Possibility of new Samsung SATA SSDs to replace 850 series?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by JTToft, Apr 17, 2016.

  1. JTToft macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #1
    Does anybody know or have any qualified guesses about when Samsung might introduce new SSDs to replace the 850 EVO and 850 Pro?

    The EVO is nearly 1.5 years old and the Pro is coming up on 2 years in the next few months. Considering there were about 1.5 years between the 840 EVO and 850 EVO, and between 1.5 and 2 years between the 840 Pro and 850 Pro, it might not be unreasonable to expect the "860" to come relatively soon.

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. satinsilverem2 macrumors 6502

    satinsilverem2

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Location:
    Richmond, VA
    #2
    I really don't know what Samsung could do to make them better. More density is all I can think of. The Evo and Pro already saturates the SATA III bus, so I don't think they will get faster but it would be nice to see a 3-4TB version of the drives.
     
  3. \-V-/ Suspended

    \-V-/

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    #3
    Not completely, but pretty close.
     
  4. JTToft thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #4
    - For sequential read and write, sure, nearly. But for random read/write they're both hovering around 100/300 MB/s. Lots of room for improvement in that area.
     
  5. Mr. Retrofire macrumors 601

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #5
    Not if they use the SATA protocol. Newer SSDs use NVMe via PCIe. See also:

    [​IMG]
     
  6. JTToft, Apr 17, 2016
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2016

    JTToft thread starter macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Location:
    Aarhus, Denmark
    #6
    - Yes, I'm aware of the benefits of the new interfaces and protocols. But is there any technical reason why SATA should be limited to the around 100 MB/s 4KB random reads and 300 MB/s 4KB random writes that the 850 Pro is able to muster up? From what I can understand, those performance measures are limited far more by the SSD controller than they are by the SATA interface.

    Still, who knows what other sorts of optimisations Samsung might be able to come up with? Cost-efficiency seems a great candidate.
     
  7. treekram macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2015
    Location:
    Honolulu HI
    #7
    If you look at: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9702/samsung-950-pro-ssd-review-256gb-512gb/7

    The random write benchmark of the PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe drives (with the exception of the Intel 750) isn't that much faster than the SATA drives. Same with the random read benchmark, except the Intel 750 is slower than all of the Samsung's. Maybe it's the nature of the benchmark and the current technology?

    In the "Final Words" section of the review of the Intel 750,
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/9090/intel-ssd-750-pcie-ssd-review-nvme-for-the-client/10
    they criticize Intel for concentrating on random IO performance to the detriment of sequential performance, so I don't think they're that surprised that random benchmarks fall in the SATA range for the PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe drives. In other words, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for significantly better performance in the random benchmarks with SATA drives.
     
  8. Mr. Retrofire macrumors 601

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #8
    Yeah, the SATA protocol is not a low latency protocol compared to NVMe.

     
  9. treekram macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2015
    Location:
    Honolulu HI
    #9
    In the Anandtech article for the Samsung PCIe drives I linked in post #7, they had a benchmark random read and the Samsung AHCI PCIe drive was about 15% slower than the slowest Samsung NVMe PCIe drive, so there's more than just the protocol that explain speed differences in the Samsung SSD's (much faster in sequential benchmarks, not so much in random benchmarks).

    Perhaps what's happening is that the fast PCIe NVMe drives get a lot of their speed advantage by parallelism and with a 4K random benchmark won't use that unless the block sizes are 1K - I think the block sizes are larger. In the case with Samsung, the NAND chips in the 850 and the PCIe drives are from the same family (maybe different densities) so unless you get faster NAND chips or smaller block sizes, you wont get much faster random read benchmarks?
     
  10. Mr. Retrofire macrumors 601

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #10
    Current hardware and software does not use the full potential of NVMe. That is the reason why you see only a small difference in some benchmarks. I do not think, that they improve a dead legacy protocol like SATA/AHCI, if a replacement is available.
     
  11. Tobias Funke macrumors 6502a

    Tobias Funke

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    #11
    Both 1TB 850 Evo and Pro have been removed from Amazon.co.uk today.

    Maybe a coincidence.
     

Share This Page