Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Samsung 870 QVO SSD Performance On Ubuntu Linux

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    So the TLDR of this is what you'd expect. QLC is garbage, both slower and shorter-lived than a decent SSD from 5 years ago. Technology moving backwards - like SMR, but without even the one redeeming feature that has.

    QLC "should" compensate for its utter shittiness by being (much) cheaper than a "proper" SSD, but the combination of DRAM glut and corporate greed means it's not even managing to do that.

    Comment


    • #12
      So these would be something that would better be used for archiving data?
      a whole bunch of these used as, ie, minio drives for read mainly?
      use nvme drives for where speed is required..

      Comment


      • #13
        The main thing that's wrong with the Samsung QVOs is their price, IMO. There should be a non-trivial discount for using QVO, and right now they seem to be similarly priced to same-capacity 860 EVOs

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by willmore View Post
          I'm so glad Fedora has decided to move to the slowest filesystem.
          Yeah it will be interesting to see if it works out as well as Fedora leadership thinks it will.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
            Just 360 TB of endurance on a 1 TB drive? A pitiful 360 cycle life per cell? No wonder SSD prices have been falling, the product keeps getting worse and worse. My intel X25-E drives from *ten years* ago have a 1 PB (yes petabyte) endurance on a 64 GB drive. That's over 15,000 cycles per cell. Clearly QLC NAND is only suitable for the very lightest duty throw-away consumer use cases. Grandma checking her AOL email and such.
            True enough. Then again Samsung has a pro and an evo line, and the vast majority of consumers go for the evo. This new qvo is sort of pathetic with 360 life cycles, but truth is most users will never reach anywhere close that.

            I'd be curious how the cells, when not-so-new, behave after 3-4 months storage. Not my choice for cold storage, or high use scenario, but most people want their games to load faster, most new "AAA" games are 100GB+, and the data isn't that valuable.

            Comment


            • #16
              QLC is a shit. Nothing new here.

              Comment


              • #17
                These QLC drives have pretty good price/performance/size ratios. Their lifetime endurance sucks. But they're cheap.

                On the expensive side is Optane. I think these make most excellent NVMe drives and I've got two now. Write endurance is huge. Probably even better than SLC flash.

                So, pick your priorities and lay out your money where you want to put it.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by torsionbar28 View Post
                  Just 360 TB of endurance on a 1 TB drive? A pitiful 360 cycle life per cell? No wonder SSD prices have been falling, the product keeps getting worse and worse. My intel X25-E drives from *ten years* ago have a 1 PB (yes petabyte) endurance on a 64 GB drive. That's over 15,000 cycles per cell. Clearly QLC NAND is only suitable for the very lightest duty throw-away consumer use cases. Grandma checking her AOL email and such.
                  You are going to love Penta Level Cell NAND.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    $120 for 1TB of QLC crap? I'm pretty sure you could buy 1TB Samsung TLC for the same if not less on Amazon half a year ago.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Prices need to seriously go down for this to be even considered. This I think also applies to all SATA based SSDs in general, since you can get a NVMe drive for nearly the same price now. Now with motherboards having several NVMe capable M.2 ports (2 and more) there is really no reason to get the much slower storage option.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X