# Samsung 4tb evo vs qvo



## Studio E (May 23, 2021)

This last weekend’s sales did me in on drive space. My 2TB SSD is full and my other sample drive is a 7200 for smaller, less used libraries.

I only know enough to be dangerous, and not enough to know if there is a significant difference for the purpose of sample streaming. Any thoughts from the hard drive-literate?


----------



## SlHarder (May 23, 2021)

EVOs on sale have been my purchases.

Here's a detailed article from a reputable source.









Samsung QVO vs EVO vs PRO: What's the Difference?


This post talks about the differences among Samsung QVO, EVO, and PRO series, taking Samsung 860 and 970 series as examples.




www.partitionwizard.com


----------



## Hadrondrift (May 23, 2021)

The QVO models have very bad writing speed, can be even slower than a HDD at long sequential writes. Usually, I would avoid them as a system drive. BUT as big storage for sample data, where you write once and read often, I think they can be an inexpensive alternative to the EVOs. I have no personal experience with the QVOs, though.


----------



## pcarrilho (May 25, 2021)

QVO are excelent for samples dedicated drives. I have 2 just for samples...


----------



## el-bo (May 25, 2021)

If you widen the net a little, Crucial ssd can be had for very good prices.


----------



## Fry777 (May 25, 2021)

I have a 4Tb EVO and a 4Tb QVO with some libraries on each and I see no difference when using samples. The notable difference is in warranty length (5 years (EVO) vs 3 (QVO) ) and when writing massive files to the SSD (not typical when composing) as @Hadrondrift said.


----------



## heisenberg (May 25, 2021)

Fry777 said:


> I have a 4Tb EVO and a 4Tb QVO with some libraries on each and I see no difference when using samples. The notable difference is in warranty length (5 years (EVO) vs 3 (QVO) ) and when writing massive files to the SSD (not typical when composing) as @Hadrondrift said.


Same experience. QVO has been fine for me along with the EVOs I have. No appreciable difference in use with samples.


----------



## wst3 (May 25, 2021)

I have used different drives from both Samsung and Crucial. All my sample drives are MX500s, I went with them for price, warranty, and performance. In the real world (or as close as my world comes) I have seen no difference between the MX500 and different Samsung models.

My criteria, since I am about to upgrade a 1TB sample drive to 2TB:
I want a 5 year warranty - that doesn't prove anything more than the manufacturer is willing to bet that it will last that long.
Performance has to approach the limits of SATA III, beyond that there really isn't much of an advantage. And performance specs are tricky at best anyway.
Price - I have to be able to afford it<G>

For now it looks like a 2TB Crucial MX500 for about $200. For just a little more I could "upgrade" to an 870 EVO, which is tempting. The leap to the 860 EVO is significantly more, and the 860 Pro is even more.

My only concern with the QVO drives is the 3 year warranty, and that's probably silly since I've yet to have a drive I did not outgrow in 3 years. But one can hope...


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 25, 2021)

$200 for a 2TB SSD with a 5-year warranty is very good.


----------



## colony nofi (May 26, 2021)

We have 6 of the QVO's around the studios here. 2 are 2TB and 4 are 4Tb each Used for 
(a) Sample Libraries
(b) Sound Effect Libraries
(c) Project Backup / Temporary Project Drive (old server wasn't up to task on a multi-room project and this was a great stop-gap measure

Yes, they only have 3 years warranty, but looking at the expected life of the drives, for the use purposes (which is mainly reading) they're fantastic and very good value.
I've recently got some QLC drives in by Sabrent which are incredible value - the 8TB NVME particularly allows for some pretty useful workflows. 

So long as you are not using these for a data base server (or something that is constantly writing/re-writing massive files, they are excellent drives.


----------



## Guffy (May 26, 2021)

I have a few EVO's and a QVO, and i've not noticed any difference between them.


----------



## Soundbed (Jun 16, 2021)

with that said, the 2TB QVO is under $180 right now


and the 4TB is under $420 right now


----------



## sostenuto (Jun 16, 2021)

Been awhile, but got several excellent 'deals' on Amazon 'returns' for both EVO & QVO. 
QVO 4TB works well as sample drive 'here', but do not do large, orchestral projects.


----------



## Soundbed (Jun 16, 2021)

sostenuto said:


> Been awhile, but got several excellent 'deals' on Amazon 'returns' for both EVO & QVO.
> QVO 4TB works well as sample drive 'here', but do not do large, orchestral projects.


what are 'returns' ?


----------



## sostenuto (Jun 16, 2021)

Often appear on Item page, but down below price and brief descriptions.
_Check this Link, just off right bottom corner of SSD image (after scrolling down as far as page goes).
'New & Used (17) from $90.29 & FREE Shipping.'

Have purchased several from Amazon Warehouse like this 'Used - Very Good' one. _


----------



## Soundbed (Jun 16, 2021)

sostenuto said:


> Often appear on Item page, but down below price and brief descriptions.
> _Check this Link, just off right bottom corner of SSD image (after scrolling down as far as page goes).
> 'New & Used (17) from $90.29 & FREE Shipping.'
> 
> Have purchased several from Amazon Warehouse like this 'Used - Very Good' one. _



Oh I see! I would likely never trust buying a drive that is not new.


----------



## sostenuto (Jun 17, 2021)

Understand ! 👍🏻
_Purchase many items regularly _ Amazon Prime _ and amazing return system. Several SSD /HDD, like the one mentioned, and never an issue. Very few returns (0 Disk drives) yet all handled quickly /smoothly. Use Samsung Magician to check performance. _


----------



## zwhita (Jul 9, 2021)

Just ordered a 4TB QVO 870 to upgrade my 1TB EVO 860, and in regards to read performance, the only significant difference I see is random-access reads seem to be about 10% faster on the EVO(TLC vs. QLC). User Benchmark link

I'm now wondering what Orchestral libraries to keep on the smaller drive, if it's going to have somewhat faster random-access read performance.

My first guess would be to partition the orchestral libraries out (between the two drives) in accordance to what would be a typical project. Since I'm so green at this, I would just put larger sized libraries on the 4TB drive and smaller ones on the 1TB.

One thing I still wonder about performance is how much difference the 4GB cache in the QVO vs. 1GB cache in the EVO will make?


----------



## thevisi0nary (Jul 12, 2021)

Piggy backing on this thread. 

Is the prevailing knowledge that QLC read only speed remains unaffected when the drive is full?


----------



## Soundbed (Jul 12, 2021)

sostenuto said:


> Understand ! 👍🏻
> _Purchase many items regularly _ Amazon Prime _ and amazing return system. Several SSD /HDD, like the one mentioned, and never an issue. Very few returns (0 Disk drives) yet all handled quickly /smoothly. Use Samsung Magician to check performance. _


That’s good to know. It would still “stress me out” to know I bought something used and it might have a higher failure chance. I’ll pay more for a little peace of mind.


----------



## colony nofi (Jul 13, 2021)

thevisi0nary said:


> Piggy backing on this thread.
> 
> Is the prevailing knowledge that QLC read only speed remains unaffected when the drive is full?


I have a 4TB QVO here (QLC) and it is sitting at 3.9TB used. No difference to read speeds.

All this talk about small differences to read / write speeds and random access performance is kinda forest trees stuff. Given how kontakt reads files, then worrying about this stuff is completely unnecessary. You will never notice any real world difference in kontakt when using the same interface to the drive.


----------



## thevisi0nary (Jul 22, 2021)

colony nofi said:


> I have a 4TB QVO here (QLC) and it is sitting at 3.9TB used. No difference to read speeds.
> 
> All this talk about small differences to read / write speeds and random access performance is kinda forest trees stuff. Given how kontakt reads files, then worrying about this stuff is completely unnecessary. You will never notice any real world difference in kontakt when using the same interface to the drive.


Got it, that is reassuring. I've been looking at getting a 4tb QLC Inland NVME. I know it's going to be filled near the brim and will be using it only for reading files, but I've never owned a QLC drive so just nervous about it.


----------

