Samsung T5/X5 & Equivalents

[F-Train]

Some general advice... don't get caught up in Speed Tests.

But if you're copying thousands of tiny files... or even large photos... it'll slow to a maddening crawl.

Suddenly... your 1GB/s SSD feels like an old spinning hard drive!


Even if a run a large Premiere Pro project off the drive... scrubbing through multiple layers of 4K video... I still can't get the disk activity to get above 300MB/s.

I have a fair bit of sympathy for the general sentiment here, but...

File transfer between my mini and a Samsung T5 or equivalent is much, much faster than with a standard hard drive, and indeed significantly faster than with a TB2 hard drive. This is clear even on ordinary backups involving a lot of small files. I use Carbon Copy Cloner to back up my internal drive to a T5 SSD drive, and the T5 wipes the floor with the standard drive that I use for Time Machine.

To take a simple example, I keep my games on an external drive, and they load a lot faster than they would if they were on a standard drive. There are many, many YouTube videos that demonstrate this. The only serious issue is whether one of these T5-type external drives improves game play.

When I use Final Cut to edit video, the video footage is imported to the mini internal drive. I can't think of a reason why I would want to use Final Cut to edit video footage on a T5. The T5 is there for storage, and my internal drive is there for work. If I wanted to use Final Cut to edit footage on an external drive, I'd get a Samsung X5 or equivalent. Indeed, the difficulty that I have in justifying this is why I said in post #41 that I have trouble justifying the purchase of an X5.

The real criticism of these fast external drives is that they save time and that the amount of time saved isn't worth the cost. There's something to that, but it tends to go over the head of boys who like toys and fast cars. To that charge, I plead guilty.

 

[Michael Scrip]

I have a fair bit of sympathy for the general sentiment here, but...

File transfer between my mini and a Samsung T5 or equivalent is much, much faster than with a standard hard drive, and indeed significantly faster than with a TB2 hard drive.

To take a simple example, I keep my games on an external drive, and they load a lot faster than they would if they were on a standard drive. There are many, many YouTube videos that demonstrate this. The only serious issue is whether one of these T5-type external drives improves game play.

When I use Final Cut to edit video, the video footage is imported to the mini internal drive. I can't think of a reason why I would want to use Final Cut to edit video footage on a T5.

Yes... any SSD is faster than a standard spinning hard drive. No one should ever have a spinning hard drive in their computer anymore.

But I was talking about the difference between a 500MB/s SSD (like a T5) and a 2,800MB/s SSD (like an X5)

The MVNe drive's benchmarks show multi-gigabyte speeds. But will you ever actually see those speeds in real-world use?

It depends on the task.

If you're copying a bunch of large video files from one super-fast MVNe drive to another one super-fast MVNe drive... then you'll probably get those multi-gigabyte speeds.

But copy a folder of thousands of small documents or photos... and it might not be any faster than a standard SSD or even a spinning hard drive.

That's all I was saying.

And yes... games load MUCH faster from an SSD than from a spinning hard drive. No argument there!

But will they load even faster from an MVNe drive? Probably not.

My point was... people get excited about speed test benchmarks. And we'd all love to have the fastest drive available.

Unfortunately... you'll probably never reach those benchmark speeds in real-world tasks. (unless all you care about is copying large files from one drive to another)

 

[F-Train]

Yes... any SSD is faster than a standard spinning hard drive. No one should ever have a spinning hard drive in their computer anymore.

But I was talking about the difference between a 500MB/s SSD (like a T5) and a 2,800MB/s SSD (like an X5)

The MVNe drive's benchmarks show multi-gigabyte speeds. But will you ever actually see those speeds in real-world use?

It depends on the task.

If you're copying a bunch of large video files from one super-fast MVNe drive to another one super-fast MVNe drive... then you'll probably get those multi-gigabyte speeds.

But copy a folder of thousands of small documents or photos... and it might not be any faster than a standard SSD or even a spinning hard drive.

That's all I was saying.

And yes... games load MUCH faster from an SSD than from a spinning hard drive. No argument there!

But will they load even faster from an MVNe drive? Probably not.

My point was... people get excited about speed test benchmarks. And we'd all love to have the fastest drive available.

Unfortunately... you'll probably never reach those benchmark speeds in real-world tasks. (unless all you care about is copying large files from one drive to another)

Your whole post was about using a T5. It sounds like you don't even have an X5, and that you are theorising about how it would perform.

That's cool, but people who have an X5 or equivalent and have posted here say that it is indeed faster and worth the money, such as in this post just above yours:

Having had the 1 TB X5 for a little while, I can certainly verify that the thing is fast and well worth the money. Good to see the prices continuing to drop, as over time I will be wanting more of these.
​

If you've done T5 vs X5 performance tests, let's see the results, or is this just you theorising?

As for spinning drives, I haven't had one in a computer for many, many years, and yes, the sooner that I don't have any as external drives, the better. In fact, I'd like Apple to hurry up and say that an SSD can be used for Time Machine. As it is, I use Carbon Copy Cloner with an SSD.

 

[Stephen.R]

No one should ever have a spinning hard drive in their computer anymore.

Oh great, any recommendations on which 10TB SSD I should get? Oh. Right. They don't exist and I have a need for all my arms and legs..

 

[Michael Scrip]

Your whole post was about using a T5. It sounds like you don't even have an X5, and that you are theorising about how it would perform.

That's cool, but people who have an X5 or equivalent and have posted here say that it is indeed faster and worth the money, such as in this post just above yours:

Having had the 1 TB X5 for a little while, I can certainly verify that the thing is fast and well worth the money. Good to see the prices continuing to drop, as over time I will be wanting more of these.
​

If you've done T5 vs X5 performance tests, let's see the results, or is this just you theorising?

As for spinning drives, I haven't had one in a computer for many, many years, and yes, the sooner that I don't have any as external drives, the better.

I don't have an X5. I only have experience with a T5. So yes... I'm theorizing.

But from my tests with the T5... the only time I come anywhere close to the advertised speeds is when I'm copying large files from one drive to another similar drive. That's it.

If I'm copying a bunch of smaller files... it's not as fast.

Maybe MVNe drives handle tons of smaller files better. I don't know.

Sorry for hijacking your thread.

 

[Zdigital2015]

I don't think this will work - I've read that if you connect a TB3 device to a TB2 computer with the Apple adapter, the TB3 device needs to supply it's own power.

Crap...thanks for that catch. Yes, you are correct...it completely slipped my mind that bus-powered devices will not work. Going back and reading the reviews on the Apple Store, that is a common complaint, along with the lack of direct DisplayPort support for monitors.
[doublepost=1550068065][/doublepost]

The Asus enclosure, although not the cheapest on the market, is easily the nicest looking, and you got a good price on the RX 580.

Even without the cryptocurrency craze, it's become clear to me that hardcore gamers are prepared to spend serious money on graphics cards. It's a world unto itself, and I don't expect prices to plummet from where they are now, which is pretty much post-mining, least of all for new cards. AMD's new Radeon VII is US$700, and people, or at least that subset of people who are gamers, are apparently prepared to pay that
[doublepost=1550025101][/doublepost]Some owners of the Asus enclosure are having an issue with the TB3 cable, which is great for its length, but doesn't have the firmest connection. If you run into a problem, see post #480 and following here: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/external-gpu-egpu-resources.2154653/page-20
[doublepost=1550025920][/doublepost]

Thanks for a post that's really informative generally.

I have a Samsung T5 500GB and the cable is longer than I've seen on products in the same class, including on the WD drive that I'm returning. My understanding is that the G-Technology cable is also quite short. Like you, I have an interest in using drives from different manufacturers to differentiate them visually.

Apple is already making money from me from the purchase of cables for the mini, and I suspect that it is going to make more

Off topic: After reading this post, I double-checked my XG Station and indeed the Asus-provided Thunderbolt 3 cable is loose on both my MacBook Pro and the enclosure's Thunderbolt ports. I was ecstatic that Asus was providing a long, active Thunderbolt 3 cable with the XGStation, but now I will be ordering the Apple cable to make sure there is a snug fit on both ends and reworking my setup. Thunderbolt 3 cables are still a bit of a mess, which is a bit maddening at this point in the game.

On topic: Plugable just released a new USB-C 3.1 (Gen2) enclosure supporting NVMe for $50 - https://9to5mac.com/2019/02/13/usb-c-nvme-ssd-enclosure-mac/ - while pricey, I have other Plugable products and would be apt to purchase this enclosure if it proves to be worth the price.

 

[F-Train]

On topic: Plugable just released a new USB-C 3.1 (Gen2) enclosure supporting NVMe for $50 - https://9to5mac.com/2019/02/13/usb-c-nvme-ssd-enclosure-mac/ - while pricey, I have other Plugable products and would be apt to purchase this enclosure if it proves to be worth the price.

Just did some price checking for 1TB.

This enclosure (US$50, one year warranty) with Samsung’s new 970 EVO Plus ($250, five year/TBW warranty)* is $300. The price with WD’s new Black SN750 is similar. Crucial’s SSD is quite a bit less than the Samsung and WD, but gets mixed reviews on Amazon.

My understanding is that Glyph’s Atom RAID (two 500GB SSDs in RAID 0) is slower, but not by much. Main pros are that it’s off-the-shelf with notably good build quality, comes with a three year warranty and is less expensive. Current price is $280 (Amazon, B&H, Sweetwater).

Samsung T5 or similar is $180 - $250, depending on brand/sales.

Samsung X5 is $450.

* The EVO Plus replaces the EVO (without the “Plus”). 1TB and 500GB available now; 2TB in ~ April.

[Edit]:
Video overview of the Plugable enclosure. Looks like the enclosure will easily come undone in a backpack (see 07:42):

 

[F-Train]

I don’t think that it’s been mentioned above, but TEKQ has released its bare Thunderbolt 3 enclosure, which it calls the Cube: https://www.amazon.com/Cube-Thunder...F1DNMC535W2&psc=1&refRID=SN8GRBF5GF1DNMC535W2

However, a 1TB Samsung X5, at US$450, is currently the same price as the TEKQ enclosure ($200) plus Samsung’s 970 EVO Plus ($250). Also, Samsung’s X5 warranty is three years and TEKQ’s warranty on its enclosure is one year. As far as I know, TEKQ has no presence outside Taiwan in the event that warranty service is needed.

EDIT: On thermal issues, see post #68.

 

[F-Train]

Also, Glyph has just announced a new line of Thunderbolt 3 mobile drives called Atom Pro NVMe SSD. No reviews or YouTube videos yet. The launch price of the 1TB is US$500, which is $50 more than the current price of Samsung's 1TB X5. See photo.

Glyph has also announced an interesting dock that will take an MVMe SSD. Empty, it's $300.

 

[Fishrrman]

I guess some folks really -need- thunderbolt3 speeds.

But considering that an empty tbolt3 nvme enclosure costs $200, when you can buy a USB3.1 gen2 enclosure for $40 ?

I will speculate that for -most folks- (I said "most", not "everyone") USB3.1 gen2 will do just fine and they wouldn't notice the difference...

 

[Zdigital2015]

I guess some folks really -need- thunderbolt3 speeds.

But considering that an empty tbolt3 nvme enclosure costs $200, when you can buy a USB3.1 gen2 enclosure for $40 ?

I will speculate that for -most folks- (I said "most", not "everyone") USB3.1 gen2 will do just fine and they wouldn't notice the difference...

Speaking only for myself, I have been pleased with the performance of the SanDisk Extreme Portable SSDs that I purchased not too long ago. I also have a Samsung 860 EVO 500GB in a Vance Nexstar USB-C enclosure that I was pleasantly surprised by in terms of build quality.

While none of these drives approaches USB-C 3.1 (Gen 2) speeds, I have yet to feel constrained by the speed. Perhaps that is because my 2016 MacBook Pro's SSD storage is so fast.

Right now, for the work I do (productivity, audio), I think *most people* really are fine with SATA 3.0 6Gbps speeds. I would counter that I think Apple should continue to equip ALL of its Macs with SSD or Fusion drives from the cheapest iMacs on up and stop using spinning HDDs in the lower tier models while keeping the prices the same, as opposed to moving the entry point higher for a Fusion-equipped Mac.

For video, it is still not completely cut and dry that Thunderbolt 3 is necessary and I would encourage users to research what they really need to get the job done as it is more dependent on CODECs, bitrates and your requirements versus a client's requirements (if you are self-employed).

Hopefully, we will see some more innovation in the USB-C arena and some better pricing with Thunderbolt 3 in the future, should Intel make good on certain promises it made a while ago to lessen the cost of Thunderbolt 3 for PC OEMs and peripheral makers.

 

[Dr. Stealth]

I've read that the manufacturers of these TB3 enclosures have to pay up to $100.00 per device to licence the Thunderbolt chips from Intel.

So if you buy a $200.00 enclosure half that money goes directly to Intel. Prices will continue to drop over time...

 

[gpspad]

For some dumb reason Im always the person that wants to make use of all the ports on back of the computer. Even if the ports are already obsolete.

I am the guy who ends up maxing up their RAM 5 years later, just because I didn't do it because I couldn't afford to do it when it was new

But Im slowly getting wiser, and will leave my two Thunderbolt 2 ports unused, and just get a 2TB SSD USB3 T5 Drive when a good deal comes round. I figure it won't have to be plugged into the UPS battery backup and be fast enough. the quiet is the main thing.

I'd love to make use of the TB2 ports, but it doesn't seem cost effective. The only issue is I still use TM backups and have forgotten if I can do TM backups with a Samsung T5 connected as an external.

 

[treekram]

I've read that the manufacturers of these TB3 enclosures have to pay up to $100.00 per device to licence the Thunderbolt chips from Intel.

So if you buy a $200.00 enclosure half that money goes directly to Intel. Prices will continue to drop over time...

Intel changed the licensing to be royalty-free in 2018. So you still have to license the technology and adhere to that license, which will cost money, but there's no royalty fee. You need a Thunderbolt chip in the peripheral and those chips I believe are still only produced by Intel. Something like the Intel JHL7440 has a "recommended customer price" of just under $10. The actual cost to a manufacturer is likely lower, but still more than a USB 3.1 or 3.0 chip.

 

[F-Train]

The only issue is I still use TM backups and have forgotten if I can do TM backups with a Samsung T5 connected as an external.

One reason that I’m not using my external SSDs for Time Machine backups is I have them formatted AFPS (which Apple recommends) and Time Machine drives have to be formatted HFS+. The other reason is that I don’t think it makes financial sense to use an SSD for Time Machine backups. If I was traveling with a laptop, and wanted to save on space and weight, I might have a different view, formatting an SSD HFS+ exclusively for Time Machine use.

I have experimented with doing Carbon Copy Cloner backups to an SSD, formatted AFPS and on which I created a CCC volume. I really like the way that APFS volumes work; no need for partitions, they expand and shrink as required. However, given that I use my internal drive strictly as a workspace, and how I use external drives, I’m undecided about the utility of CCC backups to an external SSD.

 

[gpspad]

No the plan is to use the T5 as a work drive, not as a TM backup destination.

I just want it backed up together with the internal SSD drive to a TM via apples own automated backups.

I use CCC once a day to an external HD as my main backup, but is a pain because each has to go to a separate volume.

Apple's TM makes restoring files easy because they re treated as one whole drive.

1 backup for whole system restoration, the other for easy file recovery via time machine.

I havent worked an easy way for an off site backup yet, my upload speed is only 10Mbps, and I can really afford the cloud just for home use.

 

[F-Train]

No the plan is to use the T5 as a work drive, not as a TM backup destination.

I just want it backed up together with the internal SSD drive to a TM via apples own automated backups.

I’ve backed up both my internal SSD and an external SSD (indeed, a Samsung T5) to a single Time Machine hard drive. Not a problem. It’s just a matter of deciding what goes on your Time Machine inclusion/exclusion list.

There are situations where it can be a bit of an issue if a full Time Machine backup winds up being larger than your internal drive. This is resolvable, but worth looking into. There are a few discussions about it, e.g. in the context of Migration Assistant, on the MacRumors forum.

But it sounds like you may only want to use Time Machine for individual file recovery.

 

[F-Train]

The Plugable enclosure discussed in posts 56 and 57 was unavailable on Amazon and other sources when I checked yesterday. I just received this e-mail.

[doublepost=1550277701][/doublepost]Further to post #58, see this AnandTech discussion comparing the thermal performance of the Samsung X5 and TEKQ enclosures: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13276/the-samsung-portable-ssd-x5-review-thunderbolt-3-and-nvme-/4

 

[F-Train]

New AnandTech review comparing the Plugable and MyDigitalSSD M2X NVMe enclosures: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13953/plugable-usbcnvme-toolless-nvme-ssd-enclosure-capsule-review

Review of the MyDigitalSSD M2X enclosure on its own: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13510/mydigitalssd-m2x-usb-to-nvme-storage-bridge-review

And here's a good overview of the MyDigitalSSD enclosure:

 

[F-Train]

In addition to a bare Thunderbolt 3 enclosure (post #58), TEKQ has just released a USB-C Gen. 2 enclosure called the 583 SuperFast. See photo. It's more expensive than the Pluggable and MyDigitalSSD enclosures, but it appears that it might do a better job of heat dissipation. It’s also clearly easier to assemble/disassemble than the MyDigitalSSD enclosure.

Here are two videos about using it with a WD Black 1TB NVMe. The videos are in Chinese, but I found them easy to follow. Both videos are by the same person. The first is a short "unboxing". The second video shows the components at 03:43:

 

[Stephen.R]

I wonder if the titan ridge controllers with USB fallback are compact enough to work in one of these. Intel says they’re specifically designed with hub/monitor vendors in mind but it’d be interesting to have that fallback for a portable drive too.

 

[F-Train]

I’m interested in purchasing an NVMe SSD, but I’m not keen on then putting the SSD in an enclosure, such as the MyDigitalSSD, Plugable and TEKQ enclosures discussed just above, that generates NVMe heat while hobbling NVMe performance. That just seems perverse, and if I’m going to do that, it isn’t clear to me what the point is of purchasing an NVMe SSD in the first place.

When it comes to Thunderbolt 3 enclosures, I’m also beginning to wonder about the superiority of off-the-shelf. If I’m looking into the new TEKQ Cube (see post #58), it’s because there appears to be a throttling issue with the Samsung X5, and when it comes to getting rid of heat, AnandTech appears to think that TEKQ does a better job than Samsung.

TEKQ now sells two empty Thunderbolt 3 enclosures. The first is the Rapide, which originally came only with an SSD. TEKQ sells this enclosure with a 240GB SSD on Amazon US for $220, and obviously more for SSDs with more capacity. The enclosure is now also available empty, but only direct from TEKQ. In USD, the price is $160. Shipping from Taiwan to the US is an additional $40, for a total of $200.

The second is the new TEKQ Cube, which is not (yet) on the TEKQ web site but showed up on Amazon US a few days ago. It is only offered empty and costs $200. This price just happens to equal the price of the Rapide enclosure plus postage from Taiwan, although TEKQ is obviously paying Amazon some amount as middleman. TEKQ currently has 30 of these enclosures in space grey and silver at an Amazon warehouse.

There are no reviews or videos on the TEKQ Cube, but the exterior designs and dimensions of the Rapide and Cube are different. Query whether the Cube is a redesign that makes it easier for purchasers to install/uninstall their own NVMe SSD. It would be interesting to know whether the interior design of the Rapide differs markedly from that of the new TEKQ USB-C Gen. 2 enclosure shown in the videos linked in post #70.*

CamelCamelCamel shows some pronounced swings in the Amazon price of the TEKQ Rapide with SSD. My gut feeling is that the price of the Cube will come down $20-$50 within a couple of months, if not sooner. The question is whether the saving is worth the wait.

* Edit: Looking at photos on the net, it’s clear that the interior of the two enclosures is quite different. However, it doesn’t follow that the Cube is necessarily a redesign of the Rapide.

 

[Clix Pix]

The Samsung X5 includes a heat sink; does the TEKQ?

 

[F-Train]

The Samsung X5 includes a heat sink; does the TEKQ?

The TEKQ enclosures are heat sinks. Have a look at the videos in post #70. Most of the enclosure absorbs heat. In one of its reviews, AnandTech says that the TEKQ Rapide is superior to the Samsung X5 on heat dissipation, partly because it’s made of aluminum rather than magnesium. In a note to AnandTech, Samsung said that it chose magnesium as part of a trade-off; magnesium is 33% lighter and also harder, making the X5 less susceptible to scratches and dents. It looks like TEKQ may also be using some copper.

 

[Clix Pix]

Thanks for the info! Guess I should've watched the videos and read the AnandTech articles/reviews.