It is hard to come to a full and final conclusion on which one is the best. The Samsung 990 Pro or the Crucial T705. I have read almost all the reviews of both the drives and watched all the videos available on the internet. So, I can say that I have researched enough to give you a fairly honest and satisfactory answer to the question of which one to choose: Samsung 990 Pro or the Crucial T705.
The 9100 Pro was released in February 2025. Ironically, about a year after the release of Crucial T705. According to the benchmarks, both are ranking on top of the graphs and have the ability to utilize most of what the Gen 5.0 x4 slots have to offer. The Crucial T705 comes in three storage variants, i.e., 1TB, 2TB, and 4 TB. The Samsung 9100 Pro gives you the fourth option, the 8TB variant, which is a really big thing for capacity-hungry buyers.
Crucial T705’s datasheet says that it can reach up to 14,100 MB/s sequential read and 12,600 MB/s sequential write speed. About the random read/write speeds, it promises a maximum of 1500K and 1800K IOPS.
Having a look at the Samsung 9100 Pro’s datasheet, I was impressed more by the maximum sequential read speed of 14,800 MB/s and write speed of 13,400 MB/s. The random read IOPS are up to 2200K and up to 2600K write IOPS.
So, theoretically, the Samsung 9100 Pro looks and sounds better, but we are going to look at the benchmarks before we reach the conclusion. So, let’s start our comparison.
Theoretical Specifications
Let’s first compare the theoretical specifications of both to have a basic overview of both the drives and what the brands are promising.
| Specification | Samsung 9100 Pro | Crucial T705 |
|---|---|---|
| PCIe Generation/NVMe Version | PCIe Gen 5.0 x4/ NVMe 2.0 | PCIe Gen 5.0 x4/ NVMe 2.0 |
| Release Date | Feb 25th, 2025 | Feb 20th, 2024 |
| Capacities | 1TB, 2TB, 4TB, 8TB | 1TB, 2TB, 4TB |
| Sequential Read Speed | 14, 800 MB/s | 14,100 MB/s |
| Sequential Write Speed | 13,400 MB/s | 12,600 MB/s |
| Random Read Speed | 2,200K IOPS | 1,500K IOPS |
| Random Write Speed | 2,600K IOPS | 1,800K IOPS |
| NAND Flash | Samsung’s TLC V8 V-NAND | Micron’s B58R FortisFlash TLC |
| DRAM | Yes | Yes |
| Controller | Samsung Presto (S4LY027) | Phison E26 |
Benchmark Scores Comparison
The benchmark scores are of the 2TB variants of both the drives. The benchmark scores are taken from different online publications like Tom’s Hardware, PCWorld, PCMag, and ServeTheHome. The links to the pages are given at the end. Let’s compare the benchmark scores and see which drive is the best one for you in terms of performance.
PCMark 10 Full Storage benchmark
PCMark 10 Full Storage Benchmark runs different tests on your SSDs, simulating the real-world environments that an OS drive has to go through. A better PCMark 10 score, higher bandwidth, and lower latency mean your drive will work well as your primary drive.
The Samsung 9100 Pro gave us the PCMark 10 score of 6597, while the Crucial T705 had 6541. So, the Samsung 9100 Pro has a 0.85% higher PCMark 10 score compared to the Crucial T705. If we look at the bandwidth, the 9100 Pro gives us around 30.42% higher bandwidth, i.e., 1037 MB/s compared to T705’s 763 MB/s. Latency is the same in both, i.e., 25 microseconds.
3DMark Storage Benchmark for Gamers
3DMark Storage benchmark for gamers tests a drive’s capabilities in different gaming-related scenarios. The tasks mainly include installing, loading, saving, closing, and streaming games. A higher 3DMark score will always mean an SSD is better for gaming compared to the low scores. Again, you get bandwidth and latency in MB/s and microseconds. Let’s see what these drives have on offer.
If we look at the 3DMark scores, the Crucial T705 has a 5.76% higher score of 6739 compared to the 9100 Pro’s 6371. The bandwidth is also 42 MB/s higher in the Crucial T705. The latency is 2 microseconds lower with the T705 at 26 compared to the Samsung 9100 Pro’s 28 microseconds. All in all, we can say that the Crucial T705 is going to be a good pick for gaming-specific tasks.
CrystalDiskMark Peak Sequential Read/Write Speed
The peak sequential numbers are not that up or down when we compare these drives. The big difference can be seen in the sequential 1MB QD8 write speed, which is around 522 MB/s higher in the Crucial T705. In the 1M test at a queue depth of 8, the 9100 Pro has around 120 MB/s higher speed. So, the results are mixed, but in 3 tests out of 4, the 9100 Pro wins, and we can declare our winner in that way.
CrystalDiskMark Peak Random IOPS
In the random read/write IOPS, bigger peak performance differences can be seen. Firstly, in the 4KB test at a queue depth of 256, the 9100 Pro offers around 340K higher IOPS compared to the T705. At the same QD, in the write test, the 9100 Pro gave us 163K higher IOPS. The difference at the Queue Depth of 1 is lower. But, if we have to declare the winner in this test, it’s again the 9100 Pro.
File Read and Write Speed Comparison
In the raw file copy, read, and write tests, the Crucial T705 has surprisingly better performance compared to the 9100 Pro.
Power Consumption and efficiency
The MB/s per watt is slightly better in the Crucial T705 by around 15MB/s. So, we can say that it is more effecient/. However, the average and idle power consumption are higher in the T705, which can contribute negatively to heat generation and may require some kind of thermal solutions. The maximum power consumption under load also goes to 11 watts in the T705 compared to the 9100 Pro’s 8 watts.
Write speed after SLC-exhaustion
The sustained write speeds are way better in the T705 compared to the 9100 Pro. To give you a little context, the raw speed of the NAND flash in the T705 is slower than the 9100 Pro. But, the average write speed after 15 minutes at 1 MiB blocks and queue depth of 32 is 4029 MB/s compared to 9100 Pro’s 1867 MB/s. However, the cache lasts longer in the Samsung 9100 Pro for almost double the duration of T705. However, what contributes to T705’s higher sustained average write speed is its higher raw write speed compared to the 9100 Pro. So, if your workload includes writing big chunks of data, which happens with content creators, the T705 can offer you better results.
Thermals
The E26 controller is known for its higher heat generation, and it is clear that when we compare it with the Samsung’s latest Presto controller, Samsung is going to win. The same happens in this case. Although Samsung hasn’t done very serious about the controller optimization but the overall power consumption and heat generation is lower than the T705.
During heavy workloads and testing, the Samsung 9100 Pro reached a maximum of 67°C. The average temperature of the T705, under load, is generally higher, but both drives come in the heatsink variants, which will be necessary if you are going to put these under heavy workloads.
Tech Specs
| Specification | Samsung 9100 Pro | Crucial T705 |
|---|---|---|
| Controller | Samsung’s Presto (S4LY027) | Phison’s PS5026-E26 |
| Controller Architecture | ARM 32-bit Cortex-R8 (5-Core) | ARM 32-bit Cortex-R5 + AndesCore 32-bit N25F RISC-V (5-Core) |
| DRAM Specifications | Samsung’s LPDDR4X DRAM 1TB: 1×1024 MB 2TB: 1×2048 MB 4TB: 1x 4096 MB 8TB: 1×8192 MB | Micron’s LPDDR4 DRAM 1TB: 1×1024 MB 2TB: 1×2048 MB 4TB: 1x 4096 MB |
| SLC Write Cache | 1TB: approx. 114 GB (108 GB Dynamic + 6 GB Static) 2TB: approx. 226 GB (216 GB Dynamic + 10 GB Static) 4TB: approx. 442 GB (432 GB Dynamic+ 10 GB Static) 8TB: Available, but capacity isn’t found. | 1TB: approx. 110 GB (dynamic only) 2TB: approx. 220 GB (dynamic only) 4TB: approx. 440 GB (dynamic only) |
| NAND Flash | Samsung’s TLC V8 V-NAND | Micron’s B58R FortisFlash TLC |
| Topology | 236-Layers | 232-Layers |
| NAND speed | 2400 MT/s | 2400 MT/s |
| Read Time (tR)/Program Time (tProg) | 40 µs/390 µs | 61 µs/600 µs |
| Die Read Speed | 1600 MB/s | 1574 MB/s |
| Die Write Speed | 164 MB/s | 160 MB/s |
| Encryption | AES-256, TCG Opal | AES-256, TCG Opal |
| Power Loss Protection | No | No |
| SMART/TRIM/PS5 Support | Yes/Yes/Yes | Yes/Yes/Yes |
There are some differences in the technical specifications that we can observe, like the 9100 Pro’s larger SLC write cache and lower NAND flash program timings. The die write and read speed are better in the Samsung 9100 Pro, but by tiny margins. Both drives have the same encryption, SMART, TRIM, and PS5 support. However, both lack the power loss protection feature.
TBW, DWPD, MTBF, and Warranty
| Specificiation | Samsung 9100 Pro | Crucial T705 |
|---|---|---|
| TBW (Terabytes Written) | 1TB: 600 TBW 2TB: 1200 TBW 4TB: 2400 TBW | 1TB: 600 TBW 2TB: 1200 TBW 4TB: 2400 TBW 8TB: 4800 TBW |
| DWPD (Drive Writes per Day) | 0.3 | 0.3 |
| MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure) | 1.5 Million Hours | 1.5 Million Hours |
| Warranty | 5 Years Limited | 5 Years Limited |
Both drives have exactly the same endurance and reliability specifications, along with the TBW, DWPD, and MTBF. So, there is nothing to compare here.
Price Difference
Generally, you’ll be able to save money going for the T705’s 1TB and 2TB variants. The 4TB variant of the 9100 Pro is around 50 bucks cheaper when I am writing this article. But make sure to check the current prices because they keep changing. Also, you might end up saving some money due to the ongoing sales and discount periods.
Conclusion: Samsung 9100 Pro vs Crucial T705
In terms of performance, both the drives are on the top of the graphs in the Gen 5.0 NVMe category. However, if we have to consider even the tiny differences, the Samsung 9100 won in the peak sequential and random read/write performance. However, in the PCMark 10 benchmark, again 9100 Pro won. However, in the gaming benchmark, the T705 won. So, the performance results are mixed, and we can’t really declare a clear winner.
However, there are other things to consider, like price, power consumption, and thermals. As we discussed earlier, the Crucial T705 generally runs hot, and if you are using it without a heatsink, it could cause issues during heavy workloads. But, if you go for it, you’ll surely be able to save some money, especially in 1TB and 2TB versions.
The Samsung 9100 Pro seems to be the right option here because of its good thermal efficiency, lower power consumption, better SLC-write cache, and less heat generation. However, you’ll have to pay more, and if you are ready for it, I would recommend going for the 9100 Pro.
Other Competitor Drives
Other popular Gen 5.0 drives which compete with these two are Corsair MP700 Elite, MP700 Pro SE Sabrent Rocket 5, and Micron 4600. These are the top drives reaching the highest level of SSD speeds till day. They utilize the best from the Gen 5.0 interface but the Samsung 9100 Pro and Crucial T705 are on the next level. If we look at the real-world performance, only Micron 4600 has the capabilities to beat these two, that too, in only some benchmarks. Otherwise, the 9100 Pro and the T705 are top on the list of Gen 5.0 SSDs.
Resources and Benchmarks
https://www.techpowerup.com/ssd-specs/samsung-9100-pro-8-tb.d2321
https://www.techpowerup.com/ssd-specs/crucial-t705-2-tb.d1925
https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/crucial-t705
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ssds/samsung-9100-pro-ssd-review/2