970 pro vs 970 evo plus

[Alexc6545]

Thinking about getting either the 970 pro (512gb) or the 970 evo plus (500gb), the evo plus is about 20$ cheaper. Is the evo plus supposed to be faster than the 970 pro and is it cheaper cause of the loss of 12 gb? On the website it says the 970 pro is supposed to be used for work intensive actives while the 970 evo plus is for high end gaming and editing, does it really make a difference?

[TempestCatto]

The difference between them is that EVO is TLC (triple level cell) while PRO is MLC (multi level cell). PRO would be a bit faster and last longer. Personally, I'll never not go PRO. But that's all up to you, if you're just gaming and doing everyday tasks, you won't see a difference between the two in terms of speed. "Work intensive activities" and "high end gaming and editing" is just a marketing ploy. Get whatever your heart desires.

 

P.S. these days TLC and MLC are so similar in quality, they now just about perform the same and last as long. It's kinda like .9mm vs .40 CAL, ballistically, they're the same.

[Turtle Rig]

19 minutes ago, Alexc6545 said:

Thinking about getting either the 970 pro (512gb) or the 970 evo plus (500gb), the evo plus is about 20$ cheaper. Is the evo plus supposed to be faster than the 970 pro and is it cheaper cause of the loss of 12 gb? On the website it says the 970 pro is supposed to be used for work intensive actives while the 970 evo plus is for high end gaming and editing, does it really make a difference?

Dude honest to GOD there is no difference at all in the real world.  Benchmarks will show a difference but real world will have zero difference.  I don't even see a difference when I went to m.2 years ago.

[Turtle Rig]

1 minute ago, TempestCatto said:

The difference between them is that EVO is TLC (triple level cell) while PRO is MLC (multi level cell). PRO would be a bit faster and last longer. Personally, I'll never not go PRO. But that's all up to you, if you're just gaming and doing everyday tasks, you won't see a difference between the two in terms of speed. "Work intensive activities" and "high end gaming and editing" is just a marketing ploy. Get whatever your heart desires.

 

P.S. these days TLC and MLC are so similar in quality, they now just about perform the same and last as long. It's kinda like .9mm vs .40 CAL, ballistically, they're the same.

Thanks for the lesson chief.  As I said before no difference at all in real world. ZERO ,,,,,,, only higher benchmark scores that's it.

[Alexc6545]

6 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

The difference between them is that EVO is TLC (triple level cell) while PRO is MLC (multi level cell). PRO would be a bit faster and last longer. Personally, I'll never not go PRO. But that's all up to you, if you're just gaming and doing everyday tasks, you won't see a difference between the two in terms of speed. "Work intensive activities" and "high end gaming and editing" is just a marketing ploy. Get whatever your heart desires.

 

P.S. these days TLC and MLC are so similar in quality, they now just about perform the same and last as long. It's kinda like .9mm vs .40 CAL, ballistically, they're the same.

Thanks for the response! on amazon it says the 970 evo plus has 57% faster RANDOM write speeds, and the max sequential write speed on the evo plus is about 500mb higher as well, can you explain what what that means, and how the 970 pro is still faster than this?

[Turtle Rig]

3 minutes ago, Alexc6545 said:

Thanks for the response! on amazon it says the 970 evo plus has 57% faster RANDOM write speeds, and the max sequential write speed on the evo plus is about 500mb higher as well, can you explain what what that means, and how the 970 pro is still faster than this?

Like I said before You cant tell a real world difference between a SSD and a m.2 nVme SSD.  I went from a SSD to m.2 absoletly zero performance boost alto it says 2500mbps read and write and your SSD says 540mbps.  Ive tested this out, games launch the same maps load the same ammount of time,, windows boots up in same ammount of time going from SSD to m.2 ............. I mean its a good thing, there just isnt any real world performance to be had.  But its cool to have a m.2 their sexy and small and all that jazz.

[TempestCatto]

3 minutes ago, Alexc6545 said:

Thanks for the response! on amazon it says the 970 evo plus has 57% faster RANDOM write speeds, and the max sequential write speed on the evo plus is about 500mb higher as well, can you explain what what that means, and how the 970 pro is still faster than this?

This link should explain it https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-970-evo-plus-ssd,5608.html

 

Without getting complicated, Samsung basically made a bunch of hardware improvements to the drive, making it capable of doing more.

 

Also, be careful when you read/use MB and mb as MB means megabyte where as mb means megabit. One does not equal the other exactly. megabit is usually use for telling transfer or download speeds, where as megabyte is used for telling size of a file or drive. So what you're reading may or may not be written deceitfully, making use of MB rather than mb.

[Turtle Rig]

Just now, TempestCatto said:

This link should explain it https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-970-evo-plus-ssd,5608.html

 

Without getting complicated, Samsung basically made a bunch of hardware improvements to the drive, making it capable of doing more.

I don't buy it all marketing ploys my friend. 

[TempestCatto]

2 minutes ago, Turtle Rig said:

I don't buy it all marketing ploys my friend. 

I'm sure they did make it better, but it now seems like it's the exact same as the PRO (performance and life wise). Back when Samsung first had their SSD's come out, there was a good difference between EVO and PRO's. It's why I went with, and stick with the PRO line. Once I'm stuck on something, I'm kinda stuck forever (but that's just me).

[Turtle Rig]

Just now, TempestCatto said:

I'm sure they did make it better, but it now seems like it's the exact same as the PRO (performance and life wise). Back when Samsung first had their SSD's come out, there was a good difference between EVO and PRO's. It's why I went with, and stick with the PRO line. Once I'm stuck on something, I'm kinda stuck forever (but that's just me).

Me too man, dont get me wrong here,,,,, Im just talking from experience and research that its not such a big jump from SSD to M.2 as it shows in the benchmarks ya know.

[r2724r16]

Just now, Turtle Rig said:

from SSD to M.2 

You mean SATA to PCIe, right? Because M.2 is a form factor, not an interface.

[Alexc6545]

Personally im just asking for the best bang for my buck, so not if ill ever see real life performance but weather or not one is theoretically better than the other. @TempestCatto so if the evo plus and the pro (970) were released at the same time what would you have bought

[TempestCatto]

4 minutes ago, Alexc6545 said:

Personally im just asking for the best bang for my buck, so not if ill ever see real life performance but weather or not one is theoretically better than the other. @TempestCatto so if the evo plus and the pro (970) were released at the same time what would you have bought

I would have bought the PRO, but that's because I'm stuck in my old ways. If you want the best bang for your buck, you can safely go EVO with no regrets.