Samsung 840 Pro SSD Review @ [H]

raxstime

n00b
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
12
Dammit, the 128GB version was on sale for $120 yesterday on Amazon and I didn't buy it. Now it's back up to $144! :mad:

I missed a couple deals on these too. Argh. I check SSD prices almost every day. I there a treatment for my condition?

I found a discount which is way cheaper than what I paid for my Samsung 830 512GB SSD:
Samsung 512GB 830 Series, Internal Desktop Kit
$449 USD, free ship
www bhphotovideo com/c/product/828470-REG

Back on topic:

Someone posted a review on 12/21 at Newegg on item N82E16820147193 stating they bricked two of their 840 Pro 256GB drives performing a secure erase on newest firmware DXM04B0Q. This was the same problem reported here and everywhere with the *beta* (beta?) firmware, but fixed in the release firmware for Pro drives DXM03B0Q.

Curious if anyone else has (or not) experienced secure erase issues with *latest* firmware for either 840 & 840 Pro series. I do not need secure erase, yet, but I am worried.

I purchased my 840 Pro a couple days after the firmware released and installed latest firmware before loading software. I updated my 840 Pro 256GB drive to DXM04B0Q. I do not have time to unload software & test bricking my drive. Funny.

Latest:
Update: 840 Pro, Dec 13, 2012: DXM04B0Q
Update: 840, Dec 13, 2012: DXT07B0Q
 

Reverie

n00b
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
46
almost bit on the newegg deal on the 128GB drive today. had to really hold myself back :) probably will be my next drive when I want to treat myself :p
 

raxstime

n00b
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
12
Newegg link on HardOCP Commissioned Buying Links thread
Newegg is *first* item in list:
http://hardforum.com/announcement.php?f=28&a=92

Search Item: N82E16820147193
SAMSUNG 840 Pro Series MZ-7PD256BW 2.5" 256GB SATA III SSD
Newegg promo code
SAMPR30, ends 12/30
SAMPR30, ends 12/30
$30 off = $239.99 USD after rebate, free ship, no tax

Search Item: N82E16820147192
SAMSUNG 840 Pro Series MZ-7PD128BW 2.5" 128GB SATA III
Newegg promo code
SAMDEC30, ends 12/30
SAMDEC30, ends 12/30
$30 off = $119.99 USD after rebate, free ship, no tax
 
Last edited:

waiaung1

n00b
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
23
Would you guys buy this drive at $120 over a 128gb over the Intel 520 at $130 for a 180gb?

*Nvm, please disregard this post. Wanted to delete but I'm not given that choice.
 
Last edited:

AndreRio

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
1,240
hey guys. how much faster is this new ssd compared to an ocz vertex 4 256gb?
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
It should be taken into consideration that AS SSD measures latency at a 512b file size, when 4k QD1 is actually the industry accepted method.
I can't quite understand this. Doesn't it really mean that it's using a 512-byte transfer size? Does the benchmark really use 512-byte files?
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
It is paired with 512MB of LPDDR2-1033 ram cache directly above the MDX controller, double the amount and bandwidth that was employed on the previous gen 830.
How is this cache utilized? If power is lost during write operations, does the device properly harden the write, or roll it back upon subsequent power application?
 

Hugh_Briggs

[H] SSD Guru
Joined
Jun 7, 2012
Messages
103
The cache is used for LBA mapping. This map of the contents of the SSD is much better served directly from the RAM, speeds up things massively. If you lose the LBA map portion that is in the RAM you are fine, it is also on the NAND. It is just cached in cache :)
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
The cache is write through, then, and only for the LBA translation?
 

nanotube

Weaksauce
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
75
Edit: someone posted a better deal in the Hot Deals forum. Sorry for posting a deal in this thread. Just thought people would like to save money. I guess not.
 
Last edited:

vr.

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
3,656
Vendors are listing models that end in BW and Z. I'm not seeing ones with KW like in the review. Was this a change in market designation or . . . what's the difference?
 

johnnydoe

Gawd
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
621
How is this cache utilized? If power is lost during write operations, does the device properly harden the write, or roll it back upon subsequent power application?

No. Cache = / = Battery Backup Unit. The cache only serves the purpose of speeding up the drive, just like the cache in HDD's.

If you want your data to be saved in case of a power loss while you're writing data, then you need to look into an SSD with a Supercap or Tantalum caps (which exist on enterprise SSD's).

Currently, this drive is the only exception on the enthuasiast front:

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4996/comay_venus_pro_3_240gb_ssd_review/index4.html

http://www.amazon.com/Comay-Venus-Pro-Protection-Overload/dp/B009CBRYNE
 

yapchagi

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 7, 2012
Messages
438
frys has a bundle of Far Cry 3 game with the purchase of samsung 840 SSD. Thinking about jumping on it.
 

Khaydarin

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2005
Messages
2,534
frys has a bundle of Far Cry 3 game with the purchase of samsung 840 SSD. Thinking about jumping on it.

Ah, seriously? I just bought one from them yesterday, and didn't know about this. Ordered it online for store-pickup... and just got the drive.
 

johnnydoe

Gawd
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
621
Indeed. You can't notice much difference from an old SATA2 SSD to a new one in real World conditions, however, this SSD is not for the "difference noticer". It's for the folks that want the very best.

If bang for the buck is a concern, then you can just get about ANY SandForce SF-2281 drive (I.E, Kingston HyperX, SanDisk Extreme, Intel 520 etc etc.) and it'll perform very close, unnoticeably, very, very slighty slower for significantly cheaper.

IMO, SandForce is the way to go.
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
Indeed. You can't notice much difference from an old SATA2 SSD to a new one in real World conditions, however, this SSD is not for the "difference noticer". It's for the folks that want the very best.

If bang for the buck is a concern, then you can just get about ANY SandForce SF-2281 drive (I.E, Kingston HyperX, SanDisk Extreme, Intel 520 etc etc.) and it'll perform very close, unnoticeably, very, very slighty slower for significantly cheaper.

Isn't "the very best" an enterprise-class PCIe SSD?

The Samsung 840 Pro 512 gig is $520 at Newegg, while the Intel 520 480 gig is $499 at Newegg. How is the Intel 520 "significantly cheaper"?
 

johnnydoe

Gawd
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
621
Isn't "the very best" an enterprise-class PCIe SSD?

The Samsung 840 Pro 512 gig is $520 at Newegg, while the Intel 520 480 gig is $499 at Newegg. How is the Intel 520 "significantly cheaper"?

Intel overcharges since their take on the SF is just about the fastest and the most reliable.

You can have the Edge Boost Pro 480, with the exact same performance, and just as good firmware for $350.

It isn't the Intel in general that's "significantly cheaper". It's the SandForce drives that're cheaper and that's about it. SandForce's have gone down A LOT in price in the past year and most can be had for significantly cheaper than the big three (Neutron GTX/Vector/840 Pro).

"Very best" depends on how you see "very best". When I say very best on here, I'm referring to an enthuasiest SSD on an enthuasiest forum, not an enterprise SSD.

But if you want the "very best" literally, then you of course can shell out a few thousand bucks for an STEC ZeusRAM...
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
Enthusiasts buy inappropriate hardware all the time; I can't see how your limitation was implicit. The Intel 520 is among the drives you enumerated as being cheaper, I thought you were explicitly identifying it as a drive that competes in price wit hthe Samsung 840 Pro.
 

johnnydoe

Gawd
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
621
Enthusiasts buy inappropriate hardware all the time; I can't see how your limitation was implicit. The Intel 520 is among the drives you enumerated as being cheaper, I thought you were explicitly identifying it as a drive that competes in price wit hthe Samsung 840 Pro.

No, the Intel 520 wasn't the point. SandForce drives were. It was just an example of a SandForce-driven drive.

My reference to "very best" was as IN REGULAR SSD's as this IS the review of a regular SSD and that's what we all are on about.

Of course a simple RevoDrive can be had for a bit more and blows the 840 Pro away, but then there's it's twictyness...
 

zazzn

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
149
http://imageshack.us/a/img96/3091/intelvssam.jpg
I'm in a dilemma,

For some reason my RAID 0 Intel SSD array died the other day for no reason and after a LONG recovery process, I ended up buying a 840 pro 512. I'm just not sure if I should keep it now since I have 2x x25 G2's in raid 0. Yes I know the write speed is much faster on the pro, but the read speed is actually capped out on both drives because of the controller. Also the intel's are a little faster in the lower end of the spectrum for reading.

The dilemma is, do I return the drive for 500$ back in my pocket or suck it up and swap out the Intels? Also in my HDtune test I couldn't get more than 370 sustained read on my samsung, how come kyle has 500+??

intelvssam.jpg
 

KENNYB

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 26, 2004
Messages
3,147
http://imageshack.us/a/img96/3091/intelvssam.jpg
I'm in a dilemma,

For some reason my RAID 0 Intel SSD array died the other day for no reason and after a LONG recovery process, I ended up buying a 840 pro 512. I'm just not sure if I should keep it now since I have 2x x25 G2's in raid 0. Yes I know the write speed is much faster on the pro, but the read speed is actually capped out on both drives because of the controller. Also the intel's are a little faster in the lower end of the spectrum for reading.

The dilemma is, do I return the drive for 500$ back in my pocket or suck it up and swap out the Intels? Also in my HDtune test I couldn't get more than 370 sustained read on my samsung, how come kyle has 500+??

intelvssam.jpg


What AHCI driver and power mode are you using?
 

Telo

n00b
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
46
Just got two of these for $209.99 each at Newegg... everyone else has it for $224.99 and up.

Thanks for the info in this review, it really pushed me to grab it.
 

mda

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 23, 2011
Messages
2,117
Will I be noticing any real world (i.e. gaming) performance difference between this and the vanilla 840 or for something like a Crucial M4 or a Plexor M5S?

Wondering if the performance is worth the price premium for relatively non-intensive users like me.
 

KENNYB

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 26, 2004
Messages
3,147
Will I be noticing any real world (i.e. gaming) performance difference between this and the vanilla 840 or for something like a Crucial M4 or a Plexor M5S?

Wondering if the performance is worth the price premium for relatively non-intensive users like me.

I doubt you'll notice a difference. I use a 500 GB 840 non-pro as a Steam drive and I can't tell the difference between it and the 256GB M4 drive that runs Windows.
 

Balanar

n00b
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
2
I've read a fair bit on these and am convinced that one cannot recognize the performance difference between the latest gen of SSDs and something like say the M4s.

I am however curious if there has been any information regarding the lifespan of the newer SSDs? Do they last longer and/or maintain performance better over time?
 

mda

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 23, 2011
Messages
2,117
Thanks for the input.

Will help me save more than a pretty penny in my upcoming build. :D
 

TheGamerZ

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 18, 2003
Messages
5,217
I've read a fair bit on these and am convinced that one cannot recognize the performance difference between the latest gen of SSDs and something like say the M4s.

I am however curious if there has been any information regarding the lifespan of the newer SSDs? Do they last longer and/or maintain performance better over time?

I have an 840 Pro 256 in this machine and a M4 256 in my girlfriends machine. I notice no difference as far as general usage is concerned.
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
What the fuck is "general usage"? How much difference would there need to be before you did notice a difference? It seems like this review started by providing very little useful information and the thread just makes for less and less information.
 

zazzn

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
149
I'm using the intel RST 11.2.0.1006
AHCI is set to RAID.

Don't know about power...
 

Bishi

n00b
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
4
Here's some benchmarks of these drives in RAID 0 purely for informative purposes. I compare them to my older drives for reference.

I bought a couple of Samsung 840 Pro drives and have them in Intel RAID 0 on my Gigabyte Z68X-UD3P-B3. Fresh install of Windows 8 with latest drivers.

SAMSUNG RAID (bare drive, just Windows install)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.2 x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 1118.737 MB/s
Sequential Write : 1004.223 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 779.312 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 925.625 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 39.381 MB/s [ 9614.4 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 335.163 MB/s [ 81827.0 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 610.470 MB/s [149040.5 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 532.957 MB/s [130116.4 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [C: 48.3% (230.3/476.6 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2013/02/13 22:32:58
OS : Windows 8 Enterprise Edition N [6.2 Build 9200] (x64)


SAMSUNG RAID (half full, copied my old data over)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.2 x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 1126.290 MB/s
Sequential Write : 1003.742 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 857.942 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 948.811 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 39.180 MB/s [ 9565.4 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 308.000 MB/s [ 75195.2 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 549.667 MB/s [134196.0 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 529.216 MB/s [129203.2 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [C: 48.3% (230.3/476.6 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2013/02/13 23:10:39
OS : Windows 8 Enterprise Edition N [6.2 Build 9200] (x64)


OCZ Vertex 3 RAID 0 (mostly full)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.2 x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 503.800 MB/s
Sequential Write : 284.090 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 459.549 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 205.058 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 26.436 MB/s [ 6454.2 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 157.994 MB/s [ 38572.9 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 216.592 MB/s [ 52879.0 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 128.577 MB/s [ 31391.0 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [D: 88.4% (197.7/223.6 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2013/02/13 22:39:33
OS : Windows 8 Enterprise Edition N [6.2 Build 9200] (x64)


CRUCIAL C300 (single drive, no RAID)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.2 x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 281.875 MB/s
Sequential Write : 214.017 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 269.579 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 99.021 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 33.937 MB/s [ 8285.5 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 64.914 MB/s [ 15848.2 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 205.707 MB/s [ 50221.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 89.722 MB/s [ 21904.8 IOPS]

Test : 1000 MB [F: 56.9% (135.7/238.4 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2013/02/13 22:55:12
OS : Windows 8 Enterprise Edition N [6.2 Build 9200] (x64)


Let me know if you want another benchmark.
 

mikeblas

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - May 2006
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
12,776
Seems like a pretty meaningless benchmark -- too many unknowns.
 
Top