Unstable work of Samsung 860 EVO 300MB/s

[don dolarson]

Hi everyone It's my first post here since I'm new to this forum and fact that I need help with what I think instabile work of my Samsung 860 EVO 500GB bring me here. I'm not so new to this page, was mostly reading news, tests, forum, and I'm pretty sure I get the help I need here. To the problem...
Every time, couple of weeks after formatting, the drive slows down. I can't really explain why this happen. Within this time I'm just doing some customization, programs & games installation, some registry tweaks, but nothing involving in the system so much itself, mostly customization, everything takes me about 3-4 weeks to do after every format so no way I'm doing it one more time as I already done it twice and same shit happens. I've only disabled the Windows Search service as the "bigger thing", and changed the virtual memory to my own setting minimum 1024 and maximum 2048 (not more than 20% is in use). I've 32GB RAM.

When the disk is fresh, after formatting, everything is smooth and nice. I check benchmarks CrystalDiskMark from time to time and 2 weeks they are the same as after formatting (1st picture), then between 2nd and 3rd week I felt less responsiveness in Photoshop and it took longer time to open the software and was slower on working on files, so I've checked bench again and it gave me about 300MB/s write and less on whole column down . (2nd picture) I was pissed off as it happened before too and I can feel less power from it in some usage, ex Photoshop, just like I can feel a bad cylinder on a car engine. Then for some day ago I've checked benchs again as it felt a bit faster and look 3rd picture, like sequential is back to normal, except some others... I've checked benchs today, about 1 hour after powering the system up and the result is on 4rd.




Anyone knows what is going on? I've a laptop with old Toshiba 128GB SSD SATA III, also with BitLocker encryption enabled, paired with i7 Haswell Mobile CPU and I get not much worse bench results than Samsung EVO 860 500GB after formatting on 1st picture, and the system is still on Windows 10 1809 and works great about 8 months now.

 

[don dolarson]

Really? No one? In addition to the first post I can tell you that I'm getting about 40-45 I/O in ATTO Disk Benchmark.

 

[Ferrum Master]

It works fine. It is an EVO drive and it acts like that when emulated SLC cache runs out.

Other than that, it will give you zero issues or slowdowns.

 

[newtekie1]

It could be lots of things. My first guess would be something either writing to the drive in the background, or an issue with TRIM. Or it could just be running out of SLC cache.

 

[Zareek]

It could be lots of things. My first guess would be something either writing to the drive in the background, or an issue with TRIM. Or it could just be running out of SLC cache.

I agree, I would install Samsung Magician and check for a firmware update.

The performance you are seeing is in-line with what is expected when you fill the SLC turbo-write cache on a 500GB drive. The empty drive SLC cache is 22GB on the 500GB drives. As I understand it, the cache will recover some capacity based on the amount of drive space left open. This process isn't instant as the drive moves the SLC writes to TLC storage internally. From Samsung Look at the asterisks under the laptop picture with the drive speeds listed. TLC drives like the 860 EVO are not meant for writing big chucks of data to on a daily basis. If you are using this drive for professional use that depends on consistent speed you should consider a Pro drive. The Pro series drives use MLC NAND and are made for that kind of work.

 

[don dolarson]

Other than that, it will give you zero issues or slowdowns.

I'm experiencing a bit slower work on files in Photoshop and a little bit lower responsiveness in couple of scenarios, so it's not really "zero issues" as you say.

My first guess would be something either writing to the drive in the background, or an issue with TRIM. Or it could just be running out of SLC cache.

I've checked the TRIM by a cmd command and it's set to 0, and 0 means it's ON.
What do you mean with "writing to the drive in background" ? It's hard to not write or read from the disk which is in use and installed OS on it, especially being benched. I've got flawless CrystalDiskMark results up to 2-3 weeks after formatting the drive & installed new OS on it, and I've benched it every 2nd day. If it was because of the drive activity, don't you think that I'd get same results all the time?

The performance you are seeing is in-line with what is expected when you fill the SLC turbo-write cache on a 500GB drive. The empty drive SLC cache is 22GB on the 500GB drives. As I understand it, the cache will recover some capacity based on the amount of drive space left open. This process isn't instant as the drive moves the SLC writes to TLC storage internally. From Samsung Look at the asterisks under the laptop picture with the drive speeds listed. TLC drives like the 860 EVO are not meant for writing big chucks of data to on a daily basis. If you are using this drive for professional use that depends on consistent speed you should consider a Pro drive. The Pro series drives use MLC NAND and are made for that kind of work.

Firmware is up to date. I've updated it once (before 3rd drive format) but nothing has changed, and... to be honest, I doubt it could be just because of newer firmware, unless the old one was buggy, but it's not, since thousands of people worldwide using the same drive & firmware and runs just fine...

Really? I can understand that the disk slows down when filled more and more by the time, especially when filled around 80% or more as almost all SSDs work this way, but mine was filled with no more than 10% of the total capacity, 37GB I've two partition on it, C with installed OS on it is 111GB (37GB in use) and E partition is 353GB (0GB in use).
If you take a look at 2nd and 3rd picture? 2nd was taken before formatting the drive, about 2 months after Windows installation. 3rd picture was taken about a week after formatting and a new Windows 10 has been installed on it. As you can see, after new OS has been installed, the disk was filled with even more data, 42GB vs 37GB (before format) and still gave me decent numbers. You can even take a look at 4rd picture, which is the newest one. 1GB less data on it and pretty bad numbers. Sound pretty weird

I'm posting some ATTO Disk Benchmark results as of today




It's hard for me to believe that it has something to do with any kind of cache, especially when seeing all these benchmarks of people using the same drive, for example, the CAN-User, 5 mins ago outperform my numbers with MUCH more filled disk.

 

[Mussels]

the evo drives (and most SSD's) have a high speed cache, and the rest of the drive is slower.
Your is performing slower than expected, but dont be surprised that it slows as it fills, even a smaller amount.

You'll notice your drive got 88.9% 'excellent' compared to other drives of the same model - your below expecations result is likely comparing to other drives

 

[don dolarson]

Alright, you all look like united to this cache thing in these disks, and if the problem is caching for real, then it was the last Samsung storage device I ever got my hands on, unless I can get them for for free... China ordered Vasekey 256GB SSD for 1$ outperforms it, as it is now... what a shame Samsung. I've 6 years old M.2 Toshiba 128GB SSD installed in my laptop. 55TBW written on it, ~3000 spins/starts and ~15.000 hours powering on, remaining life according to different software is less than 5% and I get better result than new EVO, all the way down I've even a 3 years old M.2 Crucial MX300 275GB installed in the same laptop and running with no problems, just like the Toshiba disk.

Did you took a look on the last picture I've posted above? Different people, different machines, different disk capacity usage, and 5, almost 6 out of 8 has normal speeds. How the heck is this possible?
Is there a way to reset that cache somehow?

 

[Toothless]

I'd check your pagefile as a "just in case" something isn't being cached up there and sucking up your drive. I can vouch that sometimes my 850s will get a little slow for a few, then get right back to speed.

 

[tabascosauz]

Something feels off here, maybe have a quick chat with Samsung? I don't think the user has control over what the controller decides to do with that cache. Otherwise, the 860 EVO isn't of particularly great value or speed nowadays.

 

[don dolarson]

I've just turned the pagefile back to automatic mode and I'll let it settle down 1-3 days (if it needs?) and will be back here to tell you if it caused my problem.
Thanks for suggest to contact the manufacturer. It'll be the last thing I'll be doing, before I leave this SSD wannabe back and take something more reliable.

I've just ordered an Intel 545s 256GB for L2 caching my 3TB Toshiba HDD, and started wondering if it would be better to migrate my OS to it instead of EVO, and turn EVO into L2 cache... though I don't need 500GB SSD just for caching. EVO isn't brand new, I bought it 1 year ago for about 90$, which was a good price at that moment. I just haven't used my PC for about 8-9 months.

 

[Mussels]

I'm gunna say somethings wrong with userbench when it comes to reporting their results as well
I have no SSD caching, just a fast SSD and it tells me mine is both absurdly fast, and absurdly slow at the same time

Way below expectations (15th percentile) yet 280% outstanding at the same time?

 

[don dolarson]

I'm just comparing my results to other peoples results. Only number to the right (next to Bench) are interested to me when comparing. I get same results every time I run this benchmark.

 

[trparky]

I would make sure that TRIM is indeed working properly on your system, you can do this by using TrimCheck.

 

[don dolarson]

I would make sure that TRIM is indeed working properly on your system, you can do this by using TrimCheck.

I've tested it and this is what I've got:

Spoiler

Press Enter to test drive C:...

Querying C:\ disk space and sector size information...
C:\ has 512 bytes per sector, and 8 sectors per cluster.
14740582 out of 29132543 clusters are free.
Generating random target data block (16384 bytes)...
First 16 bytes: DF 0F 31 2C CC 5C D2 EF 43 0B 53 4B B8 B5 D0 78...
Creating C:\Users\Don Dolly\Desktop\trimcheck.bin...
Querying file final paths...
DOS : \\?\C:\Users\Don Dolly\Desktop\trimcheck.bin
GUID : \\?\Volume{9c64cda7-aebd-4325-809a-247b22026c78}\Users\Don Dolly\Desktop\trimcheck.bin
NT : \Device\HarddiskVolume4\Users\Don Dolly\Desktop\trimcheck.bin
NONE : \Users\Don Dolly\Desktop\trimcheck.bin
Writing padding (33554432 bytes)...
Writing data (16384 bytes)...
Writing padding (33554432 bytes)...
Flushing file...
Checking file size...
Data is located at Virtual Cluster Numbers 8192-8195 within file.
Querying file physical location...
trimcheck.bin has 8 extents:
Extent 0: Virtual clusters 0-264 are located at LCN 15090371
Extent 1: Virtual clusters 265-926 are located at LCN 15256128
Extent 2: Virtual clusters 927-1856 are located at LCN 12081063
Extent 3: Virtual clusters 1857-3895 are located at LCN 15198643
Extent 4: Virtual clusters 3896-7968 are located at LCN 10256323
Extent 5: Virtual clusters 7969-12147 are located at LCN 11961113
(this is the extent containing our data)
Extent 6: Virtual clusters 12148-15239 are located at LCN 12976366
Extent 7: Virtual clusters 15240-17343 are located at LCN 13249608
Closing file.
Saving continuation data to C:\Users\Don Dolly\Desktop\trimcheck-cont.json...
Flushing buffers on \\.\C:...
Opening \\.\C:...
Flushing buffers...
Deleting file...
Flushing buffers on \\.\C:...
Opening \\.\C:...
Flushing buffers...

Test file created and deleted, and continuation data saved.
Do what needs to be done to activate the SSD's TRIM functionality,
and run this program again.
Usually, you just need to wait a bit (around 20 seconds).
Sometimes, a reboot is necessary.

Press Enter to exit...

I've been hearing about testing to move the pagefile to another disk, and even try to defrag the SSD. I've loaded Defraggler yesterday, analyzed fragmentation of both partitions and I've seen some high numbers, like 24GB fragmentet files on partition C and 67GB on partition with only installed games. It looked a bit to high for me and thought thats why it slows down. I've analyzed the disk after a restart and checked it, only 2GB fragmented files after a start and 2,4GB after 1 check with ATTO disk benchmark. How is the log from command prompt?

 

[Toothless]

Never defrag an ssd. TRIM is to an ssd as defrag is to an hdd.

 

[trparky]

What happens when you reboot and run the trim check again?

 

[Regeneration]

Post PC specifications. Why 1GB benchmarks? you're killing the drive with those.

 

[Athlonite]

Never defrag an ssd. TRIM is to an ssd as defrag is to an hdd.

the windows Defrag program wont actually let you defrag an SSD but will run trim so maybe a good Idea for the OP to check and see if this has indeed been run or not last time I checked mine stated it hadn't been run for 17 days even though it's been set to run everyday

 

[eidairaman1]

I agree, I would install Samsung Magician and check for a firmware update.

The performance you are seeing is in-line with what is expected when you fill the SLC turbo-write cache on a 500GB drive. The empty drive SLC cache is 22GB on the 500GB drives. As I understand it, the cache will recover some capacity based on the amount of drive space left open. This process isn't instant as the drive moves the SLC writes to TLC storage internally. From Samsung Look at the asterisks under the laptop picture with the drive speeds listed. TLC drives like the 860 EVO are not meant for writing big chucks of data to on a daily basis. If you are using this drive for professional use that depends on consistent speed you should consider a Pro drive. The Pro series drives use MLC NAND and are made for that kind of work.

Pro Drives are SLC iirc

the windows Defrag program wont actually let you defrag an SSD but will run trim so maybe a good Idea for the OP to check and see if this has indeed been run or not last time I checked mine stated it hadn't been run for 17 days even though it's been set to run everyday

Run it in a dos prompt Defrag /? For all parameters

 

[Mussels]

Pro Drives are SLC iirc

Not all of them, but they're a step up from consumer models
So if a consumer was TLC, the pro would be MLC

my 970 pro is 2 bit MLC, while the 970 evo is three bit MLC (technically, TLC)

 

[don dolarson]

Never defrag an ssd. TRIM is to an ssd as defrag is to an hdd.

Yes, I know to not defrag SSDs, but in this situation I don't think it hurt more than it already hurts to the disk, because it's not working as it should.
I did defrag with Defraggler these fragmented 24GB + 67GB files, but without any issues and/or without any positive/negative result in benchs.

Post PC specifications. Why 1GB benchmarks? you're killing the drive with those.

ASUS X470 Strix, AMD Ryzen 1700x stock, 32GB RAM @ 3200MHz OC, GTX 970, Samsung 860 EVO 500GB, Toshiba P300 3TB. What do you mean with 1GB benchmarks?

What happens when you reboot and run the trim check again?

This is what I've got. I tried 2 times and get the same thing:

Loading continuation data from C:\Users\Don Dolly\Desktop\trimcheck-cont.json...
  Drive path   :  \\.\C:
  Offset       :  54231375872
  Random data  :  A2 14 4D C2 81 54 30 D6 3B 1F 29 89 F2 99 1C 1E...

Reading raw volume data...
  Opening \\.\C:...
  Seeking to position 54231375872...
  Reading 16384 bytes...
  First 16 bytes: 1E C4 82 D4 85 51 62 3D C3 F4 4C 74 98 7A 6E 36...
Data is neither unchanged nor empty.
Possible cause: another program saved data to disk,
overwriting the sector containing our test data.

CONCLUSION: INDETERMINATE.
Re-run this program and wait less before verifying / try to
minimize writes to drive C:.

Press Enter to exit...

In addition to it, I run a simple command to check TRIM and it's what I've got:

C:\Windows\system32>fsutil behavior query disabledeletenotify
NTFS DisableDeleteNotify = 0  (Disabled)
ReFS DisableDeleteNotify = 0  (Disabled)

I've checked it for my HDD and the program tell me that TRIM is unsupported on this drive.

And finally I've checked TRIM on my 2nd SSD partition where I've all my games installed and it's what I've got:

Loading continuation data from H:\trimcheck-cont.json...
  Drive path   :  \\.\H:
  Offset       :  17809408
  Random data  :  5C 38 CC 96 FE EA 73 74 AB 03 4C C2 98 FA 7D D0...

Reading raw volume data...
  Opening \\.\H:...
  Seeking to position 17809408...
  Reading 16384 bytes...
  First 16 bytes: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00...
Data is empty (filled with 0x00 bytes).

CONCLUSION: TRIM appears to be WORKING!

Press Enter to exit...

 

[Gungar]

Pro Drives are SLC iirc

If i am not mistaken there is no SLC ssd on the market except maybe datacenter ones (stupidly expensive).

The Samsung PRO series has always been MLC since it exists.

 

[don dolarson]

THANKS TO YALL FOR ALL HELP I GET HERE ❤ YOU ALL GR8.

I'm tired of messing with this drive and shortening life of it with all these benchmarks and I'm aware of this, I don't know how much but remaining life showing at 99%, and I know that this drive isn't working as it should, that's why I did 3 formats, to track it down. What more can I do? After every format everything was good so it MUST be something that isn't working 100% with this disk, which occurs by time. It won't be a problem for me as for example system boot up time is the same, chrome opens my 20+ tabs as fast as before too, not biggger differences as when it was fresh, but as told you I'm working in Photoshop and it feels less responsive in some situations. I've had 22GB RAMDisk with Photoshop installed on it with junction activated to copy an image of RAM to SSD on reboot and restoring after, which took 15-20 seconds more to do than usual but I'm normally not restarting my PC, it is always powered on, but these 15.000MB/s I've got is a speed unreachable for any disk and was worth it and everything saved on this RAM Disk felt as a dream.

I've just bought an Intel 545s 256GB and was wondering if maybe I'll return EVO disk to manufacturer for checking it? What do you think guys? Maybe I can use this topic to tell 'em about the problem, if they care. However, I bought this Intel disk because I wanted to use it to work as a L2 cache for SSD both for system and installed games and a HDD partition where I've my installed games too. I wanted even L1 RAM cache for SSD on system partition because I've get rid of RAMDisk and will be better using PrimoCache with L1 RAM cache given to it, as it caches only needed files, not need to install Photoshop with extensions on it, which takes about 4.5GB, so it gonna be used even for speeding up whole system. I've 30 icons/shortcuts/files on desktop and when refreshing it it takes about 200-250ms before all icons and arrow in them are refreshed. It was less than 100ms before. Maybe it's not related to anything with the disk and it's just because Windows can't handle this properly as it's the very small percentage of all possible number of icons on a FullHD resolution. I just hope that Windows will be still usable when there's +300 icons on desktop.

The question is if it's worth to paying for shipping the disk back to the store and get it checked or just dont' bother and use it along with L1 + L2 cache, totally about 100GB for the SSD, and forget. I will get much higher numbers in both benchmarks and daily use anyway, I think so, so I won't even mark this malfunction of EVO. I was reading documentations about it before and that's why I decided to buy this Intel disk and run as a cache. The 2nd option is to migrate the system to the Intel disk and use EVO as an installed games disk.

 

[trparky]

Yes, you're supposed to be getting the message "CONCLUSION: TRIM appears to be WORKING!" but it appears that on your C drive you're not. This is strange. If TRIM isn't working then the SSD isn't performing the garbage collection that it's supposed to be doing hence the degraded performance. This is very weird. The only time that I've seen this happening is when using the standard SATA controller drivers that come with Windows, you should be using the manufacturer's SATA controller drivers be it Intel, AMD, or ASMedia.