Kicking off a busy day in the SSD industry, today we're looking at the launch of Samsung's new 860 PRO SSD. The Samsung 860 PRO is an update to the venerable 850 PRO SATA SSD, and comes at a time where Samsung faces more serious competition than they have in several years, but also when the market has almost entirely moved on from premium SATA SSDs. The 860 PRO uses the latest 64L 3D MLC NAND and LPDDR4 DRAM from Samsung plus a new revision to their highly successful SATA SSD controller series. Accordingly, the latest PRO SSD from Samsung isn't meant to be a game-changer like its predecessor, but rather is a natural evolution of Samsung's SATA SSDs – at least as much as SATA SSDs can evolve. For the SATA SSD market then, the 860 PRO stands to be the latest, greatest, fastest, and possibly last(est) high-end desktop MLC SATA SSD that we'll ever see.

The Samsung SSD 850 PRO introduced 3D NAND flash memory to the consumer SSD market over three years ago. Since then, it has reigned as the top SATA SSD. The combination of Samsung's MLC 3D NAND and their top-notch SSD controller gave the 850 PRO performance and write endurance that were nearly unbeatable.

The SSD market now is very different from when the 850 PRO launched in mid-2014. All the attention for premium SSDs is now focused on the NVMe market where significant performance differentiation is possible. The mainstream SSD market has shifted to using TLC NAND instead of MLC NAND, first in the SATA segment and now even most NVMe SSDs are adopting TLC. At first, the switch to TLC was a race to the bottom that left the 850 PRO almost completely unchallenged. In 2016, Intel and Micron brought the second 3D NAND implementation to market, but their 32-layer 3D floating gate NAND flash proved to be slower (though cheaper) than Samsung's. In 2017, Toshiba and Western Digital/SanDisk finally produced 3D NAND suitable for the mass market, and the second-generation 3D NAND from Intel/Micron debuted. With 64-layer 3D NAND and more mature SSD controllers, these competitors have finally started to challenge the performance of the Samsung 850 PRO—usually while beating it on price.

Samsung hasn't been standing still. In addition to extending their dominance into the NVMe SSD market, Samsung has quietly updated the 850 PRO and 850 EVO without introducing new naming. In mid 2015, Samsung introduced 2TB models to both SATA families, and updated the controllers to support LPDDR3 DRAM instead of the LPDDR2 initially used by the 850s. Over the course of 2016, Samsung moved the 850s from their second-generation 32-layer 3D NAND to their third generation 48L 3D NAND. This brought a doubling of the capacity of each NAND die, and allowed Samsung to produce 4TB versions of the 850 PRO and EVO, though only the 4TB EVO actually made it to market.

Samsung 860 PRO Specifications
Capacity 256 GB 512 GB 1 TB 2 TB 4 TB
Form Factor 2.5" SATA 6 Gbps
Controller Samsung MJX
NAND Samsung 64-layer 3D MLC V-NAND
Sequential Read up to 560 MB/s
Sequential Write up to 530 MB/s
4KB Random Read  up to 100k IOPS
4KB Random Write  up to 90k IOPS
DevSleep Power 2.5 mW – 7 mW
Endurance 300 TBW 600 TBW 1200 TBW 2400 TBW 4800 TBW
Warranty 5 years
MSRP $139.99 (55¢/GB) $249.99 (49¢/GB) $479.99 (47¢/GB) $949.99 (46¢/GB) $1899.99 (46¢/GB)

The changes the 860 PRO brings over the 850 PRO are pretty mundane. The controller has been updated again to support new memory: now codenamed MJX, it uses LPDDR4 DRAM. Samsung hasn't shared whether it deviates from their pattern of two or three ARM Cortex-R cores, nor what the clock speeds or fabrication process node are. The flash memory has been updated to Samsung's 64L 3D MLC, their fourth generation of 3D NAND. The Samsung 860 PRO is our first look at Samsung's 64-layer MLC V-NAND, after several encounters with the 64L TLC last year. Both 860 PRO models we have tested use 256Gb dies that are substantially larger than the 256Gb 64L TLC dies we have used previously.

The most visible change is that Samsung is finally launching the 4TB capacity in the PRO line. The 4TB model may turn heads, but it should not be mistaken for a mainstream product. It is a product born from the same mindset that leads to the GeForce Titan GPUs, Extreme Edition or Threadripper CPUs, and 1.5kW power supplies. The total available market for such products is tiny and often insufficient to justify creating the product. Instead, these parts are valuable for their "halo effect": Samsung's ability to offer a 4TB SSD helps their brand image even among consumers who cannot afford to spend anywhere near this much on their SSD.

Aside from the inclusion of the 4TB model, there is little to make the 860 PRO appear superior to the 850 PRO. Power consumption ratings have decreased slightly, but the limits of the SATA connection mean there is little room for performance improvement. The warranty period has dropped from the outstanding 10 years to a more typical 5 years. On the other hand, Samsung has stopped severely lowballing the write endurance rating. At every capacity, the 860 PRO's total write endurance rating is at least doubled, and given the shorter warranty period this yields a drive writes per day rating of 0.64, compared to a maximum of 0.16 DWPD over 10 years for the 850 PRO. The write endurance ratings are still lower than the enterprise PM863a to say nothing of the SM863a's 5.5 DWPD, but among consumer drives the 860 PRO's specified endurance no longer looks like a joke.

The other noteworthy recent MLC SATA drive is the Crucial BX300. This drive conveniently solved several problems for Micron. Since their 32L 3D NAND dies can be treated either as 384Gb TLC or 256Gb MLC, the BX300 gives Micron an outlet to sell dies that cannot meet the endurance requirements for use as TLC. At the same time, the smaller usable capacity of their MLC parts makes them more suitable for use in low-capacity SSDs. The Samsung 860 PRO isn't as convenient for Samsung to produce—they have little use for the 64L 256Gb MLC parts elsewhere in their product line so far, nor for a 384Gb TLC part.

There aren't any many SSDs to make a fair comparison against the Samsung 860 PRO, especially the 4TB model. This review includes test results from the 4TB 850 EVO and the 2TB 850 PRO, but otherwise focuses on comparisons in the 512GB capacity class. Those drives include:

  • The Samsung 850 PRO 512GB: Our sample is one of the original generation using 32L 3D NAND and LPDDR2 DRAM, rather than the updated model with 48L 3D NAND and LPDDR3.
  • The Intel 545s, using Intel's 64L 3D TLC and the Silicon Motion SM2259 controller
  • The SanDisk Ultra 3D (unfortunately in the 1TB capacity) using SanDisk/Toshiba 64L 3D TLC and the Marvell 88SS1074 controller
  • Three Crucial SSDs with Micron 3D NAND: the MX500 with 64L 3D TLC and the SM2258 controller, the MX300 with 32L 3D TLC and the Marvell 88SS1074 controller, and the BX300 with 32L 3D MLC and the SM2258 controller
  • The Samsung PM981 512GB, a M.2 NVMe SSD for the OEM market, using 64L 3D TLC. A retail version of this is likely to be the successor to the Samsung 960 EVO, and the pricing will probably be on par with the 512GB 860 PRO. Thus, the PM981 illustrates the tradeoffs of sticking with the SATA interface and insisting on MLC NAND when cheaper TLC is good enough for almost all users.

The 860 PRO is going to be the most expensive SATA drive in this bunch, and even the one NVMe drive is probably not going to be much more expensive per gigabyte than the 860 PRO when its retail version arrives. Even without the legacy of the 850 PRO, the expectation would be for the 860 PRO to demonstrate clear superiority.

AnandTech 2017 SSD Testbed
CPU Intel Xeon E3 1240 v5
Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty E3V5 Performance Gaming/OC
Chipset Intel C232
Memory 4x 8GB G.SKILL Ripjaws DDR4-2400 CL15
Graphics AMD Radeon HD 5450, 1920x1200@60Hz
Software Windows 10 x64, version 1703
Linux kernel version 4.14, fio version 3.1
AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer


View All Comments

  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    "Are the 256gb and 512gb pcbs the smaller pcb?"

    Correct. The small PCB shots are the 512GB drive, and the large PCB shots are the 4TB drive.
  • comma - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Awesome. Thanks for continuing to take apart the drives and showing us the innards :D Reply
  • will2 - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    You included some data on the EVO 860 but no consumption figures ! As the EVO 860 otherwise appears the more cost-effective than the Pro, any chance of adding the 2 Idle figures and the power efficiency for the EVO 860 ? Reply
  • cfenton - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    At this point, I usually recommend whichever drive from a major manufacturer has the lowest $/GB. It's been a while since that was a Samsung drive. I would be astonished if anyone could tell the difference between an 860 Evo and an MX500 in typical client usage, so I don't think it makes much sense to buy the more expensive drive. I'm sure there is a small market that, for some reason, needs the fastest and most durable SATA drives possible, but it's unnecessary for most people. Reply
  • Magichands8 - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    What a joke. Another SSD release crippled with the SATA interface? CHECK. Another SSD offered at the ridiculous $0.50/GB price point? CHECK. Another SSD with woefully low storage capacity? CHECK. Another customer convinced to avoid buying their SSDs? CHECK. Now my money isn't going anywhere near one of these so I admit I didn't read the whole article but just from reading some of the comments it appears that Samsung also managed to reduce both durability AND warranty coverage for this tripe. Samsung's really on a role these days. It's not all bad though, apparently someone in their corporate structure has been using their brains as Samsung has managed to avoid the M.2 format for each of these offerings. What they should have done in addition to giving buyers that special feeling of owning an SSD with the letters "PRO" on it is wrap the drives with flashing multicolored LEDs so the kids can really get their bling bling on! Samsung is definitely taking on 2018 by storm! Reply
  • Round - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    While I agree with most of what you just said, I disagree on SATA. I think SATA drives are great for 90%+ of the population. They work everywhere, they're cheaper, and besides running some fake bench mark tests and moving files on the drive, they give people the same feel/real world performance.

    NVME is the real rip off in SSDs IMO. Same memory, same format for M.2 SATA/NVME, different controller, but the NVME is significantly more expensive. Why charge so much? No reason other than they can get away with it.
  • Magichands8 - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    Anyone moving around any data over a couple hundred MB will notice the difference IMMEDIATELY. And there is absolutely, positively, no excuse whatsoever for hogtying a storage technology NATIVELY capable of vastly better performance. The "it's good enough" argument doesn't work any better for SATA vs. PCIE than it did for HDD vs. SSD. We all moved from 32 bit to 64 bit, from HHD to SSD and now we are able to move from SATA to PCIE because the technology for the latter is here, it's present and it has, literally, made SATA obsolete. Reply
  • chrcoluk - Friday, April 12, 2019 - link

    if you think sata is obsolete then I assume you dont use netflix, youtube, and other mainstream media services as these services run of spindles not flash storage, the reason been flash storage cannot compete on capacity.

    For a home user nvme offers little benefit vs sata for ssd's, for a datacentre user, its good for performance sensitive loads such as database caching, but doesnt shine in raw storage capacity.

    SATA as long as its good enough for spindles will survive.

    For NVME to wipe out SATA ssd's the pricing needs to be improved to match SATA pricing, in addition m.2 form factor is a step backwards, board manufacturers are struggling to fit even only 2 slots per board, and they are a pain to install vs simply slotting in a sata drive into a drive bay.

    How often do people move enough data around that the performance of nvme really matters? Most of my writes to my ssd are me downloading games, and the bottleneck in that case is the speed of my internet.

    NVME is faster but thats its only win at the moment, it loses on many other things, and because of that SATA is not obsolete.
  • overseer - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    My Intel X25-M was bought before wedding and it still has 90+% writes left. Guess I may pass it to my grandson... Reply
  • Hixbot - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    What is with the PM981 idle wake up latency. Almost 8 seconds to wake up?! Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now