FirmWare Updates - for WD Black and Samsung

[brave]

In 2022 i buyed a 1TB WD Black SN850 for a 85 pounds, and now this year 2023 i buyed a 1TB WD Black SN850X for a 65 pounds, brand new. Is a so cheap from Ebay.
WD Black SN850 1TB - FirmWare Updates
611100WD - 01.2021
612100WD - 03.2021
613000WD - 05.2021
613200WD - 07.2021
614300WD - 09.2021
614600WD - 11.2021
614900WD - 01.2022

WD Black SN850X 1TB - FirmWare Updates
620241WD - 06.2022
620281WD - 08.2022
620311WD - 01.2023
620331WD - 03.2023 - fixed the problem with \Device\RaidPort1 error.

Samsung 980Pro - FirmWare Updates
1B2QGXA7 - 12.2020
2B2QGXA7 - 02.2021
3B2QGXA7 - 05.2021
4B2QGXA7 - 12.2021
5B2QGXA7 - 01.2022

Samsung 990Pro - Firmware Updates
0B2QJXD7 - 10.2022 - First
1B2QJXD7 - 02.2023 - Fixing The Degradation to address these anomalies.
The update fixes the underlying cause of the rapid health declines.

 

[olymind1]

How is the 990pro and SN850x compared to each other? Are there any (noticable or noteable) difference between them?

 

[SPDIF]

The Samsung 990 Pro is the much-anticipated successor to the popular 980 Pro. It is poised to be the very fastest drive, outdoing even the SK hynix Platinum P41 and the WD SN850x
The Samsung is much more economical and also generates much less heat than the WD.
And the Samsung 990 Pro does support TCG Opal encryption - an unsupported feature for many consumer SSDs, while the WD does not support any encryption.

 

[brave]

Samsung is have a new Firmware but the problem is a i still read a so many complaints in the many forum website ,and after this new firmware. To maybe is a better to buy a WD Black SN850X.
Samsung 990Pro - Firmware Updates
0B2QJXD7 - 10.2022 - First
1B2QJXD7 - 02.2023 - Fixing The Degradation to address these anomalies.
The update fixes the underlying cause of the rapid health declines.
3B2QJXD7 - 05.2023

 

[wNotyarD]

The Samsung 990 Pro is the much-anticipated successor to the popular 980 Pro. It is poised to be the very fastest drive, outdoing even the SK hynix Platinum P41 and the WD SN850x
The Samsung is much more economical and also generates much less heat than the WD.
And the Samsung 990 Pro does support TCG Opal encryption - an unsupported feature for many consumer SSDs, while the WD does not support any encryption.

The SN850X is in a weird spot. Even WD's documentation on it is flippy, adding and removing encryption as a supported feature. There's been reports, though, of it being Opal 2.01 compliant (just not on any review, so it was possibly in a firmware update but WD never discloses the changelogs).

 

[brave]

Hi is have a New Firmware from today for WD Black SN850X - 620361WD - improves the stability and performance of the drive.

 

[mechtech]

Hi is have a New Firmware from today for WD Black SN850X - 620361WD - 11.2023

Hmmmm
I heard people moan about this drive with random issues like slow downs, hiccups, etc. I wonder if this will improve that?

 

[SPDIF]

Hmmmm
I heard people moan about this drive with random issues like slow downs, hiccups, etc. I wonder if this will improve that?

They fixed all known problems already in another firmware update released some time ago.

The firmware version is indeed 620361WD, which is released on November 3, 2023. This firmware update improves the stability and performance of the drive. What exactly only WD knows.

 

[freeagent]

I took the update yesterday, but hadn't noticed any problems or issues. The other 4 M.2s in my system had no update available, just the 850X.

 

[SPDIF]

Good to know they are still working on it to make it better. There where some problems with the old first versions of the firmware, but it was only some error messages in Windows.

They fixed that long time ago already. It was all fixed in 620331WD firmware,

 

[brave]

I tested now the new Firmware 620361WD, with the CrystalDiskMark 8.0.4.
And the result is not so good. The Write speed is go little down.
And the Read speed is like before.

 

[SPDIF]

For me nothing changed speeds are the same! I don't see anything improved, but maybe they just take out some bugs. Don't forget to NOT test speeds in Windows and boot with this, that is very unreliable test. I test it empty, and boot from another SSD, that gives real results only.

If you do anyway; You should close most background applications such as indexing, Windows updates, and anti-virus disabled in the OS to reduce run-to-run variability, and get a reliable testing result.

And i can't say it enough, for new users that want to update the firmware, always take a backup first!

I would not call this exactly Not good...

 

[JackOO7]

On an almost identical AMD system, almost identical numbers .......

 

[chrcoluk]

They fixed all known problems already in another firmware update released some time ago.

The firmware version is indeed 620361WD, which is released on November 3, 2023. This firmware update improves the stability and performance of the drive. What exactly only WD knows.

View attachment 321676

I am on 620331WD which was the latest at the time I got my drive, which wasnt that long ago.

Why are SSD manufacturers never supplying meaningful changelogs.

Anyone got a screen grab of the latest dashboard software? 4.xx

I am on 3.8.2.10 and like its style, and the changelog says a new look so want to preview it before I decide to update it.

 

[SPDIF]

I am on 620331WD which was the latest at the time I got my drive, which wasnt that long ago.

Why are SSD manufacturers never supplying meaningful changelogs.

It's always the same with motherboard BIOS updates also, many things changed without any meaning.

 

[bonehead123]

The Samsung is much more economical

Please elaborate.... as Sammy's are almost ALWAYS more $$ than the 850x, or any other top-tier drive for that matter

Anyways, I applied the latest 620361 firmware to all 7of my 850x's nottaproblemo, and the speeds are practically identical to the ones posted above, which are essentially what I was getting before the update, no moans, no groans from me, hehehe

 

[SPDIF]

At least they actively working on it to improve things. Many other SSD out there never gets any update at all.

Anyone got a screen grab of the latest dashboard software? 4.xx

I am on 3.8.2.10 and like its style, and the changelog says a new look so want to preview it before I decide to update it.

 

[Swampylee]

On an almost identical AMD system, almost identical numbers .......

View attachment 321686

Strange, I've got a pretty high spec system and I don't get these sort of numbers - anyone any ideas? Still on FW 620331, Asus PRIME_Z690-P_D4 , i5-13600k, 32GB RAM

 

[SPDIF]

Is this SSD used as boot and you use Windows on it?

 

[Swampylee]

Is this SSD used as boot and you use Windows on it?

Yes indeed.

 

[SPDIF]

Well there's your problem...

Do a test like this on an SSD used as C: drive and OS Boot, is giving always mixed results.
You should close most background applications such as indexing, Windows updates, and anti-virus disabled in the OS to reduce run-to-run variability, and get a reliable testing result.
For a good test, this SSD should be connected to the first NVMe slot, closest to the CPU. And boot from a Sata drive, then test this NVMe drive again.

 

[Swampylee]

Well there's your problem...

Do a test like this on an SSD used as C: drive and OS Boot, is giving always mixed results.
You should close most background applications such as indexing, Windows updates, and anti-virus disabled in the OS to reduce run-to-run variability, and get a reliable testing result.

Got it - many thanks!

 

[SPDIF]

And in crystaldiskmark, make sure that in the settings tab, it is set for NVMe SSD.

The default setting is for old HDD and SATA SSD.

 

[R-T-B]

The SN850X is in a weird spot. Even WD's documentation on it is flippy, adding and removing encryption as a supported feature. There's been reports, though, of it being Opal 2.01 compliant (just not on any review, so it was possibly in a firmware update but WD never discloses the changelogs).

If there is no PSID printed on it, it's not an opal drive.

This image seems to have a PSID under where the heatsink may apply, so, that is likely the issue: whether or not the label is visible/gets applied

 

[Klemc]

Well there's your problem...

Do a test like this on an SSD used as C: drive and OS Boot, is giving always mixed results.
You should close most background applications such as indexing, Windows updates, and anti-virus disabled in the OS to reduce run-to-run variability, and get a reliable testing result.
For a good test, this SSD should be connected to the first NVMe slot, closest to the CPU. And boot from a Sata drive, then test this NVMe drive again.

Why not launch from a boot CD/USB ?