Samsung 870 QVO and Sabrent Rocket Q 8TB SSDs Reviewed

Flash reminiscence costs have been on a downward trajectory for years. A decade in the past, this development was serving to SSDs set up a foothold within the client market—largely for fans. Now, SSDs have taken over because the default storage medium for client PCs and additional advances in flash reminiscence are not pushing client SSDs into new product segments. As a substitute, cheaper flash is driving a rise in SSD capability.

That progress in drive capability has not been regular. For each technical and advertising causes, client SSD capacities stick near powers of two. The primary 2TB client SSDs began to indicate up in 2015, and now 2TB choices are widespread throughout all of the SSD market segments. 4TB drives began to indicate up in 2018 however are nonetheless fairly uncommon, and this 12 months we have seen the primary 8TB client SSDs.

At this time we’re trying on the first two consumer-oriented 8TB SSDs. The 8TB Samsung 870 QVO is a SATA drive from the model that has been on the forefront of the previous a number of capability will increase and leads the SSD market by most different measures. The opposite drive is the 8TB Sabrent Rocket Q, a M.2 NVMe drive from a model that is working to face out from the gang of many different Phison companions. Unsurprisingly, each of those drives use 4 bit per cell QLC NAND flash reminiscence which provides the bottom value per GB and the best per-die capacities presently accessible. QLC NAND typically places SSDs into an entry-level market phase, however because of their excessive capacities these 8TB SSDs are nonetheless a few of the most costly drives within the client SSD market.

Sabrent Rocket Q 8TB

Sabrent Rocket Q Specs
Capability 500 GB 1 TB 2 TB 4 TB 8 TB
Kind Issue M.2 2280 single-sided
PCIe 3 x4
M.2 2280 double-sided
PCIe 3 x4
Controller Sabrent-branded Phison E12S
NAND Flash Micron 1Tbit 96L 3D QLC
DRAM Kingston DDR3
Sequential Learn (MB/s) 2000 3200 3300
Sequential Write (MB/s) 1000 2000 3000 2900
Random Learn IOPS (4kB) 95k 125k 255k 550k 550k
Random Write IOPS (4kB) 250k 500k 670k 680k
Consumption (W)
Learn 3.5 5.0 5.5 5.0 5.6
Write 3.5 4.5 6.0 6.5 6.5
Guarantee 5 years
Write Endurance 120 TB
0.13 DWPD
260 TB
0.14 DWPD
530 TB
0.14 DWPD
940 TB
0.13 DWPD
1800 TB
0.13 DWPD
Present Retail Costs $64.99 (13¢/GB) $109.98 (11¢/GB) $219.98 (11¢/GB) $599.98 (15¢/GB) $1299.99 (16¢/GB)


The Sabrent Rocket Q is a bit uncommon amongst QLC NVMe SSDs, and never simply because it provides such excessive capacities. Most client QLC SSDs use pretty low-end SSD controllers relatively than let the efficiency potential of a high-end controller be wasted on gradual QLC NAND. However the Rocket Q makes use of the Phison E12, a well-recognized mainstay of the high-end NVMe market phase (however seen right here within the extra compact E12S packaging). This implies the Rocket Q has an 8-channel controller at its disposal relatively than simply 4 channels, and that helps immensely on the larger capacities the place there’s sufficient flash to compensate for the low efficiency of QLC NAND.

The Rocket Q does reduce corners a bit by utilizing only one fourth of the DRAM we normally see on mainstream SSDs. That hurts a bit on the decrease capacities (although nowhere close to as a lot as a completely DRAMless design would), however is way much less of an issue for this 8TB mannequin: 2GB of DRAM remains to be lots for the SSD to deal with any typical client workload.

The Rocket Q lineup goes from 500GB to 8TB, however we typically think about QLC drives smaller than 1TB to be a poor various to DRAMless TLC drives. That is much more true for the Rocket Q, as a result of the 500GB mannequin can solely use half of the Phison E12’s 8 channels.

Sabrent has additionally launched the Rocket This fall as a partial successor. This makes use of the Phison E16 controller and brings PCIe 4 assist and improved efficiency. Nonetheless, the E16 will not be but (and should by no means be) accessible in a small package deal dimension just like the E12S controller, so it’s not but sensible for Sabrent and Phison to squeeze 8TB of QLC onto a PCIe gen4 M.2 drive.

Samsung 870 QVO 8TB

Samsung 870 QVO Specs
Capability 1 TB 2 TB 4 TB 8 TB
Kind Issue 2.5″ 7mm SATA
Controller Samsung MKX
NAND Flash Samsung 1Tbit 92L 3D QLC
Max SLC Cache Dimension 42 GB 78 GB 78 GB 78 GB
Sequential Learn 560 MB/s
SLC 530 MB/s
QLC 80 MB/s 160 MB/s
IOPS (4kB)
QD1 11k (SLC)
5k (QLC)
11k (SLC)
5k (QLC)
QD32 98k (SLC)
45k (QLC)
98k (SLC)
74k (QLC)
IOPS (4kB)
QD1 35k (SLC)
22k (QLC)
35k (SLC)
34k (QLC)
QD32 88k (SLC)
22k (QLC)
88k (SLC)
42k (QLC)
Learn 2.1 W 2.1 W 2.2 W 2.4 W
Write 2.2 W 3.0 W 3.2 W 3.3 W
Idle 30 mW 30 mW 35 mW 45 mW
DevSlp 3 mW 4 mW 7 mW 10 mW
Guarantee 3 years
Write Endurance 360 TB
0.3 DWPD
720 TB
0.3 DWPD
1440 TB
0.3 DWPD
2880 TB
0.3 DWPD
Present Retail Costs $89.99


We reviewed the Samsung 870 QVO when it first launched, however the 8TB capability arrived a bit later. Aside from the upper capability, there’s not a lot new to say concerning the 8TB mannequin of their second-generation QLC SSD. It has twice the NAND and twice the DRAM and twice the whole write endurance, however the identical efficiency rankings and SLC cache sizes because the 2TB and 4TB fashions. Samsung’s SATA SSD controller does not provide a lot potential for larger efficiency as soon as all channels are populated with no less than two NAND dies.

In comparison with the Rocket Q, the Samsung 870 QVO has larger write endurance rankings each when it comes to drive writes per day and complete TB written. Nonetheless, the Rocket Q comes with a 5 12 months guarantee and the 870 QVO solely has a 3 12 months guarantee. The Samsung 870 QVO is much cheaper at these excessive capacities; NVMe SSD controllers are solely a bit of bit dearer than SATA SSD controllers, however lack of competitors leaves Sabrent free to cost a a lot larger worth per GB for his or her QLC NVMe product. Samsung’s vertical integration most likely helps them keep respectable revenue margins even on their extra competitively-priced drive.

QLC NAND’s Affect on the Shopper SSD Market

The introduction of QLC NAND as a less expensive various to a few bit per cell TLC NAND has not revolutionized client SSD affordability, however it has made larger SSD capacities sensible. QLC NAND provides only a 33% improve in theoretical storage density, however in apply most QLC NAND is manufactured as 1024Gbit dies whereas TLC NAND is manufactured as 256Gbit and 512Gbit dies. Because of this it’s simpler to suit far more flash into the identical type issue utilizing QLC than with TLC NAND. Certainly, the Sabrent Rocket Q is bumping up in opposition to the sensible limits for a M.2 drive.

For drives with extra commonplace capacities, QLC NAND has a number of distinct disadvantages. Storing extra bits per bodily reminiscence cell requires extra exact management over the voltage of every cell, and consequently writing to QLC NAND is way slower than writing to TLC NAND (studying can also be a bit slower). That sensitivity to cell voltage additionally reduces the usable write endurance of QLC NAND earlier than knowledge retention turns into an issue. Drives utilizing QLC NAND must be rated for fewer drive writes per day (DWPD) in an effort to meet business requirements for knowledge retention of a worn-out client SSD.

Nonetheless, nearly all of these downsides of QLC NAND could be mitigated with sheer capability. The sequential switch velocity of a single die of NAND flash reminiscence has by no means been notably spectacular, no matter what number of bits are saved per cell. These 8TB QLC drives use a complete of 64 NAND flash dies every, which permits for lots of parallelism in knowledge transfers (although the SSD’s controller turns into a bottleneck). SLC caching helps tackle many of the remaining efficiency issues, however when the SLC cache on a QLC drive runs out, the efficiency impression is far more extreme than for TLC drives.

Write endurance rankings of 0.1 to 0.3 DWPD seem inferior to the 0.5 DWPD or extra from good client TLC drives, however taking a look at endurance as a fraction of drive capability maybe is not probably the most helpful measure for these drives. Each of those 8TB QLC drives are warrantied for over 1TB of writes per day (over 2TB per day for the Samsung drive, however its guarantee is simply three years relatively than 5). Most client use instances for a multi-TB drive don’t contain re-writing most of that knowledge typically. Giant collections of video games, films and photographs can burn up the capability of those 8TB drives, however such infrequently-modified knowledge will not put a lot of a dent within the drive’s complete write endurance. A mere 3% of the capability of those drives (240GB) is lots to carry an OS and most knowledge that can see frequent modification. Filling the remainder of the drive with comparatively static knowledge will not harm the drive’s lifespan.

Who Wants 8TB SSDs?

A capability of 8TB is a bit on the big aspect even for mechanical onerous drives. Positive, consumer-oriented onerous drive product strains are beginning to transcend 14TB, however common capability offered is way decrease. Many use instances for big drives do not require excessive efficiency. An 8TB SSD will provide important noise and energy effectivity benefits over an 8TB onerous drive, however both one is ample for storing a big film assortment. A mechanical onerous drive is unquestionably preferable for long-term archival/backup obligation, however an SSD has benefits for conserving knowledge readily accessible.

That is very true in a cellular setting, which can be the place these 8TB drives take advantage of sense. Most desktops can accommodate a number of drives of decrease capability, and up to now these 8TB drives carry a big worth premium on a $/GB foundation in comparison with 1TB or 2TB fashions. However in a pocket book, it is unusual to have multiple drive bay/slot, and greater than three is simply present in machines that stretch the definitions of “pocket book” and “moveable”. So probably the most smart or believable use instances we will think about for these drives are eventualities that kind of fall into cellular workstation territory. However the sustained write velocity of those drives can be an issue relating to ingesting uncompressed video even when efficiency is ample for enhancing a considerable amount of video already residing on one of many drives, so these drives undoubtedly aren’t appropriate for each situation the place a number of TBs of knowledge are thrown round.

It is also straightforward to think about different area of interest use instances for these drives the place value is of no object: a small type issue nearly-silent NAS, for instance. (QLC efficiency does not matter if it sits behind a 1Gbps community bottleneck, and nonetheless is not a lot of a problem even with a 10Gbps community.) However for at the moment, we’ll consider these drives with our traditional client SSD testing methodology.

The Competitors

It is difficult deciding what to match these 8TB drives in opposition to. The usage of QLC NAND would historically flag these drives as low-end choices. However their excessive capability is unmatched by client TLC drives, and the uncooked value of 8TB of NAND makes for a high-priced drive total. Other than QLC drives, most different low-end client SSDs are DRAMless TLC designs—and people product strains largely prime out at 1TB. We have included the Mushkin Helix and Toshiba BG4 as representatives of the DRAMless TLC NVMe market phase.

The biggest client SSDs we’ve got to match in opposition to are Samsung’s earlier 4TB SATA SSDs. We have included the 4TB 860 EVO. For some assessments, we even have included outcomes from a couple of enterprise drives: 8TB NVMe fashions from Intel and SK hynix, and 4TB SATA drives from Kingston and Samsung. These all use TLC NAND, however with out SLC caching.

Excessive-end client SSD product strains are beginning to embrace extra multi-TB capacities, however for now the biggest high-end client NVMe drives we’ve got available are a “mere” 2TB every: Samsung’s 970 EVO Plus and the HP EX950.

AnandTech 2018 Shopper SSD Testbed
CPU Intel Xeon E3 1240 v5
Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty E3V5 Efficiency Gaming/OC
Chipset Intel C232
Reminiscence 4x 8GB G.SKILL Ripjaws DDR4-2400 CL15
Graphics AMD Radeon HD 5450, 1920×1200@60Hz
Software program Home windows 10 x64, model 1709
Linux kernel model 4.14, fio model 3.6
Spectre/Meltdown microcode and OS patches present as of Might 2018

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *