add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Which SSD loads things faster: HP EX920 or Samsung 860 QVO?

Growligator

2 months ago

Build: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/XsjK3t

The HP has a data transfer rate of 3.2 gb/s while the Samsung has one of 6 gb/s. Does this mean that the Samsung will load things faster or am I misunderstanding how it works?

Comments

  • 2 months ago
  • 2 points

I think you're confusing GB/s and Gb/s - gigabytes vs gigabits. The EX920 hits 2.4 gigabytes/sec peak sequential read in anandtech's test. In a similar test, the 860 QVO will manage 500+ gigabytes/sec, which is pretty close to the practical limit for SATA 3. If you measure random 4K reads the two will come out a lot closer, of course.

There's no question that the EX920 is faster on paper. Whether it will actually matter depends on how much of the I/O is sequential, and whether the data being loaded is large enough that you can actually tell the difference.

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

the 860 QVO will manage 500+ gigabytes/sec, which is pretty close to the practical limit for SATA 3

You mean 500+ Magabytes/sec. No consumer storage drive is anywhere near 500 GB/s. Sata 3 speed is capped about 570 MB/s.

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

Darn it. :-) Yes, I mean Megabytes/sec.

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

I see no HP...

But at a guess, you're looking at the interface the drives use: 6 Gb/s is SATA III and 3 Gb/s is the older SATA II.

See here: https://kb.sandisk.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/8142/~/difference-between-sata-i%2C-sata-ii-and-sata-iii

tl/dr You're right, Samsung is faster.

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

I should have gone to bed, about ten minutes before replying.

  • 2 months ago
  • 1 point

The Samsung is slower. It is a SATA III drive vs the HP Drive which is a NVMe drive. The 6gb/s is just the max interface for SATA III which will end up just under 500 MB/s (MegaBYTES) on a good drive. The NVMe has a much faster interface (I forget the limits by version just google it if interested), but the limit won't matter much, you are concerned with the actual drive performance. The EX920 is showing around 2624MB/s which is 5x faster than the sata III. This is all on paper and depends on what data, how used, etc. etc. and likely you won't even notice the difference in normal use. But most will grab the NVMe since they are not much more expensive these days.

Specifics of the two drives performance side by side so you can compare the paper benchmarks. https://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-860-QVO-1TB-vs-HP-EX920-NVMe-PCIe-M2-1TB/m667965vsm488611

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube