[ad_1]
Samsung is the latest SSD supplier to be in trouble.A sort of Chinese YouTuber Claims that Samsung has replaced its components 970 Evo Plus SSD, one of The best solid state drive Now on the market.
Not that there was no component swap before the pandemic. With a global shortage of semiconductors, it has only now become a more common practice. SSD vendors, including Needle, patriot, Critical with Western Digital Some drive components have been replaced.
A sort of Digital Age Report Confirm that Samsung has faced SSD controller shortage Because its Texas plant, which produces SSD controllers, has been idle since February.
The shortage may force Samsung to replace the components on some of its SSDs. In any case, the manufacturer has changed the packaging and part numbers of the 970 Evo Plus and updated the product table to give consumers a friendly reminder.
From the most obvious start, the old and new 970 Evo Plus both use a rectangular frame, but the design direction is slightly different. The new version tends to have a vertical design, while the old version sticks to a horizontal design. The part numbers are also different, which will help customers distinguish one version from another. The new version is marked with the MZVL21T0HBLU part number, and the old version is marked with the MZVLB1T0HBLR part number.
If you look at the Samsung 970 Evo Plus 2019 and 2021 data sheets side by side, you will find that the order and random performance of the drives remain unchanged. However, it is obvious that Samsung has changed the SSD controller on the new version. Although the original specification tablet proudly mentions the Phoenix SSD controller, the revised version vaguely specifies the “internal” controller.
The previous data sheet defines the sequential and random write performance when the TurboWrite buffer size is exceeded in footnote 4. However, Samsung deleted the values in the new data sheet.
Samsung 970 Evo Plus Revised Edition
| SSD | Controller | NAND | LPDDR4 | Part Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Samsung 970 Evo Plus (new) | Phoenix (S4LR020) | K9DUGY8J5B-DCK0 | K4F8E3D4HF-BGCH | MZVLB1T0HBLR |
| Samsung 970 Evo Plus (old) | Elpis (S4LV003) | K9DUGY8J5B-CCK0 | K4F8E3D4HF-BGCH | MZVL21T0HBLU |
At the hardware level, the original 970 Evo Plus uses Samsung’s Phoenix controller (S4LR020) and a 92-layer 3D TLC with the K9DUGY8J5B-DCK0 identifier. On the other hand, the new 970 Evo Plus uses an Elpis controller (S4LV003).
For those who are not familiar with Samsung SSD, the Elpis controller is the controller that powers Samsung. 980 professional solid state driveAlthough the Elpis controller is designed for the PCIe 4.0 x4 interface, it is also backward compatible with the PCIe 3.0 x4 standard, which is why Samsung can recycle it for the 970 Evo Plus. Basically, the new 970 Evo Plus is like the 980 Pro, but without PCIe 4.0 speed.
As far as NAND is concerned, the new 970 Evo Plus has the K9DUGY8J5B-CCK0 module, which should also belong to the 92-layer 3D TLC series. LPDDR4 (K4F8E3D4HF-BGCH) DRAM is still the same in both versions.
Due to hardware changes, the 970 Evo Plus drive has different firmware. The old version uses 2B2QEXM7 firmware, while the new version uses 3B2QEXM7 firmware.
Comprehensive benchmarks, such as CrystalDiskMark and AS SSD benchmarks, have mixed results. The new 970 Evo Plus provides higher sequential read and random read and write performance on certain indicators, so its performance in every workload is not better than the previous version.
HD Tune Pro results show that Samsung seems to give the new 970 Evo Plus a larger SLC cache. The original version is 42GB, and the new version is 115GB. However, there is a huge disadvantage. When the new version of the SLC cache is filled, its write performance drops sharply.
According to the results, the old version started at 1,750 MBps and eventually dropped to 1,500 MBps after the 40GB mark. On the new version, the hard drive runs stably at 2,500 MBps, but once the 115GB SLC cache is exhausted, the SSD drops to 800 MBps.
Although the composite results showed significant differences, the two versions performed similarly in a real copy test using 154GB video files. The old version of the SLC cache is smaller, but the continuous write performance is higher. Although the new version of the SLC cache is 173% larger, its sustained write performance is reduced by 47%. In the end, everything was balanced, and the new version completed the copying process, but it was a hairline faster than the old version.
When it comes to thermal results, it is always tricky because we cannot guarantee the environment in which the test is performed. According to YouTuber’s survey results, the new version with the Elpis controller runs warmer than the old version with the Phoenix controller.
[ad_2]
