SSD controller: the 860 EVO is currently selling for about a third of what the launch MSRPs were in 2018. The Samsung 870 EVO's newer 128L flash may be setting the stage for future price drops, but this early in Samsung's transition to 128L flash it's not bringing any savings to consumers.

Knowing that any changes the 870 EVO brings relative to its predecessor will be minor, the most important function of this review is simply to check whether Samsung remains at least consistent with the refresh. As far as we can tell, all seems to be well. Our testing didn't reveal any serious performance regressions, though several signs point to the 870 EVO's SLC caching being a bit less effective. Since this only shows up on tests that are deliberately more strenuous than any common consumer workload, we're not concerned by these results. Otherwise, the 870 EVO continues to be just about as fast as possible for a SATA SSD, and is a fine replacement for the 860 EVO.

It is a little disappointing that the 870 EVO doesn't bring further improvements to power efficiency. Since the 860 EVO's launch, SK hynix has raised the bar for consumer SSD efficiency in both the SATA and NVMe market segments, but Samsung is not challenging that leadership with their recent launches.

Widespread adoption of NVMe in the consumer space means the role of SATA SSDs is shifting and shrinking. There's no longer any point in competing to offer the fastest SATA SSD, and not much reason to compete on write endurance when any workload that actually pushes the endurance limits of mainstream consumer SSDs would benefit greatly from NVMe performance. Most systems that are too old to support NVMe SSDs probably have more serious performance bottlenecks than storage performance. So the 870 EVO has to compete more in the role of secondary storage, providing extra capacity for things like an overflowing video game library. With game developers only just beginning to explore ways to make use of NVMe performance, most any mainstream SATA SSD will offer more than enough performance and endurance for this use case now and for the near future.

  250 GB 500 GB 1 TB 2 TB 4 TB
Samsung 870 EVO $39.99 (16¢/GB) $64.99 (13¢/GB) $129.99 (13¢/GB) $249.99 (12¢/GB) $479.99 (12¢/GB)
Samsung 870 QVO     $109.99 (11¢/GB) $218.00 (11¢/GB) $411.77 (10¢/GB)
Samsung 860 EVO $39.99 (16¢/GB) $59.99 (12¢/GB) $109.99 (11¢/GB) $229.99 (11¢/GB) $444.76 (11¢/GB)
Samsung 860 PRO $68.80 (27¢/GB) $99.99 (20¢/GB) $199.99 (20¢/GB) $379.99 (19¢/GB) $729.99 (18¢/GB)
WD Blue 3D NAND $40.48 (16¢/GB) $59.99 (12¢/GB) $97.99 (10¢/GB) $199.99 (10¢/GB) $442.99 (11¢/GB)
Crucial MX500 $48.99 (20¢/GB) $53.99 (11¢/GB) $104.99 (10¢/GB) $209.99 (10¢/GB)  
SK hynix Gold S31 $43.99 (18¢/GB) $56.99 (11¢/GB) $104.99 (10¢/GB)    
NVMe
Samsung 970 EVO Plus $59.99 (24¢/GB) $79.99 (16¢/GB) $164.99 (16¢/GB) $320.44 (16¢/GB)  
SK hynix Gold P31   $74.99 (15¢/GB) $134.99 (13¢/GB)    
Sabrent Rocket Q   $64.99 (13¢/GB) $109.98 (11¢/GB) $219.98 (11¢/GB) $599.98 (15¢/GB)
WD Blue SN550 $42.99 (17¢/GB) $59.99 (12¢/GB) $109.99 (11¢/GB) $224.99 (11¢/GB)  

Now that its successor is out, the Samsung 860 EVO will eventually be going away, but it's likely to still be in stock with major retailers for at least several months, and with third-party sellers for much longer. For now, the 860 EVO is cheaper than the 870 EVO for all but the smallest capacity, and that makes the 860 the smarter buy. But as Samsung transitions more fab capacity to their 128L TLC, this situation will change. (The 860 EVO also manages to be priced quite well against the 870 QVO, which really should offer more than just $10 savings at 2TB.)

Other major brands like Western Digital, Crucial and SK hynix offer great SATA SSDs that are generally cheaper than Samsung's 870 EVO. Samsung's performance advantages are too slight to justify any significant price premium. I also don't think that Samsung's reputation for quality is so much stronger than these competitors that Samsung should be charging $25 more at 1TB and $40-50 more at 2TB compared to eg. Western Digital.

The decline of the SATA SSD market broadly will take at least a few more years. But Samsung's niche as the premium choice within the SATA SSD market is shrinking much more quickly. If you want to spend a bit more to get a nicer than average SSD, the obvious route it to spring for a decent NVMe SSD that at least offers the possibility of being noticeably faster. But if you just need another terabyte or two of good-enough storage in a system where space is getting tight, there area a variety of cost-effective models with similar performance that fit the bill.

Mixed IO Performance and Idle Power Management
Comments Locked

136 Comments

View All Comments

  • Billy Tallis - Thursday, February 18, 2021 - link

    I still occasionally use SATA SSDs as if they were floppies, since all of my desktops have hot-swap bays. But its becoming more common that I use M.2 NVMe SSDs in USB enclosures. Either solution is preferable to WiFi or gigE when transferring tens of GB or more.
  • Kamen Rider Blade - Thursday, February 18, 2021 - link

    Not every machine is going to be connected locally on your own network.
    Not every machine will even be online either.

    Please don't comment for the rest of us.
  • Spunjji - Friday, February 19, 2021 - link

    M.2 in a USB 3.2 / Thunderbolt caddy

    Sorted
  • CaptainChaos - Wednesday, February 17, 2021 - link

    How many grannies or grandpas need more than what SATA offers in the machines they use to go online for email, Facebook, or Amazon? Even if they stream videos their systems are ok using hardware a couple steps behind state of the art! SATA will linger for several more years.
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, February 19, 2021 - link

    640K ought to be enough for anyone.
  • lmcd - Wednesday, February 17, 2021 - link

    The thing that gets me is that just because a drive is U.2 doesn't mean it has to be a full 2.5in drive. Could easily do a "half size" or some random thing.
  • Silver5urfer - Wednesday, February 17, 2021 - link

    Yes the world needs a SATA SSD lol.

    NVMe drives are tooo damn hot. I don't know how long they will run like that, I've been running SATA without any ventilation on my notebook machine and use MLC drive for games and it's fantastic. Reliable doesn't overheat or has BS driver things esp for Win7 or such.

    I thank Samsung for at-least doing this, I hope they put out a damn MLC with 4TB as well and do an 8TB 870 EVO update. As for SATA it's a reliable technology and has numerous advantages over the stupid PCIe lane limit, bandwidth, heat, dependable TBW.
  • lmcd - Wednesday, February 17, 2021 - link

    There's a reason people are going wild over the SK Hynix P31. It's exactly what you need.
  • Danvelopment - Wednesday, February 17, 2021 - link

    SATA drives totally still make sense.

    Why?

    Because there's only so much space on a motherboard, and every m.2 drive takes up quite a bit of it.

    SATA allows you to redistribute drives within the case.

    Maybe once hard drives are gone, then a new form factor can come out, 1" SATA or something. But cases will still be made with HDD form factors until they disappear, so might as well stick to that standard.

    But they should do something about IOPS, design a drive destined to be SATA, with a controller that can knock out the full 600MBps with any load pattern, dump three or four times as many channels on it as an m.2, and they'll fly off the shelves.
  • Gigaplex - Wednesday, February 17, 2021 - link

    Then you should be using U.2 instead of M.2.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now