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

  • Flunk - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    I agree, the low price makes the mx500 a really good buy. It certainly qualifies as "fast enough" while delivering very low cost/GB. Reply
  • GreenMeters - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Looking like it. The 850 EVO was on sale over Black Friday for less than the MX500 (at 1 TB size anyway), but outside big discounts like that (and assuming there's no simultaneous discount of the MX500) then it looks like Samsung is about to be irrelevant when it comes to SATA. Disappointing in some ways (have four 850 EVOs in various systems now, two of them picked up at the aforementioned sale, and they've been great) but as long as PCI is becoming more affordable I guess it's not a big deal. Reply
  • Alistair - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    You are comparing with the launch price of the MX500. I've bought 5 x MX500 1TB drives for $242 USD each. I'm pretty sure the Samsung 850 is more expensive. Reply
  • Samus - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    If you are going to compare sale prices of Samsung drives to the competition, it becomes even more obvious Samsung is a bad buy when you see the sale prices of competitors. The BX300 256GB drives were on sale for $70 at one point. No Samsung 250GB drive has been under $90 in over a year, even on sale. Reply
  • bug77 - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    SATA does not prevent performance improvements. 4k random reads are what give a drive its speed for home usage and we're not even at 100MB/s in this aspect. Plenty of room for improvement right there.

    In other news, if you have ~$250 to spend, you can either get a 512GB 850 Pro or a 1TB MX500. Imho, as good as Samsung is, there's no contest here.
  • zodiacfml - Sunday, February 11, 2018 - link

    I agree. The only limit is in sequential. However, we have seen the performance/capabilities of the Intel Optane drives and that even that doesn't improve a desktop experience by any noticeable level. Reply
  • Round - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    Sorry, but I disagree. What's so impressive about this, because I'm not seeing it? They improved the power spec, but for real world use, especially in a desktop, I'm just not seeing any benefit at those prices.

    I can't see buying any more Samsung drives (I have 6 850 Evos) or recommending them to anyone. The price/performance from Crucial is superior, and I doubt anyone is ever going to notice a performance difference between the MX500 and 850/860 Evos (the 860 Pro is priced ridiculously high and is not a wise purchase for any average user).

    I find myself hoping Samsung gets punished in the market place....
  • StrangerGuy - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    Yup, I fail to see whats so great about this SSD either for consumers either. MX500 beats it in 4K random IOPS while having a much higher GB/$. The extra endurance and warranty length is also completely irrelevant for 99.99% of consumers out there; I myself have a Crucial M550 1TB since 2014 and I still only have 11TB total writes on it. Reply
  • BurntMyBacon - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    While I don't find this drive particularly impressive (not much room to impress on SATA anymore), it does have the distinction of likely being the last MLC drive available on SATA. While normal consumers can (in theory) use TLC drive with no negative effect, there are cases of people who have experienced a TLC SSD failure and aren't too eager to get another. I've personally been involved with 7 TLC SSD failures (3 different Crucial models, 2 Sandisks, and 2 Samsung). While the NAND was not likely responsible for any of these failures and this makes up a pretty low percentage of total TLC SSDs deployed within my purview, it does start to leave a less reliable image when compared to the zero MLC SSD failures (Crucial, Intel, Samsung, Sandisk, Corsair, etc.) I've seen in my client base. Granted, this is all anecdotal and I use global data (including HDD vs SSD failure rates) to color my recommendations. However, clients who've experienced the drive failures have universally decided that TLC was not an option for them. I haven't sworn off TLC drives personally, but entirely coincidentally, I have yet to purchase one since I burnt one out under heavy load (improper cooling on the controller I believe). Reply
  • chrone - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Could you guys perform synchronous write test in Linux as well?

    dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/test bs=4K count=100 oflag=direct,sync status=progress
    dd if=/dev/zero of=/tmp/test bs=4M count=100 oflag=direct,sync status=progress

    Sadly, the synchronous write for older Samsung SSD 850 Pro is similar to HDD. Synchronous write are used by OS and app for data consistency and reliability in Linux environment.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now