Samsung seemingly caught swapping components in its 970 Evo Plus SSDs

Joined
Mar 30, 2005
Messages
9,571
Reaction score
25
Points
48
You can't see the part number which distinguishes the newer, slower drive from the older, faster one on the box—you need to check the PN field in the top center of the label on the drive itself.

Enlarge / You can't see the part number which distinguishes the newer, slower drive from the older, faster one on the box—you need to check the PN field in the top center of the label on the drive itself. (credit: Jim Salter)

Recently, major SSD vendors Crucial and Western Digital have both been caught swapping out TLC NAND in their consumer SSDs for cheaper but much lower-performance, lower-endurance QLC NAND. Samsung appears to be joining them in the part-swapping corner of shame today, thanks to Chinese Youtuber 潮玩客, who documented a new version of the Samsung 970 Evo Plus using an inferior drive controller.

Although the consumer-facing model number of the drives did not change—it was a 970 Evo Plus last year, and it's still a 970 Evo Plus now—the manufacturer part number did. Unfortunately, the manufacturer part number isn't visible on the box the SSD comes in—as far as we've been able to determine, it's only shown on a small label on the drive itself.

Falling off the write cliff

  • crystaldiskmark-short-test-980x493.png


    This CrystalDiskMark test makes the newer, inferior drive look faster than the original in most tests—but notice the very small 1GiB test size. This test isn't escaping the SLC write cache! [credit: 潮玩客 ]

We tested the 970 Evo Plus (alongside the 980, and the older 970 Pro) in March, clocking it at write speeds of 1,600+ MiB/sec on 1MiB workloads. Our benchmarking was done with he old version, part number MZVLB1T0HBLR. The newer version—part number MZVL21T0HBLU—is considerably slower. According to 潮玩客's test results, the newer version only manages 830MiB/sec—half the performance of the original.

Read 6 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Click here to view the article...
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
17,542
Reaction score
1,576
Points
113
Location
Brentwood Bay, BC, Canada
Your Mac's Specs
2011 27" iMac, 1TB(partitioned) SSD, 20GB, OS X 10.11.6 El Capitan
Not really an ideal situation, but a lot is left to the customer to do their homework and checking...

And their site does say:
Performance may vary depending on SSD’s firmware, system hardware & configuration and other factors. For detailed information, please contact your local service center.


- Patrick
=======
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
9,962
Reaction score
1,235
Points
113
Location
The Republic of Neptune
Your Mac's Specs
2019 iMac 27"; 2020 M1 MacBook Air; macOS up-to-date... always.
I'm sure a lot of this is a consequence of the chip shortages. Still, I want to get what I'm paying for. And performance that is HALVED for some operations, depending on which lot of SSDs I managed to score, is NOT what I'd want to pay for. "Performance may vary" is weasel-speak.
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
17,542
Reaction score
1,576
Points
113
Location
Brentwood Bay, BC, Canada
Your Mac's Specs
2011 27" iMac, 1TB(partitioned) SSD, 20GB, OS X 10.11.6 El Capitan
"Performance may vary" is weasel-speak.

I tend to agree, and for those companies substituting lower quality chips in their solid state drives, I would at least expect them to change the model number accordingly or maybe even mention and state the change outright. Yeah right... dream on... 😏


- Patrick
=======
 

Shop Amazon


Shop for your Apple, Mac, iPhone and other computer products on Amazon.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Top